Originally Posted by SHERMAN
Well, the reeason I used the word free is very simple. Nasser, the Egyptian president at that time, nationalized the Canal, which was partly owned by the French and English. The Canal was to be given to the Egyptians soon anyway, as was agreed with the Egyptian gov when it was dug. Nasser made a provocaation and nationalised it for no good reason. He also blocked Israeli trade from what was considred an international shipping lane. Israel said before that as far as we are considred, any blockade or blocking against Israeli shipping is an act of war, and we refuce to be starved to death. I really to this day don't see any moral problem with that war, it was completely justified.
If a blockade is an act of war wouldn't the Cuban missile crisis have been an act of war by the United States? What did the Israeli government intend to do with the canal?