• 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

Andalublue said:
Y'see, that's what I always thought you believed. When you were calling Richard Goldstone nasty names the fact of his Jewishness didn't seem to be very relevant.
Click to expand...
What's wrong with what he said?
Some poster said that Dershowitz is not a credible person because he's a Jew. Clearly even you can see that such thinking is wrong?
 
Apocalypse said:
What's wrong with what he said?
Some poster said that Dershowitz is not a credible person because he's a Jew. Clearly even you can see that such thinking is wrong?
Click to expand...

I think Dershowitz is an interesting voice. I don't always agree with him but he's thoughtful while too often being a little over-partisan. I like the guy and think he IS credible. My point was that Gardener was trying to say he was credible BECAUSE he was Jewish and that Jews should be respected for their opinions on the issue. I would question the former and fully agree with the latter. The thing is, Gardener, as per his every flaming post, only deems Jewish opinion credible when it concords with his own ultra-hawkish-Israeli-government-supporting stance, hence Goldstone is dissed and insulted and his opinions and finding rubbished. I dare say he'll be none-too-impressed with Aaronovitch's column either. There's an old Turkish saying... am buldunda kılsızınımı istiyorsun... effectively, and more politely, he wants his cake and eat it.
 
Apocalypse said:
What's wrong with what he said?
Some poster said that Dershowitz is not a credible person because he's a Jew. Clearly even you can see that such thinking is wrong?
Click to expand...

If you are referring to my statement, I said no such thing. I said Dershowitz is neither a specialist in international law nor unbiased. His written commentaries concerning Israel and his attempts to stifle critics are well known
As it happens Richard Falk does not agree with Dershowitz, he is an authority on international law and is also Jewish. Jewish or not Jewish - it is really irrelevant.
 
Cassandra said:
If you are referring to my statement, I said no such thing. I said Dershowitz is neither a specialist in international law nor unbiased. His written commentaries concerning Israel and his attempts to stifle critics are well known
As it happens Richard Falk does not agree with Dershowitz, he is an authority on international law and is also Jewish. Jewish or not Jewish - it is really irrelevant.
Click to expand...

So you would declare anyone with previous anti-Israeli commentaries biased, right?
 
Maybe Tashah or someone could chime in here and try to explain what the reasoning was behind attacking ships in International waters vs just letting them come to port and searching them thoroughly? Does Israel not have folks at the destination port do that? And at the very least, why do it in international waters? What legal grounds can any country have for dropping commandos onto ships in international waters? And then cry about getting attacked by the people ON said ships.

Are they going to attack and kill the people on the Irish ship too? While *they're* in international waters?
 
rivrrat said:
Maybe Tashah or someone could chime in here and try to explain what the reasoning was behind attacking ships in International waters vs just letting them come to port and searching them thoroughly? Does Israel not have folks at the destination port do that? And at the very least, why do it in international waters? What legal grounds can any country have for dropping commandos onto ships in international waters? And then cry about getting attacked by the people ON said ships.

Are they going to attack and kill the people on the Irish ship too? While *they're* in international waters?
Click to expand...

The bordering was in accordance with international law.
The ship was warned twice by Israeli navy officials to stop and when it has refused to twice, and has declared its intention to be running the blockade on Gaza the IDF was given the legitimacy to board it on international waters.
International law says that if a ship is trying to run a blockade it can be boarded on international waters.

Why was it boarded on international waters and not on the territorial waters?
The amount of ships in the flotilla was too big - if the bordering would have been done on the territorial waters there would be a great chance of one or more of the ships making it to the Gazan port before the soldiers are able to stop it.
Besides that there's the risk that the terrorist organization of Hamas, which controls the Strip, would have sent speed boats towards the interception area and would have greatly escalated the situation.

And about the second flotilla; it will be intercepted.
The crew consists of 11 people if I'm not wrong so there shouldn't be a real issue - but then again one week ago we were sure this was a flotilla that is carrying a bunch of peaceful activists, a bunch of hippies, not full bearded terrorists supporters that dream about becoming Shahids.
 
Last edited:
Apocalypse said:
So you would declare anyone with previous anti-Israeli commentaries biased, right?
Click to expand...

Every sentient individual has biases. The only question is whether, like Krishnamurti, a person attempts to question their own assumptions and thought processes. I think that Richard Falk is biased also. This does not mean that I outright reject what either has to say; I recommend that both points of view should be considered.
 
