Israeli forces storm Gaza aid ship

[Lunar]

I am afraid, the easiest way to provoke Israelis into true attrocities, all the way to a collective national suicide, would be for Arabs to dress their old men and women in striped concentration camp suits, put the red crescent where the yellow star would have been and send them, completely unarmed, with canes and wheelchairs to the Eretz border crossing in Northern Gaza

Seconds away from going to sleep here, but I gotta ask, why the red crescent?  The only symbol I'm aware of that  being associated with is with the Red Cross.   Why wouldn't it be green?

I should have more comments on everything on the morrow.

edit: hmm, there is some red crescent stuff: http://www.palestinercs.org/

maybe ignore this post?

[Associate Justice PiT]

I am afraid, the easiest way to provoke Israelis into true attrocities, all the way to a collective national suicide, would be for Arabs to dress their old men and women in striped concentration camp suits, put the red crescent where the yellow star would have been and send them, completely unarmed, with canes and wheelchairs to the Eretz border crossing in Northern Gaza

Seconds away from going to sleep here, but I gotta ask, why the red crescent?  The only symbol I'm aware of that  being associated with is with the Red Cross.   Why wouldn't it be green?

I should have more comments on everything on the morrow.

edit: hmm, there is some red crescent stuff: http://www.palestinercs.org/

maybe ignore this post?

     FWIW, the organization you linked to appears to render services similar to those rendered by the Red Cross.

[dead0man]

Let me try to formulate here.

1. The action itself was, obviously, a provocation, which Israelis have happily walked right into.

2. Of course, the main point of the action wasn't to deliver anything this time, but to run the blockade and, preferably, make it untenable.

3. So far, it is, at least, half successful in that: Raffah crossing is semi-open now and, it seems, this will be permanent. They forced Mubarrak's hand

4. The deaths, however sad to be saying it, added a huge propaganda coup to the blockade runners.

5. Another added benefit for their cause has been that Israel managed to do this in a manner that would be forcing ANY Turkish government to react. Talking to an atheist, non-nationalist, moderately anti-government (anti-Islamic), anti-military Turkish expat in the morning (before he digested the news) I got a very dismissive reaction "ah, we are less likely to go to war w/ Israel then w/ Argentina". By lunchtime (he'd read Turkish news meanwhile) I got a very different reaction from the very same guy: "if they <Israelis> can get away w/ THIS, they can get away w/ ANYTHING. They can't be getting away w/ this" His only reason for opposing the military action at that point was, that he didn't want the Turkish military to win anything (he hates them), and he was afraid they might.

6. This, actually, strengthened Hamas. If the delivery, actually, happened, it would have been a non-Hamas activity in the strip, It would have done more to strengthen the UNRWA and other internationals there (there has been a good article on this in the Economist). 

7. To the extent the Israelis are trying to counteract the propaganda disaster, they are doing it all wrong. NOBODY outside Israel itself and a very narrow circle of its hardest core supporters is going to be making up their mind about this based on whether the Israeli soldiers were under attack or whether the stop was legal by some intricacy of international law on bolckade running.  They may be 10,000 times right there, nobody cares. As long as the blockade is viewed as wrong, as it is viewed by most people, and as long as Israel is the militarily stronger party, which it obviously is, they will be blamed even for the deaths of their own soldiers (which, mercifully, didn't occur this time). 

8. The only way for Israel to have gone out of this reasonably unscathed reputationwise would have been to appologize and start heads rolling among those who could be blamed for the disastrous decision to go in.  This hasn't happened, so the damage is done.
The more they continue hair-splitting on why they were justified doing what they did, the more they loose the neutrals. There is little value in preaching to the choir - it's not what they should be doing.

9. Mercifully, they seem to be coming to their senses. Deporting all those detained and releasing from prison for the moment even most (if not all?) of their own and Palestinian citizens, involved, was sensible. Apparently, Turkey made releasing its own nationals a condition for maintaining diplomatic relations, BTW, so it shows, Israel is still capable of responding to incentives.

Excellent summary that I concur with 100%.  At this point they should just let somebody else "credible" take over Gaza....Egypt, Turkey, Jordan...somebody.  Then, 2 weeks later when the rocket attacks are back up to hundreds a day they might be able to start turning the PR back their way a little.

I'm still curious as to why the first 5 ships were boarded with little or no trouble.

[ag]

I am afraid, the easiest way to provoke Israelis into true attrocities, all the way to a collective national suicide, would be for Arabs to dress their old men and women in striped concentration camp suits, put the red crescent where the yellow star would have been and send them, completely unarmed, with canes and wheelchairs to the Eretz border crossing in Northern Gaza

Seconds away from going to sleep here, but I gotta ask, why the red crescent?  The only symbol I'm aware of that  being associated with is with the Red Cross.   Why wouldn't it be green?

Because I am semi-asleep ) Thanks for catching it )

[ag]

I'm still curious as to why the first 5 ships were boarded with little or no trouble.

Because the bulk of these people are actually in for non-violent resistance. On one of the ships there was, probably, a group of people less prone to turn their cheak. Likely, this group wasn't very big as a proportion of the total ship population, but it was there. When the Israelis faced it, they panicked and started shooting.

It's like in every big demonstration: there will always be people of differing temperament and intensions. Sometimes violence might erupt even when both sides, in general, would prefer it not to happen. Of course, any police force should take this into account.

[GMantis]

Let me try to formulate here.

1. The action itself was, obviously, a provocation, which Israelis have happily walked right into.

2. Of course, the main point of the action wasn't to deliver anything this time, but to run the blockade and, preferably, make it untenable.

3. So far, it is, at least, half successful in that: Raffah crossing is semi-open now and, it seems, this will be permanent. They forced Mubarrak's hand

4. The deaths, however sad to be saying it, added a huge propaganda coup to the blockade runners.

5. Another added benefit for their cause has been that Israel managed to do this in a manner that would be forcing ANY Turkish government to react. Talking to an atheist, non-nationalist, moderately anti-government (anti-Islamic), anti-military Turkish expat in the morning (before he digested the news) I got a very dismissive reaction "ah, we are less likely to go to war w/ Israel then w/ Argentina". By lunchtime (he'd read Turkish news meanwhile) I got a very different reaction from the very same guy: "if they <Israelis> can get away w/ THIS, they can get away w/ ANYTHING. They can't be getting away w/ this" His only reason for opposing the military action at that point was, that he didn't want the Turkish military to win anything (he hates them), and he was afraid they might.

6. This, actually, strengthened Hamas. If the delivery, actually, happened, it would have been a non-Hamas activity in the strip, It would have done more to strengthen the UNRWA and other internationals there (there has been a good article on this in the Economist). 

7. To the extent the Israelis are trying to counteract the propaganda disaster, they are doing it all wrong. NOBODY outside Israel itself and a very narrow circle of its hardest core supporters is going to be making up their mind about this based on whether the Israeli soldiers were under attack or whether the stop was legal by some intricacy of international law on bolckade running.  They may be 10,000 times right there, nobody cares. As long as the blockade is viewed as wrong, as it is viewed by most people, and as long as Israel is the militarily stronger party, which it obviously is, they will be blamed even for the deaths of their own soldiers (which, mercifully, didn't occur this time). 

8. The only way for Israel to have gone out of this reasonably unscathed reputationwise would have been to appologize and start heads rolling among those who could be blamed for the disastrous decision to go in.  This hasn't happened, so the damage is done.
The more they continue hair-splitting on why they were justified doing what they did, the more they loose the neutrals. There is little value in preaching to the choir - it's not what they should be doing.

