• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Israel intercepts Gaza flotilla, says Hamas

I've agreed with you on numerous occasions:)

In addition to paint ball, were they not armed with pistols/rifles?

what would you deem a necessary level of firepower for the boarding of a ship? just for perspective reasons.....

Paul
They were equipped with pistols and were told not to draw them unless there is a risk for their life.
I think that the level of firepower necessary for the boarding of a human rights peaceful activists' ship is no firepower at all.
That was not a human rights peaceful activists ship.
 
Next time they need to go in with a full combat loadout, including automatic weapons and grenades. And if they encounter a reception like that one, they need to use them.
 
They were equipped with pistols and were told not to draw them unless there is a risk for their life.
I think that the level of firepower necessary for the boarding of a human rights peaceful activists' ship is no firepower at all.
That was not a human rights peaceful activists ship.

Lets not set up an illusion. The conflict runs deep and we're not suggesting the flotilla was entirely manned by CND daisy chain tree huggers [at least i'm not].
You are part correct in stating 'no firepower is needed whilst boarding a humanitarian ship' but are incorrect for the purpose of 'storming' a humanitarian ship.

Paul
 
DANAHEA posted (The answer to that question is the same answer why Israel would be allowed to do the same thing, if they suspected the shipments to contain weapons. Add to that the fact that the floatilla brazenly announced that it was going to run the blockade, and your argument goes completely out the window.)

If they suspected armaments were carried aboard then yes I have to admit that this would be excuse enough.

Naturally when the Israeli's unload these ships in Ashdod Arms will be found.
 
I've agreed with you on numerous occasions :)
We've had our special moments.

In addition to paint ball, were they not armed with pistols/rifles?
Only sidearms as I understand it.

what would you deem a necessary level of firepower for the boarding of a ship? just for perspective reasons.....
That depends on many factors. The level of firepower increases exponentially with the threat level. In a scenario such as this, lightly armed should suffice.
 
I wondered when Obama would get dragged into this. :roll:

He has nothing to do with the topic.

You are of course quite correct, Obama could never have thought this one up. Pelosi would say this is all Bush's fault.
 
Footage now released by the IDF boats show the boarding troops being attacked as they land on the largest ship, individual commandos are attacked and one is thrown overboard - however they have boarded a ship in international waters. There is now a UN Security Council meeting but I fully expect the US to block anything critical of Israel or any attempt to put forward any independent enquiry.

You are dead wrong on that. The floatilla announced in advance that they would attempt to run a blockade. Under international law, that gives Israel the right to board the ships.

/thread

I'm struggling with all the bandying about of "International law" on this thread. Israel hasn't signed the UN Conventions on High Seas - (neither has Turkey so it's strange that the Turkish accuse Israel of breaking International Law) but you're throwing around (among others) that the Aid mission was attempting to break a blockade.

Is the blockade of Gaza itself legal under "International Law?"

Israel certainly says its blockade is legal however the UN has repeatedly asked Israel to lift the blockade.

I suggest you read up on International Maritime Law (immunity from boarding) and the San Remo Conference (running a blockade).

The ships that tried to run the British Blockade were classified at the time as "illegal" if I recall correctly?

Israel may now have lost any support it would ever get from Turkey (I realise that relations have soured recently however) or other moderate Islamic nations and apparently Greece has just cancelled joint naval activities about to start with Israel.
 
DANAHEA posted (The answer to that question is the same answer why Israel would be allowed to do the same thing, if they suspected the shipments to contain weapons. Add to that the fact that the floatilla brazenly announced that it was going to run the blockade, and your argument goes completely out the window.)

If they suspected armaments were carried aboard then yes I have to admit that this would be excuse enough.

Naturally when the Israeli's unload these ships in Ashdod Arms will be found.
Boxes of cold weapons were already found, including boxes filled with long knives.
This specific ship was planning this all along, and I wonder if the rest of the activists knew about it.
 
i cannot believe that you realy think that israel has honestly murderd those people!plz listen to me... i live in israel, my boyfriend is in the army and i know exactly what is going on... for several days the idf has warn those shipes n-o-t to come to gaza. we were afraid that the shipes contain weapons and armory that can harm our citizens and soilders. i remind you that evry country has the right to defend it self. we even offered them to anchor in ashdod,so that we could check the supplies and pass it over to gaza. but the shipes refused- is it not suspicious? the shipe was going to enter our teritory and we were afraide 4 our citizens- it could even exploud! the idf had warn them for days that we will enter the boat if they would not let us check the suspicious but our intentions are pure and not harmfoul. our soilders, while sliding down those ropes were packing paint guns and just in case the hand guns were in the back cuz there were no intention of using them at all (!!!!!). while coming down,they were ripped away from the rope and bitten with fists, knifes, clubs, long crow bar-type pole and they were shot with guns!!! each soilder was surrounded with 3-5 guys that beat the hell out of them! all of the soilders were hert! those unfortunate soilders had no chance of survivel! they had to defend them shelf- it was kill or be killed! this wasn't a humanitarian shipe, they acted like terorists and they were armd with weapons!!!! just so u know- we found boxes with guns and ammunition on the shipes so what kind of humanitery cruz whas it?! i'll tell you. the one that hamas orgenized deliberately to draw attention to gaza and believe me hamas dose not give a damn obout the lost lifes... but i can ensure u, they are smuged that their plan worked and we all played into theire hands. it's a sad day to all of us...
 
