Israel attacks Aid Flotilla. At least 2 dead

Grumpypants

karma_ wrote: »

Have you been following this thread at all?

I have and its the only thing people keep going back to that this happened on international waters. when i point out that the ships needed to be searched i get told not on international waters. When i say the aid workers attacked the soldiers i get back because it was on international waters.

This international waters thing might hold up if the boat was minding its own business and the soldiers came along boarded it but it wasn't. They announced that it was going to Gaza it was on course for Gaza it was stopped before it got to Gaza.

dlofnep

glaston wrote: »

If I was living in Israel I would expect my government to do everything in its power to stop terrorist attacks.

Placing people under blockade, where they live in sub-human conditions will not stop terrorism. Only mutual understanding and compromise will do that.

alastair

glaston wrote: »

I'm not sure what you mean by your brief comment.

From the top:

Right so you have a ship with lots of Turkish fundamentalists potentially carrying long range missiles.

No you don't. Nor do you have a ship with lots of smurfs carrying pixiedust. So why pretend otherwise?

This ship refuses to stop, be searched,

This ship that doesn't exist? There are laws that govern when a state can legally board a suspect ship in international waters, and they wouldn't apply in the current situation - where no armed conflict is in place (legally).

wtf would you let it get any closer to civillians?

Gazan territorial waters are 20 miles from the coast - no-where near civilians.

Anyway its a no win situation. Israel cant do anything in international waters

It can, but only within the law.

and same bleeding heart crowd would complain if they boarded a ship in Gaza waters, probably say it was out of their juristiction.

And? Since when has any state bothered with anything but their self-interest and the law? Are you suggesting that Israel is suddenly going to start concerning itself with foreign sentiment?

Johnboy1951

dlofnep wrote: »

Placing people under blockade, where they live in sub-human conditions will not stop terrorism. Only mutual understanding and compromise will do that.

I would suggest it is likely to encourage acts that are deemed as 'terrorists' by those who have little or no hope in their present conditions and can see no future with better conditions.

glaston

dlofnep wrote: »

Placing people under blockade, where they live in sub-human conditions will not stop terrorism. Only mutual understanding and compromise will do that.

I agree with you on this.

However the plight of people in Gaza is due to the actions of both Israel and Hamas.

Israeli pulls its citizens out of Gaza and the the rocket attacks only intensify.

alastair

Grumpypants wrote: »

This international waters thing might hold up if the boat was minding its own business and the soldiers came along boarded it but it wasn't. They announced that it was going to Gaza it was on course for Gaza it was stopped before it got to Gaza.

So what? They said exactly the same thing in Turkish waters, Cypriot waters, Irish waters, etc etc. Israel could legally stop them in Gazan waters or Israeli waters, not elsewhere.

glaston

and same bleeding heart crowd would complain if they boarded a ship in Gaza waters, probably say it was out of their juristiction.

And? Since when has any state bothered with anything but their self-interest and the law? Are you suggesting that Israel is suddenly start concerning itself with foreign sentiment?

Precisely the opposite, if Israel gave a toss about the sentimensts of the Irish left them it would have been wiped off the map years ago.

How can you be so sure whats on any boat entering Gaza. As stated previously thousands or rockets made their way into the hands of Hamas over the last number of years. How do you think they got into Gaza?

Maybe they made them from your pixie dust.

alastair

glaston wrote: »

Precisely the opposite, if Israel gave a toss about the sentimensts of the Irish left them it would have been wiped off the map years ago.

Nonsensical rhetoric aside - that's exactly why your claim matters not a whit.

glaston wrote: »

How can you be so sure whats on any boat entering Gaza. As stated previously thousands or rockets made their way into the hands of Hamas over the last number of years. How do you think they got into Israel?

They make them in Gaza with materials smuggled in through tunnels. No-one disputes this - the IDF included. You check boats entering Gaza - as previously mentioned. No-one is asking that Israel stop checking for weapons.

glaston wrote: »

Maybe they made them from your pixie dust.

