Israeli forces storm Gaza aid ship

[+susieice]

Two wrongs don't make a right. I realize that the Hamas are just as bad when it comes to attacking civilians.

[The Silver Thong]

Wow. I am so sorry that he is a she. Thats really important isnt it? that is definitely the thing i should pay attention to most. why do you do this in every thread? you just post snide comments to people who disagree with you. you make yourself look great.

I know exactly who i am i asking: Ryinrea. Do you think thats why i quoted her when i asked my question. is this getting too confusing for you?

I have been reading this read.

What was wrong with my question? Her and I disagree on something. I gave my source earlier. She did too, but i asked for the particular quote of the law that supported her argument because i didnt want to look through the pointless other parts. Did i do something wrong? Or are you just being a jackass again?

Your maturity knows no bounds. How old are you? 13? shouldnt you be trash talking on halo 3 right now?

This was your original post.

"was i talking to you? do i care what you have to say? try to keep up

I asked him for a source. what i got was a long article with pointless stuff. im trying to have a serious discussion. please leave now"

Now if you would have come up with something better than that then you wouldn't have had me comment on your post now would we. Try to keep things somewhat normal as now as some I notice seem to attack the poster and not the post. So befor I start insulting someone that thinks I'm 13 and embarrasses them further could you please add something to the thread.

[MARAB0D]

UNSC condemned the Israeli role in the episode - all except US, so there is no clear resolution as far as I can understand... I wonder why Turkish authorities did not arrest the protesters before this happened?

[Drj312]

This was your original post.

"was i talking to you? do i care what you have to say? try to keep up

I asked him for a source. what i got was a long article with pointless stuff. im trying to have a serious discussion. please leave now"

Now if you would have come up with something better than that then you wouldn't have had me comment on your post now would we. Try to keep things somewhat normal as now as some I notice seem to attack the poster and not the post. So befor I start insulting someone that thinks I'm 13 and embarrasses them further could you please add something to the thread.

you havent embarrassed me. youve only made yourself look like a jackass. ive been trying to add to this thread. thats why im talking to Ryinrea and not you. you prefer making rude comments that are completely unnecessary. i asked her a question that was completely relevant to this thread and you felt the need to make a comment that in no way was relevant to my question. i am attacking you because you make pointless, irrelevant comments. i am trying to have a real discussion with Ryinrea. oh and please do start insulting me, i would love that

[Drj312]

This was your original post.

"was i talking to you? do i care what you have to say? try to keep up

I asked him for a source. what i got was a long article with pointless stuff. im trying to have a serious discussion. please leave now"

Now if you would have come up with something better than that then you wouldn't have had me comment on your post now would we. Try to keep things somewhat normal as now as some I notice seem to attack the poster and not the post. So befor I start insulting someone that thinks I'm 13 and embarrasses them further could you please add something to the thread.

you havent embarrassed me. youve only made yourself look like a jackass. ive been trying to add to this thread. thats why im talking to Ryinrea and not you. you prefer making rude comments that are completely unnecessary. i asked her a question that was completely relevant to this thread and you felt the need to make a comment that in no way was relevant to my question. i am attacking you because you make pointless, irrelevant comments. i am trying to have a real discussion with Ryinrea. oh and please do insult me, i would love that

Edited June 1, 2010 by Drj312

[The Silver Thong]

Two wrongs don't make a right. I realize that the Hamas are just as bad when it comes to attacking civilians.

Thats the point both sides see themselves as just. Is that the case? far from it. However there are supporters of Israel that see now wrong as when israel is concerned. I'm not out to bash Israel but to show the hipocricy some speak of.

[The Silver Thong]

you havent embarrassed me. youve only made yourself look like a jackass. ive been trying to add to this thread. thats why im talking to Ryinrea and not you. you prefer making rude comments that are completely unnecessary. i asked her a question that was completely relevant to this thread and you felt the need to make a comment that in no way was relevant to my question. i am attacking you because you make pointless, irrelevant comments. i am trying to have a real discussion with Ryinrea. oh and please do start insulting me, i would love that

I saw your first point and it was far from having a point. Anyway it's good to see some have no shame

[Drj312]

I saw your first point and it was far from having a point. Anyway it's good to see some have no shame

asking for a source has no point?

[The Silver Thong]

give me a quote. i dont want to read through all of it

This was your first post in this thread and it doesn't speak to highly of what you request. I will not retract your initial arogance.

[+susieice]

Thats the point both sides see themselves as just. Is that the case? far from it. However there are supporters of Israel that see now wrong as when israel is concerned. I'm not out to bash Israel but to show the hipocricy some speak of.

