[NYCFarmboy]

Sri Lanka rejects Israel rescuers

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4130599.stm

Israel has cancelled plans to send a 150-person rescue mission to Sri Lanka after the devastated island objected to the military composition of the team.

The delegation - including 60 soldiers - had been due to set off on Tuesday to help after Sunday's tsunami disaster.

Instead, a smaller team will escort a convoy carrying emergency supplies, Israeli officials said.

Sri Lanka restored diplomatic ties with Israel in 2000, despite objections from the island's Muslim minority.

Neither side has officially explained the change of plan, although some reports say the objection came from Sri Lanka's military.

Sri Lanka Ambassador Diffa Digeratna is quoted by Jerusalem Post as saying that the change was due to the "the lack of accommodations in Colombo".

Israel's army had planned to send staff to set up field hospitals, including internal medicine and paediatric clinics, an Israeli army spokesman said.

A situation room has been set up to track down Israeli holidaymakers


Other Israeli agencies have sent emergency relief to Sri Lanka and other tsunami-hit countries.

Humanitarian organisation Latet sent a jumbo jet carrying 18 metric tons of supplies to Colombo, medical teams have been dispatched to Thailand and help offered to India, Haaretz reported.

A rescue-and-recovery team from the Jewish ultra-Orthodox organisation Zaka left for the region on Monday with equipment used for identifying bodies, as well as body bags.

Israel's foreign ministry has set up a situation room for relatives to track down hundreds of Israelis on holiday in the tsunami zone, who have not yet made contact.

No one from the country has yet been confirmed dead in the disaster.

[Lysistrata]

Never mind the 50,000+ dead - the important news is that a few Israelis aren't going to Colombo.

[vmarks]

If they are willing to turn away help when offered, they must not think they need assistance that desperately.

They should be thankful that Israel isn't the only country volunteering aid, and grateful for the other countries which have also graciously volunteered money and workers to help them through this tragedy.

[ambush]

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by ambush:

and yet another insightful post from comrade ambush.

[lil'babykitten]

They rejected one team that was composed of Israeli military personnel, which is understandable. There are still Israeli aid teams heading there.

[roam]

Read the article, it's military help they are refusing. I don't blame them, who wants Israeli military prowling through your backyard?

[Splinter]

Originally posted by roam:
Read the article, it's military help they are refusing. I don't blame them, who wants Israeli military prowling through your backyard?

Not that anyone else from Israel is much different... probably something like 7 or 8 in 10 people you meet from Israel are military trained. My brother and I might be going to Indonesia Friday/Saturday and he has been through the army in Israel and will be having reserve duty in February and I'm going in March... there�s not much avoiding it when getting help from us.

*shrug*

[roam]

Originally posted by Splinter:
Not that anyone else from Israel is much different... probably something like 7 or 8 in 10 people you meet from Israel are military trained. My brother and I might be going to Indonesia Friday/Saturday and he has been through the army in Israel and will be having reserve duty in February and I'm going in March... there�s not much avoiding it when getting help from us.

*shrug*

It's not a question of what one's background is, but rather what the Government response team consists of. So, it's no surprise that countries like Sri Lanka are suspicious of a team primarily made up of troops. Granted that most Israelis do military service, there is a big difference between someone's background having been through compulsory military service, and a unit of helpers who are currently career military.

The problem that comes up, is Israel's history of foreign relations. Just last week, the Jordanian intelligence service contacted Sudan with reports of Israeli troops helping the rebels there; they were captured and expelled. In Pakistan, two Mossad agents were found recently, and expelled. In New Zealand, a similar thing has happened. In Turkey, after their devastating earthquake a few years ago, several Israeli agents were asked to leave the relief team.

Now, it's pretty obvious that a country like Sri Lanka is going to wonder if the Israeli effort has a couple of Mossad spies hidden amongst them, which wouldn't surprise me. And that is the difficulty.

I applaud you for going to help, but it's not surprising if some nations are sceptical of who exactly is in the Israeli team, based on past efforts by Israel.