Are you being intentionally obtuse, or just have difficulty with the basic facts at play? Just wondering if there's any point in responding to your posts.

philologos

taconnol wrote: »

Who gets to decide that?

Israel, because:
1) Israel is responsible for the security of the Sea of Gaza following the Gaza - Jericho Agreement.
2) Israel currently has an at-war status with Hamas, and wishes to seek that any material that could be used to construct weapons cannot enter Gaza.

I think that this is reasonable, that Israel can monitor the goods at Ashdod and let the aid through that way.

taconnol wrote: »

Of course there is a PR element to their actions. Why do you not appreciate the positive impacts that greater international attention can have on the Gazan blocade?

This would assume that it is always best that Israeli security isn't applied. I think ships do need to be allowed to enter Gaza, but I also think that Israel must have the right to secure itself in this situation.

It seems that the US influence is already affecting Netanyahu, so time will tell.

Nodin

Jakkass wrote: »

Israel, because:
1) Israel is responsible for the security of the Sea of Gaza following the Gaza - Jericho Agreement.
2) Israel currently has an at-war status with Hamas, and wishes to seek that any material that could be used to construct weapons cannot enter Gaza.

I think that this is reasonable, that Israel can monitor the goods at Ashdod and let the aid through that way.

...however, its generally agreed that Israel applies restrictions in order to inflict massive hardship rather than for its own security, thus making it all rather unreasonable.

Laminations

dlofnep wrote: »

Placing people under blockade, where they live in sub-human conditions will not stop terrorism. Only mutual understanding and compromise will do that.

And conversely terrorism will not stop the blockade. Only mutual understanding and compromise will do that. This conflict is perpetuated by both sides, a fact that most side takers fail to grasp

dlofnep

Jakkass wrote: »

I think that this is reasonable, that Israel can monitor the goods at Ashdod and let the aid through that way.

That's the problem. Israel is not allowing sufficient aid through, and is blocking legitimate aid like concrete, which is essential for the Palestinians to rebuild their infrastructure.

halkar

glaston wrote: »

I agree with you on this.

However the plight of people in Gaza is due to the actions of both Israel and Hamas.

Israeli pulls its citizens out of Gaza and the the rocket attacks only intensify.

Israel did not move out of Gaza for their love of Palestinians. They knew Hamas would win the elections in Gaza which would leave their settlers in more hostile territority with difficult and expensive to defend.
September 12, 2005 Israel disengagement plan from Gaze completed.
January, 26, 2006 Hamas wins elections in Gaza.

They have moved out of Gaza but their land grab increased in West Bank and in Jerusalem. Situation in West Bank is no better than Gaza where people have to go through numerous Israeli check points to get on with their daily lives often not knowing if they will make back to their homes.

dlofnep

Laminations wrote: »

And conversely terrorism will not stop the blockade. Only mutual understanding and compromise will do that. This conflict is perpetuated by both sides, a fact that most side takers fail to grasp

The conflict is perpetuated by Israel, because it is Israel that illegally occupies Palestinian territory. It is Israel that creates illegal settlements. It is Israel that disallows legitimate aid from reaching Palestinians.

I love how people attempt to claim that both parties are equally responsible for the conflict. One is the oppressor, the other is the oppressed. They are both not equally responsible. It's quite clear.

alastair

Laminations wrote: »

And conversely terrorism will not stop the blockade. Only mutual understanding and compromise will do that. This conflict is perpetuated by both sides, a fact that most side takers fail to grasp

There wasn't/isn't any terrorism employed in the flotilla. Is anyone here advocating a terrorist attempt to stop the blockade?

philologos

dlofnep wrote: »

That's the problem. Israel is not allowing sufficient aid through, and is blocking legitimate aid like concrete, which is essential for the Palestinians to rebuild their infrastructure.

I agree, there needs to be a set standard for what is allowed in and what is allowed out. When it is done on a case by case basis it can be done improperly.

