Israel allows some once-banned products into Gaza
http://tinyurl.com/28g47uy
Quote:
|
Looks like all the international attention is having a positive effect. I mean, seriously, how is banning soda and sweets any sort of real achievement? How anyone can back a ban which includes such items and still say with a straight face it is all about 'security' is beyond me.
|
Banning those things in the first place is more likely a result of beuracratic laziness than "Just being a douchebag".
Someone in charge probably said: "Nothing gets by!" and the underlings went, "Really? Nothing?" and the guy said "You heard me, nothing!", which was followed up by "What about-" and yet another "NOTHING!". Now that we have the rest of the world, the guy is forced to re-examine his policy of "nothing", and is quickly realizing it's idiocy. I highly doubt there was some wizended old Jew sitting in a dark room tapping his fingers and cackling over his plan to deprive the Palestians of soda and shaving cream. |
I don't think support for Israel should blind us to the fact that the blockade is a sordid business and the banning of such items is an example of negligence towards a great many suffering people if not forthrightly malicious.
|
They are intentionally banned, items such as that are considered "luxury items", so if they aren't deemed necessary they don't get through, normally.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8101002.stm This has a good overview of what is and isn't allowed, at least before this recent lift. Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
However, given what Saya posted, Malice is looking a bit more likely. |
When assembling a blockade there are two aims- one is to deprive the actual aggressors of things they can use for aggressive purposes (weapons and weapon building materials), and the other is to demoralise the populace so they'll be far more willing to accept whatever terms are offered, if terms are offered. It's easier to claim victory over a desperate, unhealthy, malnourished, unwashed population with no steady power and no steady water or sewage treatment than it is to claim victory over a people healthy and comfortable enough to still resist.
Technically this second reason comes under 'collective punishment' and was pretty thoroughly outlawed after the second world war, but for some reason the UN hasn't called time on the blockade yet. |
I don't think malice is the motive here. If you've already committed yourself to maintaining a nebulously legal blockade, to err on the side of attrition is simply less of a hassle, especially considering that every incoming vessel you inspect could potentially be manned by greasy long-hairs itching to club the shit out of you with pipes.
|
I wasn't saying that it was malicious, I was saying that even if it isn't, the fact that they have been negligent with an issue concerning so many lives means that they are still open to harsh criticism regardless. As it turns out, soda and cookies aren't a pressing issue, but it betrays a mindset on the part of Israel towards the blockade which is far from salubrious for the Palestinian civilians.
|
I sensed in your and Despanan's posts the suggestion of a distinction between reproachable negligence and active malice. I think these excessive proscriptions are probably due more to the former than the latter.
|
Quote:
............ |
Just curious... Did anyone on here say that Israel was in the right for doing the blockade or did most of us just say that we understand why they did it?
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:14 PM. |