Israel criticized over Gaza flotilla attack

inigoball.png
 
It's funny we always get pissed when China steps in for North Korea and here we are stepping in for Israel.

And people wonder why a significant portion of the globe is pissed off the countries that make up the security council.
 
There are many ways for the Palestinians to receive aid and many ways in and out of the Gaza. Breaking the blockade is completely unnecessary and a ruse to ionstigate a greater war with Israel. Those who like to offer reading material should read this:

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Government/Communiques/2009/Humanitarian_aid_to_Gaza_following_6_month_calm.htm


Now let's talk a little bit about lunacy. Our president is to be interviewed by Larry King tonight and will have provided the following lunatic statements and opinions:

"They recognize that this (flotilla incident) can't be good for Israel's long-term security,"
Click to expand...

Neither can being surrounded by groups who's foundation is the destruction of Jews and the State of Israel. Their "long term" security is in jeopardy every day, not just after one flotilla debacle. It's been in jeopardy since 2 minutes after they were declared a country. In fact, the only times it HASN'T been in jeopardy is when they've had to kick everyone's ass and make it clear they aren't to be fucked with. Now people like you want to take that away from them under the misguided belief that if Israel would only play nice, palestine would be a happy-go-lucky-rainbow palace where jew and arab could live in harmony. That's complete bullshit. Their enemies do not need incidents such as this as a rationale for hate, the hate already exists and cannot be assuaged. These "incidents" are a means to an end, and people like you refuse to accept that truth.

Obama said the most recent incident presents an opportunity for all parties involved to break out of the current impasse and move toward a two-state solution in which Palestinians and Israelis can live peacefully side by side.
Click to expand...

Uh, huh, sure. This has been offered numerous times, but continuously refused by palestinian leadership. They have made it clear that they will settle for nothing less than the complete extinction of Israel as a state. This opinion, reiterated by the President, is either extreme naivete, or simply political platitude, pretending to be diplomacy.

Insanity, in this case, is the propagation of the moderate. This attitude is lip service to both sides in the conflict, appeasing none, and solid gold fodder for the mush-brained, moderate American public who believe that no decision must be a good decision. This type of diplomacy only allows Israel's enemies to continue to ignite a conflicts and start a greater war. By then, REAL diplomacy will be impossible.

Except that Israel doesn't want that war, they want rockets to stop being fired into their shopping malls and will exercise their military to prevent this from happening. As a government, their primary responsibility is to protect their own citizens. This is in stark contrast to the palestinian "government", who's primary and stated duties are to create terror and kill innocents - AT THE EXPENSE OF THEIR CITIZENS. Lunacy would be to support that latter form of leadership over the former.

Here are some of the things Hamas does for their own people:

Deny humanitarian aid to it's own people for political purposes

Exploit medical care evacuation arrangements to carry out murder attacks

Withhold food from their own people to propagate their own corrupt, and warped form of crony government that values death over life.

Those that believe the plight in Gaza is due to the Jewish dogs, the flotilla was full of humanitarians, or that such aid ships are on peaceful missions are the real lunatics.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']

Those that believe the plight in Gaza is due to the Jewish dogs, the flotilla was full of humanitarians, or that such aid ships are on peaceful missions are the real lunatics.[/QUOTE]

Where the hell is this "Jewish Dogs" thing coming from? Honestly, I think we should really just let them blow each other off the map, I don't think there will really be any resolution in this area anyway.
 
bmulligan...who commended the Palestinian piss-poor leaders, ever called the Jews dogs, or went ape sh*$ on them at all? You're the only one who keeps posting these sky is falling, the world vs. me type of posts.

You keep saying everyone surrounding Israel is out to get them too, and that's an outright lie. Surely even you know that. Jordan and Israel have lived in peace for quite some time now, and even Egypt and Israel have been playing fairly nice for a long time.

I think where many people, myself strongly included, get agitated with the whole situation, is when we see $4.5 million in US taxpayer dollars going to Israel in the form of interest-free loans, gifts, grants, etc. For the "strongest democracy in the middle east". This seems unnecessary. If Israel didn't have the US fighting all of its political battles for them, they would have to justify some of their more outrageous actions, and likely behave more responsibly.

And to throw a history curveball in there, the breakdown of residents prior to 1948 break down to be about 60% "moslem" 30% jewish, and 8% Christian. These populations were living in relative harmony. All hell broke lose when foreign countries started telling 68% of the population that they were living in someone else's country overnight.