Apocalypse said:
The bordering was in accordance with international law.
The ship was warned twice by Israeli navy officials to stop and when it has refused to twice, and has declared its intention to be running the blockade on Gaza the IDF was given the legitimacy to board it on international waters.
International law says that if a ship is trying to run a blockade it can be boarded on international waters.

Why was it boarded on international waters and not on the territorial waters?
The amount of ships in the flotilla was too big - if the bordering would have been done on the territorial waters there would be a great chance of one or more of the ships making it to the Gazan port before the soldiers are able to stop it.
Besides that there's the risk that the terrorist organization of Hamas, which controls the Strip, would have sent speed boats towards the interception area and would have greatly escalated the situation..
Click to expand...

The ships were carrying building materials primarily- so what if a ship made it to Gaza?
 
Well this situation is going to have on going consequences.

Watching BBC news this evening, there is concern about Turkey moving away from the west and towards Islamist support.

One of our women who was on the boat with fatalities speaks of her experience here British survivor of Gaza flotilla raid: 'Israelis ignored SOS calls' | World news | guardian.co.uk

and lastly, the Irish are still on their way. They want to deliver aid directly to Gaza, just like the previous ships wanted. They say their reasons are simply that they believe that Israel will not deliver all their cargo - for instance cement. They are very happy for the UN to come and inspect them and take them into Gaza. They say their mission is humanitarian and that is all - lost my link to that story

but here is a Guardian link. The Irish are very clear they do not want any of their people harmed in this undertaking.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/01/irish-aid-boat-gaza-israel-warning
 
Last edited:
Apocalypse said:
We didn't know that until it was boarded.
There were other cases though that justify Israel's suspicion.

Karine A Affair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Francop Affair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

The Free Gaza organization has delivered medical supplies by ship to Gaza in the past w/o incident. I also noted that the Israeli ambassador's statement that Gazan's were receiving sufficient food and medical supplies by approved channels seems to be undermined by the fact that journalists observed lines of severely ill people crossing into Egypt for medical care when Egypt opened the border
 
Cassandra said:
The Free Gaza organization has delivered medical supplies by ship to Gaza in the past w/o incident. I also noted that the Israeli ambassador's statement that Gazan's were receiving sufficient food and medical supplies by approved channels seems to be undermined by the fact that journalists observed lines of severely ill people crossing into Egypt for medical care when Egypt opened the border
Click to expand...

How could Israel know if the ship has carried weapons or not if it has let it pass?

And you'll have to link to a source for your second claim, besides it not undermining the claims for no lack in medical supplies, since it could just as well be the lack in skillful doctors.
 
alexa said:
They say their reasons are simply that they believe that Israel will not deliver all their cargo - for instance cement. They are very happy for the UN to come and inspect them and take them into Gaza. They say their mission is humanitarian and that is all - lost my link to that story
Click to expand...

Why didn't they agree to the Egyptians accepting the cargo if they didn't trust the Israelis?

It was decidedly not to provide humanitarian aid to the residents of Gaza, but rather to break the entirely lawful Israeli military blockade. The proof lies in the fact that both Israel and Egypt offered to have all the food, medicine and other humanitarian goods sent to Gaza, if the boats agreed to land in an Israeli or Egyptian port. That humanitarian offer was soundly rejected by the leaders of the flotilla who publicly announced:

"This mission is not about delivering humanitarian supplies, it's about breaking Israel's siege on 1.5 million Palestinians." (AFP, May 27, 2010.)
Click to expand...

Alan Dershowitz: Israel's Actions Were Entirely Lawful Though Probably Unwise
 
Last edited:
Cassandra said:
The Free Gaza organization has delivered medical supplies by ship to Gaza in the past w/o incident. I also noted that the Israeli ambassador's statement that Gazan's were receiving sufficient food and medical supplies by approved channels seems to be undermined by the fact that journalists observed lines of severely ill people crossing into Egypt for medical care when Egypt opened the border
Click to expand...

If it was only about delivering supplies why did the ship refuse to go into port either Israel or Egypt?

OF course that wasn't the goal. Propeganda was the goal.
 
bhkad said:
Why didn't they agree to the Egyptians accepting the cargo if they didn't trust the Israelis?
Click to expand...