[eklipse]

Soon the Israeli government will be telling Jews living in Asia that the only way they can be safe from tsunamis is to move to Israel.

Wait for it.

[DBursey]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
They rejected one team that was composed of Israeli military personnel, which is understandable.

Oh, for sure. Who should care if a few more innocent lives are tossed away over ideological differences? The maintenance of the grudge matters most.

[roam]

Originally posted by DBursey:
Oh, for sure. Who should care if a few more innocent lives are tossed away over ideological differences? The maintenance of the grudge matters most.

If Israel conducted themselves properly in the political arena, then we wouldn't see such issues arising. Israel knows fine well that they can send their usual response teams which aren't currently in military service, so why not?

[Millennium]

Originally posted by roam:
Read the article, it's military help they are refusing. I don't blame them, who wants Israeli military prowling through your backyard?

They don't seem to mind other nations' militaries sending aid. Therefore, why not Israel's?

[roam]

Originally posted by Millennium:
They don't seem to mind other nations' militaries sending aid. Therefore, why not Israel's?

National security. Israel has a terrible record in SE Asia. It's not surprising they refised military asistence. Israel is perfectly capable of sending non-military relief crews, why they insist on sending teams largly comprised of currently serving military, is beyond me. They should be aware of the senstvities involved.

[DBursey]

The process of saving civilian lives in the aftermath of natural disasters should necessarily be one in which political and ideological differences are put aside.

The Israeli rescue teams are technically proficient in the required rescue techniques. Does the identity of the rescuers so badly bother the man who has just watched his family disappear beneath the waves?

As I recall, it was a year ago when theocratic Iran permitted the passage of rescue teams sent by the Great Satan to assist the ravaged survivors of Bam. Recent and past history is replete with such examples of the laying aside of differences in common recognition of humanity's vulnerability in times of great need.

The overwhelming need for humanitarian aid trumps political/ideological differences in such situations. Those authority figures who refuse to so recognise will live with the permutations of this pathetically petty decision.

[roam]

Originally posted by DBursey:
The process of saving civilian lives in the aftermath of natural disasters should necessarily be one in which political and ideological differences are put aside.

In an ideal world, but alas, it isn't.

[DBursey]

You mean in a world wherein might reside Sri Lankan authorities of sound judgement. Regrettably, they have not demonstrated themselves as possessing any reasonable capacity in this regard.

[roam]

Originally posted by DBursey:
You mean in a world wherein might reside Sri Lankan authorities of sound judgement. Regrettably, they have not demonstrated themselves as possessing any reasonable capacity in this regard.

Yes, they have. They've only refused help from one team comprised of military personnel. Israel should know better.

[DBursey]

I totally disagree with the assertion that incidental political concerns trump the lives of innocents in time of disaster. As my previous link demonstrates, others (even radically divergent idelogies) have come to a similar conclusion when faced with similarly disastrous circumstances.

Israel cannot be faulted for maximizing its proffered rescue capacity to the region's striken humanity.

[roam]

Originally posted by DBursey:
I totally disagree with the assertion that incidental political concerns trump the lives of innocents in time of disaster. As my previous link demonstrates, others (even radically divergent idelogies) have come to a similar conclusion when faced with similarly disastrous circumstances.

Israel cannot be faulted for maximizing its proffered rescue capacity to the region's striken humanity.

You can't compare both things without taking into account the various factors. Israel is at fault, for a good many reasons, and we can't blame nations now if they turn them away. That's my feelings on this, Israel only has themselves to blame for how the world sees them.

[budster101]

Send in the UN? On second thought, maybe not, they'd just rape the dead bodies. [tic]

[roam]

Originally posted by budster101:
Send in the UN? On second thought, maybe not, they'd just rape the dead bodies. [tic]

Ouch! The UN is meant to be spearheading the relief effort in Sri Lanka, I just read that they've sent out teams to E. Africa, where the effects of the disaster hit as far as there.

[Splinter]

I can understand both. They are letting our doctors and such in but the military personnel they aren�t.

