Israel attacks Aid Flotilla. At least 2 dead

Nody

prinz wrote: »

Is Israel not at war with Hamas?

A country can not be in a state of war with anything but another nation; it can not be in a state of war with an organisation. Israrel is no longer in a state of war since their last campaign in Gaza.

RasTa

PeakOutput wrote: »

what do you mean just tell the truth for once?

Pretty simple, you lied about said statment.

P. Breathnach

prinz wrote: »

They have every right as Israel controls the seas off Gaza.

Is this an instance of the "might is right" principle?

dlofnep

If I've learned one thing from this - It's that, no matter what actions Israel take - there will always be someone defending them, or trying to deflect attention through red herrings.

The majority of the people understand that what Israel has done, and is doing is wrong. I feel sorry for that minority who believe Israels actions are warranted or just.

Villain

prinz wrote: »

Countries have the right to blockade ports and inspect ships coming and going from beligerent states/areas.

So is Ireland a beligerent state now? What other reason to stop an Irish ship with Aid.

Do you accept the Blockade is illegal?

prinz

Nody wrote: »

Beyond the issue of control of the Gaza sea and a blockade which is not lawful; the problem is also that they took them on international water where they have no legal right to do anything (short of being in a state of war which Israel is not).

IrishTonyO wrote: »

Israel does not control international waters!!!!

Glenshane Pass wrote: »

in international waters..

Yes, countries do have the right to act in international waters.

IrishTonyO

PeakOutput wrote: »

he didnt say that

He said that Israel had every right to board the ships as Israel control the waters off Gaza. These ships were in International waters not in Gaza/Israel waters. Also most of the world including Ireland say that this blockade is illegal. The protective principle only applies when proof of a threat exists.

wes

prinz wrote: »

Whataboutery? No. Countries have the right to blockade ports and inspect ships coming and going from beligerent states/areas.

Nope, they don't. Also, the flotilla are in no way shape or form beligerent. Israel engaged in a act of murderous piracy.

Glenshane Pass

prinz wrote: »

Yes, countries do have the right to act in international waters.

.....?

bernardo mac

No doubt they are at war with Hamas but Israel is also at war with Decency,Compassion,International Law and opinion

IrishTonyO

prinz wrote: »

Yes, countries do have the right to act in international waters.

How many times do we have to point out to you the protective principle, given a state the right to act in international waters ONLY applies with proof of a threat!

prinz

IrishTonyO wrote: »

He said that Israel had every right to board the ships as Israel control the waters off Gaza..

Nope, I said claiming that the ships were heading to Gaza instead of Israel negated their right to act is nonsense. It is no argument whatsoever.

IrishTonyO wrote: »

These ships were in International waters not in Gaza/Israel waters. ..

Again irrelevant.

IrishTonyO wrote: »

Also most of the world including Ireland say that this blockade is illegal. The protective principle only applies when proof of a threat exists.

Israel wanted to check that out. The people behind the convoy wouldn't let them.

partyguinness

Just listening to RTE 1...the usual PR from the Isreali ambassador....

"Concerned Isreali Commandos brutally attacked by blood thirsty aid workers on flotilla...."...is the line...:rolleyes:

That replusive little state will not see it's 100 yr anniversary...something has to give...IMO

2kool4skool

The excuses that the Israeli state come up with are lame and an effront to people's intelligence. They are now going on an all out media campaign to try to muddy the waters and suggest that in some way or other the victims were trying to be killed. A number of points need to be clearly stated:

1 The ships were in international waters and were well known to be carrying no arms (I suggest that the Israelis will not even try to plant weapons on the ship). Mossad monitored the cargo at all embarkation points and were well aware of this.

2 The organisers of the campaign would have been very conscious of avoiding giving Israel any chance to discredit the convoy and would have ensured that no weapons of any sort were on board.

3 The fact that the commandos were wearing the uniforms of a State that believes it is divinely appointed does not give them the right to behave like terrorists.

