• 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

It is not the first time the IDF has killed an American and it won't be the last either.

This guy joined his jihadist sympathizer gal-pal Rachel Corrie in "the world is better off without them" category. Don't hang out with Jihadists and maybe you won't be mistaken for a jihadist except in this case I seriously doubt there was any mistake.
 
-- But some on this thread want to bitch and whine about "disproportionate force"? --

I used to think this was a "debate forum".

I'm not going to justify why I respond to this thread however I'm fairly sure that those who have disagreed the Israeli actions don't just post on ME threads - you're a mod, I'm fairly certain you can track where we post. One thing I've noted time and time again in this thread (including the attacks and insults against "jetboogieman") is pretty poor language and terminology used against posters who have disagreed the recent actions in the Med.

The "bitching and whining" used against many on this thread (and false accusations of being "Israel haters") is poor debate and sucks intelligence out of many exchanges.

Two soldiers were seriously wounded, and a few others have suffered from gunshot wounds.
That they did not die is hence only fortune playing its role, and I can't see how you're planning to use it to justify the lynch.

Neither can I actually - probably because that's a line I have not pushed / explored or tried in this thread. You know that so I'm curious to know why you said this?

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 --

Well said.
 
So they say. From the videos it seems to be more of a bloodthirsty mob that was planning this attack all along.
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.
And in that case the law has condemned a nation that has done nothing wrong. If anything the world has revealed its hypocrisy.
And they are to be dealt with by the country with the security issues.

Regarding Israel storming the boat.

The ships that were intercepted by Israel, however, were carrying aid. The law or armed conflict requires that blockading states allow aid through to the civilian population; however, the blockading state may control the channel through which aid is delivered, and that is what Israel has been doing.

The authority to intercept vessels and control aid deliveries, however, is available only in a lawful blockade. To be lawful, a blockade must not be implemented where the damage to the civilian population is excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated from the blockade, and this is where Israel’s legal position is open to question.

The BBC has reported UN agencies as saying that insufficient aid is reaching Gaza, possibly less than one quarter of daily needs. This raises serious questions about the underlying legality of the blockade.

The relevant rules of armed conflict prohibit intentionally starving the civilian population and require that humanitarian supplies essential to survival must be allowed to pass, albeit subject to certain controls by the blockading power.

To maintain a population at a level just above the bare minimum needed for survival might arguably be within the strictest letter of the law, but could never seriously be thought consistent with its spirit.

Calls for the immediate cessation of the blockade may well have a good case in law as well as in humanitarian policy.

Gaza fleet raid raises questions over legality of Israel’s blockade - Times Online

'Free Gaza' has made several trips. According to them the first 5 went without incident despite, according to them, receiving threats that they would even be killed. The next 3 or 4, according to them, resulted in them being severly beaten. They say that following that they were determined that this would not happen again and so spent one year organising this trip.
 
Regarding Israel storming the boat.



Gaza fleet raid raises questions over legality of Israel’s blockade - Times Online

'Free Gaza' has made several trips. According to them the first 5 went without incident despite, according to them, receiving threats that they would even be killed. The next 3 or 4, according to them, resulted in them being severly beaten. They say that following that they were determined that this would not happen again and so spent one year organising this trip.

Same Question. If aid was the goal why did they ignore both offers by Egypt and Israel to offload their supplies?
 
He was on board a jihadist owned and operated ship, he should have kept better company.

And I'm sure he greeted the IDF with roses and not knives, flash grenades and metal pipes :roll:
 
Same Question. If aid was the goal why did they ignore both offers by Egypt and Israel to offload their supplies?

As far as I can tell the aid was not the only goal. Bringing world attention to the inhumane blockade of Gaza was certainly an aim. It worked quite successfully. The Israeli action was not merely overkill- it was really dumb and not in Israel's self-interest. I should think someone in the defense force will be looking for another job.
 
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

Well "bubba" lets allow that I said 'most' and that you are one of the few...OK...I'll buy it...

So tell me Bubba...other than getting 'outraged' when Israel strikes out...wow us with your social conscience...your day to day efforts to bring about a better world. Your experience with those other agencies...your work to inspire peace...

you know...the real stuff...