Yeah. Both are fighting for the survival of their people but involving non-combatants like this is wrong. You can't prevent civilians from having proper medical care, sufficiant food supplies and an ability to provide shelter for themselves. Childrens toys are not a threat to anyone.

I haven't seen it posted anywhere, but were these ships showing the display of the Red Cross or the UN? They were an international group from many countries.

[Drj312]

This was your first post in this thread and it doesn't speak to highly of what you request. I will not retract your initial arogance.

haha are you sure about that? you might want to look a little harder. to be honest, my actual first post was rather pointless. since then, i have contributed to this thread.

how was i being arrogant? i was looking for the exact quote of the law that Ryinrea was using to defend her argument. isnt that how it works on UM? you say something and you back it up?

[The Silver Thong]

Yeah. Both are fighting for the survival of their people but involving non-combatants like this is wrong. You can't prevent civilians from having proper medical care, sufficiant food supplies and an ability to provide shelter for themselves. Childrens toys are not a threat to anyone.

I haven't seen it posted anywhere, but were these ships showing the display of the Red Cross or the UN? They were an international group from many countries.

Now there is something we can agree on No matter who your enemy is compasion is what wins out. When a long standing so called war is at hand the only hand that counts is the one willing to shake yours in return.

[The Silver Thong]

haha are you sure about that? you might want to look a little harder. to be honest, my actual first post was rather pointless. since then, i have contributed to this thread.

how was i being arrogant? i was looking for the exact quote of the law that Ryinrea was using to defend her argument. isnt that how it works on UM? you say something and you back it up?

Yes it is rather pointless, but you demanded a link because you were to lazy to read the thread so nuff said really. Drop it and move on.

Edited June 1, 2010 by The Silver Thong

[Drj312]

Yes it is but you demanded a link because you were to lazy to read the thread so nuff said really. Drop it and move on.

i already had the link. maybe you should right this down. i was asking for a quote from the link already given to me. im sorry, but reading international law is not one of my hobbies, so pardon me for asking for what was relevant. how is that lazy?

nuff said? really?

[MichaelW]

What would you do if you sent a boat full of aid to Africa and a canadian destroyer intersepted and killed crew members. Better yet what would you do if the U.S sent aid to Saudi Arabia?

I couldn't care less. I don't want my money supporting third world dictators.

As for Saudi Arabia- I'd blow the American boat up. Serves them right for being two faced hypocrites.

[Runa86]

You don't know that was the people were the ones on that video were on the freaking ships it was a youtube video that wasn't linked to any news organization

Wow, such a great power of denial.

*"Peace Activists" clubbing IDF soldiers- I can't see it, too blurry, too this, too that

*IDF soldier getting stabbed- No comment.

*"Peace activists" chanting anti-jewish songs- Staged! Staged!

I like this game.

Let me try: the hundreds deceased in Gaza during 2008-2009 is just make-believe. We didn't see pictures of hundreds and hundreds of bodies so it must be a lie!

Yes, let's see how quickly we can spoil it by denying it.

[MichaelW]

UNSC condemned the Israeli role in the episode - all except US, so there is no clear resolution as far as I can understand... I wonder why Turkish authorities did not arrest the protesters before this happened?

To make Israel look bad- why else? Bad press for Israel means good press for both Gaza and Hamas.

[The Silver Thong]

I couldn't care less. I don't want my money supporting third world dictators.

As for Saudi Arabia- I'd blow the American boat up. Serves them right for being two faced hypocrites.

now there is an honest answer. How about your money taking third world contries and turning them into cash cows because of resources. Better yet a country that extorts another because of a religious doctrine Blow up an American boat or a Saudi boat? or does it matter? There is much a good chance of Americans on the Saudi boat as there is of Saudi on the American boat. Who is the guilty party?

[+susieice]

After the ships were boarded, it does seem some of the people on one of the six ships did take up a defense and it is a defense if the Israelis came on board just shooting anything, even paintballs.

[The Silver Thong]

After the ships were boarded, it does seem some of the people on one of the six ships did take up a defense and it is a defense if the Israelis came on board just shooting anything, even paintballs.

They attacked the boats from a helicopter. I don't think there was much to discuse after the fact really.

Makes me laugh as far to many think Israel is Americas great allie all the while we have two presidents holding hands, kissing and bowing to Saudi Arabia all the while being Israels biggest supporter. Can we say sleeping with the enemy means your doing good. Pick your enemy as i don't know who it is.

Hipocricy at it's finest.

Edited June 1, 2010 by The Silver Thong

[Rosewin]

It's getting lame having to explain to people that the "Jew-hating" label was directed at those terrorist-supporting Jew-haters who tried to violate the blockade, not every person in the world who opposes Israel.