4 Even if one of the troops while pistol whipping an individual on board had his weapon taken off him and a shot fired, gives no entitlement to the Israelis to shoot the person who is trying to defend himself not to talk about the other victims.

5 It is hard to imagine that the amount of victims could undre any stretch of the imagination been all so close together as to be seen to comprise a single threat and the presumption must be therefore that the Israelis went to other parts of the ship and continued firing after the initial incident (if any).

6 The Israelis prior to boarding the ship from 5 RIBs, disabled the ships communication systems thereby preventing the contemporaneous braodcast of the sound and possibly video coverage of the attack on the ship. Why do this if they felt they are in the right and did not intend or not care if they shot people.

7 The Israeli naval commandos are highly trained and are not at all likely to engage in a loss of head impulsive shooting spree. That amount of murder can only have been sanctioned from the Government (Interesting to find out when the relevant ministers last spoke)

8 The suggestion from Israel that in some way the people on the ship or the individual(s) who is alleged to have wrestled with the soldier or waved a kitchen knife or piece of wood justified their been shot dead should be contrasted with the scenario if an Israeli ship was boarded and the people on board sought to fight with the attackers and were killed. Is Israel suggesting that that would be justified?

9 To see a nation whose original population had suffered so much during the holocaust, descend to such a level of cruelty and ghetto creation of the Palestinians, makes one despair of the human race learning from the mistakes of the past.

10 Is there any chance of the usual apologists for the Israeli State for once realising that even if they are of the religion of the majorit of Israelis, they are not obliged to attempt to excuse every act of barbaric murder and genocide carried out by Israel and as so manifest during their invasion of (and use of phosphorous shells in) Gaza?

PeakOutput

RasTa wrote: »

Pretty simple, you lied about said statment.

which part? and i what was the 'for once' part about? have you seen me lie somewhere else at some stage or were you mistaking me for someone else?

prinz

IrishTonyO wrote: »

How many times do we have to point out to you the protective principle, given a state the right to act in international waters ONLY applies with proof of a threat!

..not proof of threat. Reasonable suspicion.

IrishTonyO

prinz wrote: »

Nope, I said claiming that the ships were heading to Gaza instead of Israel negated their right to act is nonsense. It is no argument whatsoever.



Again irrelevant.



Israel wanted to check that out. The people behind the convoy wouldn't let them.

That is NOT proof, can you not see this. If you have no proof you cannot use the protective principle. If you could states could do what they wanted in international waters and use that as an excuse

RasTa

Anyone else find it funny that if it's Hammas, crowds, schools, boats whatever it's always the other side that attacks first?

calex71

Whats happened saddens me

More can and should be done internationally about the situation in the region.

But let's get real here, the organizers of this flotilla had to have known something like this would happen. If they didn't then they are idiots.

I think they got exactly what they wanted from this, a reaction from Israel (not getting people hurt) and publicity for their cause internationally. This actually angers me almost as much as Israel's actions, as I am certain that there were people on board the boats who believed they would get to Gaza trouble free :mad:

I am far from being a fan of Israel but I think that both sides in this share part of the blame for todays events and the situation as a whole.

PeakOutput

RasTa wrote: »

Anyone else find it funny that if it's Hammas, crowds, schools, boats whatever it's always the other side that attacks first?

i dont understand that sentence can you clarify?

alastair

prinz wrote: »

Yes, countries do have the right to act in international waters.

No they don't - the law of the sea is unambigious in that regard.

All you have to claim otherwise is a vague reference to the the Protective Principle - by which logic any state could do anything anywhere without penalty - including the use of Irish passports to murder in Dubai.

partyguinness

Robert Fisk is on RTE 1 radio now and he has clearly lost the plot.....he wants to debate the massacre of Armenians in WW1 by Turkey.

baldbear

I bet that there will be guns "found" on this ship when Israel release there statements. Has there been any statements from Washington over these killings?

Fits Morris

This vile shower of terrorists should have a South African style trade and diplomatic blockade imposed against them.

