- Joined
- Aug 3, 2014
- Messages
- 22,885
- Reaction score
- 3,914
- Location
- UK
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Left
Okay there seems to be some things to consider as to the statement
Many commentators say that the Israeli control over many many important aspects of life constitutes an effective control ( occupation from without ) of the Gaza strip
People should really by now know something of what a list of these things would consist of. But for those still a little vague here is a summary
Control over all of Gaza's airspace and coastal waters
Control over who and what gets in and out in conjunction with Egypt ( both tied together by US allegiance/reliance )
Control over the borders as per the two mentioned above
Control over the treasury by means of control , along with the PA ( occupying sub contractors ), over the finances of the Gaza strip
Control of the registry of the population and the issuance of passports etc
That's the bones of it
So does that constitute a military occupation ?
The usual response being no boots on the ground = no occupation
So the boots on the ground would constitute an ongoing occupation
To me the best way to look at it , the most accurate way , is to see that the guards have been moved from the interior of the prison to the perimeter fence. Thus making their lives a lot safer but still giving them the opportunity to shoot the prisoners themselves as and when they choose
Something to consider from a military POV
Israel often cites occasions when an IDF operator/commander has a telephone call with a Palestinian family whose house they intend to blow up. ( that they know everyone's phone numbers is another indication of the level of control btw but there you go. )
If they have the means to take out individuals and homes as and when they please they obviously don't need boots on the ground to carry out the actions needed to maintain a military occupation. Technology has , in this instance , given them the means to carry out the actions a boots on the ground occupation requires without the need for boots on the ground in reality.
Thus the argument , imo , falls flat on it's face
Many commentators say that the Israeli control over many many important aspects of life constitutes an effective control ( occupation from without ) of the Gaza strip
People should really by now know something of what a list of these things would consist of. But for those still a little vague here is a summary
Control over all of Gaza's airspace and coastal waters
Control over who and what gets in and out in conjunction with Egypt ( both tied together by US allegiance/reliance )
Control over the borders as per the two mentioned above
Control over the treasury by means of control , along with the PA ( occupying sub contractors ), over the finances of the Gaza strip
Control of the registry of the population and the issuance of passports etc
That's the bones of it
So does that constitute a military occupation ?
The usual response being no boots on the ground = no occupation
So the boots on the ground would constitute an ongoing occupation
To me the best way to look at it , the most accurate way , is to see that the guards have been moved from the interior of the prison to the perimeter fence. Thus making their lives a lot safer but still giving them the opportunity to shoot the prisoners themselves as and when they choose
Something to consider from a military POV
Israel often cites occasions when an IDF operator/commander has a telephone call with a Palestinian family whose house they intend to blow up. ( that they know everyone's phone numbers is another indication of the level of control btw but there you go. )
If they have the means to take out individuals and homes as and when they please they obviously don't need boots on the ground to carry out the actions needed to maintain a military occupation. Technology has , in this instance , given them the means to carry out the actions a boots on the ground occupation requires without the need for boots on the ground in reality.
Thus the argument , imo , falls flat on it's face