Israel attacks Aid Flotilla. At least 2 dead

Archie D Bunker

Just had to share this video, hilarious

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_is0WRHrAD4&sns=em

Zulu

Deleted User wrote: »

Why didn't the people on the irish boat do the same?

My guess is because no one was assassinated on their boat by the commandos boarding.
And because, unarmed civilians were executed by commandos on a previous boarding.

Scofflaw

Archie D Bunker wrote: »

Just had to share this video, hilarious

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_is0WRHrAD4&sns=em

In this context, and in the light of repeated moderator warnings about the use of videos on this thread, banned for trolling.

moderately,
Scofflaw

deravarra

Archie D Bunker wrote: »

Just had to share this video, hilarious

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_is0WRHrAD4&sns=em

Absolutely disgraceful - mocking those killed. Shame shame shame.

BlaasForRafa

Scofflaw wrote: »

Our pro-Israel posters would do much better if they argued with the people on this forum rather than with views from other sources (or straw men). I think pretty much everyone here is quite clear on the idea that the people on board defended themselves from the Israeli assault with violence, and that amongst other things they captured three of the commandos and took their weapons from them. The debate round this neck of the woods centres on whether that was right, not whether it happened.

regards,
Scofflaw

No, only the pro-palestinian posters think that. You do not get to choose what is or isn't a fact.

There were a group of hyped up thugs on that ship who were ready to attack any Israeli that boarded, they weren't all innocent activists just reacting on the spur of the moment to the boarding.

BlaasForRafa

deravarra wrote: »

The idea of the illegal state of Israel was brought about by the balfour declaration in 1917. This precursor to the League of Nations granting Great Britain a mandate for Palestine and a Jewish national home within it. In 1947 the United Nations voted in favour of the partition of Palestine.

Does that count as your idea of establishment of the illegal state of Israel? It was simply "normalizing" the situation, under sever pressure from the US, and the allies, after being subjected to a collective guilt forced upon it by the Jewish people because of what happened in WWII.

Mass immigration did and still does take place. Not so much now, but it still does happen.

A "state" founded upon the principles of being a home for a religious group, which discriminates on the basis of religion, and fights to promote one religion over any other is theocratic. Israel pretends its a democracy. Saudis dont.

Off topic? Simply pointing out the simple and irrefutable arrogance of a nation bedevilled by their collective paranoid schizophrenia.

Again you are completely off topic and engaging in whataboutery but I wonder if a mod will even bother saying that to you.

Offy

Deleted User wrote: »

Why didn't the people on the irish boat do the same? Because they had more sense. Where?

Unless you were one of those people how can you speak for them? You werent there were you?

Deleted User wrote: »

You are either misrepresenting my point or just ignoring it again. On that basis,would you enter garden full of marrauding wasps simply because it was your own?
Or a den of hungry tigers on your own because you are the keeper?

No you wouldn't.

Do you think that the tiger keeper in Dublin Zoo refuses to enter the tiger enclosure because the tigers are hungry? That point has nothing to do with killing aid workers, another attempt to divert.

Deleted User wrote: »

The same applies to the flotilla.It could have sailed to Israel.
Theres being righteous and theres being stupid.
The IDF are the lions and the wasps in this case.
They have form and this man O'Keefe is admitting that he anticipated what was going to happen and was preparing for it.
Thats text book aggitation.

Who are you accusing of stupidity? Are you saying that aid workers bringing aid to Gaza are stupid because they defy Israel? I am unclear as to what you mean by that comment.

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't disagree for one moment that the IDF had another option and that was lift the blockade and thats what they should do and hopefully will do.

I second that.

Deleted User wrote: »

No he's pointing out that whats sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander or that theres a liberal amount of ignoring awkward points here by the "you are 100% for us or nothing" approach from most posters here.
I've seen the tactic aimed at me umpteen times now.
I see it's aimed at Sands aswell now.How dare he ask awkward questions..

This was never about them and us. Its about letting aid workers live. The aid workers did not carry guns, they were not in a war ship, they were not bringing arms to Hamas. They were bringing humanitarian supplies and they were killed for it. Period.

Offy

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

No, only the pro-palestinian posters think that. You do not get to choose what is or isn't a fact.

There were a group of hyped up thugs on that ship who were ready to attack any Israeli that boarded, they weren't all innocent activists just reacting on the spur of the moment to the boarding.

Sorry I must be missing something here, by what right did the Israelis board the ship?

Lemming

Deleted User wrote: »

You are either misrepresenting my point or just ignoring it again. On that basis,would you enter garden full of marrauding wasps simply because it was your own?
Or a den of hungry tigers on your own because you are the keeper?

