Remember the "dog that didn't bark" argument from Sherlock Holmes

  IF the killer was a stranger, THEN the dog would have barked.

  The dog didn't bark.

  THEREFORE the killer was not a stranger.

Apply that to GAZA:

  IF some Israeli air attack hit a Gaza home that was nowhere near

  any military target,  THEN the mainstream press would point this out.

  The mainstream press NEVER mentions whether a Gaza home hit

  by an Israeli attack was near a military target.

  So THEREFORE, we can be VERY SURE that the Gaza victims WERE located

  near military targets.

This points out how pervasively the mainstream press is cooperating

with the Hamas strategy of placing military targets near civilian

homes and businesses.

It would help a lot to point this out over and over.

Phil Shaw

phil@okshaw.com

Michael Oren writes:

To be sure, I am far beyond reserve age (two of my post-army kids are waiting for their call-ups), but have remained in the ranks because of my familiarity with the foreign press. Though I'll soon be signing off on a weapon and body armor, more efficaciously, I'll check out the maps, photographs, and statistic charts designed to reinforce Israel's case in the media.

george responds:

Since I am not familiar with the real-time relationship between the Israeli government, the Israeli military and the Israel media, how close or how far removed is it from, say, the relationship between the American government, the American military and the American media on the run up to and support for the war in Iraq in 2003?

How does the Israeli media gain access to front line sources? How objective is the information given to them by the Israeli government? Can we be certain beyond a reasonable doubt that Israel in no way contributed to the misery of ordinary Gazan citizens the past few years? Can we be equally assured that the flagrant efforts on the part of Israel and the US to sabotage Hamas after it won a democratic election, has nothing whatsoever to do with the tactics Hamas pursued in the aftermath? Is the strategy enveloped by Olmert and Bush and Abbas truly aimed at deconstructing Israeli settlements in the West Bank and installing a free and democratic Palestinisn state? I keep hearing that Abu Mazen and his PLO are utterly corrupt and weak. Isn't that in fact one of the most important reasons they lost the election to Hamas?

And we keep hearing how Iran is the puppetmaster behind the scenes. Why then has it not "ordered" Hezbollah to launch a second front in Israel to the north. Furthermore, if Iran is behind Hamas, why in the world is Hamas forced to use rockets and other weaponry that are so primitive?

And, of course, all of these sideshows are, as you note, just the appetizers before the main course: sending Iran back to the stone age.

And as usual I am always tugged amabivalently in both directions because I too want to see these theocratic thugs wiped out. I just don't want to see all the "collateral damage" that comes with it sanatized by endless assurances that the very last thing the Israeli governemnt wants to do is harm civilians. Well,  other then making them miserable as hell for electing the "wrong" Palestinian faction in the election.

george walton

phil shaw writes:

This points out how pervasively the mainstream press is cooperating

with the Hamas strategy of placing military targets near civilian

homes and businesses.

It would help a lot to point this out over and over.

Phil Shaw

George responds:

Well, gee, if there is one thing we can be absolutely certain about it is that the mainstream press is little more than a fifth column for Hamas.

Just as in the months before Bush invaded Iraq the liberal press excoriated the plans. It was as though Saddam Hussein himself had infiltrated every editorial board at every news publication and planted stories about how grossly ill-advised and [to quote one of the lefty traitors] how "dumb" the war was.

And of course it goes without saying the reason Hamas integrates its military into the civillian population is that they are little more savages. They could not care less if their mothers and fathers and wives and sons and daugthers are slaughtered. The fact that they are forced to do this both strategically and tactically has nothing whatsoever to do with fact that, as I noted in another post, their military capacity is a minnow to Israel's great white shark.

george walton

George,  this is ridiculous.  They are not "forced" to integrate their combatants with the civilian population because nothing whatsoever is forcing them to engage in combat other than their own insistence on prosecuting their war to destroy Israel, however hopeless the odds.  If the Gazans forswore violence and disarmed as is under way in Northern Ireland, do you believe that Israel would attack them or, indeed, do anything other than assist them in building a prosperous civil society?  Well, do you?  These people are not defending themselves against a more powerful foe coming to kill them or destroy them.  Why do you think Israel withdrew from Gaza if not so that they could reciprocate by demonstrating their willingness to build their own society rather than trying to destroy Israeli society?

The logic you employ might can just as easily be used to justify Al Qaeda's destruction of the World Trade Center:  They were "forced" to adopt these terrorist tactics because they are a mere flea facing a military colossus.  Do you think Al Qaeda was "forced" in this way?

roidubouloi writes:

George, this is ridiculous. They are not "forced" to integrate their combatants with the civilian population because nothing whatsoever is forcing them to engage in combat other than their own insistence on prosecuting their war to destroy Israel, however hopeless the odds. If the Gazans forswore violence and disarmed as is under way in Northern Ireland, do you believe that Israel would attack them or, indeed, do anything other than assist them in building a prosperous civil society? Well, do you? These people are not defending themselves against a more powerful foe coming to kill them or destroy them. Why do you think Israel withdrew from Gaza if not so that they could reciprocate by demonstrating their willingness to build their own society rather than trying to destroy Israeli society?

