It Was Not ‘Violence-Violence’

Posted on | May 31, 2010 | 92 Comments

by Smitty (via Memeorandum)

Andrew Sullivan treats us to the Full Whoopi in relating the IDF raid on the Gaza flotilla, emphasis mine:

A simple point. The violence by the activists is pretty abhorrent. These are not followers of Gandhi or MLK Jr. But the violence is not fatal to anyone and it is in response to a dawn commando raid by armed soldiers. They are engaging in self-defense. More to the point: they are civilians confronting one of the best militaries in the world. They killed no soldiers; their weapons were improvised; the death toll in the fight is now deemed to be up to 19 – all civilians.

It staggers me to read defenses of what the Israelis have done. They attacked a civilian flotilla in international waters breaking no law. When they met fierce if asymmetric resistance, they opened fire. And we are now being asked to regard the Israelis as the victims.

Look, since 2007 there has been a blockade, blockhead. These have gone on long enough for an Internet to develop a Wikipedia and have its own page. When you know there is a blockade in place, you sort of expect the blockader to have a vested interest in interdicting cargo. Legitimate humanitarian aid should get through, or else reasonable people should join nitwits like yourself in the “That’s Uncool” chorus.
Via Knowledge Is Power comes a clip from idfnadesk indicating Flotilla Ship Mavi Marmara may have been packing more than band-aids and rubbing alcohol:But, hey: don’t let the context of being surrounded by people that literally want your blood upset your narrative, Andrew.

The attempt at some proportionality argument ignores the reports that the IDF went in without assault rifles. Had the IDF slaughtered half the Mavi Marmara crew outright, you may actually have an argument. But the evidence seems to indicate they did not. The a priori judgment that Israel is always wrong utterly pollutes your mind, Sullivan. They ceased to be civilians when they engaged the IDF in close combat.

Furthermore, the problem was limited to one boat in the flotilla. Do you think that, maybe, just maybe, the Mavi Marmara carried more than M-and-M’s?

One nearly approaches a sort of academic curiosity, wondering what it would take to bring an Andrew Sullivan sort of character into reality. Just before becoming a full thought, the whole venture drowns in a puddle of contempt. I actually have more respect for the personal courage of Whoopi Goldberg than that of Andrew Sullivan; she’s a tough lady.

Update: Insta-lanche!

Update II: As far as I can tell, the two Andrew Sullivan comments are authentic.

Category: Andrew Sullivan, Israel

Comments

92 Responses to “It Was Not ‘Violence-Violence’”

Room 237
June 1st, 2010 @ 6:41 am

It still does not change the fact that Israel screw up. They walked right into the trap. The Islamists wanted an incident live on video tape and they got it.
smitty
June 1st, 2010 @ 11:45 am

@Room 237,
Whether or not this was a screw-up or the cost of doing business remains to be seen.
smitty
June 1st, 2010 @ 6:45 am

@Room 237,
Whether or not this was a screw-up or the cost of doing business remains to be seen.
Barney
June 1st, 2010 @ 11:51 am

Aids Related Dementia is the only possible explanation for the increasingly incoherent ramblings of rawmuscleglutes
Barney
June 1st, 2010 @ 6:51 am

Aids Related Dementia is the only possible explanation for the increasingly incoherent ramblings of rawmuscleglutes
Andrew Sullivan
June 1st, 2010 @ 12:05 pm

Israel opened fire on a ship from a NATO member, Turkey. Should NATO treat this as an attack on every member nation?

The answer to that is of course, yes.

Your Christianist Fascist posts are noted and dismissed.
Andrew Sullivan
June 1st, 2010 @ 7:05 am

Israel opened fire on a ship from a NATO member, Turkey. Should NATO treat this as an attack on every member nation?

The answer to that is of course, yes.

Your Christianist Fascist posts are noted and dismissed.
Virginia Right! News Hound for 6/1/2010 | Virginia Right!
June 1st, 2010 @ 7:23 am

[…] It Was Not ‘Violence-Violence’ […]
Rob Crawford
June 1st, 2010 @ 12:37 pm

The “proportionality” argument is crap. This is not law enforcement; it’s war. Israel would have been in the right had they torpedoed the Terror Fleet; sending in troops with paintball guns was an attempt to avoid ANY loss of life.