But of course as long as Israel are in bed with the US, the UK and most of the Western media where their lying spin doctors and lobbyists rule the roost, nothing will happen.

They ethnically cleansed the Arabs off the land. Nothing happened.
They colonized land that wasn't given to them in 1948. Nothing happened.
They invaded the West Bank, Gaza, Golan Heights and the Sinai peninsula. Nothing happened.
They invaded Lebanon and stood back while Palestinian refugees were massacred in the refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila. Nothing happened.
They invaded Lebanon again and massacred civilians. Nothing happened.
They massacred Gaza. Nothing happened.
They continue to plant settlers in the West Bank, bulldozing Palestinian homes, with the ultimate aim of driving the Palestinians out.
Nothing happens.

Nothing will happen this time either.

It's profoundly depressing.

partyguinness

baldbear wrote: »

I bet that there will be guns "found" on this ship when Israel release there statements. Has there been any statements from Washington over these killings?

Well, surprisingly enough, the Israeli Ambassador on RTE 1 just now said there was guns on the boat and that it was the Aid Workers that strting shooting first....as you do when you see Israeli commandos approaching.

Turkish authorities have stated that they thoroughly checked the boat yesterday and they found no guns....and it goes on..

prinz

alastair wrote: »

No they don't - the law of the sea is unambigious in that regard..

What "law of the sea" would that be?

alastair wrote: »

All you have to claim otherwise is a vague reference to the the Protective Principle - by which logic any state could do anything anywhere without penalty - including the use of Irish passports to murder in Dubai.

A vague reference to an international legal principle used before and no doubt which will be used again?

dan719

dlofnep wrote: »

If I've learned one thing from this - It's that, no matter what actions Israel take - there will always be someone defending them, or trying to deflect attention through red herrings.

The majority of the people understand that what Israel has done, and is doing is wrong. I feel sorry for that minority who believe Israels actions are warranted or just.

I feel sorry for people, like yourself, who for so long have justified the murderous campaign in the North waged by Sinn Fein/IRA, that they feel the need to support the actions of terrorists in the Middle East, so as not to look completely idiotic.

Israel does not "play by the rules", and I don't blame them. No matter what anyone says they are at a constant state of war with their neighbours. More rockets are at aimed at Tel Aviv per square foot then anywhere else in the world. Their actions are a result of the siege mentality formed since the creation of the state of Israel and Jewish history more generally. (The holocaust was merely the icing on the cake for two thousand years of anti semitism).

P.S These marches were organised very quickly, no doubt the hand wringers expected something like this to happen, and had them provisionally set.

Deep Easterly

Fits Morris wrote: »

Nothing will happen this time either.

It's profoundly depressing.

Indeed it is , but as long as Isreal exists only as a gateway into the oil rich Middle East, this will always be the case.

IrishTonyO

prinz wrote: »

What "law of the sea" would that be?



A vague reference to an international legal principle used before and no doubt which will be used again?

That would be the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Law_of_the_sea

dlofnep

calex71 wrote: »

But let's get real here, the organizers of this flotilla had to have known something like this would happen. If they didn't then they are idiots.

Ridiculous. They expected Israel to murder 19 people? The consensus was that Israel would force the ships to move to an Israeli port where they may have been held in a detention camp. Nobody expected them to be murdered.

calex71 wrote: »

I think they got exactly what they wanted from this, a reaction from Israel (not getting people hurt) and publicity for their cause internationally.

Yeah, I'm sure that they are relishing in the fact that 19 of their friends are now dead.

calex71 wrote: »

This actually angers me almost as much as Israel's actions, as I am certain that there were people on board the boats who believed they would get to Gaza trouble free :mad:

You're angry that activists who wanted to bring aid to Gaza which was seriously lacking in aid (Confirmed by the UN)? Ridiculous.

calex71 wrote: »

I am far from being a fan of Israel but I think that both sides in this share part of the blame for todays events and the situation as a whole.

No, only one side shares the blame. The one that opened fire and killed 19 innocent civilians.