Two takes on the Gaza blockade

The New York Times publishes two op-eds today in support of the Gaza blockade and Israel's actions to enforce it. The first is by Michael Oren, Israel's ambassador to the U.S., and the second is by Daniel Gordis, a noted writer.

Oren's column can be found here, An Assault, Cloaked in Peace.

PEACE activists are people who demonstrate nonviolently for peaceful co-existence and human rights. The mob that assaulted Israeli special forces on the deck of the Turkish ship Mavi Marmara on Monday was not motivated by peace. On the contrary, the religious extremists embedded among those on board were paid and equipped to attack Israelis — both by their own hands as well as by aiding Hamas — and to destroy any hope of peace.

Gordis' column can be found here, A Botched Raid, a Vital Embargo.

Like every other country, Israel has as its foremost obligation the protection of its citizens. Given that, why should it have allowed the flotilla to enter without inspecting its goods? If the United States were to impose a blockade on Iran (which seems unlikely), and another country dispatched a string of ships in a similar operation, is there any chance the United States Navy would let them through without inspection?

What's your take on this?