10 die in Israeli raid on aid flotilla

BlaasForRafa

Morphéus wrote: »

That wasnt an apology, this thread is SUPPOSED to be about the military aspects of the raid, if you want to discuss these opinions of yours then do us all a favor and find another thread. Ive already said that I believed the IDF were wrong to come on board in this manner and equipped as they were, but then also stated that once on board they were systematically attacked, I didnt form that opinion from the Jerusalem Post, I got it from the video clips of the landings.

Have you gouged out your own eyes so that you couldnt seeing the extreme reaction of the "NOT humanitarians" to the soldiers hitting the deck?? Because this entire thread is plastered with videos that blatantly show the soldiers being hacked at with metal bars and chairs etc.

Maybe you should go to the walter mitty forum and post about how the israelis actually filmed a mock landing on a different ship to send to the media that made it LOOK like their guys were being beaten up, or maybe they created it all as a computer animation or maybe we all forgot to wear a tinfoil hat today...

The IDF website has posted some testimony from one of the soldiers injured in the Marmara operation. I'd post it on the politics forum only most of the posters there aren't interested in the Israeli side of the story:

http://dover.idf.il/IDF/English/News/today/10/05/3105.htm

One of the Naval Special Forces soldiers, who participated in the interception of the Mavi Marama ship and sustained a broken arm while under attack by the ship’s passengers, described the events. “Each soldier who descended was taken by three or four men and they simply exploded, beating him up. They lynched us. They had metal clubs, knives, slingshots, glass bottles…At one point there was also live fire.

“I was among the last to descend, and I saw that the group was dispersed, everyone in his own corner surrounded by 3 or 4 men, I saw a soldier on the floor with two men beating him. I peeled them off of him and they came at me and began beating me with the clubs. That’s how I broke my arm. At that moment I had no weapon in my hands, like everyone else who descended on the cables empty-handed. My paintball gun was behind me.

“They came and attacked me, I brought them down to the floor, I took a few steps back, I took out my paintball gun, they came at me, and I shot at their legs. One of the clubs destroyed my paint gun and I moved on to my pistol which was the only thing to hold against them. At this point my arm no longer functioned.”

“From the opening of the corridor, they were shooting at us the entire time with live fire”

The naval soldier described how the soldiers were shot at from the entrance to the ship’s corridor: “I saw two from my group lying flat on the ground. From the opening of the corridor they were shooting at them the entire time with live fire, bullets. We identified a gun barrel, and one of us shot at the guy holding it. Afterwards we entered and he wasn’t there. About 30 men, they simply came for war. We came to straighten things out, to speak to those who went downstairs, but each of us who descended was simply attacked.”

“There were some from my group that were thrown to the lower floor, and the passengers took their equipment. They jumped to the water as a last resort. We were told that if they didn’t listen, we should shoot at their legs with the paintball gun. 'The pistol is only for if you really feel your life is in danger, which shouldn’t happen. It would be extremely abnormal.' But in the end, that is what happened.”

“We came with the intention of stopping the ship and taking it to Ashdod, and we did not come with the weapons we usually have, we came for something entirely different.”

vulcan57

I haven't read through all the pages of this thread, haven't the time. I normally would have a lot to say about the actions of Hamas and the right of the Israelis to defend themselves. However, I think the actions taken by Israel in this instance are paramount to piracy and they were way out of line. A ship in international waters being forcably boarded has the right to defend itself. Unfortunately this incident along with the passport saga has tarnished their credibility though out the world. Its a shame they didn't handle it better, they have the skills and manpower to have done that.

Manic Moran

Morphéus wrote: »

Maybe you should go to the walter mitty forum and post about how the israelis actually filmed a mock landing on a different ship to send to the media that made it LOOK like their guys were being beaten up, or maybe they created it all as a computer animation or maybe we all forgot to wear a tinfoil hat today...

That would be the Conspiracy Theories forum, I believe.

NTM

UltimateMale

Manic Moran wrote: »

That would be the Conspiracy Theories forum, I believe.

NTM

Slob Murphy gets a weeks ban for what is regarded as a post that should be on a different forum, while Morphéus doesn't even get an infraction ! Obviously some people are getting very little leeway ( anti Israel) while those pro Israel get plenty of leeway it seems !

Now I'll be joining Slob Murphy as I wouldn't be getting any leeway and of course I'm back seat modding as well :eek:

Manic Moran

I actually did have a think about Morpheus's post because it did attract my attention as being somewhat combative, but since his post is on the facts and not discussing evil zionists or whatever, I decided it broke no rules.

Now I'll be joining Slob Murphy as I wouldn't be getting any leeway and of course I'm back seat modding as well

No, you're just getting a warning for backseat modding. I don't believe I've ever warned you on the subject before.

NTM

Avgas

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

The IDF website has posted some testimony from one of the soldiers injured in the Marmara operation. I'd post it on the politics forum only most of the posters there aren't interested in the Israeli side of the story:

http://dover.idf.il/IDF/English/News/today/10/05/3105.htm

Thanks for the post Blaas....keep eating your blaas...leaving aside for a moment that the press release may well have some accurate information and some serious evasions...in other words a work of classic propaganda.....even if we take it at face value

There are a couple of puzzles...at least for simple minded Avgas....

“I was among the last to descend, and I saw that the group was dispersed, everyone in his own corner surrounded by 3 or 4 men, I saw a soldier on the floor with two men beating him. I peeled them off of him and they came at me and began beating me with the clubs. That’s how I broke my arm. At that moment I had no weapon in my hands, like everyone else who descended on the cables empty-handed. My paintball gun was behind me.

BUT IF HE HAD TIME TO LAND FROM THE ROPE, AND THEN "PEEL THEM OFF"...WHY NOT DRAW THE GUN AND BEGIN USING IT TO GET THEM OFF...RISK OF INJURY TO HIS OWN PEOPLE? TOO NEAR?

“They came and attacked me, I brought them down to the floor, I took a few steps back, I took out my paintball gun, they came at me, and I shot at their legs. One of the clubs destroyed my paint gun and I moved on to my pistol which was the only thing to hold against them. At this point my arm no longer functioned.”

WHICH HAND THEN DREW THE PISTOL....COULD HE FIRE IT-DID HE?
SEEMS THIS IS EVIDENCE THAT PAINTBALL GUNS WITH PEPPERBALLS MAY NOT BE A GREAT LESS-THAN-LETHAL?:rolleyes:

“From the opening of the corridor, they were shooting at us the entire time with live fire”

NOTICE THE EMPHASIS ON 'ENTIRE TIME'....SO WHY NOT BEGIN USING PISTOLS STRAIGHT AWAY IF THEIR USING LIFE FIRE...