The choice for violence lies with the Terror Fleet and its jihadi trash. Anyone who attacks Israel over this is an enemy of civilization.
Rob Crawford
June 1st, 2010 @ 7:37 am

The “proportionality” argument is crap. This is not law enforcement; it’s war. Israel would have been in the right had they torpedoed the Terror Fleet; sending in troops with paintball guns was an attempt to avoid ANY loss of life.

The choice for violence lies with the Terror Fleet and its jihadi trash. Anyone who attacks Israel over this is an enemy of civilization.
Narniaman
June 1st, 2010 @ 2:12 pm

In defense of Mr. Sullivan. . .

well, maybe not a defense, but an observation.

Are we sure that the comments submitted under Mr. Sullivan’s name — are really from Andrew Sullivan?

It’s hard to imagine that anybody with more than a microgram of functioning neurons would post such idiotic drivel under their own name.
Narniaman
June 1st, 2010 @ 9:12 am

In defense of Mr. Sullivan. . .

well, maybe not a defense, but an observation.

Are we sure that the comments submitted under Mr. Sullivan’s name — are really from Andrew Sullivan?

It’s hard to imagine that anybody with more than a microgram of functioning neurons would post such idiotic drivel under their own name.
Moe Lane » #rsrh Where’s Obama on Gaza?
June 1st, 2010 @ 9:33 am

[…] that they went too far in attempting to secure the boats at first using nothing more lethal than paintball guns. Which I doubt that they’re going to do the next […]
ak4mc
June 1st, 2010 @ 2:50 pm

Are we sure that the comments submitted under Mr. Sullivan’s name — are really from Andrew Sullivan?

Most of us are in fact reassured he is not, thanks to “Andrew’s” comments in a previous thread. The commenter is throwing himself on the grenade of reading Sully’s column so we don’t have to.
ak4mc
June 1st, 2010 @ 9:50 am

Are we sure that the comments submitted under Mr. Sullivan’s name — are really from Andrew Sullivan?

Most of us are in fact reassured he is not, thanks to “Andrew’s” comments in a previous thread. The commenter is throwing himself on the grenade of reading Sully’s column so we don’t have to.
Andrew Sullivan
June 1st, 2010 @ 2:52 pm

Narniaman. Without giving links to the Daily Dish, most of the statements above attributed to me are taken directly from the most popular one man political blog in the world. So in answer to your question, yes I did post such idiotic drivel under my own name.
Andrew Sullivan
June 1st, 2010 @ 9:52 am

Narniaman. Without giving links to the Daily Dish, most of the statements above attributed to me are taken directly from the most popular one man political blog in the world. So in answer to your question, yes I did post such idiotic drivel under my own name.
Baxter Greene
June 1st, 2010 @ 2:53 pm

Will the real Andrew “bleeding Heart” Sullivan please stand up.

This is Andrew’s own definition of torture:

Although it seems awfully late in the debate, the Daily Dish defines torture:

It is to subject captives to such levels of physical or mental pain or suffering that they “have reached the limit of their ability to withhold [information] in the face of psychological and physical hardship.” This is, in fact, as close to a definition of torture as you are likely to find.”:

…So according to the super liberal Andrew here…the mere fact of making someone uncomfortable enough to talk is considered torture.

But when it comes to people attacking Israelis…Andrew says this:

But the violence is not fatal to anyone and it is in response to a dawn commando raid by armed soldiers. They are engaging in self-defense. More to the point: they are civilians confronting one of the best militaries in the world. They killed no soldiers; their weapons were improvised;

…the violence is not fatal to anyone….and no one was killed.

Talk about moving the goal posts!!!!

According to Andrew here…just making a terrorist uncomfortable, who is committed and probably caught in the act of doing their best to kill innocent and unarmed civilians is an act of inhuman depravity……

….Attacking Israelis with fire bombs,knives,and steal poles, who are there to protect and enforce their own countries laws for defense is okay as long as they don’t “kill anybody” and use “improvised” weapons (like knives,guns,and fire bombs).

If the “peace activists” were “defending” themselves…how come the only violence that erupted out of the six ships that were boarded happened on the one WHERE THE PASSENGERS ATTACKED THE ISRAELI SOLDIERS!!

