Israel attacks Aid Flotilla. At least 2 dead

FlutterinBantam

Someone tell him!

Byron85

I Drink It Up! wrote: »

Do you want evidence or proof? I see your Greek friends did a spot of the old Yank Flag burning today. Austerity indeed, Lord Byron.:D

What the hell are you talking about???

Ok then, show me the evidence or the proof. Whatever the evidence is.

I Drink It Up!

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Two days away.

Máiréad and her mates will make the most of it.

Watch for Butterly getting in on the action.

Ah yes, that's the girls name. Is she Irish or American? Was she in East Timor?

mrboswell

I Drink It Up! wrote: »

I do not have any proof. Only evidence.

Israel took the ships intact. They are going to sift through the contents in their own time, and thats when the weapons will be discovered. It's probably already happening.

I their own time they'll "find" evidence or weapons, will they??

I smell a plant...

Dar

I Drink It Up! wrote: »

Because that's what organizations like Hamas and H'zbllah do.

They hijack the legitimate efforts of well meaning people.

And still there is absolutely no evidence that this is the case. Israel launched an armed assault against a merchant fleet in international waters. They have provided no evidence that the ships were carrying anything other than humanitarian aid. And you still believe their actions were justified?

youcrazyjesus!

I Drink It Up! wrote: »

I never laughed at her. She is dead, and that is a pity, and I would hate to die like that. I am sorry for her. She was used and she is dead. And that is a pity. What more do you want me to say?

You're bull****ting but unfortunately there's no way to prove it.

yoshytoshy

I Drink It Up! wrote: »

Ah yes, that's the girls name. Is she Irish or American? Was she in East Timor?

Grim.

sceptre

I Drink It Up! banned for two weeks for choosing to ignore an obviously made and bolded moderator instruction. Repeatedly.

I'd appreciate it if the rest of you stayed on the point as opposed to getting derailed by a probable troll as that way I can limit myself to banning only one person today.

/mod

paulaa

duckysauce wrote: »

how friggin near ?

Gazan waters tomorrow I think.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6504FE20100601

Foxtrol

yoshytoshy wrote: »

But besides isreal doing something illegal (blockades),these boats are internationally known to be humanitarium ships.
Purposely designed to help people.

It still doesnt change that they have a(n illegal) blockade and it doesnt make sense from their point of view to allow any ships through unchallenged as it would set a difficult precedent for them. Again I dont agree but I see their point of view. The whole point of them being well known as humanitarian ships was that the organisers thought they were in a win win situation. They stopped by Israel, Israel look like monsters. If they dont get stopped they set a precedent that could be tried again in future.

I also dont think that anyone has responded to my question on whether they think that the protesters also hold some blame for the bloodshed through attacking and injuring the commandos?

alastair

Foxtrol wrote: »

I also dont think that anyone has responded to my question on whether they think that the protesters also hold some blame for the bloodshed through attacking and injuring the commandos?

I certainly don't.

eoin5

Foxtrol wrote: »

...the protesters escalated the situation which led to these sad deaths

I'd agree with this, but I wouldnt go as far as saying the protesters did anything wrong as such. That would be an arbitrary assessment. Firstly as soon as the IDF invaded the ship it was an act of war, so that means the protestors had plenty of leigtimate options. They defended themselves instead of giving up, not a good option if you want to live.

Did their actions lead to more deaths in the short term? Yes.

Would that mean they are responsible for those deaths? No. The invaders are 100%. They had every right to defend themselves.

Was it the right thing to do? Who knows, unless you can see what comes of it in the future. It could lead to the lifting of the blockade!

Is this any consolation to the families of those that died? Probably not.

paulaa

Foxtrol wrote: »

It still doesnt change that they have a(n illegal) blockade and it doesnt make sense from their point of view to allow any ships through unchallenged as it would set a difficult precedent for them. Again I dont agree but I see their point of view. The whole point of them being well known as humanitarian ships was that the organisers thought they were in a win win situation. They stopped by Israel, Israel look like monsters. If they dont get stopped they set a precedent that could be tried again in future.

I also dont think that anyone has responded to my question on whether they think that the protesters also hold some blame for the bloodshed through attacking and injuring the commandos?

I did
http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=66183024&postcount=1500

yoshytoshy

Foxtrol wrote: »

It still doesnt change that they have a(n illegal) blockade and it doesnt make sense from their point of view to allow any ships through unchallenged as it would set a difficult precedent for them. Again I dont agree but I see their point of view. The whole point of them being well known as humanitarian ships was that the organisers thought they were in a win win situation. They stopped by Israel, Israel look like monsters. If they dont get stopped they set a precedent that could be tried again in future.

I also dont think that anyone has responded to my question on whether they think that the protesters also hold some blame for the bloodshed through attacking and injuring the commandos?

The world is watching and isreal has left themselves wide open to whatever happens next.
It could be as unexpected as what isreal has just done.

paulaa

Anyone could have told them that. As General Petraeus said "the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was fomenting anti-American sentiment due to the perception of U.S. favoritism towards Israel. "

Mossad also say they didn't interfere with the flotilla ships. Their explanation is ironic to put it mildly
"He said that the army had decided against sabotaging a ship in the Gaza flotilla at the center of Monday's deadly clashes, out of fear that the vessel would be stranded in the middle of the ocean and at risk of a humanitarian crisis. "

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/mossad-chief-israel-gradually-becoming-burden-on-u-s-1.293540

Mr.Micro

yoshytoshy wrote: »

The world is watching and isreal has left themselves wide open to whatever happens next.
It could be as unexpected as what isreal has just done.

Well the Israel coast is not a place to go cruising...too many pirates armed to the teeth. I doubt if travel insurance would cover one in the area against accidental death if one defended oneself against these pirates. One wonders how long more this rogue state is going to be allowed to act with such aggression unfettered and with impunity? As someone posted here last night this state is a nuclear power and are so trigger happy. Makes the case against the rogue Iran and its nuclear programme appear totally hypocritical.

dublinlawless

Israelis protest against the Zionists state's murder of humanatarians on Gaza Aid Flotilla. I presume all the Pro-Israeli right wing people on boards will also support these Israelis? or do they just support the blood-hungry Israelis?

Free Palestine!

Sand

Out of curiousity, should the Israeli commandos have used stun grenades, tear gas and fired their paintguns from the helicopters to clear the mob away so they could land on the deck in safety and form up? The inevitability of the deaths seems to have occured because the commandos landed in the middle of the mob who attacked them with a ferocity the Israelis hadnt expected - if they mob had been dispersed by less than lethal weapons before any troops landed, surely the outcome would have been better for all concerned?

P. Breathnach

dublinlawless wrote: »

Israelis protest against the Zionists state's murder of humanatarians on Gaza Aid Flotilla. I presume all the Pro-Israeli right wing people on boards will also support these Israelis? or do they just support the blood-hungry Israelis?

Thank you. It is good to be reminded that not all citizens of Israel share the position of its government and its armed forces.

Sand

Thank you. It is good to be reminded that not all citizens of Israel share the position of its government and its armed forces.

Israel is a liberal democracy. One of only recognisable ones by Western standards in the region.

karma_

Sand wrote: »

Out of curiousity, should the Israeli commandos have used stun grenades, tear gas and fired their paintguns from the helicopters to clear the mob away so they could land on the deck in safety and form up? The inevitability of the deaths seems to have occured because the commandos landed in the middle of the mob who attacked them with a ferocity the Israelis hadnt expected - if they mob had been dispersed by less than lethal weapons before any troops landed, surely the outcome would have been better for all concerned?

It was a poorly planned and executed landing no matter what way you look at it. Acommentator in the Israeli press had this to say:

"The inefficiency and the panic that overwhelmed the commandos, leading to the deaths of so many, raises worrying questions about their skillfulness and operational capability."

Reuven Pedatzur in Haaretz

20Cent

Sand wrote: »

Out of curiousity, should the Israeli commandos have used stun grenades, tear gas and fired their paintguns from the helicopters to clear the mob away so they could land on the deck in safety and form up? The inevitability of the deaths seems to have occured because the commandos landed in the middle of the mob who attacked them with a ferocity the Israelis hadnt expected - if they mob had been dispersed by less than lethal weapons before any troops landed, surely the outcome would have been better for all concerned?

They shouldn't have boarded the boat at all.

alastair

Sand wrote: »

Out of curiousity, should the Israeli commandos have used stun grenades, tear gas and fired their paintguns from the helicopters to clear the mob away so they could land on the deck in safety and form up? The inevitability of the deaths seems to have occured because the commandos landed in the middle of the mob who attacked them with a ferocity the Israelis hadnt expected - if they mob had been dispersed by less than lethal weapons before any troops landed, surely the outcome would have been better for all concerned?

They (the IDF) just shouldn't have been there in the first place - they had no legal authority, no justification, and most importantly, no common sense in engaging with the ships this way. The protesters had a legitimate claim that they were acting in self-defence, and the soldiers were presented with a situation (by their commanders) that was bound to be dangerous (both for themselves, but primarily for the passengers). This was a series of decisions that the Israeli state made, not anyone else.

dlofnep

Sand wrote: »

Out of curiousity, should the Israeli commandos have used stun grenades, tear gas and fired their paintguns from the helicopters to clear the mob away so they could land on the deck in safety and form up? The inevitability of the deaths seems to have occured because the commandos landed in the middle of the mob who attacked them with a ferocity the Israelis hadnt expected - if they mob had been dispersed by less than lethal weapons before any troops landed, surely the outcome would have been better for all concerned?

The Israelis shouldn't have illegally boarded at all.

gandalf

Sand wrote: »

Out of curiousity, should the Israeli commandos have used stun grenades, tear gas and fired their paintguns from the helicopters to clear the mob away so they could land on the deck in safety and form up? The inevitability of the deaths seems to have occured because the commandos landed in the middle of the mob who attacked them with a ferocity the Israelis hadnt expected - if they mob had been dispersed by less than lethal weapons before any troops landed, surely the outcome would have been better for all concerned?

Well apart from the fact that they shouldn't have boarded in International Waters surely they should have boarded en mass in one area together where they could have supported each other properly instead of diving singly into a group of people who definitely did not want them on board. The whole operation stinks of a first class botch job and not something you'd expect from so called special forces.

dublinlawless

Sand wrote: »

Israel is a liberal democracy. One of only recognisable ones by Western standards in the region.

Hamas was democratically elected in Gaza. Israel is democratic? I dont seem to remember the original inhabitants of the area voting for an Israeli occupation and the displacement of the Palestinians before this happened in 1948.

jimmycrackcorm

Sand wrote: »

Israel is a liberal democracy. One of only recognisable ones by Western standards in the region.

I guess then that democracy sucks.

sceptre

Is there some reason why you guys seem incapable of sticking reasonably within the bounds of the topic? You can tell me by PM if there is, on this thread you can just stick to the topic. Third on-thread warning, there's unlikely to be another with regard to topickality without accompanying red cards and/or bans.

/mod

Mr.Micro

dublinlawless wrote: »

Hamas was democratically elected in Gaza. Israel is democratic? I dont seem to remember the original inhabitants of the area voting for an Israeli occupation and the displacement of the Palestinians before this happened in 1948.

Yes its a pity that their democracy does not extend to the Palestinians or non Israelis. Its a democracy that does not travel well beyond the Israeli borders.

Sand

@ several who said basically the same thing

They shouldn't have boarded the boat at all.

You might believe that, but the Israelis believe differently. They have instituted a blockade around what is described as a war as and when it suits. Attempting to breach the blockade was going to bring about an IDF reaction. No one but a child believed otherwise, especially the organisers who did everything in their power to create a confrontation.

Now, I know you disagree. But that said,

Faced with the need to get on board the ship, surely the wisest course with hindsight would have been to have used less than lethal weapons from the helicopters to break up and disperse the mob from the upper decks so the commandos could land and form up. The situation devolved into a mess, with terrible consequences, because the mob attacked the surprised Israelis litterally as they dropped into the middle of the mob. Clear the mob away first, then no problem.

It seems clear that to avoid similar problems in the future (remember, the Israelis arent going to allow uninspected deliveries to Hamas, sorry) the IDF should consider any mob on board ships to be potentially violent, instruct them to disperse, and then begin using less than lethal weapons to clear them. I think it works out best for everyone. The protestors get their good TV, the IDF get to inspect the boats, and hopefully nobody gets stabbed or shot.

I think the problem is the IDF trusted too much that they would be dealing with only nonviolent, passive resistance and were caught out badly when they were attacked by the mob.