The boat that is saying it does not believe Israel will allow some of their materials into Gaza has not arrived yet. It is the Irish boat. Due to arrive Friday or Saturday. I am not though as you mentione it, aware that Egypt gave any such option to the previous boats. At that time her borders were closed to Gaza.

In addition 'Free Gaza' wants the people of Gaza to feel the world has not forgotten them. You should not confuse that with support for Hamas. Apart from the US and Israel just about the whole world wants the blockade ended and the whole world most certainly does not support Hamas. These boats have citizens from most of the countries of Europe and the US.
 
alexa said:
The boat that is saying it does not believe Israel will allow some of their materials into Gaza has not arrived yet. It is the Irish boat. Due to arrive Friday or Saturday. I am not though as you mentione it, aware that Egypt gave any such option to the previous boats. At that time her borders were closed to Gaza.
Click to expand...
Egypt did give such option, and the Irish boat is due to arrive on Sunday.
In addition 'Free Gaza' wants the people of Gaza to feel the world has not forgotten them.
Click to expand...
I don't think many really buy that.
You should not confuse that with support for Hamas. Apart from the US and Israel just about the whole world wants the blockade ended and the whole world most certainly does not support Hamas. These boats have citizens from most of the countries of Europe and the US.
Click to expand...
Apart from Israel the whole world has no obligation to the security of the people of Israel.
 
Apocalypse said:
Egypt did give such option, and the Irish boat is due to arrive on Sunday.
Click to expand...
Thank you. I will look into that. My guess is that the intention was to head towards Gaza. Some boats have been allowed in before. They did not know there's would not. It was worth a try to them. They certainly did not expect Israel to board them forcefully on the high seas, believing that to be illegal.

Apocalypse said:
I don't think many really buy that.
Click to expand...
I said that because that is what one of the first 'Free Gaza' people said. The political position is to bring Gaza to the attention of the world, to work towards getting the blockade removed and proper economic and social life restarted there.

The boats apparently came with needed supplies to build

Apocalypse said:
Apart from Israel the whole world has no obligation to the security of the people of Israel.
Click to expand...

The wole world has the need to point out when a country which we are allied to is acting against International Law and accepted Human Rights. Security issues can be dealt with along with peaceful solutions.
 
Apocalypse said:
Egypt did give such option,
Click to expand...

It was decidedly not to provide humanitarian aid to the residents of Gaza, but rather the break the entirely lawful Israeli military blockade. The proof lies in the fact that both Israel and Egypt offered to have all the food, medicine and other humanitarian goods sent to Gaza, if the boats agreed to land in an Israeli or Egyptian port. That humanitarian offer was soundly rejected by the leaders of the flotilla who publicly announced:

"This mission is not about delivering humanitarian supplies, it's about breaking Israel's siege on 1.5 million Palestinians." (AFP, May 27, 2010.)
Click to expand...

Alan Dershowitz: Israel's Actions Were Entirely Lawful Though Probably Unwise
 
alexa said:
Thank you. I will look into that. My guess is that the intention was to head towards Gaza. Some boats have been allowed in before. They did not know there's would not. It was worth a try to them. They certainly did not expect Israel to board them forcefully on the high seas, believing that to be illegal.
Click to expand...
So they say. From the videos it seems to be more of a bloodthirsty mob that was planning this attack all along.
I said that because that is what one of the first 'Free Gaza' people said. The political position is to bring Gaza to the attention of the world, to work towards getting the blockade removed and proper economic and social life restarted there.

The boats apparently came with needed supplies to build
Click to expand...
A great difference exist between what they tell the international press and their actual actions.
They have refused to take on the Israeli and Egyptian offers to bring the humanitarian aid to the Strip by themselves after an inspection.
The wole world has the need to point out when a country which we are allied to is acting against International Law and accepted Human Rights.
Click to expand...
And in that case the law has condemned a nation that has done nothing wrong. If anything the world has revealed its hypocrisy.
Security issues can be dealt with along with peaceful solutions.
Click to expand...
And they are to be dealt with by the country with the security issues.
 
You know, I am bothered a fair bit on how Israel handled this and have some issues.

But some on this thread want to bitch and whine about "disproportionate force"?

People tied to the GOVERNMENT in Palestine are routinely sending missiles into civilian areas of Israel....the outrage of "the world" and specifically the EU is negligible, mostly explaining it away as if its somehow warranted.