AND SURELY THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN AN OVERWATCH SNIPER IN ONE OF THE HELI'S...THEY COULD HAVE MAYBE RESPONDED...MAYBE COULDN'T GET A CLEAR SHOT WITH THE RIOT IN FULL SWING....?

The naval soldier described how the soldiers were shot at from the entrance to the ship’s corridor: “I saw two from my group lying flat on the ground. From the opening of the corridor they were shooting at them the entire time with live fire, bullets. We identified a gun barrel, and one of us shot at the guy holding it. Afterwards we entered and he wasn’t there. About 30 men, they simply came for war. We came to straighten things out, to speak to those who went downstairs, but each of us who descended was simply attacked.”

WHY WOULD THEY GO DOWN INTO THE SHIP AFTER BEING AMBUSHED SO BADLY...PERHAPS GETTING INTO MORE LETHAL USE OF FORCE....SURELY THE RIGHT THING WOULD HAVE BEEN TO REGROUP AND EXTRACT.....?

“There were some from my group that were thrown to the lower floor, and the passengers took their equipment. They jumped to the water as a last resort. We were told that if they didn’t listen, we should shoot at their legs with the paintball gun. 'The pistol is only for if you really feel your life is in danger, which shouldn’t happen. It would be extremely abnormal.' But in the end, that is what happened.”

“We came with the intention of stopping the ship and taking it to Ashdod, and we did not come with the weapons we usually have, we came for something entirely different.”


THESE GUYS ARE IDF SPECIAL FORCES. THEY SHOULD ANTICIPATE THAT A VARIETY OF THINGS MIGHT HAPPEN-FROM PASSIVE RESISTANCE TO ...WELL WHAT HAPPENED.

WHY WAS THERE NO PLAN B?

THERE WOULD HAVE PROBABLY BEEN A WRITTEN ROE DESCRIPTOR IN THE MISSION ORDERS NO? WONDER WHAT IT SAID?

delos

Avgas wrote: »

WHY WAS THERE NO PLAN B?

According to a report on the BBC (Link) the second commando on the deck in the video - the one who got tossed over the side - was the C.O.

"Update: this soldier has now identifed himself as the second man onto the deck and the unit commander. Speaking from a hospital bed, he said he had fired his gun at an activist who came at him with a knife but was subsequently stabbed in the stomach anyway. After being thrown onto a lower deck he and another soldier jumped into the sea to escape. He did not mention his pistol being taken from him. He also said the troops expected only passive and verbal resistance."

This might explain why the whole thing descended into chaos and Plan B wasn't put into operation as quickly as it might have been.

As for the firearms used against the commandos, have any of these actually been produced? I suspect if there had been arms on board the ship (other than those brought onboard during the assault) we would have seen them by now.

To truely judge what happened we would need to see the rest of the video but I very much doubt that it will ever see the light of day.

BlaasForRafa

Thanks for the post Blaas....keep eating your blaas...leaving aside for a moment that the press release may well have some accurate information and some serious evasions...in other words a work of classic propaganda.....even if we take it at face value

Well you can be sure that its been gone over by his superiors and by intelligence etc. The IDF are badly losing the media battle on this one though, I think they should come clean and admit their mistakes straight up and take their lumps quickly as if they don't this will keep rumbling on.

There are a couple of puzzles...at least for simple minded Avgas....

“I was among the last to descend, and I saw that the group was dispersed, everyone in his own corner surrounded by 3 or 4 men, I saw a soldier on the floor with two men beating him. I peeled them off of him and they came at me and began beating me with the clubs. That’s how I broke my arm. At that moment I had no weapon in my hands, like everyone else who descended on the cables empty-handed. My paintball gun was behind me.

BUT IF HE HAD TIME TO LAND FROM THE ROPE, AND THEN "PEEL THEM OFF"...WHY NOT DRAW THE GUN AND BEGIN USING IT TO GET THEM OFF...RISK OF INJURY TO HIS OWN PEOPLE? TOO NEAR?

For a start they wear relatively bulky asbestos gloves while descending so that they don't get burned from the rope. So they have to take those off before being able to grip a weapon properly. He probably didn't have time in the chaos to take off the gloves and start firing, on seeing his comrade he most likely went to assist and got tackled by more "aid workers"

Also he may have been worried about shooting his own comrade and also I'm betting that his commanders stressed that at all costs they weren't to start shooting people. Unfortunately these were commandos not riot police, they are trained to kill when threatened.

“They came and attacked me, I brought them down to the floor, I took a few steps back, I took out my paintball gun, they came at me, and I shot at their legs. One of the clubs destroyed my paint gun and I moved on to my pistol which was the only thing to hold against them. At this point my arm no longer functioned.”

WHICH HAND THEN DREW THE PISTOL....COULD HE FIRE IT-DID HE?
SEEMS THIS IS EVIDENCE THAT PAINTBALL GUNS WITH PEPPERBALLS MAY NOT BE A GREAT LESS-THAN-LETHAL?:rolleyes:

I'm not aware of them using paintguns in previous boardings, its something that may have worked great in training against passive targets but obviously not on a packed deck full of pumped up aggressive people.

Regarding his pistol, in the picture his left arm was in a sling therefore considering the vast majority of people are right handed I think its safe to assume he drew his pistol with his right hand. He dosen't actually seem to say if he fired his pistol. We know that at least two pistols were taken by activists and all their rounds were expended.

“From the opening of the corridor, they were shooting at us the entire time with live fire”

NOTICE THE EMPHASIS ON 'ENTIRE TIME'....SO WHY NOT BEGIN USING PISTOLS STRAIGHT AWAY IF THEIR USING LIFE FIRE...

AND SURELY THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN AN OVERWATCH SNIPER IN ONE OF THE HELI'S...THEY COULD HAVE MAYBE RESPONDED...MAYBE COULDN'T GET A CLEAR SHOT WITH THE RIOT IN FULL SWING....?

This is the bit that sounded odd to me, theres no evidence been presented so far to show that any activists were already armed, so far we only know of 2 pistols taken. If they were Glock 17s then thats a total of 34 rounds at most that could have been loosed off by the activists. In the chaos and confusion it may have seemed like a lot more to the commandos.