Sources: http://www.cjpme.ca/documents/En Demographics Factsheet v.1.pdf

http://www.mideastweb.org/palpop.htm

How pissed would you be if you woke up one morning, and someone from Canada was telling you that your neighbor now owned 2/3rds of your living room, and all of your kitchen, but dude, you still have the bathroom and a bedroom! Let's not even carry the anology further and wonder who owns the "dog house".

Oh, and one more point about the "unwillingness to negotiate with the US". Do you think perhaps that has anything to do with the fact that the US refuses to acknowledge the democratically elected leaders of Palestine and still try to do business with the equally corrupt Abbas? Nah, I'm sure it's just that those arabs are evil anti-semites...even though arabs are semitic people too.
 
http://www.jpost.com/IranianThreat/News/Article.aspx?id=177128

http://www.jpost.com/IranianThreat/News/Article.aspx?id=177128

Jordan and Israel have lived in peace for quite some time now, and even Egypt and Israel have been playing fairly nice for a long time.
Click to expand...
Take some wild guesses as to why that might be. Then think about this little tidbit: Sadat(Egypt) was the first dictator to even recognize Israel as a state - almost 30 years after it's official formation.
Then try to remember, or at least read up on how many times Israel has been set upon by force by its (mostly)muslim neighbors and how peace was eventually achieved.

Everyone surrounding Israel is out to get them, has been out to get them, and will not stop until their goal is reached. It is not a lie, it's been a fact since 1948. Even 50% or more of the people in this thread are out to get them. Do you not know of the existence of Hamas and what Hamas is? The PLO? Fatah? Hezbollah? Al-jihad? Islamic Jihad? Do you know what intifada means? Did I forget any? I'm sure I did, but certainly you can't be so obtuse as to not recognize an entire region is out to rewrite the world map without an israel ? That last question was rhetorical in nature - you've already answered it.

And here's a tidbit from your citation:

3. Zionist settlement between 1880 and 1948 did not displace or dispossess Palestinians.
Click to expand...

What is the most unfortunate consequence of all of this ongoing conflict is, of course, the treatment of the palestinian people. People who have been disowned by the very same countries you cite as being peaceful. Egypt won't take them, Syria doesn't want them in their country. Jordan threw them out. Then they created a civil war in Lebanon. Yet all of these peace loving countries who claim solidarity to the palestinian cause will do nothing to help these people except send weapons and hope for the best. That best being another war with Israel, and to win a world public opinion poll to guarantee a win this time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bmulls crazed ranting aside, I have to say that it didn't totally look like the protesters were completely peaceful. I understand that they had a right to defend themselves, but they did seem rather aggressive, and the fact that seven soldiers died makes me think they were probably up to no good. I know some of the protesters died too, but I expect that when they're fighting trained soldiers. I just think that Israel could've have handled this better, like maybe incapacitate the ship or something first before boarding. For the record, I'm not out to get the Jewish dogs.:)
 
I dunno. Just wild idea.

But if we had a flotilla of ships right off one of our coasts that are either known terrorist organizations or funded by them, claiming they are going to dock without permission and won't go away - I am pretty sure our Navy Seals would be out there dropping on those boats too. And I am pretty sure they wouldn't be carrying paint ball guns.

Then again, we always hold other countries to different standards than we hold ourselves. Especially with this stuff.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']I dunno. Just wild idea.

But if we had a flotilla of ships right off one of our coasts that are either known terrorist organizations or funded by them, claiming they are going to dock without permission and won't go away - I am pretty sure our Navy Seals would be out there dropping on those boats too. And I am pretty sure they wouldn't be carrying paint ball guns.

Then again, we always hold other countries to different standards than we hold ourselves. Especially with this stuff.[/QUOTE]

How about an accurate comparison?
 
[quote name='docvinh']Bmulls crazed ranting aside, I have to say that it didn't totally look like the protesters were completely peaceful. I understand that they had a right to defend themselves, but they did seem rather aggressive, and the fact that seven soldiers died makes me think they were probably up to no good. I know some of the protesters died too, but I expect that when they're fighting trained soldiers. I just think that Israel could've have handled this better, like maybe incapacitate the ship or something first before boarding. For the record, I'm not out to get the Jewish dogs.:)[/QUOTE]

What state do you live in?
 
[quote name='docvinh']Indiana.:) Why?[/QUOTE]

I'm trying a scenario out.

