When we were teenagers one of the most severe insults you could hurl at someone went something like this: “You’re so dumb you don’t deserve to live.” Sometimes when I read about some absolutely lame-assed, dumb IDF military actions I harken back to those teenage days. On days like this, Ehud Olmert and his government don’t deserve to live (politically of course).
Somehow Ehud, that ‘sharp as a tack’ political operative, managed to approve an IDF anti-terror operation which killed four Ramallah civilians while not netting the alleged militant it was designed to capture. What’s worse, the IDF commandos became trapped in Ramallah and had to be extracted after a two hour firefight by relief units. But this wasn’t the half of it. The botched operation happened right before Olmert was supposed to have a “peace negotiation” with Hosni Mubarak. And I have to tell you how well it went over with Hosni.
Here’s how Haaretz described the raid:
Four Palestinian civilians were killed and 20 wounded on Thursday when IDF undercover troops entered the West Bank town of Ramallah on an arrest raid, setting off protests and gunbattles in the center of town…
The soldiers, who were dressed in civilian garb in an effort to blend in with the locals, entered an office building near Manara Square with the specific objective of locating and detaining Rabia Hamad, a militant belonging to the al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade.
Hamad, who the soldiers said was armed with a pistol, identified the men as IDF soldiers and tried to escape.
The IDF exchanged fire with Hamad, injuring him, yet he managed to elude IDF forces…
The exchange of fire brought dozens of young men out of the buildings, and they began throwing stones and firebombs at the soldiers; a larger IDF force and Border Police moved in to support the commandos.
In the incident that lasted nearly two hours, heavy exchanges of gunfire
between the Israeli forces and Palestinian gunmen ensued. The commandos and the rest of the IDF force was finally extracted with the help of a bulldozer and armor plated jeeps, as well as helicopter gunships that fired against open areas to cover the retreating force…The incursion, with IDF armoured vehicles and bulldozers slamming aside parked cars near Ramallah’s main Manara Square, was the biggest such operation in the city since May, when four Palestinians were killed in a raid.
Here is all Ehud could muster in explanation of the IDF’s incompetence:
Olmert attempted to explain the Ramallah operation, reiterating Israel’s honoring of the cease-fire and its restraint in responding to the Qassam rockets fired from the Gaza Strip at the Negev.
“Things developed in a way that could not have been predicted in advance. If innocent people were hurt, this was not our intention,” he said in reference to the West Bank raid.
To which the Times adds:
Mr. Olmert said Israeli troops returned fire, but did not initiate it.
Excuse me. You mount such an operation in the heart of downtown Ramallah and you “could not predict in advance” that civilians would be in the line of fire?? And you go in to capture someone you claim is one of your top wanted Palestinian fugitives and you tell us you only “returned fire?” What did you expect, that Hamad would have run into your boys’ arms and kissed them on both cheeks without a shot being fired?? Of course, you were prepared to initiate fire. You wanted him, didn’t you? How else were you going to capture him?
You can’t piss on our backs, Ehud, and make us believe it’s rain (to quote Hester Street).
You wonder what Mubarak must’ve been thinking. Here, Olmert’s meeting with the Egyptian leader to try to unravel one of the thorniest issues in Israeli-Palestinian relations, winning the release of Gilad Shalit. And what does Olmert do? He appears to place the capture of Hamad far ahead of Mubarak. You’ve got to wonder whether Olmert has his priorities straight. Do you want Shalit back or do you want Hamad? Or are you so foolish that you think you can catch Hamad and get Mubarak to turn a blind eye to what you had to do to get him? Somehow Olmert thinks he can have his cake and eat it by grabbing the Palestinian militant AND winning Shalit’s release. Fat chance.
Instead, now Olmert has to pay the piper. He’s got a bunch of dead and wounded Palestinian civilians, Abbas demanding $5 reparations for the devastation caused to downtown Ramallah and Mubarak saying he’d like to sweep the floor with him:
The meeting apparently did not advance the two main topics on the agenda, the prisoner exchange deal involving kidnapped IDF soldier Gilad Shalit and Palestinians being held in Israeli jails, and furthering negotiations with the Palestinians.
Nice going, Ehud. Peace should break out any minute now.
Israelis are also none too pleased with their PM:
The latest opinion polls, taken for the anniversary of the Sharon stroke, show that nearly 70 percent of Israelis disapprove of Mr. Olmert’s performance as prime minister.
That would put him somewhere in range of Bush’s approval ratings which hover in the 30%+ range as well. Birds of a feather.
After writing this, I read a probing discussion of this subject by Yossi Sarid (hat tip to Sol Salbe). Sarid proffers an entirely different analysis saying that Olmert is essentially not running defense policy. Hence, he may not have even known about the incident before it happened. [UPDATE: Jerusalem Post reports that IDF West Bank commander did not inform Amir Peretz, the defense minister, about the raid. So it’s entirely credible that Olmert didn’t know either. How is this possible in an alleged democracy in which the military is supposedly subject to civilian control??] The former Meretz leader bemoans the fact that there is essentially no political leadership. The entire country is under military rule. And the army, though defeated in Lebanon and ineffectual in stopping Qassams, has other ideas than those of the political echelon. Olmert may want peace, but that’s not what the IDF wants. And the latter is in no way above sabotaging the former. This is what happened to Olmert in Sharm. He was run over by a Mack truck bearing IDF markings.
Thanks to Ann at Reclaiming Space for linking to this informative first-hand account of the fighting from Sami Bahour, who had the misfortune to be taking his family out to eat in downtown Ramallah just as the raid was unfolding.
Richard essentially admits Olmert’s case for him. The IDF was pursuing a wanted terrorist. It risked it’s own soldier’s lives to avoid collateral damage from the likes of an air strike or a tank shell. Was it carried out ineffectively? Perhaps, and Olmert and Peretz are rightfully criticized when these mistakes happen.
For Richard to argue against this, he essentially says that the IDF can’t carry out any operations anywhere by any means. Because as long as the Palestinian militants continue to operate in populated areas, they will always put their own people in the line of fire.
Far from “bringing people the truth” Richard has become a largely predictable loudmouth.
Utterly ridiculous. BTW, the NY Times reveals today that Olmert’s aides say he DID NOT KNOW about the raid in advance. So who’s prosecuting government military-security policy? The PM or the IDF?
No, only ideologues get to determine whether a man is a terrorist before trying him. Here in the good ‘ol USA we don’t call someone a terrorist until the charge is proven. Try ‘alleged terrorist.’ Oh that’s right, I forgot. You don’t need proof of such matters to believe the IDF. Because the IDF is the holy grail of probity and credibility. Never made a mistake. Never levelled a false charge against anyone. Right.
Again right. Does this image fr. the JPost look like avoiding collateral damage? Numerous eyewitnesses recount the massive damage done to Palestinian property by rampaging IDF bulldozers. The center of the city is an utter shambles. Sure, they avoided collateral damage. My ass.
You sure are credible. The IDF didn’t even get their man. They left their PM w. egg on his face before an enraged Hosni Mubarak. They killed 4 Palestinian civilians. The W. Bank IDF commander is being condemned by MKs for his pigheadedness. And the best you can muster is “Perhaps??” You’re lame.
No, neither Olmert nor Peretz knew about the raid in advance. So you can’t blame them. You can only blame Gen. Naveh, the brilliant tactician who thought up (or at least commanded) this monstrosity. You CAN blame Olmert & Peretz in the sense that they should’ve known about this thing. The fact that they didn’t merely confirms the utter ineptitude of this government.
Bullcrap. What YOU say I say lacks any credibility whatsoever because you so willfully misread & distort what I say or believe. Here’s what I believe. You don’t carry out a massive raid on the same day yr PM is conducting a delicate negotiation w. Egypt in yr. bid to free a kidnapped IDF soldier. You don’t carry out a massive raid in the center of the W. Bank’s largest city in broad daylight. If you do, you should expect to have yr head handed to you not only by world opinion, but by sitting MKs & perhaps the ministries whom you’ve embarrassed terribly.
There is more truth in a single sentence of this blog than in all the bloviating comments you’ve ever published here. And that amounts to thousands of hot-air filled words by now.
If someone in the United States is an alleged terrorist, the authorities may investigate, approach and detain that individual. If the Palestinian “resistance” would like to play according to such rules of law, then no one would be more happy than I (and anyone who cares for peace).
Of course, if a suspect comes out with guns blazing, the police can indeed shoot back.
The Palestinian can do no wrong crowd essentially allows the “resistance” to play by the rules of war, while demanding that Israel act as if it is already at peace. It just doesn’t work that way.
This is an inapt analogy. Here is a better one–is a U.S. law enforcement agency entitled to send an armed contingent into the heart of downtown Havana to arrest a fugitive fr. U.S. justice? Of course not.
You will argue that Cuba is an independent country and Palestine is not. But the facts are that Palestine is not the sovereign territory of Israel & therefore the rules must be different. But for Israel they are not since Israel does not believe in honoring the norms that most other nations follow in their relations with others. If Israel were to annex the W. Bank then while such an action would be unrecognized under international law, at least there would be some legal fig leaf for arresting Palestinians within the W. Bank. But since it has not done so, such raids are blatant violations. Would you care to pronounce yourself on the notion that Israel should annex the W. Bank?