A "President" of a country who arguably stole an election (the likes of which should make those in the US bitching about "stolen" elections ashamed of themselves) and since then many of those leading the freedom movement seem to have "disappeared". All the while the country is known to be funneling money to various terrorist organizations and aquiring nuclear material, all being done with the most mild and tacit disapproval of "The world", specifically the EU, who the country primarily ignores.

North Korea creates nuclear weapons, keeps a entire horde of missiles aimed at a neighboring city, and actually sinks a vessel of another country seemingly purposefully and the outrage is mild at best.

Israel sets up a blockade and attempts to inspect a boat that is trying to breach it, and then responds with deadly force when attacked, and the "World" EXPLODES in outrage. This board explodes with outrage.

The amount of outrage, condemnation, and standards at which Israel is given or held to is so completely and utterly out of whack with what "The world" holds ANY OTHER COUNTRY to it seems. The sinking of another countries vessel is unquestionably an act of war but we hear next to nothing about it, yet a disputed "act of war" at best is being made out to be the most grevious thing to have happened in decades.

This is insane, and frankly this kind of absolutely idiotic and over the top response makes it difficult to actually hold Israel to blame for the mistakes they made and the things they did in error because at this point it'd be like trying to ground a child for sticking their tongue out at someone while at the same time they are being beaten with bats by a group of other kids.
 
Zyphlin said:
You know, I am bothered a fair bit on how Israel handled this and have some issues.

But some on this thread want to bitch and whine about "disproportionate force"?

People tied to the GOVERNMENT in Palestine are routinely sending missiles into civilian areas of Israel....the outrage of "the world" and specifically the EU is negligible, mostly explaining it away as if its somehow warranted.

A "President" of a country who arguably stole an election (the likes of which should make those in the US bitching about "stolen" elections ashamed of themselves) and since then many of those leading the freedom movement seem to have "disappeared". All the while the country is known to be funneling money to various terrorist organizations and aquiring nuclear material, all being done with the most mild and tacit disapproval of "The world", specifically the EU, who the country primarily ignores.

North Korea creates nuclear weapons, keeps a entire horde of missiles aimed at a neighboring city, and actually sinks a vessel of another country seemingly purposefully and the outrage is mild at best.

Israel sets up a blockade and attempts to inspect a boat that is trying to breach it, and then responds with deadly force when attacked, and the "World" EXPLODES in outrage. This board explodes with outrage.

The amount of outrage, condemnation, and standards at which Israel is given or held to is so completely and utterly out of whack with what "The world" holds ANY OTHER COUNTRY to it seems. The sinking of another countries vessel is unquestionably an act of war but we hear next to nothing about it, yet a disputed "act of war" at best is being made out to be the most grevious thing to have happened in decades.

This is insane, and frankly this kind of absolutely idiotic and over the top response makes it difficult to actually hold Israel to blame for the mistakes they made and the things they did in error because at this point it'd be like trying to ground a child for sticking their tongue out at someone while at the same time they are being beaten with bats by a group of other kids.
Click to expand...
Thats because like most of the Arab countires, people on this board truly couldnt give a tinkers damn (which is the equivalent of a rats ass) about Palestine or Palestinians. They arent driven by the plight of those poor people. They are driven by their Jew hatred. The sad thing is it is so freqin obvious. the LAUGHABLE part is they think they are disguising it.
 
VanceMack said:
Thats because like most of the Arab countires, people on this board truly couldnt give a tinkers damn (which is the equivalent of a rats ass) about Palestine or Palestinians. They arent driven by the plight of those poor people. They are driven by their Jew hatred. The sad thing is it is so freqin obvious. the LAUGHABLE part is they think they are disguising it.
Click to expand...

a mind reader eh, vance
in your own world there is no way possible that some of us support a homeland for the jews, while simultaneously opposing the oppression the once oppressed are now inflicting on the Palestinians. pity you are so wrong
as a 15 year old kid going to school in japan during the '67 war i wore an armband inscribed 5-10-5 ... in japanese that is pronounced "Go Jew Go"
but the balance of power has turned around since then and if there is a people who should be opposed to inflicting oppression against others, it is the nation of israel
i admire much about the jewish people and especially how they have shaped a nearly self sufficient, technological paradise out of a barren desert
one can be opposed to actions without being opposed to a people
israel could be so much better if its government would focus on peace instead of war ... and that is also true of the palestinian leaders, and the better lives they could offer those they claim to represent


so, don't give up the day job vance, because this mindreading thing isn't working out for ya
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom