Israel attacks Aid Flotilla. At least 2 dead

alastair

Foxtrol wrote: »

And the commandos were stabbed with the daisy's these humanitarians were greeting them with.

The soldier who said he was stabbed also reckons he was attacked by 75% of the 700 odd 'terrorists' on the ship. Maybe he just got a particularly sharp poke with the paint-roller shown amongst the 'sophisticated weapons' cache.

BlaasForRafa

Scofflaw wrote: »

Indeed - but you seem to be begging the question of why it was necessary to "fast-rope from helicopters onto moving ships".

regards,
Scofflaw

I already said I don't think they should have landed on the ship at all.

gandalf

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

You know thats not what I'm saying.

It was a policing type operating carried out by troops trained in fast-roping from helicopters onto ships, it would have carried on being a policing operation if the mob hadn't attacked the commandos with iron bars and clubs.

But the guys used are normally a unit that specializes in sea-to-land incursions, assassinations, counter-terrorism, sabotage, maritime intelligence gathering and maritime hostage rescue.

Hardly the ideal people to send on a "Policing" mission.

Also as it is acknowledged that these humanitarians or protesters did not present any real danger beyond a few hot heads would it not made more sense to execute the boarding during daylight hours?

As I have said before it was a complete and utter botch job!

Euroland

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

I used logic. If they had intended to kill people they would have been armed with Uzis and Tavors not paintball guns and beanbag guns.

They went with intention to kill but used the paintball guns for posing in that short video made for the Israeli mass media propaganda. After finishing with the video recording they started their massacre with the real weapons.

Archie D Bunker

Memnoch wrote: »

"Mohamed Vall, Al Jazeera reporter
The Israeli assault took those of us on the ship by complete surprise.

During that hour an half in the early morning everybody on board the ship thought that no-one would survive the Israeli attack because we saw about 30 war vessels surrounding this ship and helicopters attacking with very luminous bombs, the sound of them makes you think you are dead

That was a fear of war, complete war, on a ship that was full of men, women and even children."

Wow, luminous bombs - must have been white phosphorous... Thank god a few of them managed to survive...

Selkies

Scofflaw wrote: »

The right to resist aggression is not dependent on the capacity to do so.

regards,
Scofflaw

"Here lie the bones of Solomon Gray,
Who died defending his right of way.
He was right, dead right, as he sped along,
But just as dead as if he'd been wrong."

Why did aid workers feel that they would be more useful dead?

Scofflaw

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

You know thats not what I'm saying.

It was a policing type operating carried out by troops trained in fast-roping from helicopters onto ships, it would have carried on being a policing operation if the mob hadn't attacked the commandos with iron bars and clubs.

That's an appalling and desperate piece of spin (although at least not as disgusting as eamo12's views). There's no such thing as a "policing-type operation" - there are military operations, and civilian operations, with two clear legal frameworks. You're trying to blur them in order, once again, to shift the blame to people who legitimately resisted an illegal attempt to seize control of their ship, armed only with makeshift weapons.

regards,
Scofflaw

Memnoch

Selkies wrote: »

Yeah people like that always seem in a hurry to show off the guts, in the figurative and literal sense.

"You know what a hero is? Someone who gets other people killed"

Then the Israelis are BIG hereos.

BlaasForRafa

Memnoch wrote: »

The activists did not have guns. Even the Israelis have stopped making this claim as it has been completely rubbished.

Even if the activists managed to grab guns OFF the Israelis, this then proves that it was the Israelis who used the guns first.

They took at least two guns off the commandos. And it does in no way mean that the israelis used the guns first, they could have taken them from the troops holsters. seriously, use some common sense.

BlaasForRafa

Euroland wrote: »

They went with intention to kill but used the paintball guns for posing in that short video made for the Israeli mass media propaganda. After finishing with the video recording they started their massacre with the real weapons.

Thats just complete rubbish.

Scofflaw

Selkies wrote: »

"Here lie the bones of Solomon Gray,
Who died defending his right of way.
He was right, dead right, as he sped along,
But just as dead as if he'd been wrong."

Why did aid workers feel that they would be more useful dead?

All the signs point to the idea that they believed they'd be just as dead either way.

Again, the problem is that Israel chose a night assault to seize control rather than boarding openly. The people on board may well have thought they would simply be shot as part of the assault - and if you're going to be shot anyway, you might as well resist.

regards,
Scofflaw

gandalf

Scofflaw wrote: »

You're trying to blur them in order, once again, to shift the blame to people who legitimately resisted an illegal attempt to seize control of their ship, armed only with makeshift weapons.

regards,
Scofflaw

I don't think that Blaas is trying to shift the blame. Its Israeli spokesmen who yesterday starting to use the phrase Policing Operation to try and soften the reality of people using the actual term that describes this with is a Illegal Military Assault on a vessel in International Waters.

Scofflaw

Euroland wrote: »

They went with intention to kill but used the paintball guns for posing in that short video made for the Israeli mass media propaganda. After finishing with the video recording they started their massacre with the real weapons.

Don't inject unsubstantiated rubbish into this thread, thanks.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Memnoch

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

They took at least two guns off the commandos. And it does in no way mean that the israelis used the guns first, they could have taken them from the troops holsters. seriously, use some common sense.

How could they take guns of the commandos if the commandos only came with Paintball guns?

You're saying that the Israelis were stupid enough to land a small handful of commandos with paintball guns in their hands in a crowd of what THEY say were violent terrorists wielding all kinds of dangerous weapons, and also leave those commandos with deadly automatic weapons holstered so that if they got over powered the terrorists could use them to shoot back?

Brilliant tactics.

Memnoch

Scofflaw wrote: »

All the signs point to the idea that they believed they'd be just as dead either way.

Again, the problem is that Israel chose a night assault to seize control rather than boarding openly. The people on board may well have thought they would simply be shot as part of the assault - and if you're going to be shot anyway, you might as well resist.

regards,
Scofflaw

QFT

If only boards had a "re-tweet" function.

Scofflaw

deadtiger wrote: »

I don't think that Blaas is trying to shift the blame. Its Israeli spokesmen who yesterday starting to use the phrase Policing Operation to try and soften the reality of people using the actual term that describes this with is a Illegal Military Assault on a vessel in International Waters.

Blaas is trying to blur the boundaries between the two in order to explain why commandos were used on a 'policing operation'.

cordially,
Scofflaw

BlaasForRafa

Scofflaw wrote: »

That's an appalling and desperate piece of spin (although at least not as disgusting as eamo12's views). There's no such thing as a "policing-type operation" - there are military operations, and civilian operations, with two clear legal frameworks. You're trying to blur them in order, once again, to shift the blame to people who legitimately resisted an illegal attempt to seize control of their ship, armed only with makeshift weapons.

regards,
Scofflaw

Its neither appalling or desperate, thats just your opinion. They obviously went in to take the ship using non-lethal means, then got attacked and defended themselves. At the end of the day it does boil down to being as simple as that, its unfortunate but the activists did have some responsibility in what happened on that deck.

The politicians and military commanders are responsible for putting the commandos in that situation and I hope that comes to light too. I'd be quite happy to see the netanyahu government brought down over the handling of this affair.

Selkies

Scofflaw wrote: »

All the signs point to the idea that they believed they'd be just as dead either way.

Again, the problem is that Israel chose a night assault to seize control rather than boarding openly. The people on board may well have thought they would simply be shot as part of the assault - and if you're going to be shot anyway, you might as well resist.

regards,
Scofflaw

When they boarded that ship they must have known that the Israelis would stop them from entering Gaza waters, if they believed that the Israelis were going to kill them I ask again, what made them think they would be more useful dead?

Scofflaw

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Its neither appalling or desperate, thats just your opinion. They obviously went in to take the ship using non-lethal means, then got attacked and defended themselves. At the end of the day it does boil down to being as simple as that, its unfortunate but the activists did have some responsibility in what happened on that deck.

The politicians and military commanders are responsible for putting the commandos in that situation and I hope that comes to light too. I'd be quite happy to see the netanyahu government brought down over the handling of this affair.

Because Israel could have come out of it better, and that's all that counts, isn't it?

Sometimes I despair.

regards,
Scofflaw

Foxtrol

Memnoch wrote: »

This was a peaceful protest, not terrorism. It had nothing to do with an eye for an eye. It had everything to do with self-defence which is completely different and justifiable.

I disagree that it was solely self defense.

Actually, a more appropriate analogy would be if a known paedophile breaks into your house to rape your children and you try and stop him and throw him out and he kills you for it.

No. Its like giving your child to a pedophile as they got on the flotilla with the full knowledge of who they were dealing with and what the likely outcomes of their choices were.

Firstly, I don't buy the knives bit. The israelis CLAIM they were used and they show photographs of knives emptied out of the kitchen. There's little proof to back that claim.

The people defended themselves with whatever they could pick up.

There's little facts about anything at this stage. Attacking a person with a knife is still attacking someone with a knife.

I disagree very strongly. Even if I assume that the Israelis did not want to kill anyone initially. The fact is that they botched the operation and started a PANIC on the lead boat.

I GENUINELY believe that the people on the lead ship were IN FEAR OF THEIR lives and thought they had NO CHOICE but to try and defend themselves with whatever was at hand.

The other smaller boats had less people on them and were easier to manage, and also the people on those boats had already seen what was happening on the lead ship where people HAD been killed.

As observed by this al jazeera reporter:

"Mohamed Vall, Al Jazeera reporter
The Israeli assault took those of us on the ship by complete surprise.

During that hour an half in the early morning everybody on board the ship thought that no-one would survive the Israeli attack because we saw about 30 war vessels surrounding this ship and helicopters attacking with very luminous bombs, the sound of them makes you think you are dead

That was a fear of war, complete war, on a ship that was full of men, women and even children."

So as you're disagreeing with my point then you're saying that even if the boat had surrendered peacefully the IDF would have still shot 9 people?

I'm calling your attempts to blame the victims of this terrible atrocity ridiculous.

I believe that decisions made on both sides led to this tragedy. I think its ridiculous to put 100% of the blame of this situation onto Israel.

yoshytoshy

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

They obviously went in to take the ship using non-lethal means, then got attacked and defended themselves. At the end of the day it does boil down to being as simple as that, its unfortunate but the activists did have some responsibility in what happened on that deck.

This logic means richard branson can land on an isreali naval vessel and take it over.

wes

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

You obviously are just ignoring the fact that some of these activists were waiting and prepared for the Israelis.

They were ill prepared, and used stuff that is always on a boat to defend themselves. So what you state above is hardly any kind of fact.

Also, so what if they were waiting and prepared to defends themselves against IDF attaking there boat. The IDF had no business on the boat.

Euroland

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Thats just complete rubbish.

You don't like to hear the truth?

BlaasForRafa

Memnoch wrote: »

How could they take guns of the commandos if the commandos only came with Paintball guns?

You're saying that the Israelis were stupid enough to land a small handful of commandos with paintball guns in their hands in a crowd of what THEY say were violent terrorists wielding all kinds of dangerous weapons, and also leave those commandos with deadly automatic weapons holstered so that if they got over powered the terrorists could use them to shoot back?

Brilliant tactics.

Did you not look at any of the reportage on this? I'm astonished that you don't know at this stage that they were armed with paintball guns on slings with holstered pistols as backup purely for personal protection.

And who called the activists "violent terrorists", your just putting words in peoples mouths as it were.

gandalf

Scofflaw wrote: »

Blaas is trying to blur the boundaries between the two in order to explain why commandos were used on a 'policing operation'.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Fair enough was just pointing out that the official Israeli channels have been using this tactic since yesterday.

Clearly it was a military operation with highly skilled military personal who were unfortunately the wrong type of people to send on an operation like this.

Selkies

yoshytoshy wrote: »

This logic means richard branson can land on an isreali naval vessel and take it over.

No that logic means that if Richard Branson boarded with superior forces, the Israeli forces would have some responsibility in the deaths of their people if they refused to surrender.

Scofflaw

Selkies wrote: »

When they boarded that ship they must have known that the Israelis would stop them from entering Gaza waters, if they believed that the Israelis were going to kill them I ask again, what made them think they would be more useful dead?

No, you're conflating two things there. They knew Israel would try to stop them when they set off on the convoy. They almost certainly did not believe that Israel would actually try to kill them in order to do so (and I don't believe it ever intended to do so, either).

However, when the night assault happened...naval vessels surrounding you, helicopters, flashbangs, armed commandos jumping onto your decks down ropes...I daresay some may have succumbed, let us say, to doubts.

regards,
Scofflaw

BlaasForRafa

Scofflaw wrote: »

Because Israel could have come out of it better, and that's all that counts, isn't it?

Thats certainly one of the things that counts.

Selkies

Also why on earth did they bring children on that boat?

Seriously what kind of parent brings their children to break a blockade?

yoshytoshy

Selkies wrote: »

No that logic means that if Richard Branson boarded with superior forces, the Israeli forces would have some responsibility in the deaths of their people if they refused to surrender.

Exactly ,pirate mentality ,nothing wrong with that:rolleyes: