Israel butchers civilians in international waters

[Meshugger]

The way I read that article, the dudes on the boats attacked the commandos. If you attack a set of commandos, you better well expect to be blown to whatever hell you believe in. If the commandos were defending themselves, they really did nothing wrong. That doesn't explain the commandos being in the boats, but the so-called "massacre" doesn't seem like much of one.

 

So it'd be OK if the police in America opened live fire on, say, tea party protesters who hurled rocks or tried to take their guns right? An eye for an eye is neoconservative policy these days, right mate?

 

 

 

if the tea party protesters were attacking the police with knives and metal bars, we would expect the police to respond with deadly force.

 

Don't be a ****, you'd expect them to use tasers and tear gas.

 

Duuuuuude, they sent in the military. I do not think that Israel, or any other country, has a "tear gas and taser"-battalion, maybe you meant that they should've sent the Police?

 

I do not see the activists as peaceful people that only wanted to give the people in Gaza foods and clothing. They stated themselves that it was a direct political act to try to end the embargo. Well, direct confrontation doesn't exactly sound like the tenets of pacifism, does it? "Just let them through" some might say. Maybe these vessels didn't have weapons, but what about the next shipment? What guarantee does Israel have? How would they know now and for future reference that the shipments are only food and not armaments?

 

What i do not understand yet is that Israel claims that it happened in a security buffer zone that they have set up? Was that illegitimate? Don't other countries set similar ones all the time?

[Monte Carlo]

These people have already stated that they are going to do this again to force confrontation. They are actually quite clever, this tactic is working and will work.

 

I don't think they see the big picture, but then again single-issue obsessives seldom do.

[Walsingham]

A few points in no particular order since I ought to be doing my work.

 

1. Monte did indeed point out that the convoy had refused to offload at Ashdod

 

2. Construction materials are not humanitarian essentials in any other situation that I know of. I can see the logic in them being considered as such, but I'd be obliged if you could give an example where they are.

 

3. Gaza is not some random bit of land full of helpless people. Yes there are a whole lot of helpless ordinary people there and I'm sad at the condition they are in. But the ruling group in Gaza have declared a _war of annihilation_ against Israel.

 

3b. The question of legal right has been debated in an interesting way, but I think we've missed the point above. Any nation could be considered within its rights to interdict shipping to a nation it is at war with.

 

4. The commandos would have been used because they have the whoel package of skills required to carry out what is a special operation. Namely you need a unified command structure covering transport, logistics, and fighting. You need officers who can think on their feet, and don't freak out if they are answering directly to the President. I don't think I'm slandering the good name of policing if I say that cops just don't have that capability.

 

5. I have no doubt that there will be internal criticism of the decision not to equip the troops with less than lethal options like tasers. But you need to also understand that a taser isn't going to provide crowd control.

 

6. As Meshugger points out, this is one move in an ongoing game. If Israel had let the convoy through then they may as well abandon the blockade entirely.

[Humodour]

The way I read that article, the dudes on the boats attacked the commandos. If you attack a set of commandos, you better well expect to be blown to whatever hell you believe in. If the commandos were defending themselves, they really did nothing wrong. That doesn't explain the commandos being in the boats, but the so-called "massacre" doesn't seem like much of one.

 

So it'd be OK if the police in America opened live fire on, say, tea party protesters who hurled rocks or tried to take their guns right? An eye for an eye is neoconservative policy these days, right mate?

 

 

 

if the tea party protesters were attacking the police with knives and metal bars, we would expect the police to respond with deadly force.

 

Don't be a ****, you'd expect them to use tasers and tear gas.

 

...

 

HA!

 

it may seem inappropriate, but your observation has provided us with the first genuine mirth we were able to appreciate in regards to this incident. tasers and tear gas?

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Tear gas was for the situation I described to you. Remember, the tea party protesters example?

 

If you've some insight into why tasers would be inappropriate but live fire wouldn't be, do let us know. You can discuss the efficacy of pepper spray while you're at it seargent.

[Calax]

A few points in no particular order since I ought to be doing my work.

 

1. Monte did indeed point out that the convoy had refused to offload at Ashdod

 

2. Construction materials are not humanitarian essentials in any other situation that I know of. I can see the logic in them being considered as such, but I'd be obliged if you could give an example where they are.

 

3. Gaza is not some random bit of land full of helpless people. Yes there are a whole lot of helpless ordinary people there and I'm sad at the condition they are in. But the ruling group in Gaza have declared a _war of annihilation_ against Israel.

 

3b. The question of legal right has been debated in an interesting way, but I think we've missed the point above. Any nation could be considered within its rights to interdict shipping to a nation it is at war with.

 

4. The commandos would have been used because they have the whoel package of skills required to carry out what is a special operation. Namely you need a unified command structure covering transport, logistics, and fighting. You need officers who can think on their feet, and don't freak out if they are answering directly to the President. I don't think I'm slandering the good name of policing if I say that cops just don't have that capability.

 

5. I have no doubt that there will be internal criticism of the decision not to equip the troops with less than lethal options like tasers. But you need to also understand that a taser isn't going to provide crowd control.

 

6. As Meshugger points out, this is one move in an ongoing game. If Israel had let the convoy through then they may as well abandon the blockade entirely.

An argument could be made that the construction materials are humanitarian in that it gets people out of leanto's and tent slums. (In a side note, Sacramento used to have the worlds largest Tent city on it's eastern side until the city gvmnt decided to start finding ways to make that go away).

 

And to a degree, Gaza, I think, might as well be considered helpless given that the best they seem to be able to muster is sporadic firing of rockets in the general direction of their opponent (meaning any direction but the sea). I mean when two countries go to war, and one controls total access in and out, generally the other is pretty screwed in terms of EVERYTHING. Particularly given that the Israeli version of "containment" means building a wall through Gaza territory for protection that ruins farms and they don't even pay for the land they used, and then they refuse to allow people who had been working normally in Israel to go to work through the checkpoints. Honestly if this were happening anywhere that wasn't "Woe is us, we got genocided 70 years ago" Israel, people would probably have imposed sanctions on Israel.

[Walsingham]

Honestly if this were happening anywhere that wasn't "Woe is us, we got genocided 70 years ago" Israel, people would probably have imposed sanctions on Israel.

 

This is going to sound ruder than I mean to, Cal: when did the genocide thing expire?

 

The government of Gaza has declared war on Israel. Putting a naval emargo on someone you are fighting a war with doesn't very contentious to me.

[HoonDing]

"Woe is us, we got genocided 70 years ago"

Genocided, and then attacked from the inside & outside constantly since 1948.

[Calax]

"Woe is us, we got genocided 70 years ago"

Genocided, and then attacked from the inside & outside constantly since 1948.

And? Are they just being given miles of leeway because they're considered first world while Darfur is turned into a wasteland, the Congo suffers under a brutal dictatorship who are probably worse than the Nazi's and Kosovo, where the state-supported (who's leader was tried for war crimes no less) genocide was only stopped due to heafty military intervention, and then fell off the peoples radar?

 

I'm sick and tired of having to tap dance around Israel because "Oh how we've suffered". If they're under imminent attack from six states, they should learn to deal with it on their own and try to place nice, rather than saber rattle and laugh before running to uncle sam.

[heathen]

Back on topic, Israels "the activists attacked us, we were only defending ourselves"-speak is kind of weird. I mean, what was their intention, sending commandos, attacking from a helicopter? The most likely scenario is that they were supposed to take over the ship. They just didn't expect any resistance, or very little of it. Now they're acting all innocent, like they were ambushed or something when they in fact boarded a ship in pitch black. Doesn't sound too convincing to me.

[HoonDing]

^Why should they be given leeway for defending their country?

 

Also, none of their neighbours is stupid enough to attack Israel directly nowadays. Which is exactly the reason for shenanigans like this.

 

EDIT:

Edited June 1, 2010 by virumor

[lord of flies]

Israel had no jurisdiction raiding an aid convoy in international waters. As mentioned by someone else earlier, that is akin to piracy. Its funny, when a group like the Somali prates do something like this, they are labelled pirates and outlaws. When its a state that does it, well its national security. Different motives I'll grant you, but the same tactics. Same goes for the Israeli Secret Service, their tactics are no better than what terrorists conduct but again, national security is used as a get out once again.

It actually is pretty funny, since unlike the Israeli government, the Somali pirates haven't ever killed anyone!

 

Also, lmao at the fact that so many people in this thread are for a country boarding foreign nations' boats in international waters and shooting up the people on board. Just... **** you.

 

Seriously, the "burglar breaks into your house and shoots you in self defense" argument is exactly correct, shut up and stop defending this brutal apartheid regime.

[heathen]

[Meshugger]

Back on topic, Israels "the activists attacked us, we were only defending ourselves"-speak is kind of weird. I mean, what was their intention, sending commandos, attacking from a helicopter? The most likely scenario is that they were supposed to take over the ship. They just didn't expect any resistance, or very little of it. Now they're acting all innocent, like they were ambushed or something when they in fact boarded a ship in pitch black. Doesn't sound too convincing to me.

 

I guess that they(commandos) were surprised that people were trying to attack commandos with pipes, axes and whatnot. Didn't the boarding of the other ships go smoothly?