9. Mercifully, they seem to be coming to their senses. Deporting all those detained and releasing from prison for the moment even most (if not all?) of their own and Palestinian citizens, involved, was sensible. Apparently, Turkey made releasing its own nationals a condition for maintaining diplomatic relations, BTW, so it shows, Israel is still capable of responding to incentives.

Excellent summary that I concur with 100%.  At this point they should just let somebody else "credible" take over Gaza....Egypt, Turkey, Jordan...somebody.  Then, 2 weeks later when the rocket attacks are back up to hundreds a day they might be able to start turning the PR back their way a little.

I'm still curious as to why the first 5 ships were boarded with little or no trouble.

How many rocket attacks come from Jordan and Egypt?

[ag]

Excellent summary that I concur with 100%.  At this point they should just let somebody else "credible" take over Gaza....Egypt, Turkey, Jordan...somebody.  Then, 2 weeks later when the rocket attacks are back up to hundreds a day they might be able to start turning the PR back their way a little.

Nobody is going to take the job of the prison warden unconditionally. If anybody does, it would be in exchange for some sort of a big political movement by the Israelis. Otherwise, whoever takes this job will be screwed forever. Nobody is really intereseted in helping Israel on this one. Israel has created a monster here - it's their problem. If they are to persuade others to take it up, they'd have to think how they would do persuading.  Americans tried doing this job once already a generation ago in Lebanon - the end was ugly.  Nobody else would want to do this.

[dead0man]

How many rocket attacks come from Jordan and Egypt?

None, that's why I suggested they play warden and not, say, Iran or Syria.

Nobody is going to take the job of the prison warden unconditionally. If anybody does, it would be in exchange for some sort of a big political movement by the Israelis. Otherwise, whoever takes this job will be screwed forever. Nobody is really intereseted in helping Israel on this one. Israel has created a monster here - it's their problem. If they are to persuade others to take it up, they'd have to think how they would do persuading.  Americans tried doing this job once already a generation ago in Lebanon - the end was ugly.  Nobody else would want to do this.

The big political move would be "freeing" Gaza.  Let someone the people of Gaza don't hate take over until they (the people of Gaza) can play well with their neighbors.  Isn't that what everybody wants?  The many success's in the West Bank over the last few years can work in Gaza too can't they?

[bullmoose88]

Did the US actively involve itself in the Falklands War?  I believe it gave the Brits intelligence, but not a heckova lot more.  But my history might be bad.

[ag]

The big political move would be "freeing" Gaza.  Let someone the people of Gaza don't hate take over until they (the people of Gaza) can play well with their neighbors.  Isn't that what everybody wants?  The many success's in the West Bank over the last few years can work in Gaza too can't they?

This is not a motive enough. Everybody understands, Gaza is ungovernable. Everybody believes, Israel made it ungovernable. It's like in a china shop: they broke it - they own it. There are only two ways Israel can get this. There is a good way: Israel does something to make Gaza, actually, governable. This would require a genuine stab at a political solution which would both undermine the Hamas and make it clear to Gazans that they have something to loose. It won't be easy, and it will take time, but as part of a political solution outsiders might enter to enforce some security guarantees to both sides.

There is also the bad way: an attempted ethnic cleansing or worse. Yes, then outsiders (probably, including the US) will be forced to enter. They won't be happy about it, and Israel will take the brunt of this unhappiness. Hopefully, Israeli cities won't get bombed by some of its normal allies in the process, as Serbian cities were. But after this Israel can forget about international support in any quarters for a long, long time to come. At least, until it extradites its leaders to the Hague, I'd think.

[dead0man]

Are there any ideas on how the "good way" would actually work?  Everybody wants the good way, many people blame Israel for everything, but nobody ever has an answer.  Why won't the actions Israel has taken in the West Bank work in Gaza?

[??????????]

Like I said before, the only workable way would be to take everything over, de-islam the region, and train the children in the ways of the west. Horrible I know but probably the only valid option.