I'm not saying that I support everything that Israel does. Rather I am saying that the concept of examining what is on the ships is something that is important from their POV, there are clear flaws in Israel's approach.

In fact, I think it's a shame that Palestinians cannot have the former freedom to work and enter Israel that they had prior to the spate of suicide bombings in Tel Aviv in 2002. Let's not engage in pretence that both sides weren't involved in this.

gandalf

I see we have more people attempting to deflect away from the actual topic.

Which is the Illegal Assault on Civilian ships in International Waters by a military force.

A Dub in Glasgo

Jakkass wrote: »

I think that this is reasonable, that Israel can monitor the goods at Ashdod and let the aid through that way.

Israel is not letting all the aid through, it will stop the aid that they decide they do not want the population of Gaza to get.

dlofnep

Jakkass wrote: »

I agree, there needs to be a set standard for what is allowed in and what is allowed out. When it is done on a case by case basis it can be done improperly.

I'm not saying that I support everything that Israel does. Rather I am saying that the concept of examining what is on the ships is something that is important from their POV, there are clear flaws in Israel's approach.

Then why not let a neutral party like the UN inspect shipments in a neutral port? That way, legitimate aid like cement can reach Gaza - instead of Israel holding a monopoly over what is and isn't allowed into Gaza.

Remember - Israel's current blockade is collective punishment. An impartial UN body would remove Israel's unfair monopoly, while at the same time - would stop missile shipments from reaching Gaza.

I would also like to see Israeli shipments monitored by the UN, to ensure that no nuclear materials reach Israel, or leave Israel - like what happened in South Africa.

philologos

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Israel is not letting the aid through, it will stop the aid that they decide they do not want the population of Gaza to get.

This is incorrect. The IDF do let in aid, they just have restrictions on what can go in and what can go out. These restrictions are questionable and need to change.

Aid does enter into Gaza on a regular basis, both through Israel's border crossings, and through the Rafah crossing with Egypt.

Laminations

alastair wrote: »

There wasn't/isn't any terrorism employed in the flotilla. Is anyone here advocating a terrorist attempt to stop the blockade?

Am I saying Israel were right in their attack on the flotilla? Search my posts and you'll see I said the opposite. I'm arguing against both the pro Israeli and pro Palestinian camps. I'm not saying both sides bare equal responsibility, I'm saying they both perpetuate the hatred and conflict and if you deny this you are blind.

A Dub in Glasgo

Jakkass wrote: »

This is incorrect. The IDF do let in aid, they just have restrictions on what can go in and what can go out. These restrictions are questionable and need to change.

Aid does enter into Gaza on a regular basis, both through Israel's border crossings, and through the Rafah crossing with Egypt.

= 'it will stop the aid that they decide they do not want the population of Gaza to get'

'all' is missing from my sentence, now fixed

Laminations

gandalf wrote: »

I see we have more people attempting to deflect away from the actual topic.

Which is the Illegal Assault on Civilian ships in International Waters by a military force.

If you're referring to me I've said that the assault was illegal and if this was the only issue of this thread it should have been closed eons ago as it's not debatable, Israel were 100% in the wrong. But the conflict is still a two sided conflict and the side takers have perpetuated this thread as they do the conflict itself.

alastair

Laminations wrote: »

I'm saying they both perpetuate the hatred and conflict and if you deny this you are blind.

It's pretty hard to see how activism to end a blockade on aid (deemed illegal by the UN no less) perpetuates any hatred or conflict, if I'm being honest. The 'sides' in this particular debate have Israel on one side, and eh, pretty much everyone else on the other. Given that you can either support the restrictions on aid, or oppose them, it's pretty hard to sit on the fence.

philologos

dlofnep wrote: »

Then why not let a neutral party like the UN inspect shipments in a neutral port? That way, legitimate aid like cement can reach Gaza - instead of Israel holding a monopoly over what is and isn't allowed into Gaza.