If a city cop from Tampa Florida demanded you to pull over while on I-64, would you?

Let's assume you know it is a cop from Tampa so you can't claim ignorance.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']I'm trying a scenario out.

If a city cop from Tampa Florida demanded you to pull over while on I-64, would you?

Let's assume you know it is a cop from Tampa so you can't claim ignorance.[/QUOTE]

Honestly, if he was in his Tampa cop car? Probably, but I would think more then likely he would call the local cops to pull me over anyway, and I'm sure they wouldn't be happy about it so I would just pull over. I'm guessing you're saying he doesn't really have jurisdiction over me in Indiana, which I would agree with, but I would still pull over. Now if he wasn't in an official vehicle, I probably wouldn't.
 
[quote name='docvinh']Honestly, if he was in his Tampa cop car? Probably, but I would think more then likely he would call the local cops to pull me over anyway, and I'm sure they wouldn't be happy about it so I would just pull over. I'm guessing you're saying he doesn't really have jurisdiction over me in Indiana, which I would agree with, but I would still pull over. Now if he wasn't in an official vehicle, I probably wouldn't.[/QUOTE]

You have an understanding of the situation.
 
i was once pulled over for speeding by an unmarked police car in the middle of nowhere. the guy came out, showed me his badge and told me hes out of his jurisdiction but to quit speeding and if he saw me again hed call the local authorities. basically told me if he was in his jurisdiction he would write me a big old ticket. i stopped speeding the rest of the way home.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']But if we had a flotilla of ships right off one of our coasts that are either known terrorist organizations or funded by them, claiming they are going to dock without permission and won't go away - I am pretty sure our Navy Seals would be out there dropping on those boats too. And I am pretty sure they wouldn't be carrying paint ball guns.[/quote]
That would make sense, except Israel's stated position is that the embargo is not only to stop weapons, but to make life so bad in Gaza that they push out Hamas. I mean sure, stop the guns. But if that's the intent, why ban exports? Why ban the import of cilantro, sage, jam, chocolate, French fries, dried fruit, fabrics, notebooks, empty flowerpots and toys?

If you hate collective punishment, you hate the embargo.

If you hate collective punishment but want Israel to protect itself, you know they're doing it the wrong way. Free marketeers of all people should understand what an export ban does to you. And seriously, wtf? Toys? Why would they ban toys? Because 45% of the Gaza strip is under the age of 16. Way to target children, assholes.

If you love collective punishment, you're a damned awful human being.
Then again, we always hold other countries to different standards than we hold ourselves. Especially with this stuff.
Click to expand...
The day Israel comes out of pocket to personally guarantee our defense and their taxpayers spend billions of dollars a year to buy us weapons, they can complain all they want. When they get made to look like dicks as often as they've made us look like dicks on the national stage and it actually costs their national interests, they can complain.

Otherwise, they're welfare babies and they can shut the fuck up.
 
Its not only about making life miserable for the people in Gaza... You see, Israel has a little demographics problem. Eventually Jews will be outnumbered by Arabs in Israel, which would make it a little difficult to continue as a Jewish state.

Keeping them at borderline starvation keeps their population levels in check, and reduces the amount of what they call "superfluous young men". They've even discussed limiting or banning neonatal supplies in order to increase infant mortality.

Many of them simply don't see the Palestinians as human beings. Certainly not the radicals in the illegal settlements, with popular slogans such as "Arabs to the gas chambers". Netanyahu panders to these people as Bush did to our religious right.
 
[quote name='SpazX']Well they could've avoided all that by, ya know, not getting on the boat.[/QUOTE]

Supposedly the Israelis were firing on the boats before they landed.

While it might not be true no one can just dismiss it out of hand.

docvinh

A bunch of soldiers were injured, none died.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='docvinh']Bmulls crazed ranting aside, I have to say that it didn't totally look like the protesters were completely peaceful. I understand that they had a right to defend themselves, but they did seem rather aggressive, and the fact that seven soldiers died makes me think they were probably up to no good. I know some of the protesters died too, but I expect that when they're fighting trained soldiers. I just think that Israel could've have handled this better, like maybe incapacitate the ship or something first before boarding. For the record, I'm not out to get the Jewish dogs.:)[/QUOTE]

Some soldiers were injured, none died.
 
[quote name='speedracer']That would make sense, except Israel's stated position is that the embargo is not only to stop weapons, but to make life so bad in Gaza that they push out Hamas. I mean sure, stop the guns. But if that's the intent, why ban exports? Why ban the import of cilantro, sage, jam, chocolate, French fries, dried fruit, fabrics, notebooks, empty flowerpots and toys?