Understandable but also understandable why Israel would offer such a service because the military trained have the most experience and training of search and rescue then any others we can offer to send. Most people in the business of search and rescue here in Israel ARE career officers and such. Just the uniqueness of our situation... its their loss I just hope what help they allow us to send helps make a difference.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by Splinter:
Understandable but also understandable why Israel would offer such a service because the military trained have the most experience and training of search and rescue then any others we can offer to send. Most people in the business of search and rescue here in Israel ARE career officers and such. Just the uniqueness of our situation...

Actually, I'd go so far as to say your situation is not unique at all. Military search-and-rescue teams tend to be very highly trained, often more more so than their civilian counterparts, and they tend to have better technology at their disposal as well. This is not unique to your country; it is a side effect of military budgeting.

However, search and rescue aren't where the military really shines when it comes to disaster relief. Consider temporary shelter and hospitals: although the military trains to set these things up very quickly -sometimes including even more advanced infrastructure- in preparation for war, the skills are just as useful when any large group of people needs shelter and medical care and needs it fast. The same is true of distributing rations and supplies: military supply units need to be able to do it for entire armies, and so even a large-scale disaster like this is well within their reach.

It is, perhaps, ironic that training for war can be so useful in such fundamentally-humanitarian projects as disaster relief. Nevertheless, it works, and it works well. I understand how using the military for such things can leave a bad taste in people's mouths; it does that for me too. But I can't deny that they're able to get the job done better and faster than pretty much anyone else.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally posted by Millennium:
Actually, I'd go so far as to say your situation is not unique at all. Military search-and-rescue teams tend to be very highly trained, often more more so than their civilian counterparts, and they tend to have better technology at their disposal as well. This is not unique to your country; it is a side effect of military budgeting.

However, search and rescue aren't where the military really shines when it comes to disaster relief. Consider temporary shelter and hospitals: although the military trains to set these things up very quickly -sometimes including even more advanced infrastructure- in preparation for war, the skills are just as useful when any large group of people needs shelter and medical care and needs it fast. The same is true of distributing rations and supplies: military supply units need to be able to do it for entire armies, and so even a large-scale disaster like this is well within their reach.

It is, perhaps, ironic that training for war can be so useful in such fundamentally-humanitarian projects as disaster relief. Nevertheless, it works, and it works well. I understand how using the military for such things can leave a bad taste in people's mouths; it does that for me too. But I can't deny that they're able to get the job done better and faster than pretty much anyone else.

Millenium, your posts always impress me with their thoughtfulness and insight. I think this one is another shining example.

I would love nothing more than to see a small armada of supply and support ships from the US Navy offloading construction equipment and other supplies onto the beaches in Sri Lanka, Indonesia, and India. Yes, that would generate some negative responses in the world press--no matter what we do some would complain--but the US military is excellent at these types of activities. Look what the military did in Florida for the victims of Hurricane Andrew.

[Splinter]

Originally posted by Millennium:
Actually, I'd go so far as to say your situation is not unique at all. Military search-and-rescue teams tend to be very highly trained, often more more so than their civilian counterparts, and they tend to have better technology at their disposal as well. This is not unique to your country; it is a side effect of military budgeting.

However, search and rescue aren't where the military really shines when it comes to disaster relief. Consider temporary shelter and hospitals: although the military trains to set these things up very quickly -sometimes including even more advanced infrastructure- in preparation for war, the skills are just as useful when any large group of people needs shelter and medical care and needs it fast. The same is true of distributing rations and supplies: military supply units need to be able to do it for entire armies, and so even a large-scale disaster like this is well within their reach.

It is, perhaps, ironic that training for war can be so useful in such fundamentally-humanitarian projects as disaster relief. Nevertheless, it works, and it works well. I understand how using the military for such things can leave a bad taste in people's mouths; it does that for me too. But I can't deny that they're able to get the job done better and faster than pretty much anyone else.

True, however I didn�t not mean unique in that our military trained rescuers and such are the best our country has to offer but the other countries have better to offer that are outside their military. What I mean was that there is no other service like that in Israel that isn�t militarily associated... I'm sure there are some but nothing substantial that I have seen. (Speculation not fact)

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by roam:
You can't compare both things without taking into account the various factors. Israel is at fault, for a good many reasons, and we can't blame nations now if they turn them away. That's my feelings on this, Israel only has themselves to blame for how the world sees them.

