hindsight's great

Submitted by the Grand Infidel of Kaffiristan (Australia), Oct 8, 2011 at 06:02

""As the 15 of us slid down the ropes, 30 of them were waiting for us on the deck," one of the commandos later told reporters. "They charged us and threw a few of the soldiers off the deck to the floor below. We did not expect to find ourselves in such a situation."

'The soldiers acted nobly, not firing until 2 had been shot'

The assessment within the navy was that the activists would resist the Israeli takeover of their ship, but along the lines of the demonstrations the IDF faces weekly in the WestBank, where Palestinians protest against the security barrier. Rocks and punches would be thrown, it was assumed, and an occasional knife would be brandished – but not the extent of violence they met.

'Tim Lock ', of Saudi Arabia, writes:

"Israel's decision to board the vessels with such substantial force at a great distance from the blockade zone and with no final warning immediately prior to the boarding was excessive and unreasonable:

And fashioning the ship's safety railings int spears was somehow OK?

a. Non-violent options should have been used in the first instance. In particular, clear prior warning that the vessels were to be boarded and a demonstration of dissuading force should have been given to avoid the type of confrontation that occurred;

Again, - ' The ship Marmara was warned well in advance by IDF that they were sailing into an area of conflict. They were warned very clearly that they would not be permitted to travel further and should head for the Israeli port of Ashdod. The Marmara deliberately chose to ignore it. They have themselves to blame. '

"...b. The operation should have reassessed its options when the resistance to the initial boarding attempt became apparent.vii. Israeli Defense Forces personnel faced significant, organized and violent resistance from a group of passengers when they boarded the Mavi Marmara..Three soldiers were captured, mistreated, and placed at risk by those passengers. Several otherswere wounded....."

Yes - in hindsight with our post-event 20/20 vision - that might have been a better course of action. But it offered no solution to those mostly young and perhaps inexperienced IDF troops who were under immediate attack and in fear for their lives.

There are still 2 questions that remain unanswered:

And if the IDF were going to kill the 'martyrs' - why did they not do so from the safety of their helicopters?

The simple question must be asked of Mr. 'Tim' of Saudia Arabia - which might be a real stretch for his imagination and no doubt totally against his biases - but were it possible for 'Tim' to trade places with one of those Israeli soldiers at that time - what would he have done when faced with a mob of angry muslims (forgive the tautology) intent on and quite capable of killing him or his comrades - and he had a pistol at his side?

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".