If you hate collective punishment, you hate the embargo.

If you hate collective punishment but want Israel to protect itself, you know they're doing it the wrong way. Free marketeers of all people should understand what an export ban does to you. And seriously, wtf? Toys? Why would they ban toys? Because 45% of the Gaza strip is under the age of 16. Way to target children, assholes.

If you love collective punishment, you're a damned awful human being. [/quote]


1) The blockade is technically legal, whether we agree with it's reasons or not.

2) The flotilla may have contained a few people that were legitimately trying to help people suffering in Gaza, but the orgs that owned the ships and paid for the trip are known terrorist entities that are very anti-jew. This was a political play agenda of entrapment by them, pretty clearly. It was extremely provocative on their part. I would go as far to say as the entities behind the flotilla got exactly what they wanted out of this whole episode.

3)There is bad to go around all over here. That's all I am really getting at. These boats were not there out of warm and glowing hearts. They were there to bait Israel and it worked. Israel, predictably, handled a delicate situation with a hammer.

The day Israel comes out of pocket to personally guarantee our defense and their taxpayers spend billions of dollars a year to buy us weapons, they can complain all they want. When they get made to look like dicks as often as they've made us look like dicks on the national stage and it actually costs their national interests, they can complain.

Otherwise, they're welfare babies and they can shut the fuck up.
Click to expand...
I can't really argue with that.

[quote name='dafoomie']Its not only about making life miserable for the people in Gaza... You see, Israel has a little demographics problem. Eventually Jews will be outnumbered by Arabs in Israel, which would make it a little difficult to continue as a Jewish state.

Keeping them at borderline starvation keeps their population levels in check, and reduces the amount of what they call "superfluous young men". They've even discussed limiting or banning neonatal supplies in order to increase infant mortality.

Many of them simply don't see the Palestinians as human beings. Certainly not the radicals in the illegal settlements, with popular slogans such as "Arabs to the gas chambers". Netanyahu panders to these people as Bush did to our religious right.[/QUOTE]

Well at least I'm not the only conspiracy theorist on this board. I was getting lonely.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']You Jew haters and your quoting of reality.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, next people will be saying Israel has a cozy relationship with congress.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYjkLUcbJWo

Paintballs vs pipes to the head. I don't think the IDF will make that mistake again.[/QUOTE]

And where do you see paintballs? Tell me when in all of Israel's aggressions, have they EVER used paintball guns. Oh, because Israel's PR SAID they used paintballs this time. Pathetic.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']1) The blockade is technically legal, whether we agree with it's reasons or not.[/QUOTE]
There are certain conditions that need to be met in order to meet the standard of a legal blockade under international maritime law.

The blockade must be part of an international armed conflict.

It may not have the sole purpose of starving the civilian population or denying it other objects essential for its survival.

The damage to the civilian population must not be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated from the blockade.


I don't see how Israel can legitimately claim to be participating in an international armed conflict with Hamas in relation to the blockade, while claiming not to occupy Gaza when it comes to the Fourth Geneva Convention. They can't have it both ways.
 
[quote name='joeboosauce']And where do you see paintballs? Tell me when in all of Israel's aggressions, have they EVER used paintball guns. Oh, because Israel's PR SAID they used paintballs this time. Pathetic.[/QUOTE]

Around 51 seconds it looks like the guy has a paintball gun (hopper on top). Not that I think it justifies their boarding or anything.
 
[quote name='joeboosauce']And where do you see paintballs? Tell me when in all of Israel's aggressions, have they EVER used paintball guns. Oh, because Israel's PR SAID they used paintballs this time. Pathetic.[/QUOTE]

Even if some did use paintball guns that isn't the same thing as they all did.

Unless that is the argument now that paint balls killed all those people.
 
It doesn't matter if they were using paintball guns, akimbos or French ticklers. Israel boarded and detained a ship, its cargo and several people and killed and injured several people operating in international waters.

The starting point is that Israel committed an act of war.

Is there going to be a war? Why or why not?
 
There's a reason why people use the word 'Arab' as opposed to 'Palestinian'. They do this wordplay intentionally.

Also, one of the people killed was an American citizen. How will this change US Gov't's view on this?
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']evidently some people on the flotilla had written wills before going and are on video saying they want to be martyrs.[/QUOTE]

I find that very interesting Ramstoria, but then again these people were just trying desperately to get humanitarian aid to Gaza, and weren't trying to bait Israel at all.

Also to everyone else Israels blockade is legal regardless of whether or not we or the international community agree with it.

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=52&x_article=1858

According to the article and its quote of the San Remo Manual, Israel could have fired upon (not just boarded) the ships attempting to get past the legal blockade. Israel had no idea what was on those ships trying to get past, and put there own soldiers at risk, instead of just sinking them. Israel boarded the ships, and were instantly attacked with weapons that were prepared beforehand. Just watch the damn video people these "humanitarians" were beating the Israeli soldiers one by one as they came down from the helicoptor, and only after they threw an Israeli soldier off the top part of the boat did they get permission to use live fire. Oh and they Israeli soldiers were equipped with small crowd dispersing paintball guns, and a pistol as a sidearm in case of emergency.

In this case it was the "humanitarians" who were acting violent, not Israel.
 
Do we have raw unedited videos? Not O'Keefe style edited videos? It would be nice to see the videos/pictures that were confiscated by the Israeli gov't.

One can only hope and change.
 
[quote name='joeboosauce']And where do you see paintballs? Tell me when in all of Israel's aggressions, have they EVER used paintball guns. Oh, because Israel's PR SAID they used paintballs this time. Pathetic.[/QUOTE]

As spazx said, time index 0:51 to 0:53. It's at least proof that the commandos didn't intend to kill anyone. Whether that matters to you or not is up to you.

FWIW here is the story from one of the commandos. If there is no better and more clear video of the event, all we have is this type of testimony to decide what happened. It seems to me that whatever your views on Israel/Palestine before this event pretty much decide where you will stand on it regardless.

JERUSALEM - When St.-Sgt. S. fast-roped down from an air force Black Hawk helicopter onto the Mavi Marmara Turkish passenger ship on Monday morning, he did not expect to be landing in what he called “a battlefield” and facing off against a group of “murderous mercenaries.”

The 15th and last naval commando from Flotilla 13 (the Shayetet) to rappel down onto the ship from the helicopter, S. said on Thursday that he was immediately attacked by what the IDF has called “the mob of mercenaries” aboard the vessel, just like the soldiers who had boarded just before him.

Looking to his side, he saw three of his commanders lying wounded – one with a gunshot wound to the stomach and another with a gunshot wound to the knee. A third was lying unconscious; his skull was fractured by a devastating blow with a metal bar.

As the next in the chain of command, S., who has been in the Shayetet for three and a half years, immediately took charge.

He pushed the wounded soldiers up against the wall of the upper deck and created a perimeter of soldiers around them to begin treating their wounds, he said. He then arranged his men to form a second perimeter, and pulled out his 9 mm. Glock pistol to stave off the charging attackers and to protect his wounded comrades.

The attackers had already seized two pistols from the commandos, and fired repeatedly at them. Facing more than a dozen of the mercenaries, and convinced their lives were in danger, he and his colleagues opened fire, he said. S. singlehandedly killed six men. His colleagues killed another three.

On Thursday, S. sat down with The Jerusalem Post at the Shayetet’s base in northern Israel for an exclusive interview, during which he described the dramatic events aboard the Mavi Marmara on Monday; he is being considered for a medal of valor.

“When I hit the deck, I was immediately attacked by people with bats, metal pipes and axes,” S. told the Post. “These were without a doubt terrorists. I could see the murderous rage in their eyes and that they were coming to kill us.”

S. does not look like a hero. Well-built, like all commandos in the Shayetet, he is also soft-spoken and stingy with words, but his commander Lt.-Col. T. fills in the blanks.

“S. did a remarkable job,” T. said. “He stabilized the situation and succeeded in hitting six of the terrorists.”

Based on preliminary results of its investigation into the navy’s takeover of the Mavi Marmara, which ended with nine dead passengers and more than 30 wounded, the IDF said on Thursday that the commandos were attacked by a well-trained group of mercenaries, most of whom were found without IDs but with thousands of dollars in their pockets.

The group was well trained and was split into a number of squads of about 20 mercenaries each distributed throughout the upper deck, the IDF said. All of the mercenaries wore gas masks and ceramic bulletproof vests and were armed with either bats, slingshots, metal bars, knives or stun grenades.

The IDF’s understanding is that the mercenaries mainly chose dual-purpose items of this sort rather than guns, since opening fire would have made it blatantly clear that they were terrorists and not so-called peace activists.