There appear to be few in Israel and the US who understand how the world sees Israel

[vmarks]

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
There appear to be few in Israel and the US who understand how the world sees Israel

We understand how the world sees the US and how the world sees Israel. The "world", by which you generally mean France, Germany, and a handful of Arab countries that haven't signed treaties with Israel, has been wrong before, and is wrong now.

At least most of the news sources who reported the story managed to get the story right-

http://www.honestreporting.com/artic...Unreported.asp

When disaster strikes anywhere in the world, Israelis can be counted on to help. So it's no surprise that within hours of the devastating tsunami in the Indian Ocean, the following humanitarian missions all departed from the tiny Jewish state:


IDF rescue team on its way to Sri Lanka
● �_The Israeli organization Latet ('To Give') filled a jumbo jet with 18 tons of supplies.

● �_A medical team headed by four doctors from Jerusalem's Hadassah Hospital arrived in Sri Lanka on Monday night (Dec. 27), carrying medicine and baby food. The doctors specialize in rescue operations, trauma and pediatrics.

● �_An IDF rescue team is now on its way to Sri Lanka with 80 tons of aid material, including 10,000 blankets, tents, nylon sheeting and water containers, all contributed by the IDF.

● �_A ZAKA rescue-and-recovery team arrived in the disaster areas Monday night, armed with its specialized equipment for identifying bodies.

● �_A Health Ministry contingent left for Thailand on Monday night to aid in rescue efforts. The group includes doctors, nurses and four members of the IDF.

● �_Israel has also offered its assistance to India ― a search-and-rescue team from the Home Front Command, as well as consignments of food and medicine.

Yet, with the exception of UPI (as of this writing - Tues. 4pm EST), none of the major news outlets have dedicated an article to this remarkable Israeli humanitarian effort. This, despite the fact that the IDF sent all Israel-based journalists a press release Monday evening (Dec. 27), inviting them to the airport to cover the departure of one IDF group. (ed- bbc managed to get it as well, later on)

This is all the more surprising given the fact that the major news agencies have entire teams of reporters in Israel, who submit at least one 'Israel-article' each day.



http://www.yourish.com/archives/2004...tml#2004122803
Vatican slams Israel for something she didn't do


So apparently, people who write for the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano have limited reading comprehension skills. They're claiming Israel refused to help Sri Lanka.



The Vatican newspaper has denounced a decision by the Israeli army to deny emergency help to disaster victims in Sri Lanka.


Calling for "a radical and dramatic change of perspective" among people "too often preoccupied with making war," L'Osservatore Romano singled out Israeli military leaders for declining a request for emergency medical help. The Vatican paper observed that in what "should be a time for unconditional solidarity," some world leaders seem incapable of escaping a "small-minded approach that restricts their horizons."



Here's the problem. That isn't what happened. Sri Lanka refused to allow the Israel delegation in.



Contrary to the Vatican report, an Israeli plane carrying 80 tons of food and medical supplies worth $100,000 was set to depart for Sri Lanka Wednesday morning. At the request of the Sri Lankan Foreign Ministry, a team of some 150 Israeli medical and security personnel aborted their planned trip to the island nation Tuesday night.


The Vatican paper observed that in what "should be a time for unconditional solidarity," some world leaders seem incapable of escaping a "small-minded approach that restricts their horizons."


The fact that the devastation swept across different societies, cultures, and nations should help to reinforce the universal perspective, the paper suggested.



Ha'aretz has more:
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/520098.html


A 150-member Israeli aid delegation canceled its mission to Sri Lanka on Tuesday, after the country - one of the hardest hit in the Asian tsunami disaster - apparently refused to accept the Israeli team, Israel Defense Forces officials said.


However, the Sri Lankan president's military secretary sent a notice to the country's foreign and defense ministries Tuesday expressing support for the arrival of a 50-member Israeli delegation.


"We are not opposed to a plane loaded with medical supplies, food and blankets that will be accompanied by a medical team comprised of 50 IDF people, as the Israeli Foreign Ministry requested in a letter," the military secretary said in the notice.



Hell, even the BBC got the story right:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4130599.stm


Israel has cancelled plans to send a 150-person rescue mission to Sri Lanka after the devastated island objected to the military composition of the team.



One would have to say, what is wrong with the Vatican, using this to beat up on Israel?


-----

So you know what? Maybe other countries that aren't as picky need help.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
There appear to be few in Israel and the US who understand how the world sees Israel

You don't speak for "the world", you don't even know how to speak for yourself. People complain that not enough support is being sent, yet you praise the blind ignorance of a gov't who can't see a noble act when it's staring them in the face. How dare some of you applaud the exclusion of some of the most trained emergency personel in the world (and the Israeli military is) while people are suffering and dying? That's wasteful, shameful, and borderline criminal.

"Let's set aside our differences in this difficult time!"

Yeah, right.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

I respect Sri Lanka for being consistent, and honest.

I actually wish more nations and individuals would be more honest in the same way. Basically, DON�T accept money, from people you friggen hate. Don�t play the game of hating Israel with every fiber of your being on Monday, then come Wednesday when you need something, stick your hand out and go �Gimme, gimmie, gimmie, dammit why aren�t you giving me more??!!�

I don�t get what the outrage is here. I�ve got a whole lot more respect for Sri Lanka�s consistency if they really disagree with Israel that much, than I do nations that would be two-faced pricks and accept their aid when the rest of the week they�re all for pushing THEM into the sea.

As for Israel, they should take this as an indicator of where they stand with Sri Lanka, and move on. Send money and aid elsewhere, where it�s needed and appreciated. Respect the fact that at least one nation had the actual balls and honesty to be consistent in their prejudices.

I�d appreciate it greatly if any nations that hate the US six days out of the week, wouldn�t stick their hands out to us on the seventh either.

[roberto blanco]

is it really so hard to understand that they rejected the help because it was comprised of MILITARY PERSONNEL, not because it was from israel?!

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally posted by roberto blanco:
is it really so hard to understand that they rejected the help because it was comprised of MILITARY PERSONNEL, not because it was from israel?!

What other nation's military aid did they reject?

[roberto blanco]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
What other nation's military aid did they reject?

what other help from israel have they rejected?

/did any other nation even send military aid?

[Millennium]

Originally posted by roberto blanco:
/did any other nation even send military aid?

The US has pledged military aid, among others, and Sri Lanka certainly doesn't seem to object to them.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by roberto blanco:
what other help from israel have they rejected?

/did any other nation even send military aid?

The US military for one, the Indian Navy for another.

Rather than dodging a question with a question, you could next time google it yourself. Hmm?

[BRussell]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
I respect Sri Lanka for being consistent, and honest.

OK, but I think the reason people see this as absurd is because it throws a spotlight on their general attitudes rather than simply whether they're consistent or not. I mean, which is better, to have utterly foolish but consistent opinions, or to not have foolish opinions in the first place?

[Chuckit]

Originally posted by Wiskedjak:
There appear to be few in Israel and the US who understand how the world sees Israel

Regardless of how "the world sees Israel," what could they possibly think the Israelis are actually up to that would justify letting more people die? It's not like (even if it could happen) Israel would want to take over a country that just got pounded by a tidal wave and which is currently worried about its own future.

[Mister Elf]

Well if they don't want military help, it's their loss. The US is sending the USS Abraham Lincoln, a full Marine Expeditionary Unit, and half the rest of the Pacific Fleet to help. Sorry, Sri Lanka.

LOL...you WILL accept our help..or else!

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally posted by BRussell:
OK, but I think the reason people see this as absurd is because it throws a spotlight on their general attitudes rather than simply whether they're consistent or not. I mean, which is better, to have utterly foolish but consistent opinions, or to not have foolish opinions in the first place?