Considering that the Marmara has a maximum speed of 10 knots (according to wikipedia, but that seems quite slow for a passenger ferry, for example the Stena Nordica has a speed of 19.5 knots) and a helicopter being buffeted by winds, a sniper firing onto a deck of people milling around sounds pretty dodgy.

The naval soldier described how the soldiers were shot at from the entrance to the ship’s corridor: “I saw two from my group lying flat on the ground. From the opening of the corridor they were shooting at them the entire time with live fire, bullets. We identified a gun barrel, and one of us shot at the guy holding it. Afterwards we entered and he wasn’t there. About 30 men, they simply came for war. We came to straighten things out, to speak to those who went downstairs, but each of us who descended was simply attacked.”

WHY WOULD THEY GO DOWN INTO THE SHIP AFTER BEING AMBUSHED SO BADLY...PERHAPS GETTING INTO MORE LETHAL USE OF FORCE....SURELY THE RIGHT THING WOULD HAVE BEEN TO REGROUP AND EXTRACT.....?

After gaining control of the deck they may have wanted to stop anyone from rousing the hundreds of people down below.

“There were some from my group that were thrown to the lower floor, and the passengers took their equipment. They jumped to the water as a last resort. We were told that if they didn’t listen, we should shoot at their legs with the paintball gun. 'The pistol is only for if you really feel your life is in danger, which shouldn’t happen. It would be extremely abnormal.' But in the end, that is what happened.”

“We came with the intention of stopping the ship and taking it to Ashdod, and we did not come with the weapons we usually have, we came for something entirely different.”


THESE GUYS ARE IDF SPECIAL FORCES. THEY SHOULD ANTICIPATE THAT A VARIETY OF THINGS MIGHT HAPPEN-FROM PASSIVE RESISTANCE TO ...WELL WHAT HAPPENED.

WHY WAS THERE NO PLAN B?

THERE WOULD HAVE PROBABLY BEEN A WRITTEN ROE DESCRIPTOR IN THE MISSION ORDERS NO? WONDER WHAT IT SAID?

[/QUOTE]

S13 are trained to kill, they have an excellent record of attacking Hezbollah and achieving objectives and killing their targets quickly. Riot control is not their speciality.

Also a couple of interesting things came up on newsnight on the BBC tonight. Showing the footage of the troops descending they pointed out that only two ropes were being used whereas the Americans use 4 ropes to descend, thus the landing on the deck was slow and allowed the activists to pick them off. Not enough Israeli commandos were able to land quickly enough to be able to take control.

Other footage was shown of a stairwell leading to the deck which had several activists in gasmasks, wearing bulky lifejackets (as a crude type of body armour) and already armed with clubs, this footage was taken by a turkish cameraman before the troops landed so you can see that they were waiting for some action (if you have access to the bbc iplayer it should be on their fairly soon.)

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

There was one person dead and some injured even before anybody landed on the deck. They raised the white flag but the israelis kept on firing on the ship...

cyrusdvirus

Elian Salty Wimp wrote: »

There was one person dead and some injured even before anybody landed on the deck. They raised the white flag but the israelis kept on firing on the ship...

Proof?

Cos otherwise it's just a comment.

Like this one.

The ships were loaded with MBT's marked in Hamas colours and volunteer suicide bomber recruits.

BlaasForRafa

Elian Salty Wimp wrote: »

There was one person dead and some injured even before anybody landed on the deck. They raised the white flag but the israelis kept on firing on the ship...

You have zero proof for that.

Morpheus

you can also see from the video that there are some activists (not going to call them humanitarians as they clearly didnt act like them) waving white flags whilst others stand beside them waving metal bars and chairs!!! This wasnt a calm controlled situation it was chaotic and the intents of at least some of the crowd was to maim injure and possibly kill the israeli's.

The operation was a botch job but still think the soldiers reacted probably as they are trained to do.

Avgas

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Other footage was shown of a stairwell leading to the deck which had several activists in gasmasks, wearing bulky lifejackets (as a crude type of body armour) and already armed with clubs, this footage was taken by a turkish cameraman before the troops landed so you can see that they were waiting for some action (if you have access to the bbc iplayer it should be on their fairly soon.)

Many thanks Blaas...you've gone through my puzzles and get an A+ for more or less resolving them.

Also i read a quote from two German politicians onboard the Turkish ferry; one said there were only "2.5" batons....what is a .5 baton? The other said no weapons were used by the activists....

Discrepancies on both sides it seems.

UltimateMale

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

The IDF website has posted some testimony from one of the soldiers injured in the Marmara operation. I'd post it on the politics forum only most of the posters there aren't interested in the Israeli side of the story:

http://dover.idf.il/IDF/English/News/today/10/05/3105.htm

You shouldn't have bothered posting from the IDF website, you only undermine your own argument by citing those clowns :rolleyes:.

BlaasForRafa

UltimateMale wrote: »

You shouldn't have bothered posting from the IDF website, you only undermine your own argument by citing those clowns :rolleyes:.

They are a military source, this is the military forum. Just because you are biased against Israel does not mean that they are an unreliable source.

UltimateMale

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

They are a military source, this is the military forum. Just because you are biased against Israel does not mean that they are an unreliable source.

Lord Haw Haw was a military source and he was probably more reliable than the IDF :rolleyes:

Manic Moran

Lads, face it, there is going to be no such thing as an unbiased source in all this.

NTM

Avgas

Well....aside from dishing out blame....or expressing outrage....I'm interested in what western defence forces like our own humble outfit can learn from this operation clusterf**k/massacre [delete according to political sympathies :rolleyes:].

Its early days yet...facts are still murky...but that never stopped Avgas stirring it......

Can I suggest the following.....

Lesson 1: IMHO it points to the need to expand the numbers of our ARW (even if that must mean you drop the selection standards somewhat) and create a separate new exclusively marine focused “Sea Rangers” sub-unit BUT within the wing (so not like totally separate-just full time on marine ops?).

Lesson 2: Doing anything ‘special’ at sea is an order of magnitude greater as regards complexity/"what-can-go-wrong-will", than on land. It is one reason why you need a dedicated marine SOF unit. It also probably means you need simpler and more redundant plans: a day boarding by rib, and if they resist, then move to another level of stopping the boat rather than boarding? Oh.... and if you decide on coming down by heli/fast rope, make sure your LZ is secure/safe and have your guys coming down in rather larger groups than smaller?