Nevertheless, the IDF suspects that the group did have some guns of its own. Israeli forensic experts who examined the ship found casings belonging to a weapon that was not used by the commandos, and the Turkish captain of the ship later told the IDF that the “mercenaries” threw their weapons overboard after the commandos took control of the vessel.

T. said he realized the group they were facing was well-trained and likely ex-military after the commandos threw a number of stun grenades and fired warning shots before rappelling down onto the deck. “They didn’t even flinch,” he said. “Regular people would move.”

Each squad of the “mercenaries” was equipped with a Motorola communication device, the IDF said, so they could pass information to one another. Assessments in the defense establishment are that members of the group were affiliated with international global jihad elements and had undergone training in places like Afghanistan and Pakistan.

S. on Thursday downplayed his involvement in the operation. “I did what I was trained to do and now I move on,” he said.

In contrast to earlier reports, the commandos said that they began using their weapons within a minute and a half after boarding the ship, due to the extreme violence they faced. One of the reasons S. pulled out his gun right after landing on the ship was because one of the mercenaries was pointing a pistol, snatched from one of the commandos, at another commando’s head.
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='Knoell']I find that very interesting Ramstoria, but then again these people were just trying desperately to get humanitarian aid to Gaza, and weren't trying to bait Israel at all.

Also to everyone else Israels blockade is legal regardless of whether or not we or the international community agree with it.

http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=52&x_article=1858[/QUOTE]
The article you quoted conveniently omits the conditions I quoted from the San Remo Manual and ignores the question of whether it is a legal blockade or not. If it is a legal blockade, then they are within their rights to stop those ships in international waters if they have a reasonable belief they will violate the blockade.

Is Israel involved in an international armed conflict with Gaza? This is actually two questions. Can the current state of affairs between Israel and Gaza be reasonably considered an armed conflict, and can it be considered international? An international armed conflict is defined as a conflict between two states. To claim that this is an international armed conflict is de facto recognition of Gaza as a state, which would also establish that Gaza, Hamas and its fighters have protections under the Geneva Convention.

But from the other side of their mouth, they want to say that Gaza is not a state and that Israel is not an occupying power, therefore Hamas fighters have no legal status and they have no protections under the Geneva Convention. But this would mean that you can't have an international conflict since there is no state that Israel is in conflict with. This would make this a non-international armed conflict, where a blockade would not be justified by any international law. They would not have the right to enforce such a blockade in international waters.
 
Sigh. Well that's one way to interpret it Dafoomie. I'm not saying you are wrong but you need to realize that people that know a lot more about this stuff than you or I say otherwise, using the same sources you are.


Reurters:
Q&A: Is Israel's naval blockade of Gaza legal?
Jonathan Saul
LONDON


What is the legality of the blockade and did Israel's intervention breach international law? Below are some questions and answers on the issue:

CAN ISRAEL IMPOSE A NAVAL BLOCKADE ON GAZA?

Yes it can, according to the law of blockade which was derived from customary international law and codified in the 1909 Declaration of London. It was updated in 1994 in a legally recognized document called the "San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea."

Under some of the key rules, a blockade must be declared and notified to all belligerents and neutral states, access to neutral ports cannot be blocked, and an area can only be blockaded which is under enemy control.

"On the basis that Hamas is the ruling entity of Gaza and Israel is in the midst of an armed struggle against that ruling entity, the blockade is legal," said Philip Roche, partner in the shipping disputes and risk management team with law firm Norton Rose.

WHAT ARE INTERNATIONAL WATERS?

Under the U.N. Convention of the Law of the Sea a coastal state has a "territorial sea" of 12 nautical miles from the coast over which it is sovereign. Ships of other states are allowed "innocent passage" through such waters.

There is a further 12 nautical mile zone called the "contiguous zone" over which a state may take action to protect itself or its laws.

"However, strictly beyond the 12 nautical miles limit the seas are the "high seas" or international waters," Roche said.

The Israeli navy said on Monday the Gaza bound flotilla was intercepted 120 km (75 miles) west of Israel. The Turkish captain of one of the vessels told an Istanbul news conference after returning home from Israeli detention they were 68 miles outside Israeli territorial waters.

Under the law of a blockade, intercepting a vessel could apply globally so long as a ship is bound for a "belligerent" territory, legal experts say.

CAN ISRAEL USE FORCE WHEN INTERCEPTING SHIPS?

