Israeli Consulate Closed for War Crimes by Protestors

Thank you to the protestors - you are carrying out what many of us feel in our hearts. Israel's war crimes must stop. They have killed hundreds of children.

The free Gaza boat. The boat that was taking doctors and tons of medical supplies to Gaza. My hope was with that boat. Now my hope is all gone. It is an all out massacre and the military might has won over the little vessle of peace. Israeli navy ships surrounded them and said they would shoot them if they do not turn back. They radioed back to the navy ship that if they were willing to commit war crimes, with a ship full of civilians. They said they would do whatever it takes to stop them. Last time they rammed them 3 times. Now the free gaza boat turned around and went back to greece. The mission was a total failure because people of Gaza are still dying and being massacred with no aid or doctors to help. It seems the military power wins. What can you do against people who would kill you and mass amounts of people without hesitation and they still get full support from the united states government and the media. They could have killed all those human aid workers aboard that ship and they would have gotten away with it. Who would have done anything about it? Who would stand up against the U.S. and Israel? There is a reason U.S. spends over 50 percent of taxes on the military.
There is no justice only the big gun and constant hypocrisy.
Hope? Something has to give...

So, can anyone who has read or followed Israeli government decisionmaking for several decades offer an opinion on what the recent motivating factors or strategy is behind the Gaza invasion? Do you think they are using the 'crazy man' posture tactic, (described by Chomsky) which may have been the US strategy in Vietnam/Cambodia. This involves acting like the government is irrationally aggressive, so you'd better do whatever it takes to calm them or not provoke them, because they might lash out, even at great cost to themselves or their own reputation. With some cost/benefit analysis, this actually can help a state reach some goals.
Perhaps they are calculating that they will send a signal to everyone in the region that they are willing to go that far, even though they know that the europeans and north americans are gaining reservations. Would the motivation to do this be their estimation that Iran or Syria (is Syria or Lebanon hezbollah more of a serious threat right now?) or other local powers seriously could be a problem for them soon?
It all could be more simple than this. But somehow I can't believe that it is just posturing before an election, or that they weren't aware of the risk of creating a hydra (palestinian teenagers recruited into extremist position) or int'l condemnation. Were they motivated by the most immediate explanation... thinking that they could actually close all the tunnels, kill the leaders, and find most of the rocket materials?

I'm better able to understand the United States. Despite having a majority of the population opposing an invasion into Baghdad (after a decade of just maintaining sanctions on their economy and controlling their airspace), the US gov't was able to effectively ignore all the protesters and not modify any of their actions in Iraq due to our pressure. In my opinion, they relied on the fact that semi-comofrtable people have natural mellowing agents in their brains which allow them to forget and forgive very quickly - so 2001 and 2003 are almost a distant memory, and more recent positive messages about the U.S. relating to our popular culture can help us restore self-esteem and forgive Bush during his outgoing speech before retirement to the cowboy ranch.

"The Facts About Hamas and the War on Gaza", at http://www.counterpunch.org/finkelstein01132009.html , offers this:

Now, as to the reason why, the record is fairly clear as well. According to Ha’aretz, Defense Minister Barak began plans for this invasion before the ceasefire even began. In fact, according to yesterday’s Ha’aretz, the plans for the invasion began in March. And the main reasons for the invasion, I think, are twofold. Number one; to enhance what Israel calls its deterrence capacity, which in layman’s language basically means Israel’s capacity to terrorize the region into submission. After their defeat in July 2006 in Lebanon, they felt it important to transmit the message that Israel is still a fighting force, still capable of terrorizing those who dare defy its word.

And the second main reason for the attack is because Hamas was signaling that it wanted a diplomatic settlement of the conflict along the June 1967 border. That is to say, Hamas was signaling they had joined the international consensus, they had joined most of the international community, overwhelmingly the international community, in seeking a diplomatic settlement. And at that point, Israel was faced with what Israelis call a Palestinian peace offensive. And in order to defeat the peace offensive, they sought to dismantle Hamas.