And you have proof that in this raid the “suspect came out with guns blazing?”
If Palestine were part of Israel, then Israel would do what it’s police and internal security forces do in Israel. Israel has NOT annexed the West Bank or Gaza, however. So you are right that the rules are different. Specifically, Israel as an occupying authority may exercise administrative and security control as necessary to protect itself from belligerents inside the territory. For the first 20+ years of the occupation, this largely consisted of a few jeeps on patrol, and detention of suspected terrorists or supporters of hostile Arab nations.
That all changed with the intifada, particularly the second intifada. The Palestinian “resistance” is significantly more violent and deadly, and when Israel does try to arrest such figures, they are often encountered with violent resistance. Mind you, I think Palestinians CAN resist. But then Israel has a right to strike back, as well as take preventative action.
No matter how you try to spin it, Israel is entitled to take necessary action against militants in the territories. Certainly, force should be proportional and as minimal as necessary, which is why in this case, Israel sent it’s own men in on the ground, risking their lives, rather than simply dropping a bomb where the guy was staying.
Again, you demand that the Israel’s act as if they are at peace, while allowing the Palestinians to act as if they are at war.
The proof that the guns were blazing? Well, I just read the article you posted which says….
“Hamad, who the soldiers said was armed with a pistol, identified the men as IDF soldiers and tried to escape.
The IDF exchanged fire with Hamad, injuring him, yet he managed to elude IDF forces…
The exchange of fire brought dozens of young men out of the buildings, and they began throwing stones and firebombs at the soldiers; a larger IDF force and Border Police moved in to support the commandos.”
I wonder how many of the “civilians” in question were those “dozens of young men” throwing stones and firebombs.
Oh, you must be alluding to the Shehadeh killing where the IAF dropped a 1,000 lb bomb on an apt. block trying to kill one militant. They killed him all right, along with his entire family, a total of 17 people including children. The IAF commander of that operation, Doron Almog, was very nearly detained in London on an international arrest warrant. Too bad they missed him.
I guess you’re trying to say they’ve learned something fr. that fiasco (not a fiasco in IDF terms, since Halutz said the only thing he felt in executing such an action was a ‘slight flutter of the wing’ as the bomb dropped fr. the plane–clearly Halutz and the other Israeli executioners sleep soundly when they kill so many civilians).
You’re saying sending a huge force into downtown Ramallah in broad daylight while decimating every car or building that got in its way (Abbas has demanded $5-million in damages) is a “minimal & proportional” action. Here’s how Palestine Times described it:
I guess you’re saying that a 2 hr. gun battle amid a bustling city of tens of thousands is SOP for the IDF. Fat chance. Besides, they didn’t get their man so perhaps they should’ve “dropped the big one” (as you suggest they could’ve done) on Manara Square since that seems what was needed in this instance. I guess dropping a bomb in that instance would’ve been a “minimal & proportional” response, eh?!
Never said it. Don’t you dare put words in my mouth! Israel is entitled to defend itself & pursue wanted men as long as it has real evidence to prove their culpability & doesn’t kill or maim innocent civilians in the process.
You are entirely lame. This passage nowhere says that Hamad opened fire first on the IDF. It merely says “Hamad tried to escape” and the “IDF exchanged fire with him.” Pls. do show me where it says Hamad opened fire first at the IDF. It is just as likely the IDF initiated fire. There have been many documented instances in which the IDF actually executed unarmed militants it was pursuing. So the notion that the IDF would open fire first & ask questions later is entirely credible, I’m sorry to say.
Yes, it is interesting in a guerrilla insurgency like this one how quickly a civilian can turn into a fighter when they feel their fellow citizens are threatened. You have a hard time telling the diff. bet. the 2 in these situations, don’t you? Well, that’s because raids like this one turn the entire populace against the IDF. In a split second, a bustling intersection filled with civilians can become a free fire zone in which the IDF gets pinned down by fierce resistance & needs to call in the cavalry in order not to be entirely annihilated.
Next time though, the IDF might not be so lucky. Perhaps one of those civilian-militants is going to have handy access to an RPG & then some very serious damage could be done. I note also that mortars were fired at the IDF. I’ve never heard of this happening before on such a mission. Perhaps this is a new escalation of Palestinian resistance giving the IDF something new to worry about when it engages the “enemy.”
I’m presuming that the many news agencies which covered the incident live (including live video footage) can support the claim that the four killed were civilians (& that term has been used in multiple stories written by reporters on the scene). Haaretz also used this term to describe the dead. Unless you have any evidence to the contrary. BTW, your “wondering” whether the civilians were really militants doesn’t constitute evidence.