There were plenty of European MPs on board, reporters, and others. Calling a Nobel Peace Prize laureate racist destroys any credibility of your position on this issue and also exposes an inability to discuss this issue without resorting to slander and libel. But moreso it also demonstrates a true lacking of any grasp on the overall issues.

The wikipedia page is a good summary of the incident.

The raid was legal. Also, IDF forces first used paintball guns

The warrant for a raid was legal but the activity that occured during the raid might not have been.

Wikipedia also might not be the most accurate or definitive source of information at this stage. The only sources which claim the elite soldiers first used paintball guns are Israeli media sources, biased indeed. From what I heard on NPR the proposal to use paintball guns was discussed but that when they actually boarded the Marvi Marmara they decided not to. While they might have indeed first used paintball guns there is no proof of this yet as reported by international reporters.

Still I read the source used by wikipedia regarding the paintball claim, the story did not make sense, according to the Israeli media they were going to use paintball guns but also had sidearms with live ammo in case they had to defend themselves. One has to wonder in which capacity they were going to use the paintball guns then? Were they going to juse use them for show? Use them only for light resistance? What was the purpose of the paintball guns? It just does not add up.

The article goes on to say that:

"They jumped me, hit me with clubs and bottles and stole my rifle," one of the commandos said. "I pulled out my pistol and had no choice but to shoot."

And:

The soldiers said they were forced to open fire after the activists struck one of their comrades in the head and trampled on him. A senior IDF field commander ordered the soldiers then to respond with fire, a decision which the commandos said received full backing the military echelon. The IDF said its rules of engagement allowed troops to open fire in what it called a "life-threatening situation".

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/israel-navy-commandos-gaza-flotilla-activists-tried-to-lynch-us-1.293089

So which is the actual reason they opened fire? Because they stole one of the commandos rifle [paintball gun?] or because they struck another one on the head and trampled him and were then ordered by a senior commander? The guy who claimed they took his rifle did not apparently wait for the command but acted on his own it seems as well.

I understand in the heat of confrontation things can get confusing but these are professionals who are trained to contain such situations without losing their calm. There are also Israeli generated reports of live fire coming from a lower deck aimed at them, that some Israeli soldiers were tossed to the lower deck then had to jump into the sea to escape, and of even one of their own soldiers being stabbed and also attempted lynchings....yet none of this was mentioned as the reasons they opened fire according to the article which casts overall doubt on the Israeli narration of events.

Humanitarian considerations which pose no threat to Israel should take priority over politics.

I agree, according to an official, "Israel cannot keep on inflicting damage on the Palestinian people under the pretext of security concerns."

Keep up? You people are moving right along here

These ships were flying whose flags. What country were these ships registered to?

There were American, Greek, Turkish, Irish, and possibly one other nation where the ships were registered with and around 700 people from 50 different nationalities.

Edited June 1, 2010 by Rosewin

[Rosewin]

Also if this was minimally a police action then why send the equivalent of Navy Seals?

[+susieice]

I don't know. For Israel to justify their actions they'll have to prove those ships were carrying something that was a threat to their security and it doesn't sound to me like they can do that. They basically attacked ships flying neutral flags in international waters that were on a humanitarian mission. This war they got going on is so unconventional. This isn't two combatants going after each other for rights to territory. This seems like a war of attrition aimed against civilians and settlers.

[Runa86]

On the legality of the whole thing I found this:

San Remo Memorandum:

67) Merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral States may not be attacked unless they:

(a) are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture;

And

146) 146. Neutral merchant vessels are subject to capture outside neutral waters (Neutral waters consist of the internal waters, territorial sea, and, where applicable, the archipelagic waters, of neutral States)if they are engaged in any of the activities referred to in paragraph 67 or if it is determined as a result of visit and search or by other means, that they:

(a) are carrying contraband;

b- are on a voyage especially undertaken with a view to the transport of individual passengers who are

embodied in the armed forces of the enemy;

© are operating directly under enemy control, orders, charter, employment or direction;

(d) present irregular or fraudulent documents, lack necessary documents, or destroy, deface or conceal

documents;

(e) are violating regulations established by a belligerent within the immediate area of naval operations; or

(f) are breaching or attempting to breach a blockade.

----------------------------

It would seem that, once they had left Turkey's waters (or was it Cyprus' waters ?), the ships were "fair game", so to speak.

Edit: I forgot the links:

My link

My link

Edited June 1, 2010 by Runa86

[+susieice]

In a court of international law, Israel may be able to justify their actions because of their blockade. The court of public opinion is a tougher crowd. Ask OJ. A lot of countries want that blockade removed.