While the United States is busy "blocking" an effective United Nations, they might consider this point of view:
Then there came the small provocations which were designed to get Hamas to react. After several months, in which hardly any Qassam rockets were launched, an army unit was sent into the Strip “in order to destroy a tunnel that came close to the border fence”. From a purely military point of view, it would have made more sense to lay an ambush on our side of the fence. But the aim was to find a pretext for the termination of the cease-fire, in a way that made it plausible to put the blame on the Palestinians. And indeed, after several such small actions [ref?], in which Hamas fighters were killed, Hamas retaliated with a massive launch of rockets, and – lo and behold – the cease-fire was at an end. Everybody blamed Hamas.
- Uri Avenery
- Uri Avenery
Now, of course there is time to "attack" Uri Avenery and scan through everything he's ever written or said to "prove" he is a traitor (I don't share his or Hamas's big-picture view of the blockade), but the question remains: who is looking-in to see who is taunting whom?
One cannot just ignore it ... because, other, more important things, end up getting subordinated, if you do, right?