..is it any wonder why Obama’s administration is floundering around so ineptly when they take advice from idiots like this.
Baxter Greene
June 1st, 2010 @ 9:53 am

Will the real Andrew “bleeding Heart” Sullivan please stand up.

This is Andrew’s own definition of torture:

Although it seems awfully late in the debate, the Daily Dish defines torture:

It is to subject captives to such levels of physical or mental pain or suffering that they “have reached the limit of their ability to withhold [information] in the face of psychological and physical hardship.” This is, in fact, as close to a definition of torture as you are likely to find.”:

…So according to the super liberal Andrew here…the mere fact of making someone uncomfortable enough to talk is considered torture.

But when it comes to people attacking Israelis…Andrew says this:

But the violence is not fatal to anyone and it is in response to a dawn commando raid by armed soldiers. They are engaging in self-defense. More to the point: they are civilians confronting one of the best militaries in the world. They killed no soldiers; their weapons were improvised;

…the violence is not fatal to anyone….and no one was killed.

Talk about moving the goal posts!!!!

According to Andrew here…just making a terrorist uncomfortable, who is committed and probably caught in the act of doing their best to kill innocent and unarmed civilians is an act of inhuman depravity……

….Attacking Israelis with fire bombs,knives,and steal poles, who are there to protect and enforce their own countries laws for defense is okay as long as they don’t “kill anybody” and use “improvised” weapons (like knives,guns,and fire bombs).

If the “peace activists” were “defending” themselves…how come the only violence that erupted out of the six ships that were boarded happened on the one WHERE THE PASSENGERS ATTACKED THE ISRAELI SOLDIERS!!

..is it any wonder why Obama’s administration is floundering around so ineptly when they take advice from idiots like this.
pst314
June 1st, 2010 @ 3:18 pm

“Aids Related Dementia is the only possible explanation for the increasingly incoherent ramblings of rawmuscleglutes”

Not true. Jew-hatred has a long and honored history in England.

More importantly, it is one of the few bigotries that the “elite” classes can indulge in because political correctness has made most others socially unacceptable. They want to have people they can hate and who better than people who will not blow them up and cut off their heads? What’s more, they’re snobs and they deeply resent the existence of people who are their moral and intellectual superiors, so why not find ways to turn their superiors into inferiors?
pst314
June 1st, 2010 @ 10:18 am

“Aids Related Dementia is the only possible explanation for the increasingly incoherent ramblings of rawmuscleglutes”

Not true. Jew-hatred has a long and honored history in England.

More importantly, it is one of the few bigotries that the “elite” classes can indulge in because political correctness has made most others socially unacceptable. They want to have people they can hate and who better than people who will not blow them up and cut off their heads? What’s more, they’re snobs and they deeply resent the existence of people who are their moral and intellectual superiors, so why not find ways to turn their superiors into inferiors?
jcrue
June 1st, 2010 @ 3:49 pm

Hey Sully,

When you gonna teach about the legality of naval blockades between warring states and the established international law behind it?

You’re a joke and offer nothing of substance.
jcrue
June 1st, 2010 @ 10:49 am

Hey Sully,

When you gonna teach about the legality of naval blockades between warring states and the established international law behind it?

You’re a joke and offer nothing of substance.
RebeccaH
June 1st, 2010 @ 11:16 am

I don’t think we can expect much from Sullivan any more, other than delusions of grandeur and nasty slaps at people far better than himself. Perhaps he should go back to obsessing over Sarah Palin’s womb.
RebeccaH
June 1st, 2010 @ 4:16 pm

I don’t think we can expect much from Sullivan any more, other than delusions of grandeur and nasty slaps at people far better than himself. Perhaps he should go back to obsessing over Sarah Palin’s womb.
M. Report
June 1st, 2010 @ 4:30 pm

The News here is that Turkey has taken the first step on the same down-bound road that Sullivan is walking; If they abandon Kemalism
for Islam, the Doves of Peace will fly from
Ataturk’s monument.
M. Report
June 1st, 2010 @ 11:30 am

The News here is that Turkey has taken the first step on the same down-bound road that Sullivan is walking; If they abandon Kemalism
for Islam, the Doves of Peace will fly from
Ataturk’s monument.
Andrew Sullivan
June 1st, 2010 @ 4:52 pm

Damn it, why do we keep defending Zionists! Jim Henley may be right about this:

The raid is the latest case of Israel choosing militarism over liberalism, which Beinart identifies as the core issue…

Israel not only no longer faces any enemies who pose an existential threat, it doesn’t even have enemies who can thwart any strongly held Israeli policy aim. No state is going to go to war to “destroy Israel.” I doubt any state particularly wants to. Certainly no state that might want to can do so. But beyond that, no state is going to go to war on behalf of the Palestinians and the Palestinians lack the power to launch an effective war on their own behalf.

