Steven Erlanger catalogues the problems of life in Gaza in today’s Week in Review.
Hopes were high in 2005, when Israel unilaterally withdrew its troops and 9,000 Jewish settlers, and the international community lined up to help the Palestinians make Gaza a model for their potential state.
But happy endings are rare in this part of the world. In the last year, life in Gaza has been plagued by criminal gangs as well as fighting among Palestinian groups. Some rocket barrages aimed at Israel fall on Gaza itself, and Israeli retaliation for the rest ranges from military strikes to economic quarantine.
Erlanger finds fault with Israel for retaliating against the rockets, but he fails to provide any context for Israel’s retaliation. When thousands of Israeli citizens flee from a nearby city, that would seem to be ample reason for Israel to strike back militarily at Gaza.
The people of Gaza (and the PA generally) elected Hamas. Hamas has been more interested in providing guns than butter.
If Sderot wasn’t a regular recipient of rocket fire, would Israel retaliate or declare Gaza a “hostile entity?” That’s the context that missing from Erlanger’s article.
And he doesn’t mention the press restrictions either. One could reasonably ask if his report was approved by Hamas.
Crossposted at Soccer Dad.
I can distinctly recall many people calling for Israel to negotiate with Gaza after Hamas won the election because Hamas was democratically elected, etc. (Of course these were people who tended not to be moved by Israel’s democratic system but that’s another story.)
OK, Hamas was democratically elected. And the people who elected it are responsible for what they chose. As has been the case for sixty years, the Palestinian Arabs have made choices and every so often they’re going to have to take the consequences.
Memo to the Palestinians:
“You’ve made your own beds. Now lie in them.”
“One could reasonably ask if his report was approved by Hamas.”
It didn’t need to be. Erlanger’s job is Hamas’ cheif propagandist.
People like Erlanger seem to think that Israel has no right to respond in kind to those making war on Israel. If a political entity (one can hardly call the Palestinian Arabs a nation) makes war on Israel the latter has every right to make war back. Israel has, in fact, been remarkably restrained about its retaliation for Palestinian acts of war. If it was up to me the Palis would have been driven from Gaza long since, to find refuge somewhere else, like in the Wahhabist Entity.
“People like Erlanger seem to think that Israel has no right to respond in kind to those making war on Israel.”
That is because Erlanger believes Israel has no right to exist. He is too dishonest and weaselly to come right out and say it, but I have not the slightest doubt that he believes this. It is the inevitable conclusion from his “reporting”, which is nothing but a relentless sewer of anti-Zionist propaganda.
Since the anti-Zionist position of Israel being eliminated entails a new genocide of the Jews by the victorious Muslims, anti-Zionist is no different than antisemite. There are only two escapes from this charge. First, if the anti-Zionist is one of those religious Jews who thinks Israel should not exist until the Messiah comes. Second is sheer, imbecilic, ignorant stupidity. Come to think of it, these are not mutually exclusive, since any Jew who thinks successful anti-Zionism will not result in a new genocide is suffering from a severe case of cranial rectal impaction.