Lesson 3: Plan your operations around You Tube and Twitter-the new combat realities.

Lesson 4: less than lethal is vital…it is not a sissy-boy option….. It is a vital capability in modern military operations….but its not easy how to do it and with what gear exactly….needs a lot of training and thinking. You should not place all your hopes (or eggs) in one basket…and think that one less-than-lethal gizmo will suffice. In fairness, piecing together various media sources it seems S13 were using Paintballs (prob with pepperballs), stun grenades, some tear gas, and at least one report of a taser. But a range of robust less-than-lethal options/gear is vital.

comments....excommunications...other "lessons" at this early stage?

BlaasForRafa

Manic Moran wrote: »

Lads, face it, there is going to be no such thing as an unbiased source in all this.

NTM

Of course not, but some sources will be more objective and more dispassionate than others.

BlaasForRafa

Can I suggest the following.....

Lesson 1: IMHO it points to the need to expand the numbers of our ARW (even if that must mean you drop the selection standards somewhat) and create a separate new exclusively marine focused “Sea Rangers” sub-unit BUT within the wing (so not like totally separate-just full time on marine ops?).

I don't really think Ireland needs to do anything, we're unlikely to face any similar kind of issue.....unless the CPSU send an aid flotilla up the royal canal to trapped passport office workers or something

Lesson 2: Doing anything ‘special’ at sea is an order of magnitude greater as regards complexity/"what-can-go-wrong-will", than on land. It is one reason why you need a dedicated marine SOF unit. It also probably means you need simpler and more redundant plans: a day boarding by rib, and if they resist, then move to another level of stopping the boat rather than boarding? Oh.... and if you decide on coming down by heli/fast rope, make sure your LZ is secure/safe and have your guys coming down in rather larger groups than smaller?

Lesson 3: Plan your operations around You Tube and Twitter-the new combat realities.

Lesson 4: less than lethal is vital…it is not a sissy-boy option….. It is a vital capability in modern military operations….but its not easy how to do it and with what gear exactly….needs a lot of training and thinking. You should not place all your hopes (or eggs) in one basket…and think that one less-than-lethal gizmo will suffice. In fairness, piecing together various media sources it seems S13 were using Paintballs (prob with pepperballs), stun grenades, some tear gas, and at least one report of a taser. But a range of robust less-than-lethal options/gear is vital.

comments....excommunications...other "lessons" at this early stage?

I would say send commandos in only when they have the freedom to shoot to kill.

Otherwise use other measures like disabling the ships, foul the propellors, even ram the ship, just don't put your personnel in a position where the other party has the upper hand.

Avgas

Sorry on this one...I just don't agree Blaas...although I see where your coming from.....

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

I don't really think Ireland needs to do anything, we're unlikely to face any similar kind of issue.....unless the CPSU send an aid flotilla up the royal canal to trapped passport office workers or something

Its not the CPSU I'm worried about. We could have many situations at sea when we need Armed force ACP to Gardai and they do not have expertise at doing anything at sea......one scenario would be related to environmentalists say/corrib gas field...or if we ever find more gas and oil [:eek:]....another would be a fishermen's blockade of a harbour (has happened already)...yet another could be protestors against a visiting warship from a friendly country that some of our citizens didn't agree was so friendly.....you wouldn't want them getting near such a vessel......and the ferries are ....well usually their biggest risk is a drunken brawl....but what if there was something more serious on one of those?.....Islamic terrorists have a fascination with targeting (a) transport systems because it generates good TV (b) hitting unexpected places with weak security who think their safe....?

Okay all a bit paranoid granted....but sometimes you're right to plan for a worst case scenario...just ask any property developer/the entire nation.....

I would say send commandos in only when they have the freedom to shoot to kill.

Otherwise use other measures like disabling the ships, foul the propellors, even ram the ship, just don't put your personnel in a position where the other party has the upper hand.

Sooner or later somebody will have to board and take the helm and guide the ship either for towing or for piloting to a harbour. Can't be left adrift. After this incident every two-bit activist-outfit will now believe it can use 'direct action' at sea to shame national governments about this or that (they fact that many got killed for making the point might not deter persons with high levels of activism....). Secondly if your SOP is only lethal force, then you've made your special forces either (a) unusable in many situations and therefore more or less redundant after all that expensive training and kit because no politician will sign off their employment knowing this.... and (b) your locked into overkill... you need a graduated rules of engagement and flexibility...not simply black or white....the standard rule is already that troops are free to use lethal but proportionate force whenever they have a reasonable grounds to believe their live is in immediate danger.....being cornered with 3-4 guys with metal bars and clubs would fit that bill in my book and probably most reasonable people if they think about it.... leaving politics aside.........still.....less lethal is a vital skill...ordinary soldiers do it for public order ACP.....special forces should have it as well as a big part of the toolbox as well.....even if its bloody hard to get right.....too 'soft' and it doesn''t work...too hard and its lethal..... not less-than lethal.....we need a Goldie Locks less-than-lethal solution.:D

Twink?

BrianD

What's beyond me is why Israel did not do this 'policing' operation in broad daylight?

They must have known that going in under the cover of darkness was going to lead to this situation.

Ironically, if you were in international waters off the coast of Somalia, anybody landing on your ship would be fair game for a hiding.

BrianD

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

They are a military source, this is the military forum. Just because you are biased against Israel does not mean that they are an unreliable source.

They are not a reliable source nor is a military source for any other country. Most armies answer to their Government who'll send them into war rightly or wrongly. Every Govt will have an agenda and you be assured that the 'military source' will reflect that agenda. Less of course, there's a coup d'etat in the offing!

DylanJM

Avgas, I'm pretty sure the ARW would be somewhat capable of handleing maritime ops. Some are trained as combat divers and with the ARW being Ireland's only real counter terrorist option I'm sure they have factored the possibility of having to carry out maritime operations. I mean we have offshore gas drilling platforms so we would have to have a viable option to deal with terrorists no matter how unlikely it is to actually happen. It would be fairly bad if we had to rely on the SAS/SBS if something happened, well actually I wouldn't mind relying on them tbh

UltimateMale

Since some have brought up the prospect of the ARW been invovled in maritime missions, would it not be a good idea of they were on board the MV Rachel Corrie protecting the Irish citizens and the goods sent by the charities of this country from the Israeli's forcibly boarding an Irish owned ship in international waters ?