I am not finding any reference to this in any of the stories I am reading. Can you source where the ships where carrying automatic weapons and explosives?

It was on the National Post but got pulled for some reason. Please read the new Israeli's post 236 made by Nataly22, and here is what Fox says where there is a reference to the ship carrying arms. I don't think this ship was expecting the Somali Pirates, do you?

FOXNews.com - Netanyahu Cancels Visit as White House Regrets Loss of Life Following Israel Flotilla Conflict
 
Last edited:
i cannot believe that you realy think that israel has honestly murderd those people!plz listen to me...

I wouldn't argue the Israelis were murderers.

I would argue that they were morons.

They had no legal authority to do what they did, the moral authority to do what they did was shaky at best, and above all else the Israelis basically walked into a political trap.
 
Funny, how I got a report about a thread ban even thought I was telling the truth it amusing to say the least. The official story of the USS liberty doesn't add up when you put up other testimonials found by actual people that were their at the time. I have stated facts from people who were on the ship at the time of the attack. Which can be found here
 
Last edited:
It wasn't friendly fire as the cover up says it was they freaking new it was an American ship in the first place. They had people warn them it was an American ship. Actually look in to this story, since the official story doesn't even add up when you put these testimonials in to accounts.


From actual eyewitness testimonials reports say Israel even fired at people trying to fight fires on the ship.


The report on the crimes of what the Israeli's did to the Liberty.

You are talking apples and oranges. THIS event has absolutely nothing to do with the USS Liiberty, which is another topic entirely. Whether or not Israel did something wrong there can be discussed in it's own thread, rather than attempting to hijack this one.
 
They didn't have the legal authority to do what they did in international waters.

Of course they did. The flotilla was not comprised of ships that were immune from being visited and inspected. And, if some of the latest news reports are accurate, the ship in question where the incident took place, may well have been attempting to smuggle weapons to the Gaza Strip. If so, the attack against the boarding soldiers that took place is not surprising, as those on that ship would be liable to be prosecuted for running weapons.
 
Of course they did. The flotilla was not comprised of ships that were immune from being visited and inspected. And, if some of the latest news reports are accurate, the ship in question where the incident took place, may well have been attempting to smuggle weapons to the Gaza Strip. If so, the attack against the boarding soldiers that took place is not surprising, as those on that ship would be liable to be prosecuted for running weapons.

If they are not a signatory on the treaty that would've granted them the legal authority, they didn't have the legal authority.

You don't get the rights and protections of international law unless you also agree to be restricted by it.

In this case, the only legal authority Israel had was the kind it made up for itself.
 
If they are not a signatory on the treaty that would've granted them the legal authority, they didn't have the legal authority.

You don't get the rights and protections of international law unless you also agree to be restricted by it.

In this case, the only legal authority Israel had was the kind it made up for itself.

The Law of the Sea Convention (LOSC) is based on customary international law, including the Hague Conventions. It does not "create" authority for visiting/inspecting ships. It only defines what is permissible. Whether one is or is not a signatory of the Convention does not mean that one lacks authority to visit/inspect ships. Such authority existed prior to the LOSC.
 
Last edited:
If they are not a signatory on the treaty that would've granted them the legal authority, they didn't have the legal authority.

You don't get the rights and protections of international law unless you also agree to be restricted by it.

In this case, the only legal authority Israel had was the kind it made up for itself.

So by this argument, and International law, Israel was fully justified in their actions...... thanx for playing. ;)
 
how dare the international community attempt to provide humanitarian aid to an oppressed people under seige

why would israel agree to transport the ship's goods to gaza when it has imposed a seige against the transportation of those goods to gaza. that makes no sense - but it aids israel's propaganda efforts

israel was stupid to pull this stunt the day after the UN resolution condemning its failure to comply with the NPT ... world opposition to its government will only increase as a result of these actions
 
Last edited:
Sad for all these poeple to loose there lives,it would be good if they can join together as the eu as one,also to make money.


God bless them all.

Mikeey
 
I think an argument could be made that dropping them in from helicopters (at night I believe, which is even worse), increases the chance of problems. I believe that boarding from boats would have been safer and less likely to cause an escalation.

If I was in the ship and people started coming down from helicopters, I would probably be under the bed. If however I was of braver disposition, I would be arming myself and prepared for attack.
 
.

Just another facet to add to all the opinions from the "flotilla event" this morning. Believe the Israeli commanders deserve at least a little credit for tempering their response from what it could have been. If those had been my troops that dropped down the ropes and were getting somewhat savagely beaten, my inclination would have been to unleash a fury that would have left many more of the flotilla team injured or dead.

Not trying to sound melodramatic. Just offering some kudos to the Israeli military not reacting more so than they did.....


.
 
Back
Top Bottom