[mkreku]

EDIT:

I don't think anyone has claimed they didn't defend themselves when the soldiers boarded their ships?

 

Notice though, they are very careful to not show any shooting. So how did nine people die then? Editing to only show the opponents worst sides is making that video pretty useless as "evidence" or whatever it's supposed to be.

 

Personally, I would much rather be tossed from a ship than shot dead by firearms.

[Morgoth]

Personally, I would much rather be tossed from a ship than shot dead by firearms.

I disagree. Drowning isn't a pretty thing.

[Meshugger]

EDIT:

I don't think anyone has claimed they didn't defend themselves when the soldiers boarded their ships?

 

Notice though, they are very careful to not show any shooting. So how did nine people die then? Editing to only show the opponents worst sides is making that video pretty useless as "evidence" or whatever it's supposed to be.

 

Personally, I would much rather be tossed from a ship than shot dead by firearms.

 

Maybe it happened inside the ship?

[mkreku]

Personally, I would much rather be tossed from a ship than shot dead by firearms.

I disagree. Drowning isn't a pretty thing.

There have been no reports of any killed Israeli soldiers.

[Orogun01]

Personally, I would much rather be tossed from a ship than shot dead by firearms.

I disagree. Drowning isn't a pretty thing.

There have been no reports of any killed Israeli soldiers.

Maybe because shots were fired. Could be that a resolution without violence was impossible, the soldiers were outnumbered and under aggression. Under that kind of situation even the most trained are bound to respond with violence.

[Moose]

Pft, especially the most trained.

[heathen]

Personally, I would much rather be tossed from a ship than shot dead by firearms.

I disagree. Drowning isn't a pretty thing.

There have been no reports of any killed Israeli soldiers.

Maybe because shots were fired. Could be that a resolution without violence was impossible, the soldiers were outnumbered and under aggression. Under that kind of situation even the most trained are bound to respond with violence.

 

Actually boarding the ship under the cover of darkness, via a rope from a chopper is pretty much the epitome of an act of aggression, so it was the soldiers who acted first. So it was the civilians who were under aggression first.

[Gorgon]

I just don't see the relevance of mentioning the holocaust or Hamas in the same breath when discussing the boarding. Yes, fine we all stipulate that the Jewish people were chased from one end of the world to the other until they founded Israel, we all know that Hamas is responsible for countless terrorist attacks. Now can we get back to the subject please.

[Volourn]

"I'm sick and tired of having to tap dance around Israel because "Oh how we've suffered". If they're under imminent attack from six states, they should learn to deal with it on their own and try to place nice"

 

Except, they havce. And, they won. That's the problem. It's why they control Palestine. It's because they won, but stopped pushing things because the rest of the world got butthurt and stepped in and stopped Isreal from outright annilhating their enemy. People whine about the US/UN not doing anything to stop Isreal orm protect Palestine, but let's be honest, if it wasn't for Isreal trying to play nice with others, they likely would have wiped out all resistancve not only in palestine but more than a few of their neighbours.

 

btw, It's also hard to 'play nice' when your enemy's goal is to wipe you off the map.

 

 

"I just don't see the relevance of mentioning the holocaust or Hamas in the same breath when discussing the boarding."

 

Because, Hamas and even the Holocaust play a role in what is happening in the modern world.

 

I do loike the Hamas apologists who feels there is nothing wrong with Hamas targetting kiddies (including Palestian kiddies) while making Isreal out of the devil.

 

Not that I approve of Isreal's actions in this case because they mess up. Huge.

[Humodour]

Why was this ship boarded in PITCH-BLACK in the morning by COMMANDOS in the first place?!

[Humodour]

Don't be a ****, you'd expect them to use tasers and tear gas.

O.K. maybe not tasers, but I'm pretty sure, being one of the best equipped armies in the world, they could come up with something better than paintball guns and switching to their live ammunition sidearms at the sight of *gasp* a knife. Like it's totally unpredictable. In a crowd.

 

...

 

but you don't see a problem with using tear gas... on a boat? btw, is the tear gas to be used before or after the israelis shimmy down their ropes from the helicopter?

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps everybody should have a westlaw subscription... would make these kinda posts much easier for Gromnir.

 

It turns out the Israeli's did in fact use tasers, rubber bullets, and tear gas. That's something at least.

 

Oh, do you still want me to answer your question, Gromnir? Because they fired it both before and after shimmying down their ropes.

 

Then again, why were they firing before they even boarded the vessel? Why were they acting like pirates?

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/0...ccounts-gunfire

[Moose]

Why were they acting like pirates?

 

Pirate ninjas by the sounds of it.

 

Neat.