Humanitarian crisis?
What is the alternative to exchanging 1,000 convicted Palestinian terrorists for Sgt. Gilad Schalit. Apart from trying to rescue him, which could be very dangerous, Israel could cut off all supplies to Gaza and then say, "no supplies until you release our hostage!"
There is a great downside to such a policy, namely that Hamas will continue to hold Schalit and people in Gaza will start to starve or die and Israel will be accused of causing a humanitarian crisis.
But, we have already been accused by a consortium of 16 so-called human rights organizations in the UK of just that, that we are not supplying "enough" to Gaza to stop their suffering. It appears that this claim is more politically motivated against Israel than intended as a humanitarian gesture. They never seem to have enough space or time to criticize Hamas, a recognized terrorist organization, for getting them in that situation in the first case.
Maybe Israel could supply more. But, the real question is why is Israel supposed to subsidize and keep our enemy alive, why exactly are we supplying food, water, petrol, medical supplies and electricity to Gaza when it is governed by a terrorist organization sworn to our destruction. Would they do the same if the situaton were reversed?
Also, Israel is not alone in blockading Gaza, in fact the Egyptians have a much more complete blockade, they don't allow any food or other supplies to enter Gaza officially, although an enormous amount, as well as armaments and military supplies, enter Gaza thru the tunnels that honeycomb the Egypt-Gaza border.
Finally, the Egyptian Government is doing something about this problem, they are installing a metal barrier buried in the ground along the border in order to prevent the tunnelling. As a result Hamas has officially complained to Egypt and there have been Palestinian demonstations against Egypt at the border. But, the human rights organizations fail to criticize Egypt, a fellow-Arab country, for denying Gazans the right to obtain basic supplies for survival, they only blame Israel. I haven't seen a single complaint against Egypt for building a "wall." What one-sided, biased and prejudiced criticism of Israel.
So, to return to the original point, a real blockade of Gaza might be a better way to try to force the release of Gilad Schalit than releasing 1,000 terrroist murderers.
There is a great downside to such a policy, namely that Hamas will continue to hold Schalit and people in Gaza will start to starve or die and Israel will be accused of causing a humanitarian crisis.
But, we have already been accused by a consortium of 16 so-called human rights organizations in the UK of just that, that we are not supplying "enough" to Gaza to stop their suffering. It appears that this claim is more politically motivated against Israel than intended as a humanitarian gesture. They never seem to have enough space or time to criticize Hamas, a recognized terrorist organization, for getting them in that situation in the first case.
Maybe Israel could supply more. But, the real question is why is Israel supposed to subsidize and keep our enemy alive, why exactly are we supplying food, water, petrol, medical supplies and electricity to Gaza when it is governed by a terrorist organization sworn to our destruction. Would they do the same if the situaton were reversed?
Also, Israel is not alone in blockading Gaza, in fact the Egyptians have a much more complete blockade, they don't allow any food or other supplies to enter Gaza officially, although an enormous amount, as well as armaments and military supplies, enter Gaza thru the tunnels that honeycomb the Egypt-Gaza border.
Finally, the Egyptian Government is doing something about this problem, they are installing a metal barrier buried in the ground along the border in order to prevent the tunnelling. As a result Hamas has officially complained to Egypt and there have been Palestinian demonstations against Egypt at the border. But, the human rights organizations fail to criticize Egypt, a fellow-Arab country, for denying Gazans the right to obtain basic supplies for survival, they only blame Israel. I haven't seen a single complaint against Egypt for building a "wall." What one-sided, biased and prejudiced criticism of Israel.
So, to return to the original point, a real blockade of Gaza might be a better way to try to force the release of Gilad Schalit than releasing 1,000 terrroist murderers.
posted by Jack Cohen at 9:11 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home