Under international law it can use force when boarding a ship.

"If force is disproportionate it would be a violation of the key tenets of the use of force," said Commander James Kraska, professor of international law at the U.S. Naval War College.

Israeli authorities said marines who boarded the Turkish vessel Mavi Marmara opened fire in self-defense after activists clubbed and stabbed them and snatched some of their weapons.

Legal experts say proportional force does not mean that guns cannot be used by forces when being attacked with knives.

"But there has got to be a relationship between the threat and response," Kraska said.

The use of force may also have other repercussions.

"While the full facts need to emerge from a credible and transparent investigation, from what is known now, it appears that Israel acted within its legal rights," said J. Peter Pham, a strategic adviser to U.S. and European governments.

"However, not every operation that the law permits is necessarily prudent from the strategic point of view."

OPPONENTS HAVE CALLED ISRAEL'S RAID "PIRACY." WAS IT?

No, as under international law it was considered a state action.

"Whether what Israel did is right or wrong, it is not an act of piracy. Piracy deals with private conduct particularly with a pecuniary or financial interest," Kraska said.

HAVE THERE BEEN ANY SHIPPING DISRUPTIONS AFTER THE RAID?

None so far but the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), an association which represents 75 percent of the world's merchant fleet, has expressed "deep concern" over the boarding by Israeli forces, arguing that merchant ships have a right to safe passage and freedom of navigation in international waters.

"These fundamental principles of international law must always be upheld by all of the world's nations," the ICS said.
Click to expand...
 
lol it's fun watching Isreal try to spin this

First it was the people on the boat were firing on them before they got on board...that turned into they were attacked with axes...to the people on board had weapons on the ships like slingshots and Molotov cocktails....then the people on board wrestled handguns away from the swat guys and fired on them...now the people on board had stun grenades while the swat guys actually had paintball guns
ignore the 19 people who were killed and 60 injuried
....oh and IHH now has TERRORIST ties and people on board made wills and wanted to be MARTYRS!!!

I bet the next thing that comes out is that the people on the boat were actually chanting ALLAHU AKBAR and DEATH TO THE JEWS as the special forces team were rappelling onto the boat

I would say that we are smart enough to not fall for that but from the past few posts...guess we aren't.

Kind of off topic but everybody here should watch the documentary Death In Gaza.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_In_Gaza

Along with reading what happened after James Miller's death and how the IDF lied over and over about what happened.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Miller_(filmmaker)#Death
 
[quote name='Sporadic']lol it's fun watching Isreal try to spin this

First it was the people on the boat were firing on them before they got on board...that turned into they were attacked with axes...to the people on board had weapons on the ships like slingshots and Molotov cocktails....then the people on board wrestled handguns away from the swat guys and fired on them...now the people on board had stun grenades while the swat guys actually had paintball guns
ignore the 19 people who were killed and 60 injuried
....oh and IHH now has TERRORIST ties and people on board made wills and wanted to be MARTYRS!!!

I bet the next thing that comes out is that the people on the boat were actually chanting ALLAHU AKBAR and DEATH TO THE JEWS as the special forces team were rappelling onto the boat

I would say that we are smart enough to not fall for that but from the past few posts...guess we aren't.

Kind of off topic but everybody here should watch the documentary Death In Gaza.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_In_Gaza

Along with reading what happened after James Miller's death and how the IDF lied over and over about what happened.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Miller_(filmmaker)#Death[/QUOTE]

Did it really go from that point, to that point, to that point, or is that what YOU personally found out one piece at a time?

the video proves that the israeli soldiers were attacked upon boarding the ship. There is no debate with that part. The real question lies with whether or not the israelis were legally able to board the ship in international waters.
 
[quote name='dafoomie']The article you quoted conveniently omits the conditions I quoted from the San Remo Manual and ignores the question of whether it is a legal blockade or not. If it is a legal blockade, then they are within their rights to stop those ships in international waters if they have a reasonable belief they will violate the blockade.

Is Israel involved in an international armed conflict with Gaza? This is actually two questions. Can the current state of affairs between Israel and Gaza be reasonably considered an armed conflict, and can it be considered international? An international armed conflict is defined as a conflict between two states. To claim that this is an international armed conflict is de facto recognition of Gaza as a state, which would also establish that Gaza, Hamas and its fighters have protections under the Geneva Convention.

