tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post3056158943253452850..comments2024-03-18T22:21:33.261-07:00Comments on The Debate Link: Gaza Aid Convoy Reportedly Attacked in International WatersDavid Schraubhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04946653376744012423noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-58374727689223210532010-06-01T13:11:49.691-07:002010-06-01T13:11:49.691-07:00Peter Beinart makes a point similar to Joe's: ...<a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-06-01/israel-flotilla-disaster-gaza-embargo-us-supporters-to-blame/" rel="nofollow">Peter Beinart</a> makes a point similar to Joe's: the commandos' actions were justified, but Israel's blockade of Gaza, at least with regard to imports and exports that have nothing to do with weapons, is not.PGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09381347581328622706noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-84846696113026015022010-05-30T23:59:04.491-07:002010-05-30T23:59:04.491-07:00I swear I'm not just saying this to be contrar...I swear I'm not just saying this to be contrarian, but I don't see how a blockade can be sustained without the backing of some degree of violent force, or the credible threat of it. I'm not sure boarding and seizing is even that extreme a tactic next to the alternatives. Assuming, arguendo, that a blockade's justified in the first place, the logical extension in my mind is that necessary force can be applied to overcome resistance to boarding. <br /><br />Obviously, this model can lead to bloodshed, so we'd better make really sure a blockade is justified. (I'd say that stopping cement isn't nearly an acceptable reason given the totality of the circumstances.)<br /><br />In addition, these thoughts are all in the abstract because we don't know exactly what happened yet. Appropriateness of the blockader's actions has to be pretty fact specific. If it's in international waters, for example, that would seem worse to me than right off the Gaza coast.joenoreply@blogger.com