Every time Israel takes major, disproportionate action, the “counterproductivity corps” tells us that very soon now Israel’s high-handedness will cost it essential allies, alienate the United States and set the country on the road to ruin. Every time, the furor passes. In particular, the United States has attempted no material rebuke of Israel since the administration of Bush the Elder, and these days barely bothers with rhetorical rebukes…

This is not Israel “shooting itself in the foot.” This is Israel winning. Be for that or against it, but at least recognize it.
Andrew Sullivan
June 1st, 2010 @ 11:52 am

Damn it, why do we keep defending Zionists! Jim Henley may be right about this:

The raid is the latest case of Israel choosing militarism over liberalism, which Beinart identifies as the core issue…

Israel not only no longer faces any enemies who pose an existential threat, it doesn’t even have enemies who can thwart any strongly held Israeli policy aim. No state is going to go to war to “destroy Israel.” I doubt any state particularly wants to. Certainly no state that might want to can do so. But beyond that, no state is going to go to war on behalf of the Palestinians and the Palestinians lack the power to launch an effective war on their own behalf.

Every time Israel takes major, disproportionate action, the “counterproductivity corps” tells us that very soon now Israel’s high-handedness will cost it essential allies, alienate the United States and set the country on the road to ruin. Every time, the furor passes. In particular, the United States has attempted no material rebuke of Israel since the administration of Bush the Elder, and these days barely bothers with rhetorical rebukes…

This is not Israel “shooting itself in the foot.” This is Israel winning. Be for that or against it, but at least recognize it.
Noel
June 1st, 2010 @ 5:53 pm

“Israel opened fire on a ship from a NATO member, Turkey. Should NATO treat this as an attack on every member nation?

The answer to that is of course, yes.”……..

That’s demented. NATO should “of course” declare war on Israel?

Just because Bill Ayers, Code Pink and the Turkish “Union of Good” (a Specially Designated Global Terrorist-group) send five boats full of dupes and a sixth full of terrorists?

“Your Christianist Fascist posts are noted and dismissed.”……………

They are your fascists, pal. Did you notice they chanted slogans celebrating the genocide and ethnic cleansing of Jews from Arabia by Muhammed?

Europeans and leftists will yammer about “proportionality”, but if Europeans could do proportionality, the Jews would have never been forced to flee Europe. Masquerading as the moral high ground, leftist Europeans are merely trying to save their own skins from Iran’s Bomb or their own swelling Muslim populations.

Q: What Smells So Fishy?
A: The New Euro-Vichy.

Which is just like the old Vichy in its pro-Nazi nastiness. And the same old tired commies, too.

This isn’t just because Arafat was gay, is it? The same way you changed your mind about the War?
Noel
June 1st, 2010 @ 12:53 pm

“Israel opened fire on a ship from a NATO member, Turkey. Should NATO treat this as an attack on every member nation?

The answer to that is of course, yes.”……..

That’s demented. NATO should “of course” declare war on Israel?

Just because Bill Ayers, Code Pink and the Turkish “Union of Good” (a Specially Designated Global Terrorist-group) send five boats full of dupes and a sixth full of terrorists?

“Your Christianist Fascist posts are noted and dismissed.”……………

They are your fascists, pal. Did you notice they chanted slogans celebrating the genocide and ethnic cleansing of Jews from Arabia by Muhammed?

Europeans and leftists will yammer about “proportionality”, but if Europeans could do proportionality, the Jews would have never been forced to flee Europe. Masquerading as the moral high ground, leftist Europeans are merely trying to save their own skins from Iran’s Bomb or their own swelling Muslim populations.

Q: What Smells So Fishy?
A: The New Euro-Vichy.

Which is just like the old Vichy in its pro-Nazi nastiness. And the same old tired commies, too.

