Pages

Wednesday, October 18, 2023

Israel Denies Blowing Up Hospital In Gaza (Updated)

From the Daily Mail: "Israel DENIES it was responsible for blast at Gaza hospital that 'killed 500': Tel Aviv blames Islamic Jihad rocket for carnage - but Palestinian leader Abbas cancels meeting with Biden." The blast was at the al-Ahli Baptist Hospital (although the hospital is run by the Anglican Church). The IDF claims it was an errant rocket from a Hamas rocket barrage. Hamas says no. 

[Update: "Gaza hospital blast killed 'several dozen' and not 471 as Palestine health bosses claimed, insists Israeli government spokesman as two sides trade accusations about horrifying explosion"--Daily Mail. This story includes a different video clip than that shown the other day; and this newer clip does show an explosion, supposedly at the hospital site, several seconds after the rocket barrage ended. I don't see this as definitive: while you can see rocket trails for the other rockets, there is no rocket trail headed into the blast site; and the timing is a little off coming after the end of the barrage. On the other hand, based on the photographs in the article, it appears that the explosion occurred in a parking lot and not the structure of the hospital--at least there are no photographs of the hospital. This tends to tilt in favor of Israel's account.]

    It doesn't help Israel's position that the video Israel initially released as evidence that the explosion was due to an errant Hamas rocket was later discovered to be "misinformation" showing a rocket barrage from 40 minutes after the explosion. This PJ Media article includes a video purporting to show the Hamas rocket attack, but it's not clear to me if it is the discredited video or a different one. In any event, the IDF has released what is purported to be a wiretap of a call where two Hamas fighters discussing a report that it was a rocket launched from Gaza and acknowledging it might have come from the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (a Hamas ally). That seems far from dispositive to me. The final argument from Israel is that because the hospital was the only structure damaged in the explosion, it proves it was a Hamas rocket because an Israeli attack would have caused far more collateral damage. 

    So, who to believe? Don't know. 

    Hamas a long history of using human shields and storing munitions in civilian buildings. (See also this 2014 CNN news report). And while Hamas rockets are not exactly "home-made," they also aren't up to the standards of missiles rolling off a Raytheon production line. Thus, it could have easily been a Hamas rocket that struck the hospital and setting off other explosives in the building.

    On the other hand, Israel has a long history of targeting Palestinian civilians. For instance, in his article "American Pravda: Mossad Assassinations", Ron Unz relates that in 1981, hoping to provoke a PLO attack against Israel to justify an invasion of Lebanon, then-Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon authorized a series of false flag attacks:

    Under Israeli direction, large car bombs began exploding in the Palestinian neighborhoods of Beirut and other Lebanese cities, killing or injuring enormous numbers of civilians. A single attack in October inflicted nearly 400 casualties, and by December, there were eighteen bombings per month, with their effectiveness greatly enhanced by the use of innovative new Israeli drone technology. Official responsibility for all the attacks was claimed by a previously unknown Lebanese organization, but the intent was to provoke the PLO into military retaliation against Israel, thereby justifying Sharon’s planned invasion of the neighboring country.

    Since the PLO stubbornly refused to take the bait, plans were put into motion for the huge bombing of an entire Beirut sports stadium using tons of explosives during a January 1st political ceremony, with the death and destruction expected to be “of unprecedented proportions, even in terms of Lebanon.” But Sharon’s political enemies learned of the plot and emphasized that many foreign diplomats including the Soviet ambassador were expected to be present and probably would be killed, so after a bitter debate, Prime Minister Begin ordered the attack aborted. A future Mossad chief mentions the major headaches they then faced in removing the large quantity of explosives that they had already planted within the structure.

 And although not cited in that article, Israel's military has used cluster munitions against Palestinian civilians including in the 1982 invasion of Lebanon and the subsequent 2006 war.  And, as Vox Day points out:

    Let’s get this straight. To the best of our knowledge, there isn’t a single rocket, of the thousands that have been fired at Israel, that managed to harm even a dozen people when it was aimed at a target and operated properly. But we’re supposed to believe that a single misfiring rocket managed to somehow blow up more than 500 people when it went awry.

    Furthermore, we’re supposed to believe that the Israeli government, which possesses much more powerful missiles and bombs than Hamas, and which has been very loudly threatening to kill every man, woman, and child in Gaza, wouldn’t blow up a hospital when they’ve been aggressively bombing civilian apartment buildings and vehicles.

    Right.

He is correct. The IDF stated several days ago that it would ignore "human shields" if it believed it needed to strike a target

    It also doesn't help that both Islam and Judaism justify lying in order to protect members of their faith and deceive outsiders. 

    Vox Day's sarcasm aside, both stories are plausible. If Israel was a trusted ally, I would give them the benefit of the doubt. But Israel has always been an "frenemy" of the United States, so they do not deserve the benefit of the doubt. 

    What I do not see is any critical American interest being advanced in supporting Israel in its war against Hamas. At a minimum, it will alienate Muslim countries including those that supply us with oil. Wouldn't have been a big deal if Trump had gotten his second term because under his Administration the U.S. had become a net oil exporter. But we got Biden which means that we are more vulnerable than ever to an oil embargo (his having sold much of our strategic stockpile to the Chinese). 

    More likely it will drag us into yet another conflict. (See Bracken's analysis of a likely scenario involving our Navy blocking a relief convoy from Turkey to Gaza).

No comments:

Post a Comment