Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site mhuxm.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!mhuxm!abeles
From: abeles@mhuxm.UUCP (J. Abeles (Bellcore, Murray Hill, NJ))
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: The 1967 War
Message-ID: <536@mhuxm.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 19-Mar-86 12:30:19 EST
Article-I.D.: mhuxm.536
Posted: Wed Mar 19 12:30:19 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 20-Mar-86 18:14:47 EST
References: <98@ubc-vision.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 25

> > Such distortion of history is incredible.  Nasser had ordered the
> > U. N. forces out of Sharm el Sheikh (sp?) and instituted a blockade
> >    ------> ...A blockade is an act of war.<------ [Bill Tanenbaum]

> And what you conveniently forget to mention is that only 5% of Israel's
> foreign trade went through Eilat.  ... Israel wanted war and the 
> "blockade" was its golden opportunity. [Farzin Mokhtarian]

Like, Earth to Farzin, Earth to Farzin!  Read the above.  Maybe
a blockade isn't what the average Moslem or Moslem country would
consider a "cassus belli (international law term meaning cause provoking
a war)," but everyone else with one foot on this planet does,
as does international law and international courts.  (I even suspect 
that Moslem countries would go to war if someone blockaded one of 
their important ports.)

Let me try to explain it to you, Farzin.  Land and the access to it 
are limited in supply and can't be replaced.  

You seem to want Israel to take it on the chin at every turn.  If
Nassar blockades her ports, Israel is expected to reason, "We didn't
really need those ports anyway."  If the Jordanians divert Israel's
water supply (another cassus belli), Israel is expected to reason,
"We're smart Jews, and we'll figure out a way to drink salt water."
You're a racist (Martillo is right)! [J. Abeles]