[ag]

Like I said before, the only workable way would be to take everything over, de-islam the region, and train the children in the ways of the west. Horrible I know but probably the only valid option.

Are you willing to go through a new Nurnberg trial? Because that's what any attempt to implement your proposal would end in (with those like you among the accused, not the accusers, obviously).

[ag]

Are there any ideas on how the "good way" would actually work?  Everybody wants the good way, many people blame Israel for everything, but nobody ever has an answer.  Why won't the actions Israel has taken in the West Bank work in Gaza?

There are only two ways: a one-state solution and a two-state solution. The one-state solution is unacceptable to the bulk of the Israelis, at least at present. Therefore, let's forget about it for the moment. Hence, two-state solution. This would involve very slow institution-building, support for those willing and capable of negotiating and a lot of restraint on the Israeli side, if it is to be achieved. And, in the end, it will involve sacrifices on Israel's part. Palestinians have to get something they'd be afraid to loose. At present, a lot of them have nothing.

Let's not forget, that the current situation is of Israel's making: it has spend decades undermining anyone with whom it could potentially talk, so that it wouldn't have to talk. The people, who could have a chance negotiating peace, for the most part, are in Israeli prisons, or else marginalized through Israeli efforts.

It should also be remembered, that this isn't just a Palestinian problem, but an Israeli-Palestinian problem. One necessary condition, I am afraid, is a big psychological change in Israel itself. As long as Israel, contrary to all evidence, continues to think of itself as a small endangered underdog, it will be difficult to resolve the situation. The most powerful motivator in this world is fear, and Israelis have been panicking for the last 60+ years. It will take some courage on their side, that they've been consistently lacking.

[Lunar]

7. Well, if Israel wanted to change opinion it could actually try to do something about justifying the blockade. I don't think legality matters that much here. International law might be fuzzy on this (to begin with, it's not quite clear even what is it this thing called "Gaza strip") and any legal argument is going to degenerate into the details of import as a future precedent, but of no propaganda value. Things are just not clear enough to persuade anyone.

Israel's position would have been much stronger if it were making a practical argument. The problem is, there is no practical argument for the current policy that would resonate, I am afraid - at least, I don't know of any. Israel's position would have been much stronger if it could point out its efforts at somehow resolving the situation. Clearly, blockade hasn't worked as far as removing Hamas (that argument isn't washing due to its obvious futility), and leaving 2 mln. people locked up without means of existence as a permanent measure is simply not a policy that most people, not directly involved in the conflict, are likely to accept as justified.  Israel would have to show what's it doing to resolve the situation, not to preserve it - and the blockade does only the latter.

The original justifications for the blockade were based on Hamas refusing to release an Israeli prisoner and Hamas's commitment to the destruction of Israel, right?  I really don't have much to add, your posts are on the money...but if Israel's position is "this devastating blockade will continue until Palestine elects someone that doesn't hate Israel" ... seems a little like that famous phrase "the beatings will continue until morale improves."  Obviously the blockade has done little to shake up Hamas, so why can't Israel come up with a new anti-Hamas strategy?


My understanding that the two more devastating parts of the blockade are that on construction materials -- badly needed for that area of the world -- and on exports, which has destroyed the manufacturing sector and has resulted in huge swaths of Gaza being dependent on humanitarian aid for food.  Additionally, the list of things Israel prohibits, like non-frozen food items and toys, is rather bizarre.  But I could be wrong on this.   I'm reading more and more on this situation, and I'm not as informed as you are.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, obviously they decided that the solution here is to prohibit any non-anecdotal evidence getting out whatsoever.  If evidence DID come out that Israeli soldiers fired first, wouldn't that require those soldiers standing trial for murder?  Not exactly the posish Israel wants to find itself in.

I read an interesting legal analysis that said Israel's actions here could have two outcomes:
1) Either this was an official attack, approved by the Israeli government on a ship flying Turkish colors in international waters, which would be an act of war, and place Israel and Turkey at war.

or 2) Israel's government didn't approve of the attack, in which case the soldiers would be subject to the laws of the victim country, in this case Turkey, and technically should be held trials in Turkey.