Precisely, because Israel is responsible for security of the Sea of Gaza under the Gaza - Jericho agreement. That is within their rights, and actually their responsibility.

UN observers could be posted at Israeli security posts for a period of time to ensure that they are abiding by reasonable standards of aid transmission, but Israel is fully within its rights to see what is on those ships for themselves.

dlofnep wrote: »

Remember - Israel's current blockage is collective punishment. An impartial UN body would remove Israel's unfair monopoly, while at the same time - would stop missile shipments from reaching Gaza.

Actually. As far as I remember it was after a spate of rocket attacks on southern Israel. Should these rockets be improved, Tel Aviv and possibly Jerusalem will be in full range of them.

I think it's hugely unfortunate that this is the situation. Trust has effectively been destroyed.

Israel walks on a tight-rope. The second it lets security down, the chances of a terror attack within Israel increase, massing huge condemnation from Israelis. The second it tightens up security, it amasses world-wide condemnation.

dlofnep wrote: »

I would also like to see Israeli shipments monitored by the UN, to ensure that no nuclear materials reach Israel, or leave Israel - like what happened in South Africa.

Israel has no comparison to South Africa. Palestinians had free movement within the State of Israel before 2002 as I've just said. The deterioration this situation is a result of a deterioration of trust. This is down to those Palestinians who attacked Israel as well as the Israeli's being overly suspicious.

Both sides are involved, and it is dishonest to say that this isn't the case.

youcrazyjesus!

Laminations wrote: »

If you're referring to me I've said that the assault was illegal and if this was the only issue of this thread it should have been closed eons ago as it's not debatable, Israel were 100% in the wrong. But the conflict is still a two sided conflict and the side takers have perpetuated this thread as they do the conflict itself.

Wtf? They're continuing to occupy land that does not and has never belonged to them. Israel needs to leave it. This is the basis for the conflict. It's not some intractable problem that exists between two sides. The conflict will exist as long as the occupation exists. End the occupation and you end the conflict. That said, given Israel is completely out of control Hamas would do well not to give them the excuse they're looking for and I've always believed Palestinian groups would do their cause a lot of good if they took a pacifist stance.

Nodin

gandalf wrote: »

I see we have more people attempting to deflect away from the actual topic.

Which is the Illegal Assault on Civilian ships in International Waters by a military force.

...which resulted in more than a few bruises...

Nine Turkish men on board the Mavi Marmara were shot a total of 30 times and five were killed by gunshot wounds to the head, according to the vice-chairman of the Turkish council of forensic medicine, which carried out the autopsies for the Turkish ministry of justice today.

The results revealed that a 60-year-old man, Ibrahim Bilgen, was shot four times in the temple, chest, hip and back. A 19-year-old, named as Fulkan Dogan, who also has US citizenship, was shot five times from less that 45cm, in the face, in the back of the head, twice in the leg and once in the back. Two other men were shot four times, and five of the victims were shot either in the back of the head or in the back, said Yalcin Buyuk, vice-chairman of the council of forensic medicine.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/04/gaza-flotilla-activists-autopsy-results

Laminations

alastair wrote: »

It's pretty hard to see how activism to end a blockade on aid (deemed illegal by the UN no less) perpetuates any hatred or conflict, if I'm being honest. The 'sides' in this particular debate have Israel on one side, and eh, pretty much everyone else on the other.

I'm not talking about this issue, I'm talking about the conflict in general. If this pacifist activism was the only type of action taken by Palestinian groups then it'd be clear cut.

Nodin

Jakkass wrote: »

Israel has no comparison to South Africa.

We can discuss that here.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055828565

alastair

Laminations wrote: »

I'm not talking about this issue, I'm talking about the conflict in general. If this pacifist activism was the only type of action taken by Palestinian groups then it'd be clear cut.

The thread is about this issue - an action which which wasn't taken by Palestinans, but by those opposed to the blockade in Gaza.