re: "Launching Medical Diplomacy To Gaza"

Thanks to Gerald at Avuncular American ("An expatriate view of America and the world from Europe ") for the mentions, quotes, and the linkage.

He responded to my (and other's) reservations thusly:

"In the end, perhaps the French and my skeptical American commenters are right: for "logistical" or "force protection" reasons, or simply, for medical effectiveness, maybe our hospital ships are needed more for amphibious exercises with allied nations. Preparing for some future disaster surely to strike in the Gulf of Mexico.

And maybe the US Government is justified in channeling its aid to Gaza - considerable as it is - through UN specialized agencies and the ICRC.

But I doubt seriously that there is any more urgent medical-humanitarian mission right now than Gaza. And whatever the form and amount of US aid to Gaza via the UN and the Red Cross, it doesn't have the impact - and, let's face it, the public diplomacy payoff - of a gleaming white hospital ship flying the US flag.

Hospital ship - not gunboat - diplomacy - that's another way the new Administration could mark the difference with its predecessor."

I would like to add as a clarification that my reservations aren't intended as "show-stoppers," but only as concerns that would need to be addressed in a way that mitigates the risks cited, presumably through the mission statement, operations plan, and their implementation.