This isn’t just because Arafat was gay, is it? The same way you changed your mind about the War?
Israel botched this one bad « A Conservative Shemale
June 1st, 2010 @ 1:18 pm

[…] Some have attempted to defend Israel, and technically they may have been in the right, but that doesn’t matter now, it’s like the US military saying “We never lost a battle in Vietnam”. True, but so what, we lost the war. Israel lost whatever remaining moral authority it has in dealing with Hamas and Fatah, this past weekend. It alienated it’s strongest Muslim ally (Turkey) the current administration had previously made clear that Israel has no friends in Washington, out of 6 billion people in the world about 5 billion hated Israel before this, it’s about 7 billion now. The best Israel can do is apologize, accept blame and realize after this the rest of the World is going to kiss the Palestinian’s butts and give them whatever they want, so get back to the negotiating table and cut the best deal you can. […]
Bill Johnson
June 1st, 2010 @ 7:31 pm

There is no Andrew Sullivan. There is no Andrew Sullivan. If you all would quit discussing this alleged human, there would soon be no trace left.

Begin forthwith, I say.
alwaysfiredup
June 1st, 2010 @ 7:31 pm

“Israel not only no longer faces any enemies who pose an existential threat, it doesn’t even have enemies who can thwart any strongly held Israeli policy aim. No state is going to go to war to “destroy Israel.” I doubt any state particularly wants to.”

Hello? Iran? Or are we ignoring them today?
Bill Johnson
June 1st, 2010 @ 2:31 pm

There is no Andrew Sullivan. There is no Andrew Sullivan. If you all would quit discussing this alleged human, there would soon be no trace left.

Begin forthwith, I say.
alwaysfiredup
June 1st, 2010 @ 2:31 pm

“Israel not only no longer faces any enemies who pose an existential threat, it doesn’t even have enemies who can thwart any strongly held Israeli policy aim. No state is going to go to war to “destroy Israel.” I doubt any state particularly wants to.”

Hello? Iran? Or are we ignoring them today?
Andrew Sullivan
June 2nd, 2010 @ 12:20 am

An interesting account:

“I was the second to be lowered in by rope,” said Captain R. “My comrade who had already been dropped in was surrounded by a bunch of people. It started off as a one-on-one fight, but then more and more people started jumping us. I had to fight against quite a few terrorists who were armed with knives and batons.”

I note two things. It began with a one-on-one fight. This was not a lynch mob primed to kill. It was a reaction that spread as more soldiers arrived. The second thing I note is that the captain describes the passengers as “terrorists.”

Those ~~Jews~~ Israelis, they exaggerate everything.
Andrew Sullivan
June 1st, 2010 @ 7:20 pm

An interesting account:

“I was the second to be lowered in by rope,” said Captain R. “My comrade who had already been dropped in was surrounded by a bunch of people. It started off as a one-on-one fight, but then more and more people started jumping us. I had to fight against quite a few terrorists who were armed with knives and batons.”

I note two things. It began with a one-on-one fight. This was not a lynch mob primed to kill. It was a reaction that spread as more soldiers arrived. The second thing I note is that the captain describes the passengers as “terrorists.”

Those ~~Jews~~ Israelis, they exaggerate everything.
Israel Stops Flotilla Organized By Anti-Israel Activists | Daily Buzz Factor
June 1st, 2010 @ 9:41 pm

[…] / Jerusalem Post / Real Clear Politics / National Review / Daily Caller / The Other McCain / New […]
Cold Fury » The Young Turks and the Well-Rested Greeks
June 2nd, 2010 @ 11:50 am

[…] Other Day, Andrew Sullivan wandered over to The Other McCain’s for a couple of comments about himself commenting on Israel (before other commenters took over his handle, posting as him). […]
pst314
June 3rd, 2010 @ 4:11 am

“Not true. Jew-hatred has a long and honored history in England.”

When I wrote that, I failed to include a key part of my point: Andrew Sullivan is from England. Other diseases may or may not contribute to his dementia, but the mental disease in question is one he brought with him across the Atlantic.
pst314
June 2nd, 2010 @ 11:11 pm

“Not true. Jew-hatred has a long and honored history in England.”

When I wrote that, I failed to include a key part of my point: Andrew Sullivan is from England. Other diseases may or may not contribute to his dementia, but the mental disease in question is one he brought with him across the Atlantic.