BlaasForRafa

UltimateMale wrote: »

Since some have brought up the prospect of the ARW been invovled in maritime missions, would it not be a good idea of they were on board the MV Rachel Corrie protecting the Irish citizens and the goods sent by the charities of this country from the Israeli's forcibly boarding an Irish owned ship in international waters ?

It would be a complete and utter waste of resources and taxpayers money to waste them on a frivilous crusade like that.

Morpheus

If "hypothetically" you were going to send the ARW you may as well send over the fleet... this talk is silly and belongs in the realms of the mitty thread... military aspects of the israeli operation go as follows:

SOMEONE orders the boarding by small squads of commandos (lightly armed, pistols paintball guns with pepper paint ball, tazers batons and bean bag shotguns) of a ship containing 600 people, some of which are most likely known by Israeli intelligence as being extremists or tending towards violence in their opinions of the Israeli blockade. (im sure that they would have had agents on board) so must have known that they could potentially be attacked.

My opinion is that they chose the wrong area to board and used the wrong tactics, they should have had 4 fastropes in operation and should have put their teams onto the vessel in different a area once they saw the crowd below milling around with sticks.

Did they drop flash grenades or tear gas of any sort?

Once the first guy hit the deck and was swamped, the rest of the team HAD to board to protect him.

Dubious info coming out that pistols were removed and thrown overboard. given the the IHH group was involved this is probably not the case, id say said pistols were emptied at the israelis and then thrown overboard.

how many activists (not humanitarians) were potentially injured or killed by their own side firing these pistols???

Once live fire was detected OR it became obvious that far from repelling boarders, the activists were intent on killing them as brutally as they could, live fire in defence became the ONLY option. Even (as one military source suggests) the commandos were aiming at legs, your looking at rounds bouncing up into vital organs off a metal deck AND leg arteries being severed etc.

My final opinion is that

The operation should never have gone ahead,

Insertion method was flawed

choice of equipment was probably ok but they didnt deploy in the right manner to make proper use of it

and again, does anyone know if tear gas or flash bangs or anything like that were used? Im aware that FB's in the open or Tear Gas in very windy conditions (under a helis downwash) may not be effective.

Finally reaction to being beaten to death was correct even though some people ended up injured or dead and also if pistols were taken, chances are SOME of these deaths / injuries, whilst tragic, may have been as a consequence of their own side firing blindly at the soldiers.

Soldiers were right, decision to storm in this manner and planning are questionable at best and a mistake anyway as the ship was in international waters at the time.

Manic Moran

UltimateMale wrote: »

Since some have brought up the prospect of the ARW been invovled in maritime missions, would it not be a good idea of they were on board the MV Rachel Corrie protecting the Irish citizens and the goods sent by the charities of this country from the Israeli's forcibly boarding an Irish owned ship in international waters ?

I believe she's registered in Cambodia.

NTM

UltimateMale

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

It would be a complete and utter waste of resources and taxpayers money to waste them on a frivilous crusade like that.

So for the ARW to protect Irish citizens it would be a waste of money ! I can't think of a bigger waste of money than not giving the Israeli's another few stiffs to bury if they should harm some Irish citizens.

UltimateMale

Manic Moran wrote: »

I believe she's registered in Cambodia.

NTM

Yes apparently so although it gives it's Home port as Dundalk.

BlaasForRafa

UltimateMale wrote: »

So for the ARW to protect Irish citizens it would be a waste of money ! I can't think of a bigger waste of money than not giving the Israeli's another few stiffs to bury if they should harm some Irish citizens.

Theres a thread over in after hours if you want to indulge in hysteria and hyperbole.

Avgas

Aside from the fact that the ship is not Irish.....the Defence Acts 1954-2006 inclusive have quite strict and specific rules governing when and why Irish forces may be deployed abroad. AFAIK it would not likely permit an open ended dispatch of Irish troops anywhere in the globe wherever Irish citizens may be threatened.

I mean why not send them to South Korea to defend the Irish pub(s) in Seoul.....?:D

[check out http://wolfhoundpub.com/]...best burger in Seoul I kid you not...clearly worth defending from Dr.Evil......:)

If there was a UN mandate for some kind of observation/escort mission then perhaps you could deploy Irish forces.....however, there is none...... making your argument weak veering towards wafer thin........indeed a great many peace activists who no doubt quite rightly support the general Palestine cause and oppose Israel's many illegal actions, ..... have also lobbied hard to get the rigid triple lock system in place....basically our troops can't operationally deploy unless the government agrees in formal cabinet (with the Greens?), the Oireachtas must formally assent (including Jackie Healy Rae), and finally the UN must approve the missions...which in fact means China, Russia and the USA.....must agree.

In other words a recipe for banjax, delay and 100% Irish fudge.

So the wider answer to your leading question is......swings and roundabouts...:)

It may of course pan out that other countries armed/naval forces do get involved....

the Israelis may be forced to/desperate enough to accept some kind of mediation on their blockade of Gaza...but the talk is all about a NATO role in the west bank....(barmy idea if ever)....

so I would not be surprised if somebody clever on the naval side in NATO saw an opportunity to mission cherry-pick and tried to offer a NATO screening and security naval force instead which would supervise future shipments to Gaza....maybe.....

And that would leave the super equipped and resourced Irish DF to be deployed as a part of a more politically correct/acceptable (and ineffectual) EU led and (mis)managed mission on the west bank or better still, Gaza itself....led perhaps by a Maltese general........ where Hamas will give them a big Cead Mile Failte right?..... because everyone just loves the Irish don't they?.....Especially if we have to disarm them? :rolleyes:

Lots to ponder.

BTW great post Morpheus.....good analysis!

Avgas

DylanJM wrote: »

Avgas, I'm pretty sure the ARW would be somewhat capable of handleing maritime ops. Some are trained as combat divers and with the ARW being Ireland's only real counter terrorist option I'm sure they have factored the possibility of having to carry out maritime operations. I mean we have offshore gas drilling platforms so we would have to have a viable option to deal with terrorists no matter how unlikely it is to actually happen. It would be fairly bad if we had to rely on the SAS/SBS if something happened, well actually I wouldn't mind relying on them tbh

Hi Dylan...my point was not that the ARW have no marine capability or that their useless..far from it......but rather to make the case for deepening and extending that capability with a standing amphibious sub-unit.....and have greater manpower available...I think the Israelis assigned 30 commandos for the ferry and there must have been at least the same for the other ships if not close to a full Coy size ...others may really know the numbers.....but...with ARW people increasingly overseas on PK.....I think there is a case for a larger ARW...with more dedicated specialized sub-units....thats all....and this mission highlights...just how tricky anything at sea really is.........you want dedicated 100% people.......not your best diver wandering around Chad somewhere....or 200km inside Sudan.......:rolleyes:

Poccington

Lads, can we get back on the topic of the recent developments regarding the flotilla rather than the capabilities of the ARW.

Manic Moran

I mean why not send them to South Korea to defend the Irish pub(s) in Seoul.....?

O'Kim's? I had the unique pleasure of spending a St Patrick's Day there. All sorts of short little Korean dudes wearing green bowler hats saying "Happy St Patrick's Day". I mean, yes, I know the Koreans are considered the Irish of the Orient, but really...

http://www.mytravelguide.com/restaurants/profile-79617005-South_Korea_Seoul_OKims.html

Seoul's only Irish pub, O'Kim's is a lively place to enjoy Irish-style food, Guinness on tap, pub games and live Irish music. Located in the Chosun Hotel, its well-designed interior features comfortable tones of brown and Irish green. Challenge your companions to a game of darts, pool or even basketball. Although a little expensive, O'Kim's offers all the ingredients for a great night out: tasty food, great music and an exciting atmosphere.

NTM

Local-womanizer

Love the description of O'Kims! Any pub with comfortable tones of Brown and Irish Greens is my kinda place! But Basketball?

delos

Morphéus wrote: »

Dubious info coming out that pistols were removed and thrown overboard. given the the IHH group was involved this is probably not the case, id say said pistols were emptied at the israelis and then thrown overboard.

how many activists (not humanitarians) were potentially injured or killed by their own side firing these pistols???......

.....Finally reaction to being beaten to death was correct even though some people ended up injured or dead and also if pistols were taken, chances are SOME of these deaths / injuries, whilst tragic, may have been as a consequence of their own side firing blindly at the soldiers.

Some fairly wild speculation in there. What information do you have about the IHH other than the "dubious info" that comes from the Israeli government? Margaret Thatcher's public opinion of OXFAM while she was the PM bore absoultely no resemblance to the organisation that I knew. Not even the Israeli government has had the neck to suggest the deaths were a result of "friendly fire".

As for the pistols and what happened to them, if I saw any member of the IDF approaching and I was obviously "not a friend of Israel" I'd suspect that a beating is likely to come my way. Given the circumstances on the boat and the reports from the other ships where no or limited resistance was presented (no less likely to be biased than the information released by the Israeli authorities) I'd say it was a racing certainty. If I had anything like a gun in my hand I'd be dead. The best thing to do is to get the gun away from me. Dubious? Probably, but no more so than chunks of your post which was a pretty good anaylsis apart from these.

Poccington

Morphéus wrote: »

Once live fire was detected OR it became obvious that far from repelling boarders, the activists were intent on killing them as brutally as they could, live fire in defence became the ONLY option. Even (as one military source suggests) the commandos were aiming at legs, your looking at rounds bouncing up into vital organs off a metal deck AND leg arteries being severed etc.

9 people dead and 34 in hospital, that's an awful lot of casualties if you're aiming at the legs. It's awful a whole lot of ricochets and femoral arteries getting severed.

and again, does anyone know if tear gas or flash bangs or anything like that were used? Im aware that FB's in the open or Tear Gas in very windy conditions (under a helis downwash) may not be effective.

Finally reaction to being beaten to death was correct even though some people ended up injured or dead and also if pistols were taken, chances are SOME of these deaths / injuries, whilst tragic, may have been as a consequence of their own side firing blindly at the soldiers.

You have absolutely no evidence that civilians were responsible for some of the deaths. Even the Israeli's haven't tried to pull that one yet.

Morpheus

No you're right I have no evidence that some of the deaths were caused by civilians, im going by what ive read on the various news sites and then just bandying about some ideas - i have no political interest either way, im just analysing the reports and putting up my operational opinions and thoughts.

Some news sites have the military as saying the israelis had pistols taken from them while they were being beaten, some say that the activists greeted the israelis with flowers and hugs, some say the israelis fired (real bullets, not paintballs) on the activists BEFORE they landed. Theres a lot of cr@p flying about and its hard to filter out the truth...

I didnt say that ALL or indeed ANY of the casualties were caused by activists firing weapons I just gave my opinion that IF some of the above has a sniff of truth about it then im sure that its not outside the realms of possibility that somebody may have been shot by "friendly" fire.

Its obvious that Israelis were responsible for deaths, on the video "Beat the commandos" you can clearly see an israeli soldier firing a paintball gun and suddenly one of his comrades draws a pistol and aims it straight at the crowd, not downwards at their legs, but straight at them, my we-shot-at-their-legs idea came from this report http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=177040

Areport from here http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=177445 tells us that the 9 were killed at the same time by two soldiers and all were kill shots. If this report is to be believed I could see why these people were killed but nine seems quite high unless they were insanely charging repeatedly and ignoring the fact that their fellow activists were being systematically taken out beside them. Activists wearing ceramic bullet proof vests (I saw this in one of the videos on the web so believe this although it may have been a stab proof vest - supposedly the ships and passengers were searched at their port of departure, if they smuggled these on, could they also have smuggled weapons on?)

The report also says warning shots were fired whilst in the heli to scare people away from the deck and that stun grenades were dropped but didnt disperse the crowd which told the soldiers that those on deck were most likely militarily trained or experienced as normal people would panic when an FB went off or gunfire was heard.

The captain of the turkish ship (again according to these interviews) has supposedly told the Israeli's that the activists HAD guns - hard to prove this true unless it comes from a more reliable news website. I still am of the opinion that the crowd of humanitarians on this ship made up less than 100% of all on board, The rest were extremist activists who planned this event and hijacked the whole trip as an opportunity to get to grips with the Israelis and cause an international incident, in that respect they have succeeded.

Interviews (available online) with israeli soldiers gave me some of the info I hypothesised on. I also said that once the soldiers detected either live fire OR saw their mates being beaten to a pulp they had to draw weapons to protect themselves.

All of this is just sh*te talk, im in favor of neither side, whilst I admire the normal Israeli's struggle for survival in a cauldron of hatred and daily attacks of rockets suicide bombers and terrorist activities and believe that as long as HAMAS is in charge in Gaza that this will continue as these guys dont care about the ordinary palestinian trying to eke out a living, I nevertheless think that they are far too careless about international opinion in their military operations, from shelling UN posts, killing Irish soldiers - whether by proxy forces or directly - to indiscriminatly dropping 105mm shells on a densely populated city, use of phosphorous shells on civilians- list goes on- I also have no time for humanitarian attempts at breaking military blockades in this manner.

The organisers of the flotilla are as much to blame as the naval command who ordered the takeover in this manner. 15 soldiers to take on 600 passengers? with paintballs!!??

The flotilla should have thought out the whole thing in a better manner, they KNEW they would be boarded, whether in international waters or off the gaza coast so why was THIS ship the ONLY one to offer resistance in this way?

By all accounts the other vessels offered no resistance.

How did all these lunatics of similiar motivation end up in one location, armed with melee weapons, gas masks, flak or stab vests? it smacks of some kind of underhand organisation with intent and was very very silly.

Im sorry but SOME of the blame HAS to be apportioned on the organisers, if their had been NO resistance of this violent nature, then I would wholeheartedly blame the commandos but when you watch the video's you cant but say that initially it looked like the soldiers were going to be beaten to death or severly injured and once that becomes obvious ... well, those of you with military training, dropped on board in this situation... your comrades are down, life threatening injuries for all you know, paintballs are useless against the crowd, you've a pistol in your hand.... what would YOU do???

im NOT trying to say that ISRAEL was right - I think they got this 100% wrong and will pay a high price, I believe the flotilla's organisers got it wrong too, I'm only saying from a military point of view, that I believe the commando's didnt do much wrong. Loss of life could have been higher.

Morpheus

Some fairly wild speculation in there. What information do you have about the IHH other than the "dubious info" that comes from the Israeli government?

http://www.diis.dk/graphics/Publications/WP2006/DIIS%20WP%202006-7.web.pdf

page 15

IHH’s bureau in Istanbul was thoroughly searched,
and its local officers were arrested. Security forces uncovered an array of disturbing items,
including firearms, explosives, bomb-making instructions, and a “jihad flag.” After analyzing
seized IHH documents, Turkish authorities concluded that “detained members of IHH were
going to fight in Afghanistan, Bosnia, and Chechnya.

interesting article by the DANISH INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL STUDIES. [urlhttp://www.diis.dk/sw239.asp[/url]]

UltimateMale

Morphéus wrote: »

If "hypothetically" you were going to send the ARW you may as well send over the fleet... this talk is silly and belongs in the realms of the mitty thread... military aspects of the israeli operation go as follows:

SOMEONE orders the boarding by small squads of commandos (lightly armed, pistols paintball guns with pepper paint ball, tazers batons and bean bag shotguns) of a ship containing 600 people, some of which are most likely known by Israeli intelligence as being extremists or tending towards violence in their opinions of the Israeli blockade. (im sure that they would have had agents on board) so must have known that they could potentially be attacked.

My opinion is that they chose the wrong area to board and used the wrong tactics, they should have had 4 fastropes in operation and should have put their teams onto the vessel in different a area once they saw the crowd below milling around with sticks.

Did they drop flash grenades or tear gas of any sort?

Once the first guy hit the deck and was swamped, the rest of the team HAD to board to protect him.

Dubious info coming out that pistols were removed and thrown overboard. given the the IHH group was involved this is probably not the case, id say said pistols were emptied at the israelis and then thrown overboard.

how many activists (not humanitarians) were potentially injured or killed by their own side firing these pistols???

Once live fire was detected OR it became obvious that far from repelling boarders, the activists were intent on killing them as brutally as they could, live fire in defence became the ONLY option. Even (as one military source suggests) the commandos were aiming at legs, your looking at rounds bouncing up into vital organs off a metal deck AND leg arteries being severed etc.

My final opinion is that

The operation should never have gone ahead,

Insertion method was flawed

choice of equipment was probably ok but they didnt deploy in the right manner to make proper use of it

and again, does anyone know if tear gas or flash bangs or anything like that were used? Im aware that FB's in the open or Tear Gas in very windy conditions (under a helis downwash) may not be effective.

Finally reaction to being beaten to death was correct even though some people ended up injured or dead and also if pistols were taken, chances are SOME of these deaths / injuries, whilst tragic, may have been as a consequence of their own side firing blindly at the soldiers.

Like someone has pointed out before so I'll put it in bold " if someone violently boards a ship in international waters, then the people on board have the right to defend themselves form this act of de facto terrorism/piracy " :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Morphéus wrote: »

I'm only saying from a military point of view, that I believe the commando's didnt do much wrong.

9 people dead and 34 in hospital......and you " believe the commando's didnt do much wrong " :rolleyes:

UltimateMale

Poccington wrote: »

9 people dead and 34 in hospital, that's an awful lot of casualties if you're aiming at the legs. It's awful a whole lot of ricochets and femoral arteries getting severed.



You have absolutely no evidence that civilians were responsible for some of the deaths. Even the Israeli's haven't tried to pull that one yet.

Watching Vincent Brown last night the subject of the 'weapons' on board came up, knives, forks, "sling shots" been used to "deadly" effect on the poor IDF etc. So in reply Vincent Brown pointed out that since cooking and eating untensils were neccessary for people to eat and would be carried by any ship - how could they be classified as " weapons " :rolleyes: And it was also pointed out and has been admitted by the Israeli's that the two guns found on board were two pistols belonging to the IDF 'commandos'.

As far as I can see, not only was this operation a military fiasco, the IDF and their network of apologists the hasbara* have made themselves look like complete lying fools and have totally discredited themselves more than Hamas could ever hope to do.


*Hasbara - http://www.israelactivism.com/israelprograms

Morpheus

Yes I believe they didnt do much wrong, as in this is a military thread and were discussing the tactics...

take the main point that I have stated repeatedly:

This operation was botched, it should never have been played out this way, the CO at the time should NOT have ordered the boarding via helicopter once it became apparent that those on deck were waiting and prepared to repel / beat to death, the israeli squad.

Now being neutral and putting ANY military unit in a close quarter crowd control situation like this, they came under violent attack by a prepared and determined group and were starting to go down to the mobs attacking them, you cant dispute that they had to resort escalating levels of self defence to the point that weapons were drawn (as per military training) and eventually had to injure and kill activists to save their own lives... Im not a bleeding israeli supporter, im trying to analyse the military aspects of what happened.... :mad:

As to the numbers killed and injured it doesnt state that all injuries were from gunshots, there were tazors bean bags paintballs and batons used.

ectoraige

Morphéus wrote: »

The flotilla should have thought out the whole thing in a better manner, they KNEW they would be boarded, whether in international waters or off the gaza coast so why was THIS ship the ONLY one to offer resistance in this way?

