# Its time for Israel to launch Operation Susa **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 10, 2011, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474 "2011-11-10T03:41:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 19
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474/361 "2011-12-16T03:51:10Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > . . . I assume we all now agree that Gaza is occupied. . . . You scared me! I immediately started scanning news headlines, imagining that Israel had sent troops in again! I don’t understand your point here; I had thought Gaza was not occupied. ---
**Author:** ![brocks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7feea3/32.png) [@brocks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brocks)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474/362 "2011-12-16T04:28:41Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > You scared me! I immediately started scanning news headlines, imagining that Israel had sent troops in again! > > I don’t understand your point here; I had thought Gaza was not occupied. Neither was the Warsaw Ghetto. And I’m well aware that the analogy has narrow limits. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 4:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474/363 "2011-12-16T04:52:44Z")
> [@brocks](#): > > Neither was the Warsaw Ghetto. And I’m well aware that the analogy has narrow limits. I’m reminded of Gerald Ford’s claim that Poland and Czechoslovakia weren’t “dominated” by the Soviet Union. The Warsaw Ghetto, along with all of Poland was occupied by the Nazis, under the rule of the Nazis. You’re clearly misinterpreting some Jewish postwar propaganda that liked to claim that the Warsaw Ghetto held out longer than the rest of Poland. That was false, and claiming that the Warsaw Ghetto wasn’t “occupied” would be like claiming that Amsterdam wasn’t “occupied”. You should get better sources before attempting to Godwin the thread. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474/364 "2011-12-16T04:56:07Z")
Yes, the SCoI considers Gaza to be non-occupied, but under legal precedent set by the Nazis’ actions (whereby the ability to affect absolute control of an area if one chooses is determined to count as occupation even if you don’t have boots on the ground), yes, it may be argued that Israel is in a state of belligerent occupation of Gaza. Now, how closely the precedent fits and how much wiggle room there is (is/was Egypt a co-occupier? Is it, instead, a blockade carried out by two nations against Gaza, etc…) is another matter. But it’s hardly open and shut that Israel isn’t occupying Gaza just because there aren’t troops there at this moment. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474/365 "2011-12-16T05:19:22Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Yes, the SCoI considers Gaza to be non-occupied, but under legal precedent set by the Nazis’ actions (whereby the ability to affect absolute control of an area if one chooses is determined to count as occupation even if you don’t have boots on the ground), yes, it may be argued that Israel is in a state of belligerent occupation of Gaza. True, but he Nazis did have “boots on the ground” in the Warsaw Ghetto. That said, I certainly think that claiming that the Gaza Strip is “not occupied” is a pretty questionable statement. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474/366 "2011-12-16T05:25:54Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > I’m reminded of Gerald Ford’s claim that Poland and Czechoslovakia weren’t “dominated” by the Soviet Union. Both Poland and Czechoslovakia hosted quite a number of Soviet Union military bases. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 5:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474/367 "2011-12-16T05:35:25Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I also have a base criticism for how Israel is handling the refugee situation. That’s another interesting term. “Refugee”. Is someone who was born of parents who were born of parents who were born of someone who used to live somewhere else a “refugee”? Ah you see, ONLY in case of Palestinians that’s correct. Anyone else, and third-fourth etc. generations are not considered refugees. Ever wonder why others aren’t? ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474/368 "2011-12-16T06:09:40Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > True, but he Nazis did have “boots on the ground” in the Warsaw Ghetto. Oh, of course. I wasn’t very clear when I posted (took a 2 minute break while entering semester grades for my students…) I admit that my brain is a bit fried right now so I can’t remember the exact precedent or country involved, but IIRC there were (war crimes?) trials against the Nazis for their treatment of people in a country which they controlled but did not continuously have a garrison in. The defendants argued that they were not bound by the rules of occupation as they were not an occupying force. The court, however, found that the ability to exercise absolute control over a territory, even if not exercised continuously, constituted occupation. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474/369 "2011-12-16T14:37:05Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I was trying to point out that the fact that the UN thinks something is legal doesn’t immunize it from criticism. > > What do you think is the “just cause” for Israel’s occupation of Gaza? I assume we all now agree that Gaza is occupied. > > And yes I think much of my criticism is aimed at how Israel is managing the occupation. > > I also have a base criticism for how Israel is handling the refugee situation. I split the issue into two. First, does Israel have just cause for action at all? And second, if it does - is it carrying out the actions it has decided to take in a “just” manner? My answer to the first has to be “yes”. No country on earth would refrain from acting if it was targeted by rocket attacks. The answer to the second is to determine whether the action taken is in line with the international conventions governing just-ness in the course of conflict. The further question would be who ultimately is “right” in the conflict. That is, however, really outside the bounds of the question. To my mind, a lot of people are allowing their opinions on this larger question to colour their approach to the specific conflict. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474/370 "2011-12-16T15:14:10Z")
Brain started working again.[It was the Hostages Trial that I was thinking of.](http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/WCC/List4.htm#Croatian%20Government) I’m reasonably certain, although I can’t find the quotes in that cite, that the German defense was that their presence did not legally constitute occupation. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474/371 "2011-12-16T15:17:21Z")
Once again, why does everybody keep assuming Israel can attack Iran’s nuclear plants **successfully?** ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474/372 "2011-12-16T15:21:03Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Once again, why does everybody keep assuming Israel can attack Iran’s nuclear plants **successfully?** And what happens next. Successful or not. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474/373 "2011-12-16T15:41:55Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > But, of course, the prime absurdity remains at the core: “Those bastards, they’re following the international laws of war, one of the best attempts to civilize and sanitize the brutal and hellish processes of war. What assholes!” I don’t think that is what Der trihs was saying at all. I think he was saying that you were trying to justify israel’s actions by saying"but its legal" Its legal in teh sense taht its not a war crime but thats setting a mighty low standard for yourself. > [@Terr](#): > > How many Israeli soldiers are in Gaza? Oh OK so I see there IS still controversy on this board about whether or not Gaza is occupied. > [@FinnAgain](#): > > Yes, the SCoI considers Gaza to be non-occupied, but under legal precedent set by the Nazis’ actions (whereby the ability to affect absolute control of an area if one chooses is determined to count as occupation even if you don’t have boots on the ground), yes, it may be argued that Israel is in a state of belligerent occupation of Gaza. > > Now, how closely the precedent fits and how much wiggle room there is (is/was Egypt a co-occupier? Is it, instead, a blockade carried out by two nations against Gaza, etc…) is another matter. But it’s hardly open and shut that Israel isn’t occupying Gaza just because there aren’t troops there at this moment. > [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > True, but he Nazis did have “boots on the ground” in the Warsaw Ghetto. > > That said, I certainly think that claiming that the Gaza Strip is “not occupied” is a pretty questionable statement. Does this change your position at all on the issue of occupation, Terr? I suppose it depends on whether the definition of occupation requires soldiers patrolling the streets. BTW, I don’t think it is well settled that the blockade has always been legal. I remember several international bodies declaring the blockade illegal (I think it was based on collective punishment and humanitarian principles). > [@FinnAgain](#): > > Exactly what I said. That the behavior in question, following the most refined set of rules put in place to reduce the horrors of war, is something you view as scummy behavior in this circumstance. Not sure why you quoted it again as it as pretty clear that was the attitude I was mocking. Perhaps he feels that there is a standard of behaviour short of war crime that qualifies for scummy behaviour. Or perhaps Der Trihs was just referring to the notion of hiding behind legal technicalities to deflect criticism as scummy behaviour. > [@Terr](#): > > That’s another interesting term. “Refugee”. Is someone who was born of parents who were born of parents who were born of someone who used to live somewhere else a “refugee”? If it all happened in a refugee camp, then yes. You can’t wait for the refugees that you put in refugee camps to die and then ignore their children born in those camps in order to declare the refugee problem resolved. Children born of refugees in refugee camps are refugees. > [@](#): > > Ah you see, ONLY in case of Palestinians that’s correct. Anyone else, and third-fourth etc. generations are not considered refugees. Name another conflict that has gone on for so long. Name a situation where the children of refugees are not considered refugees as long as they live in those camps, even if its three or four generations removed from the original refugees? > [@](#): > > Ever wonder why others aren’t? No, but I’m sure you have a theory, lets hear it. Come on, don’t be coy, you have a theory don’t you? > [@Malthus](#): > > I split the issue into two. > > First, does Israel have just cause for action at all? And second, if it does - is it carrying out the actions it has decided to take in a “just” manner? > > My answer to the first has to be “yes”. No country on earth would refrain from acting if it was targeted by rocket attacks. > > The answer to the second is to determine whether the action taken is in line with the international conventions governing just-ness in the course of conflict. > > The further question would be who ultimately is “right” in the conflict. That is, however, really outside the bounds of the question. To my mind, a lot of people are allowing their opinions on this larger question to colour their approach to the specific conflict. I’m not excusing any violence on the part of the palestinians but do you think the rocket attacks happened first or the occupation? I suspect that a Palestinian might have a very different response than you, or are we supposed to only entertain one perspective in this conflict? Now consider the blockade, which I believe almost everyone on this baord thought was being poorly executed and several international agencies considered to be illegal. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474/374 "2011-12-16T15:49:59Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Once again, why does everybody keep assuming Israel can attack Iran’s nuclear plants **successfully?** Depends on what you mean by “attack”. If you are asking if Israel could do unto Iran what it did unto Iraq - that is, physically bomb the works out of existence using missiles or bombers - I’d say the answer is almost certainly not; the Iranians would have to have their heads several feet up their asses to concentrate their works without protection from such attacks. [Mind you, the Syrians were successfully attacked in just this way reasonably recently, and so having heads several feet up asses can’t be ruled out!] OTOH, if by “attack” you mean disabled by use of other means … well, there is no proof that it was Israel, but what about assassination of key figures, blowing up key installations on the ground, introducing computer viruses targeted at Iranian operations … somebody has been doing that for some time now, allegedly quite successfully. Can such attacks truly prevent Iran getting the bomb? I doubt it. Like physical bombing, you can slow development and throw spanners in the works, but if the target country has the resources and perseveres, you can’t stop them. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474/375 "2011-12-16T15:57:28Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I’m not excusing any violence on the part of the palestinians but do you think the rocket attacks happened first or the occupation? I suspect that a Palestinian might have a very different response than you, or are we supposed to only entertain one perspective in this conflict? > > Now consider the blockade, which I believe almost everyone on this baord thought was being poorly executed and several international agencies considered to be illegal. As I said, the issue of who is “right” in the larger sense is a totally seperate question. It is perfectly possible to address whether someone fought a war “justly” even if you happen to think, in the larger picture, that they were in the wrong. To take an example from the same region - the '67 war as it affected Jordan. In the larger picture I am of the opinion that Jordan was ‘in the wrong’, because Jordan made the mistake of agreeing to coordinate attack plans with Egypt - and thus the Israelis had no choice but to fight them. But as far as I know, no-one has ever accused Jordan of having fought in that conflict ‘unjustly’. The Israelis I have talked to, though they deplore Jordainian actions between the '48 and '67 wars, all were of the opinion that Jordan fought honourably. The problem here is the mixing-up of issues: that people, once they decide one side is in the big picture “wrong” and the other “right”, are willing to allow that decision to flavour their analysis of every other aspect of the conflict. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474/376 "2011-12-16T16:29:39Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Oh OK so I see there IS still controversy on this board about whether or not Gaza is occupied. There is no controversy. It isn’t. > [@](#): > > Does this change your position at all on the issue of occupation, Terr? Does what change my position? There was no example given of an “occupation” without a military presence. > [@](#): > > If it all happened in a refugee camp, then yes. You can’t wait for the refugees that you put in refugee camps to die and then ignore their children born in those camps in order to declare the refugee problem resolved. Children born of refugees in refugee camps are refugees. Define “refugee camp”. I have been to so-called “refugee camps” in Gaza. They are indistinguishable from cities. Is Gaza city also a “refugee camp”? How about Nablus? Ramalla? Are those “refugee camps”? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474/377 "2011-12-16T17:13:59Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > Depends on what you mean by “attack”. If you are asking if Israel could do unto Iran what it did unto Iraq - that is, physically bomb the works out of existence using missiles or bombers - I’d say the answer is almost certainly not; the Iranians would have to have their heads several feet up their asses to concentrate their works without protection from such attacks. > > [Mind you, the Syrians were successfully attacked in just this way reasonably recently, and so having heads several feet up asses can’t be ruled out!] > > OTOH, if by “attack” you mean disabled by use of other means … well, there is no proof that it was Israel, but what about assassination of key figures, blowing up key installations on the ground, introducing computer viruses targeted at Iranian operations … somebody has been doing that for some time now, allegedly quite successfully. > > Can such attacks truly prevent Iran getting the bomb? I doubt it. Like physical bombing, you can slow development and throw spanners in the works, but if the target country has the resources and perseveres, you can’t stop them. So, what does that leave for a workable “Operation Susa”? ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474/378 "2011-12-16T18:25:44Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > So, what does that leave for a workable “Operation Susa”? Obviously, I don’t think Israel could just keep repeating the same tactic over and again - unless the Iranians are idiots, it will have small chance of success. I thought I made that clear in the part you quoted. Doesn’t preclude using _different_ tactics, though. As already noted, no tactics can stop them forever. Just make it more difficult for Iran to obtain the bomb. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474/379 "2011-12-16T19:29:19Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > There is no controversy. It isn’t. > Does what change my position? There was no example given of an “occupation” without a military presence. Ermm, did you read Finn’s post about what may constitute occupation? Or are you saying that occupation simply cannot exist without soldiers patrolling the streets despite what Finn and Ibn say? > [@](#): > > Define “refugee camp”. I have been to so-called “refugee camps” in Gaza. They are indistinguishable from cities. Is Gaza city also a “refugee camp”? How about Nablus? Ramalla? Are those “refugee camps”? So if they haven’t been swautting in tents for the last 70 years it doesn’t count? Like I said, why do YOU think that Palestinian refugees are still considred refugees 3 or 4 generations out. You seemed to have a theory you wanted to share with us. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474/380 "2011-12-16T19:45:48Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > There is no controversy. It isn’t. Well, there is. Under the Hostages Trial’s precedent, having the capacity to exercise absolute authority, even if you allow the local government to do their thing as long as they don’t buck your orders, is still occupation. Under the Additional Protocol [ > [@](#): > > an occupation indicates the exercise of governmental authority to the exclusion of the established government. This presupposes the destruction of organized resistance and the establishment of an administration to preserve law and order. To the extent that the occupant’s control is maintained and that of the civil government eliminated, the area will be said to be occupied." (48) ]([http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/COM/470-750054?OpenDocument](http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/COM/470-750054?OpenDocument)) But since Hamas rules Gaza, there is a legitimate question as to whether the Hostages Trial or the Additional Protocol is a better guide. Although the SCoI determined that Gaza wasn’t held in a state of belligerent occupation, they still held that Israel was responsible for following rules that, essentially, were the same as if Gaza was occupied. I tend to disagree with their ruling but agree with the upshot. I do think that Israel’s (somewhat limited) control over Gaza plus the ability to impose overwhelming martial force at will puts them closer to the HT rather than the AP. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474.md?page=18) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-for-israel-to-launch-operation-susa/602474.md?page=20)