Obviously for #2, the Israeli public would be, perhaps understandably, up in arms.

I'm sure an option 3 exists for Israel to form a compromise solution with Turkey, like you suggested.  Perhaps where an intense investigation is formed but where Israeli soldiers will not be prosecuted.

Either way, a new convoy is going to Gaza escorted by the Turkish Navy.  Israel's going to have to decide at some point if they will let the blockade continue or if they want to go to war with NATO.  Also, Egypt has lightened their joint participation in the blockade, which will force Israel to make a hard decision.  










Also, does anyone know what would happen if Israel sunk a Turkish ship and Turkey declared war in response?  Obviously the United States would never go to war with Israel, but what would they do about the whole NATO thing?

[dead0man]

Are there any ideas on how the "good way" would actually work?  Everybody wants the good way, many people blame Israel for everything, but nobody ever has an answer.  Why won't the actions Israel has taken in the West Bank work in Gaza?

There are only two ways: a one-state solution and a two-state solution. The one-state solution is unacceptable to the bulk of the Israelis, at least at present. Therefore, let's forget about it for the moment. Hence, two-state solution. This would involve very slow institution-building, support for those willing and capable of negotiating and a lot of restraint on the Israeli side, if it is to be achieved. And, in the end, it will involve sacrifices on Israel's part. Palestinians have to get something they'd be afraid to loose. At present, a lot of them have nothing.

Let's not forget, that the current situation is of Israel's making: it has spend decades undermining anyone with whom it could potentially talk, so that it wouldn't have to talk. The people, who could have a chance negotiating peace, for the most part, are in Israeli prisons, or else marginalized through Israeli efforts.

It should also be remembered, that this isn't just a Palestinian problem, but an Israeli-Palestinian problem. One necessary condition, I am afraid, is a big psychological change in Israel itself. As long as Israel, contrary to all evidence, continues to think of itself as a small endangered underdog, it will be difficult to resolve the situation. The most powerful motivator in this world is fear, and Israelis have been panicking for the last 60+ years. It will take some courage on their side, that they've been consistently lacking.

I agree with pretty much all that, but Israel didn't make this problem by themselves, they had a lot of help from many different players.  I think there needs to be a big psychological change for the Palestinians as well, when everybody on both sides of an issue feels like they've been the victim for their entire lives it's going to be hard to get anything done until both sides change.

If Israel tore down every settlement on the wrong side of the green line, opened the West Bank and Gaza up to the world, helped them any way they could to set up proper governments there would still be rockets falling out of the sky.  We all know this, yet it's still Israel's fault and they need to change.

Anybody for a three state solution?  Anybody know why the West Bank is doing well and Gaza is still a sh**t hole?

[dead0man]

Also, does anyone know what would happen if Israel sunk a Turkish ship and Turkey declared war in response?  Obviously the United States would never go to war with Israel, but what would they do about the whole NATO thing?

It would go like the Falklands went.  Except it obviously wouldn't be so lop sided.  We wouldn't let Israel carpet bomb Ankara or anything like that (as if Israel had that capability).  I guess it's possible Turkey could leave NATO over it...that would depend on how the Euros went I would assume.  Worst case would be the break up of NATO over it...that would suck.

[ag]

Also, does anyone know what would happen if Israel sunk a Turkish ship and Turkey declared war in response?  Obviously the United States would never go to war with Israel, but what would they do about the whole NATO thing?

It would go like the Falklands went.  Except it obviously wouldn't be so lop sided.  We wouldn't let Israel carpet bomb Ankara or anything like that (as if Israel had that capability).  I guess it's possible Turkey could leave NATO over it...that would depend on how the Euros went I would assume.  Worst case would be the break up of NATO over it...that would suck.

Yep, if US didn't support Turkey, this would, almost surely, kill NATO. A minor clash wouldn't, but anything the size of the Falklands war would. Half the NATO members would, actually, be very supportive of Turkey here even without the US. I am pretty sure, Greeks would be, and so would Scandinavians. Probably quite a few others as well. It would take a lot of US effort to block application of the treaty, and once it is done, the treaty itself would be unusable: nobody would believe it is going to be applied when push comes to shove. NATO might struggle for a few more years, but it would be a paper organization from that point on. Western Europeans, probably, would have to rearm. Eastern Europeans, who'd be, actually, supportive of Israel, would wind up defenseless in front of Russia.

If US cares about its alliances (and I believe it does), it would do ALL it can to stop Israel within a day or two of the start of the action. I don't know what this administration can do, but I don't envy Israel there. At the very least, if it ignores US demands, I just don't see US vetoing a very tough sanctions resolution at the Security Council. So, I don't really think it would dare to ignore.

A clash is a possibility. Anything that lasts even 3 days (forget 6) is not, I would say. Or else, Israelis are truly nuts.

[Lunar]

Yep, if US didn't support Turkey, this would, almost surely, kill NATO.

I couldn't see the US supporting Turkey militarily against Israel. 

[ag]

Are there any ideas on how the "good way" would actually work?  Everybody wants the good way, many people blame Israel for everything, but nobody ever has an answer.  Why won't the actions Israel has taken in the West Bank work in Gaza?

There are only two ways: a one-state solution and a two-state solution. The one-state solution is unacceptable to the bulk of the Israelis, at least at present. Therefore, let's forget about it for the moment. Hence, two-state solution. This would involve very slow institution-building, support for those willing and capable of negotiating and a lot of restraint on the Israeli side, if it is to be achieved. And, in the end, it will involve sacrifices on Israel's part. Palestinians have to get something they'd be afraid to loose. At present, a lot of them have nothing.

Let's not forget, that the current situation is of Israel's making: it has spend decades undermining anyone with whom it could potentially talk, so that it wouldn't have to talk. The people, who could have a chance negotiating peace, for the most part, are in Israeli prisons, or else marginalized through Israeli efforts.

It should also be remembered, that this isn't just a Palestinian problem, but an Israeli-Palestinian problem. One necessary condition, I am afraid, is a big psychological change in Israel itself. As long as Israel, contrary to all evidence, continues to think of itself as a small endangered underdog, it will be difficult to resolve the situation. The most powerful motivator in this world is fear, and Israelis have been panicking for the last 60+ years. It will take some courage on their side, that they've been consistently lacking.

I agree with pretty much all that, but Israel didn't make this problem by themselves, they had a lot of help from many different players.  I think there needs to be a big psychological change for the Palestinians as well, when everybody on both sides of an issue feels like they've been the victim for their entire lives it's going to be hard to get anything done until both sides change.

If Israel tore down every settlement on the wrong side of the green line, opened the West Bank and Gaza up to the world, helped them any way they could to set up proper governments there would still be rockets falling out of the sky.  We all know this, yet it's still Israel's fault and they need to change.

Anybody for a three state solution?  Anybody know why the West Bank is doing well and Gaza is still a sh**t hole?

1. That Palestinians have to change their attitudes is too obvious to mention. They are, obviously, a problem. What we sometimes forget is that Israelis are as much part of the problem as the Palestinians.

2. Leaving Gaza a sh**t hole does not solve anything. And, as long as Gaza is a sh**t hole, Israel will be responsible.

[ag]

Yep, if US didn't support Turkey, this would, almost surely, kill NATO.

I couldn't see the US supporting Turkey militarily against Israel. 

