.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Born at the Crest of the Empire

Sunday, January 04, 2009


Obviously, someone in a briefing used the word "bisect." (AP) "Israeli forces bisect Gaza, surround biggest city." (NYTimes) "Israeli Troops Advance, Bisecting Gaza."

(And be prepared for the stories on tactics. The Israelis are taking over houses, removing civilians at gunpoint.)

(WaPo) Regional Arab governments are being stressed by the politics of Gaza, especially Egypt.

(AFP) France leads alarm over Gaza, splits with US

(Haaretz) The US kills the UN Security Council measures.

(NYTimes) A "news analysis" on Obama's likely honeymoon with Europe.

(AP) A female suicide bomber kills at least 35 in Baghdad, targeting a Shiite religious event.


  • I know the circumstances are hugely different, but the vision of Israeli soldiers taking over houses and removing civilians at gunpoint strikes a chord of dark irony in my mind.... If you know what I mean. I commenting on the appearance only and not trying to make any sort of moral equivalency with historic regimes who might have opposed the Jews.

    By Blogger -epm, at 8:59 AM  

  • Well, that's been a standard practice for the Israelis in most of their Palestinian operations.

    The same way the US has done in Iraq on occasion.

    It must be said that the residents are not in direct danger, but they are usually detained while soldiers take up firing positions.

    By Blogger mikevotes, at 11:50 AM  

  • Humiliating the men in front of their families is important too.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:20 PM  

  • In the case of the strategic occupations, I don't think that is so much true.

    By Blogger mikevotes, at 2:03 PM  

  • No but it's a very important psychological factor if the strategy is to break the resistance. Counter productive IMO.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:20 PM  

  • I'm just sayin' is all. Superficially there is an irony.

    By Blogger -epm, at 5:21 PM  

  • The AFP link is really a NYT story on European support for shutting down Guantanamo, killing the "missile defence" fiasco, and a bit about dissension over Afghanistan. Nothing about France and Gaza.

    Taking your word for it, though, I can see this development is to be expected. Britain was one of the last hold-outs of European support for Israel, and that has evaporated after the Second Lebanon invasion. Other European nations resent the need for placing their troops in Lebanon while forces within the White House work to precipitate more conflict with Syria and Iranian-backed militias there. The new Administration could easily see the moderate Arab states and Europe throwing in the towel on Israel unless Obama can extract heavy, real concessions from it's "misunderstood child".

    The Bush Administration's idea of Israel as a valuable "ally" is a bit of a stretch, too. Israel had to sit out both Gulf Wars because its participation would be too "divisive" and "controversial". Then it failed as a proxy in Lebanon, and proceeded to provoke regional condemnation for violating Turkey's airspace when it bombed Syria. If any other "ally" (such as Taiwan, for example) was as big a liability as Israel, we would have abandoned them long ago.

    By Blogger Todd Dugdale, at 7:19 PM  

  • EPM, yeah, I get it. There is also the broader point that they've ghetto-ized the Palistinians.


    Todd, Sorry, wrong link. That happens sometimes. I'm not going to bother tracking down the right one, though. The headline was pretty much the story. The French were pushing around versions of the Algerian proposal.

    By Blogger mikevotes, at 8:54 PM  

  • By Blogger raybanoutlet001, at 8:28 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home