But from the other side of their mouth, they want to say that Gaza is not a state and that Israel is not an occupying power, therefore Hamas fighters have no legal status and they have no protections under the Geneva Convention. But this would mean that you can't have an international conflict since there is no state that Israel is in conflict with. This would make this a non-international armed conflict, where a blockade would not be justified by any international law. They would not have the right to enforce such a blockade in international waters.[/QUOTE]

So what you are saying is that israel should not use the tools outlined in the san remo manual and pretend there is no conflict with Gaza because they are not an officially recognized state by israel? okie dokie
 
[quote name='Sporadic']lol it's fun watching Isreal try to spin this

First it was the people on the boat were firing on them before they got on board...that turned into they were attacked with axes...to the people on board had weapons on the ships like slingshots and Molotov cocktails....then the people on board wrestled handguns away from the swat guys and fired on them...now the people on board had stun grenades while the swat guys actually had paintball guns
ignore the 19 people who were killed and 60 injuried
....oh and IHH now has TERRORIST ties and people on board made wills and wanted to be MARTYRS!!!

I bet the next thing that comes out is that the people on the boat were actually chanting ALLAHU AKBAR and DEATH TO THE JEWS as the special forces team were rappelling onto the boat[/QUOTE]

Ask and ye shall receive:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxY7Q7CvQPQ&feature=player_embedded

IDF, everybody!

[quote name='IRHari']Also, one of the people killed was an American citizen. How will this change US Gov't's view on this?[/quote]

It won't change it at all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AaL1Se38gg&feature=channel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=033gCiurxbg

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/10226151.stm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/01/israel-investigation-attack-gaza-flotilla-us
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Knoell']So what you are saying is that israel should not use the tools outlined in the san remo manual and pretend there is no conflict with Gaza because they are not an officially recognized state by israel? okie dokie[/QUOTE]
Did you even read it? What I'm saying is that Israel can not have it both ways. They claim one thing with regard to the blockade, then they claim that the opposite is true with regard to the Geneva Convention and Gaza's political status. Which is it? Is Gaza a state or not? Is Hamas a belligerent or not? Are they occupying Gaza or not? You can not answer yes when it suits you and no when it doesn't.

They wish to enjoy certain rights as a party in a conflict without any of the obligations they would have towards that party and its population.
 
[quote name='IRHari']There's a reason why people use the word 'Arab' as opposed to 'Palestinian'. They do this wordplay intentionally.
[/QUOTE]


And what's that intnetion exactly? Could it be that there is no such thing as palestinian ethnicity and it's far easier to group a concentration of people according to their largest ethnic group? Should we be calling them something else? Are they bedouin? Or Philistine ? Because they are not the Philistines that occupied palestine 2000 years ago. Or maybe the Samatitans? I'm sure there are some of them left. How about druze? No, that's not really an ethnic term either.

How about we just call them the subjugated oppressed living in occupied territory? Yeah, that has a ring to it. So does Freedom fighter. Aw, screw it. Arafat call them arabs, so that's good enough for me.
 
This is all moot anyway. If these people really just want to send aid to gaza, do it through the proper channels and hope that the aid gets to the people before being siphoned off by the gaza leadership. If you have a problem with the gaza leadership, maybe you should be working to remove THEM instead of bashing Israel for their mistreatment of their own people.

The point its that aid can be sent to gaza - in trucks. Trucks that come from Israel that are guaranteed not to have rockets in the cargo area. But that's not the point of this exercise, is it? No, the point is to fuck with Israel. Think about that until you can admit it. The point is NOT REALLY to aid, but to fuck with Israel because you hate Israel. Caring about the gaza people is secondary; it is a ruse to further an understated agenda.

You treat the palistinians with the exact same disrespect that all the other arab and muslim brotherhood of states do. They are a means to an end - Israel's elimination. let them sacrifice themselves, their children, their dignity, their wealth for your goals. The entire region hates the palestinian people and could care less if they all were exterminated as long as the Jewish state is destroyed along with them.


So, here's another flotilla coming to gaza. This time filled with Irish zealots and some radical passengers , no doubt from the same organizations as the previous one. The party's now started and everyone thinks they can get a piece of pipe and start bashing some Jews when they try to take over our boat. I hope Israel uses live ammunition from the start on this one to put the kibosh on any more idiots attempting an insane instigation of war with Israel.
 
Why just trucks? I demand hot air balloons. Show me where I can donate to the Gaza Hot Air Balloon Association - or GHABA - and I'll get on the horn 23 skidoo, chief.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top