By all accounts the other vessels offered no resistance.

How did all these lunatics of similiar motivation end up in one location, armed with melee weapons, gas masks, flak or stab vests? it smacks of some kind of underhand organisation with intent and was very very silly.

Actually, as people have been released it does appear resistance was offered on some, if not all, of the other boats. It seems to have mostly consisted of acts such as obstructing access to the bridge or engine room. A few broken noses and the like seem to have been meted out, and was dealt with pretty easily by the IDF on those ships.

To illustrate why the Mavi Marmara was so different, here's the make-up of the fleet as best I can find from an amalgamation of sources:

Ship|Flagged|Operator|Length|Tonnage|SOB
Challenger 1|US|Free Gaza Movement|?m|?|16
Eleftheri Mesogeios|Greece|ECESG|65m|1133|22
the Sfendoni|Greek|ECESG|?m|?|54
MV Mavi Marmara|Comoros|IHH|93m|?|581
Gazze|Turkey|IHH|84m|2000|18
Defne Y|Kiribati|IHH|95m|4412|30
MS Sofia|Greece|Ship to Gaza|?m|?|31


It appears the IDF took the same approach to subduing a boat with over 500 souls that it took when dealing with the other ships. On the other boats they didn't face the overwhelming numbers found on the Mavi Marmara. Once the IDF soldiers on those boats had bloodied a few noses, the "fight" was over. On the Mavi Marmara however, the passengers were a match for the commandos, until lethal force was used. I think the most shocking aspect of all of this is how poorly the situation was read by the commanders at the scene.

Tactics which work in one scenario do not scale when the opposing force increases by an order of magnitude.

The other issue is the number of casualties seems excessive. Even accepting the troops would have been in fear of their lives, it just does not tally with the Israeli line that they aimed for the legs. I'd suspect they didn't hesitate to aim at whatever target was closest and most effective, and continued firing until they had a clear distance, or possibly no more targets. The American who died apparently received five shots. I don't know how many of the wounded received gunshots, but it does seem like quite a lot of rounds were fired, especially if we're to believe that some of the soldiers onboard didn't open fire at all.

UltimateMale

Morphéus wrote: »

Yes I believe they didnt do much wrong, as in this is a military thread and were discussing the tactics...

take the main point that I have stated repeatedly:

This operation was botched, it should never have been played out this way, the CO at the time should NOT have ordered the boarding via helicopter once it became apparent that those on deck were waiting and prepared to repel / beat to death, the israeli squad.

Now being neutral and putting ANY military unit in a close quarter crowd control situation like this, they came under violent attack by a prepared and determined group and were starting to go down to the mobs attacking them, you cant dispute that they had to resort escalating levels of self defence to the point that weapons were drawn (as per military training) and eventually had to injure and kill activists to save their own lives... Im not a bleeding israeli supporter, im trying to analyse the military aspects of what happened.... :mad:

As to the numbers killed and injured it doesnt state that all injuries were from gunshots, there were tazors bean bags paintballs and batons used.

Oh for the love of God :rolleyes:....... "take the main point that I have stated repeatedly" - if someone violently boards a ship in international waters, then the people on board have the right to defend themselves form this act of de facto terrorism/piracy

And yes " they came under violent attack by a prepared and determined group ". They been the people on board, the IDF were the ones doing the attacking by trying to illegally board their ship.

troubleshooter

UltimateMale wrote: »

Oh for the love of God :rolleyes:....... "take the main point that I have stated repeatedly" - if someone violently boards a ship in international waters, then the people on board have the right to defend themselves form this act of de facto terrorism/piracy

And yes " they came under violent attack by a prepared and determined group ". They been the people on board, the IDF were the ones doing the attacking by trying to illegally board their ship.

Militarily and tactically it was a stupid action, why did they not wait until it entered their waters, then they could have claimed legal justification, it was also a job for riot cops not special forces, only armed with guns.

Morpheus

ok ultimate ...

Do you believe that if the Israelis had waited until they were NOT in international waters and THEN boarded the ship that these activists would have willingly sat idly by?

ectoraige

Morphéus wrote: »

ok ultimate ...

Do you believe that if the Israelis had waited until they were NOT in international waters and THEN boarded the ship that these activists would have willingly sat idly by?

Likely not, the people in the flotilla would hold the position that Israel do not have authority in Gazan waters anyway. They were expecting to be stopped the following morning once they entered the territory. However, the fact that it took place while still in International water would have escalated tensions by adding to the anger, and by unsettling the protesters. When you're trying to exert civil control, you should be trying to diffuse the situation.

BlaasForRafa

UltimateMale wrote: »

Oh for the love of God :rolleyes:....... "take the main point that I have stated repeatedly" - if someone violently boards a ship in international waters, then the people on board have the right to defend themselves form this act of de facto terrorism/piracy

And yes " they came under violent attack by a prepared and determined group ". They been the people on board, the IDF were the ones doing the attacking by trying to illegally board their ship.

You seem to be missing the whole point of this thread. It isn't about the rights and wrongs of whether the flotilla should have been boarded (those are being discussed on the politics forum), its about the actual tactics used by the commandos.

You keep trying to derail the thread and lead it off into areas which are not appropriate for the thread or forum.

UltimateMale

Morphéus wrote: »

ok ultimate ...

Do you believe that if the Israelis had waited until they were NOT in international waters and THEN boarded the ship that these activists would have willingly sat idly by?

You have been propagating that the IDF landed and behaved like perfect gentlemen only to be violently attacked by violent thugs on board :rolleyes: -when the exact opposite is totally the case.

According to one of the Irish humanitarian's on board Dr. Fintan Lane " When they boarded our boat, we resisted entirely peacefully. I sat on the floor and tried to reason with them, but the Israeli commandos physically attacked us. Fiachra was dragged around the ground and I had a gun pointed in my face by a screaming commando. His mania was so intense that I genuinely feared for my life. Others received beatings.”

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/middle-east/i-tried-to-reason-with-them-but-they-attacked-us-2207317.html

If you ask any reasonable decent person who would they believe I'm sure it would be Dr. Lane and not the ridiculous liars the IDF or their apologists the hasbara.