No, probably, not. But it would put such pressure on Israel, that military action would be over before US could react militarily even if it wanted. And if Israel resists, it would be a choice between NATO and Israel. I don't think they'd want to check, whom US is willing to sacrifice. So, it won't get there. Hopefully. There is always a possibility that someone is nuts, of course.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

But Gaza would be a shithole, no matter what. Though I suppose we're talking about degrees of shitholeness, in which case you have a point.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Ag,

That was a fantastically astute post, and a very level-headed one.

How so?   The post treats Turkey as an innocent bystander while totally ignoring the fact that the ruling party of Turkey is a product of Hamas and Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood.  And ignores the fact that Turkey has been planning for conflict with Israel and has been conducting joint military exercises with Syria, and ignores the fact that Turkey has redefined its foreign policy towards alliance with Iran and says, “Iran is our friend”.

But, yeah, if you’ve been hiding under a rock for the last 10 years and know nothing of the reality of the fact that the ruling party in Turkey has turned Turkey sharply away from the West and towards Iran, then I guess ag’s assessment makes perfect sense.

[GMantis]

Like I said before, the only workable way would be to take everything over, de-islam the region, and train the children in the ways of the west. Horrible I know but probably the only valid option.

How do you suggest this should be done?

[Bunwahaha [still dunno why, but well, so be it]]

Ag,

That was a fantastically astute post, and a very level-headed one.

How so?   The post treats Turkey as an innocent bystander while totally ignoring the fact that the ruling party of Turkey is a product of Hamas and Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood.  And ignores the fact that Turkey has been planning for conflict with Israel and has been conducting joint military exercises with Syria, and ignores the fact that Turkey has redefined its foreign policy towards alliance with Iran and says, “Iran is our friend”.

But, yeah, if you’ve been hiding under a rock for the last 10 years and know nothing of the reality of the fact that the ruling party in Turkey has turned Turkey sharply away from the West and towards Iran, then I guess ag’s assessment makes perfect sense.

Then you stick to your 'Turkey proxy of Iran!!', what a lol.

The biggest military exercises that Turkey has always planned it was with...Israel. Israel has been one of the biggest partner, if not the biggest, to modernize Turkish army on material and tactics, they also constantly made exercises together.

You don't have a clue of the kind of country that Turkey is or what? It's a big nationalist power that thinks to itself first and doesn't really see itself as a 'proxy'. Lol, you seem to put put the Shiah Hezbollah and the nationalist Turkey on the same level. Turkey has effectively made moves to find solutions for the nuclear Iranian questions, some moves that wasn't 'western like', big crime? Big moves that was by the way done with Brazil too, but it's ok, Brazil is not Muslim, then they can't be suspected of something I guess. They also said something like maybe we could wonder further about this nuclear questions, taking here too distances with western power, but sorry, here they are just pointing out the fact that the International Right about this question is not fair, but maybe you care less since you live in a country that benefits of this unfairness, unlike Turks. And that's pretty much all for the 'big stuffs' between Turkey and Iran.

And if ever Turkish would have to be a proxy, then go speak with Turks in their early twenties there who are interested in politics and in what becomes their country, and you'll quickly see that if they are pissed off that Turkey is the 'proxy' of someone it's of the United States of America, but maybe you get it more than these Turkish persons from your Texas.

And also lol at Syria, seen as an other 'proxy' of Iran. Do you have a clue of who Bashar El Assad is? About what he did in Syria, which kind of policies Syria had, what are the Syrian perspectives? Did you try to go further on the topic that 'OMG Bashar shakes hand to Ahmadinejad!! He wants to destroy Israel!!' They have issues with Israel but saying that this is hot would be a bit too much, and saying that Syria is an Iranian puppet of Iran too, Syria has Syrian perspectives first.

I fear that the only true proxies you'd find here for Iran are the only ones who have been raised by it and/or funded by it, which are reasonable reasons for being a proxy of something, and I fear the only ones you'd have to deal with here would be the 'mighty' Hezbollah and Hamas, enjoy your Muslim worldwide plot to destroy Israel, sorry if realities doesn't match your 'interpretation of the world'.