The logic you employ might can just as easily be used to justify Al Qaeda's destruction of the World Trade Center: They were "forced" to adopt these terrorist tactics because they are a mere flea facing a military colossus. Do you think Al Qaeda was "forced" in this way?

George responds:

What is ridiculous, of course, is imagining Hamas leaving the civilian populations and gathering out in the open in traditional military bases. Gosh, I wonder if that would make it harder or easier for the Israelis to destroy them? Harder, you think?

Look, I agree with you....I agree with you that Hamas should forswear violence; they should recognize the right of Israel to exist; they should strive to immitate Israel's more democratic institutions; they should be trading with Israel in order for both populations to build a stable and properous life together.

But they won't and they don't; instead they start firing rockets into Israel again. And I back Israel in doing what it needs to do to stop it. I just do not believe they should have  inflicted an enormously out of proportion retaliatory attack.

And leaving aside all the religious and political and geopolitical stuff.....in my view, what Israel is doing now is only going to inspire more and more and more Islamic fundamentalists to join the "jihad". How in the world does that make Israelis safer in the future? What it secures of course is a brighter political future for Kadima in the short run, a brighter political future for Likud in the long run, and more and more big bucks for the corporations that profit from endless war.

As for the analogy of Al Qaeda's attack on 9/11, yes, it does fit into my own understanding of terrorism as a TACTIC. These Islamic fanatics had no navy, no air force, no heavily armed special forces, no astondingly sophisticated military technology. Instead, they were hopelessly.... unimaginably weaker then the Great Satan and its Crusaders. So they do these terrible things and they have got to be destroyed. I certainly want them gone for good.

But how to do it? Like Bush in Iraq? Like Bush in Pakistan? Like Bush in Afghanistan? Like Israel in Lebanon? Like Israel in Gaza?

Maybe Israel will in fact succeed in crushing Hamas with these tactics. And if they do I will be in here telling you that I was wrong, you were rght, Israel is safer, the people in Gaza are better off.  I hope you are right. But I spent about eight to nine months of hell in the jungles of Phouc Long Province in a III Corps MACV. And boy did I learn how wars are embedded deeply in the military indudtrial complex of the rich and powerful war mongers who run the world.

George walton

I also understand the logic of terrorism, George, but, as Herschel Ginsberg pointed out by quoting from the Geneva Conventions, the presence of protected civilians, even when used as shields, cannot be invoked to prevent the success of an otherwise legitimate military action.  The logic of terrorism is to put civilians in harm's way.  It cannot be the outcome that this tactic disables an effective military response or, worse, hands victory to the terrorists.  Sad but true.

As I said before, feel free to suggest any other tactics for Israel that you think would be more effective.  In places like Russia, they use the very effective tactic of leveling the city where their enemies are found.  I don't expect Israel to do the same, but I am sure that is what the US would do if it were being rocketed.

roidubouloi writes:

I also understand the logic of terrorism, George, but, as Herschel Ginsberg pointed out by quoting from the Geneva Conventions, the presence of protected civilians, even when used as shields, cannot be invoked to prevent the success of an otherwise legitimate military action. The logic of terrorism is to put civilians in harm's way. It cannot be the outcome that this tactic disables an effective military response or, worse, hands victory to the terrorists. Sad but true.

As I said before, feel free to suggest any other tactics for Israel that you think would be more effective. In places like Russia, they use the very effective tactic of leveling the city where their enemies are found. I don't expect Israel to do the same, but I am sure that is what the US would do if it were being rocketed.

George responds:

Terrorism is to logic, what passionaite love is Mr. Spock.

If human beings could excise their emotions, psychological states, ids, libidos etc. would there be any terrorism in the world? What, after all, is logical about killing complete strangers because your loving just and merciful God commands you to?

And all I know about the Geneva Conventions is that George W. Bush used it as kindle to burn the US Constitution.

And I make a crucial distinction regarding Hamas and Gazan civilians that you and others refuse to acknowledge. They integrate into the civilian population because of the extraordinary gap between Israel's military capacity and that of their. That is the very nature "asymmetrical" warfare. I saw it up close in Vietnam.

You and others, on the other hand, always seem to point instead to this relationship as though it shows how savage and dehumanized they are. As though they are fighting the Israelis by surrounding themselves with their wives and their children and their grandparents.

And this obsession with people rocketing America. From where, Canada? Mexico? Cuba? John F Kennedy almost ignited a nuclear holocaust because the USSR put nukes in Cuba while the US at the time had already dropped two nuclear bombs on civilian populations in Japan and had nukes ringing the USSR from many different nations. And look at the unimaginable destruction that Bush caused in Iraq. Hundreds of thousands killed, millions of refugees, the infrastructure still at pre invasion level, communities enscounced inside huge concrete barriers. But so what? We got rid of Saddam, right?

Fairly or not a lot of people view Israel in the same way. They can counter the qassams with huge bombs and endless artillary shells not just because they CAN, but also because they stand in for human virtuosity and Hamas stands in for the scum of the earth.

And I am not arguing about whether Israel should go after Hamas in Gaza. Yes, they should. Just not as a monster.

george walton