Humans have conscious thought. That's what seperates us from animal instinct. Well, that and opposable thumbs.

Are you saying that Israeli forces are incapable of behaving like anything other than with wild animal instinct? That particular line of argument bears a striking semblance to early commented Israeli propoganda doctrine (I believe on this thread, or perhaps another very similar thread in the last day or so), whereby they claim they must appear to behave with no rational thought other than extremes so as to appear dangerous to mess with.

The same applies to the flotilla.It could have sailed to Israel.

And the raison d'etre of the flotilla was to bypass the Israeli blockade. You know that the blockade includes landed goods right? So what would hve happened? The landed goods would be blockaded.

Theres being righteous and theres being stupid.

Indeed. I have trouble determining if the Israeli government is able to distinguish between the two ... they talk about being righteous and act like absolute muppets and are their people's own worst enemy.

No he's pointing out that whats sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander or that theres a liberal amount of ignoring awkward points here by the "you are 100% for us or nothing" approach from most posters here.

Sorry Briar, but you come across as being 100% "either you are against us .. etc." with your posts. The bottom line is that the Israeli actions regarding boarding the flotilla were totally out of line and law. What happened on the boats once they choose to force both sides down that route is semantics, although questions most definitely need answered regarding their soldiers conduct and the alarming reports of several bodies with point-blank gun shot wounds, suggesting execution.

Offy

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Again you are completely off topic and engaging in whataboutery but I wonder if a mod will even bother saying that to you.

Again so are you. PLEASE TELL ME YOUR SIGNATURE DOES NOT SUPPORT THE MURDER OF INNOCENT PROTESTORS LIKE RACHEAL CORRIE. I know Ive asked you on a few occasions but you refuse to explain to me what it means. Were you involved in bulldozing peoples houses?

Offy

Offy wrote: »

Do you think that the tiger keeper in Dublin Zoo refuses to enter the tiger enclosure because the tigers are hungry? That point has nothing to do with killing aid workers, another attempt to divert.[

ah come on now,with respect,it does.
I'm simply of the view that messing with the IDF is foolhardy.
They have nukes which is why nations can't mess with them either.

Who are you accusing of stupidity? Are you saying that aid workers bringing aid to Gaza are stupid because they defy Israel? I am unclear as to what you mean by that comment.

Bringing aid isn't stupid.
What I said is perfectly clear.
Regardless of what you think about the IDF,combating them is stupid.

This was never about them and us. Its about letting aid workers live. The aid workers did not carry guns, they were not in a war ship, they were not bringing arms to Hamas. They were bringing humanitarian supplies and they were killed for it. Period.

I'm with you there except,to use someone elses terminology here,combatting the mad dog was not wise.

Lemming wrote:

Are you saying that Israeli forces are incapable of behaving like anything other than with wild animal instinct? That particular line of argument bears a striking semblance to early commented Israeli propoganda doctrine (I believe on this thread, or perhaps another very similar thread in the last day or so), whereby they claim they must appear to behave with no rational thought other than extremes so as to appear dangerous to mess with.

I believe,they follow orders to that end but I really don't understand them at all.

Sorry Briar, but you come across as being 100% "either you are against us .. etc." with your posts. The bottom line is that the Israeli actions regarding boarding the flotilla were totally out of line and law. What happened on the boats once they choose to force both sides down that route is semantics, although questions most definitely need answered regarding their soldiers conduct and the alarming reports of several bodies with point-blank gun shot wounds, suggesting execution.

That bottom line,I haven't disagreed with anywhere on this thread.
All I've said is the situation could have been avoided.
There are many ways to skin a cat,this wasn't one of them in my view.

Offy

Deleted User wrote: »

ah come on now,with respect,it does.
I'm simply of the view that messing with the IDF is foolhardy.
They have nukes which is why nations can't mess with them either.
Bringing aid isn't stupid.
What I said is perfectly clear.
Regardless of what you think about the IDF,combating them is stupid.


I'm with you there except,to use someone elses terminology here,combatting the mad dog was not wise.I believe,they follow orders to that end but I really don't understand them at all.
That bottom line,I haven't disagreed with anywhere on this thread.
All I've said is the situation could have been avoided.
There are many ways to skin a cat,this wasn't one of them in my view.

Someone had to stop Hitler no matter what weapons he had.

FishFood

Is it not completely futile to argue these points with the Israel supporters any more?They will never ever see that Israel has done anything wrong no matter how many other countries or people say it, they will never be able to look at anything as an isolated incident.I mean seriously, bringing up previous Turkish/Christian/Armenian incidents is so ludicrous it just shows the sheer lack of credible arguments they have relating to this flotilla incident.Question: Israel were a bit off the map there with the attacking the flotilla no? Answer: No! Turkey hate christians and killed Armenians! Are you saying you like Turkey now? Thats insane!Really do despair for humanity in general when people can attempt to defend the indefensible.

Scofflaw

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Again you are completely off topic and engaging in whataboutery but I wonder if a mod will even bother saying that to you.

Two points - first, you're discussing moderation in-thread, which as you know is not allowed. Second, to set your mind at ease, a mod has commented on it, as you'd see if you read back a page or two.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Scofflaw

Deleted User wrote:

The IDF are the lions and the wasps in this case.
They have form and this man O'Keefe is admitting that he anticipated what was going to happen and was preparing for it.
Thats text book aggitation.

So when you know you're likely to be attacked by violent people, and you prepare for that, you're an agitator?

Your apparent wish to defend Israel whatever they do is seriously warping your moral outlook, because that's a laughably silly piece of 'reasoning'.

regards,
Scofflaw

dan719

Offy wrote: »

Someone had to stop Hitler no matter what weapons he had.

If Hitler had developed a nuclear weapon before the Americans and dropped in on London, that would have ended British involvement in WWII.

Offy

dan719 wrote: »

If Hitler had developed a nuclear weapon before the Americans and dropped in on London, that would have ended British involvement in WWII.

and what do you think will happen if Iran get the bomb? WW3

deravarra

Offy wrote: »

and what do you think will happen if Iran get the bomb? WW3

Israel has it already - but just like the recent murder in Dubai, they will neither confirm nor deny.

Scofflaw

Scofflaw wrote: »

So when you know you're likely to be attacked by violent people, and you prepare for that, you're an agitator?

You know like..they could have communicated with the IDF and arranged transport to Israel.
We'll agree to disagree on the aggitator definition but thats exactly what you are if you decide that you are going up against a countries navy regardless of it's reputation.

Your apparent wish to defend Israel whatever they do is seriously warping your moral outlook, because that's a laughably silly piece of 'reasoning'.

regards,
Scofflaw

Considering my rather strong condemnation of Israel throughout this thread does not equate to agreement with their actions,I'm baffled at your conclusion.
You can of course laugh at me if you disagree,thats your prerogative.
I'm not laughing.

deravarra

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Again you are completely off topic and engaging in whataboutery but I wonder if a mod will even bother saying that to you.

simply refuting someone else's accusations. arent i allowed do that?

thebman

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

No, only the pro-palestinian posters think that. You do not get to choose what is or isn't a fact.

There were a group of hyped up thugs on that ship who were ready to attack any Israeli that boarded, they weren't all innocent activists just reacting on the spur of the moment to the boarding.

How is the above a fact. Where is your proof that they were hyped up thugs ready want to attack any Israeli who boarded?

Would they have attacked an Israeli selling Icecream or was it just armed soldiers who boarded their ship with guns in International Waters that they were engaging in violence against?

Manic Moran

PLEASE TELL ME YOUR SIGNATURE DOES NOT SUPPORT THE MURDER OF INNOCENT PROTESTORS LIKE RACHEAL CORRIE. I know Ive asked you on a few occasions but you refuse to explain to me what it means. Were you involved in bulldozing peoples houses

Achzarit is a heavy APC, not a bulldozer. It is designed to transport troops across a conventional battlefield in greater protection than the average APC (Someone had the bright idea that charging over tank-controlled terrain in a light-skinned vehicle is hazardous to your health), and as such, is the first of the breed. The Israelis are the leaders in the use of such vehicles, and have a number of types them, the Russians come second with vehicles such as BTR-T.

Not speaking for Blaas, but as I read it (and he's a regular on the military forum), the 'more cowbell' comment is from the Saturday Night Live sketch, and is a reference to the proverbial 'just a little something needed, and it's perfect.'

The fact that the incident took place in international waters means the Israeli troops were in the wrong. Sands suggests in the post that the Israelis were in the right,

Where?

The possibility does exist. International waters are no sanctuary in certain circumstances. Whether those circumstances apply is an issue which has not yet been ruled upon by competent authority, so definitive claims one way or ther other are exaggerated.

NTM

Irlandese

Scofflaw wrote: »

Two points - first, you're discussing moderation in-thread, which as you know is not allowed. Second, to set your mind at ease, a mod has commented on it, as you'd see if you read back a page or two.

moderately,
Scofflaw

I think we all know the rule Scofflaw, which is why we stringently avoid suggesting in any way, at all, at all, at all, that you might be more than a little out of order, if you were ever thought, even for a millisecond, no matter how outragoeus such a thought would be, to all of us rule respecters, to be allegedly using your functional advantages as a mod, on thread, to advance one side of the debate. Phew.
Of course you would never do that. It would not be right. And we would be wrong to say so, whether it happened or not, am I not right?
In fact, I am on record here somewhere as commenting that you were a very moderate moderator. Now when was that comment?? I forget.....
Anyway, we were saying ? ............

Irlandese

Irlandese wrote: »

When and how did the full? Israeli Parliment, presumably by a majority vote?? decide? consider? infer? dream ? have one mad member suggest? any such thing???

So Moomoo1 didn't get to reply.
Maybe he is not really an Armenian after all?
Perhaps he would find the following interesting though, from todays Jerusalem Post;

"Although most of the recent talk regarding flotillas has revolved around ships sailing toward Gaza, at least two plans have emerged for “reverse flotillas” – from Israel toward Turkey – to highlight what organizers have labeled the Turks’ “shameless hypocrisy” in their criticisms of the Jewish state.

The most ambitious of the two plans has been devised by members of Israel’s National Student Union, who this week announced their intention to set sail toward Turkey, in an effort to bring humanitarian aid to the “oppressed people of Turkish Kurdistan” and to members of the “Turkish Armenian minority.”

I like it ! I like it !

Offy

Irlandese wrote: »

So Moomoo1 didn't get to reply.
Maybe he is not really an Armenian after all?
Perhaps he would find the following interesting though, from todays Jerusalem Post;

"Although most of the recent talk regarding flotillas has revolved around ships sailing toward Gaza, at least two plans have emerged for “reverse flotillas” – from Israel toward Turkey – to highlight what organizers have labeled the Turks’ “shameless hypocrisy” in their criticisms of the Jewish state.

The most ambitious of the two plans has been devised by members of Israel’s National Student Union, who this week announced their intention to set sail toward Turkey, in an effort to bring humanitarian aid to the “oppressed people of Turkish Kurdistan” and to members of the “Turkish Armenian minority.”

I like it ! I like it !

I dont like it, its like they are trying to start a flame war! How will that help the current situation? Perhaps they should concentrate on their own problems before trying to resolve other peoples problems?

deravarra

Irlandese wrote: »

So Moomoo1 didn't get to reply.
Maybe he is not really an Armenian after all?
Perhaps he would find the following interesting though, from todays Jerusalem Post;

"Although most of the recent talk regarding flotillas has revolved around ships sailing toward Gaza, at least two plans have emerged for “reverse flotillas” – from Israel toward Turkey – to highlight what organizers have labeled the Turks’ “shameless hypocrisy” in their criticisms of the Jewish state.

The most ambitious of the two plans has been devised by members of Israel’s National Student Union, who this week announced their intention to set sail toward Turkey, in an effort to bring humanitarian aid to the “oppressed people of Turkish Kurdistan” and to members of the “Turkish Armenian minority.”

I like it ! I like it !

Well tickle me pink ... here we go with the nimbyism Israeli style.

The Israelis WERE the minority until Jews were jetted in from all corners of the globe, with the promise of a home and money. Not even in Iran would you find this sort of theocracy!

Maybe we could provide some aid to the christian people of bethlehem ...

IrishTonyO

Looks like some good news may come out of this,

"The Middle East envoy and former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, has said Israel has agreed in principle to begin within days to ease its three-year-old blockade on the Gaza Strip."


http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0614/gaza.html

Overheal

IrishTonyO wrote: »

Looks like some good news may come out of this,

"The Middle East envoy and former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, has said Israel has agreed in principle to begin within days to ease its three-year-old blockade on the Gaza Strip."


http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0614/gaza.html

I'll believe that when pigs fly.

Because obviously the pigs will then take control of border air space, and the Israelis wont want to be near them; so they'll back off.

Irlandese

deravarra wrote: »

Well tickle me pink ... here we go with the nimbyism Israeli style.

The Israelis WERE the minority until Jews were jetted in from all corners of the globe, with the promise of a home and money. Not even in Iran would you find this sort of theocracy!

Maybe we could provide some aid to the christian people of bethlehem ...

And all this written from one of the craftiest theocracies on the planet.............
Are you not a member of Opus dei then?
My God, they will let anyone post here nowadays !

wes

Offy wrote: »

I dont like it, its like they are trying to start a flame war! How will that help the current situation? Perhaps they should concentrate on their own problems before trying to resolve other peoples problems?

Wait, so there going to sail to land locked Kurdistan:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Kurdish-inhabited_area_by_CIA_%281992%29.jpg

Well there more than welcome to try and sail over land...... Reminds me of the suggestions of floatillas to Chechenya, earlier in this thread or the other one in After Hours. Seriously do people not check maps, when suggesting this stuff....