I�m not saying I agree with whatever their disagreement with the Israeli military is, just that I respect that they chose to at least be consistent about it.

Sure it's probably better not to have some foolish opinion in the first place, but being a blatant hypocrite isn't the way to pretend the 'foolish' opinion doesn't exist.

Remember after 9/11 when Giuliani refused to accept money from a Saudi prince due to a disagreement with the political BS attached to the donation? Giuliani was consistent in the same sense- such a wide political disagreement means you also should stay consistent and not accept money from the same people, or else be a hypocrite.

I may not agree with whatever political beef Sri Lanka may have with the Israeli military, but I can at least respect that they didn�t act like ********s by bagging on them on Monday, and then turning around and accepting their aid on Wednesday. The right thing to do, if the political gulf is so wide, is turn down the assistance. �Thanks, but, no thanks.�

[roberto blanco]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
Rather than dodging a question with a question, you could next time google it yourself.

...and rather than answering my post with a snide remark, why don't you try to understand that i already responded to crash harddrive's post with a question (a completely valid rhetorical method)

thank you.

anyway, seems like there are plenty of israeli helpers and rescue workers in sri lanka and the region by now. as some others have posted already, no anti-semitism or anti-israeli sentiments here.

might as well close the thread.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by roberto blanco:
...and rather than answering my post with a snide remark, why don't you try to understand that i already responded to crash harddrive's post with a question (a completely valid rhetorical method)

thank you.

anyway, seems like there are plenty of israeli helpers and rescue workers in sri lanka and the region by now. as some others have posted already, no anti-semitism or anti-israeli sentiments here.

might as well close the thread.

You implied that Sri Lanka turned down all military aid. You were called on to back up that assumption. Rather than spend 2 minutes doing a google search to see if you were right and answer the question you were asked, you tried to put the burden on Crash to prove that other military aid had been accepted. That's not a valid rhetorical device. It's a way of trying to dodge admitting you were wrong.

In fact, as I proved with a simple google search, other countries' military aid has been accepted. They even accepted aid from India, a country with which the government of Sri Lanka has had tense relations for decades (because of perceived Indian support for the Tamils).

The key issue here evedently isn't as you asserted the military character of the aid as such. it is the fact that the military in question is the IDF. Of course, you don't want to admit that, which is why you now want to declare the conversation over. That's not a very honest way to behave in a debate.

[ambush]

The Israeli army is an occupation/imperialist army.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by ambush:
The Israeli army is an occupation/imperialist army.

And what would you call the French raping little girls in the Congo? Bet those women feel rather occupied.

[ambush]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
And what would you call the French raping little girls in the Congo? Bet those women feel rather occupied.

Yes, French people can be sickos too. Your point being?

[budster101]

Originally posted by ambush:
Yes, French people can be sickos too. Your point being?

They work for the UN, and the UN is saying teh US doesn't have the 'moral authority'.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by budster101:
They work for the UN, and the UN is saying teh US doesn't have the 'moral authority'.

So you hold the whole of the UN responsible for the actions of a few assholes? By that logic then the whole of the US military is responsible for the crimes committed at Abu Ghraib and thus completely lacks any moral authority. No?

[budster101]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
So you hold the whole of the UN responsible for the actions of a few assholes? By that logic then the whole of the US military is responsible for the crimes committed at Abu Ghraib and thus completely lacks any moral authority. No?

Didn't the UN start this argument by saying the US does not have the "Moral Authority"?
I do believe this is an excellent example to use for the pot & kettle situation.

Edited content.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
So you hold the whole of the UN responsible for the actions of a few assholes? By that logic then the whole of the US military is responsible for the crimes committed at Abu Ghraib and thus completely lacks any moral authority. No?

"A few"? Try hundreds and hundreds of women and girls being raped and sold.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by ambush:
Yes, French people can be sickos too. Your point being?

Point? That the French are performing far worse attrocities but you're not holding their feet to the fire. I know you hate the US, but c'mon, at least be consistent.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
And what would you call the French raping little girls in the Congo? Bet those women feel rather occupied.

Is France sending military aid to Sri Lanka?