I spent four years in the middle east. Not the MOST experience in the world...Im sure there are others here with more. But I can tell you as an absolute fact that other than the occasional news article and opportunity to rattle the saber, not once did I see or meet people that were committed to bringing about peace with Israel. No one offfered to bring in those Palestinian refugees (maybe they are wary considering their past history with Jordan, Egypt, and Lebanon).

Oh...I'll keep my day job. But I'd bet money my observations regarding 'most people' are right on target.
 
As far as I can tell the aid was not the only goal.

And thats the point.

Bringing world attention to the inhumane blockade of Gaza was certainly an aim. It worked quite successfully. The Israeli action was not merely overkill- it was really dumb and not in Israel's self-interest. I should think someone in the defense force will be looking for another job.

Inhumane would be allowing terrorists to receive weapons to use against Israeli citizens.

Are you under the impression no aid gets to Gaza at all?
 
Same Question. If aid was the goal why did they ignore both offers by Egypt and Israel to offload their supplies?

As pointed out, it is possible to have more than one goal with an action. Aid and publicity where to goals. Israel was really in a no win situation here. They could not let the ships land, and if, as seems likely, the people on the one ship planned to attack the Israeli forces who tried to stop them, it guaranteed publicity in a manner Israel does not really want.

I wonder if the US has a battle group in the Med, and maybe asking them to intercept the flotilla might not have been a safer course of action from a PR standpoint.
 
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..
I thought it was your job to keep threads "on topic"? As well you should know, N. Korea and Israel are not in the least analagous. Furthermore, the dominant emotional outbursts in this thread seem to come from those who support Israeli policy and actions in every circumstance.
 
And thats the point.



Inhumane would be allowing terrorists to receive weapons to use against Israeli citizens.

Are you under the impression no aid gets to Gaza at all?

According to former diplomat, Ann Wright, who was on the scene( speaking today on Democracynow) these ships were inspected beforehand and cement is not easy to use as a weapon. Do they build giant trebuches to sling great gobs of it at unsuspecting Israeli citizens?


ANN WRIGHT: Well, I think our vice president needs to take another look at this thing. The ships were open to inspection beforehand, and I’m quite sure Mossad had their little agents that were all over that place. These groups are humanitarian groups that are bringing in goods that are needed for the people of Gaza. They’ve had plenty of inspections on them.

If you talk about violence, it’s not 3,000 rockets Hamas is putting on Gaza; it’s a twenty-two-day attack that the Israelis did that killed 1,400 people, wounded 5,000, left 50,000 homeless. And here we are a year and four months later, and the Israelis will not let any sort of reconstruction materials in. And then, when reconstruction materials start coming that way, instead of waiting until—if they have a zone that they are trying to protect, let ships come into it and stop them.

But I would say that there are ways that you can stop them without killing people. There are ways you can stop even passenger ship like that ferry boat, and certainly like our little thirty-foot craft. You don’t have to use commandos with—I mean, you can use commandos with excessive force, which they do, but there are other ways to do it, if you want to kind of preserve a sense of civility, humanity, and meeting the international law, quite honestly.

And going outside a boundary, going into international waters, I mean, what they are are pirates. They are pirates. They kidnap people, and they’re stealing stuff. They’ve probably stolen over a million dollars’ worth of cameras, computers, cell phones. I mean, I’m in Istanbul. We just got here early this morning. Some luggage is here. There’s not a thing in it. Everything has been taken. The Israeli military said, "Oh, yes, we have to count this. You know, we have to take it." Well, what they’ve done, they’ve stolen it. And if we have any friends that are in Israel, I hope that they go down to the black market and see where our stuff is, because somebody is making a killing on this thing.
 
US-Turkish man killed in Israeli flotilla raid - Yahoo! News

So they murdered an American citizen.. 4 shots to the head.

Let me guess he aint a real American now...

Neither of us were there so neither of us know how the guys death came about. Did think this was a fascinating quote from Furak's father:

"Dogan's father told Turkey's state-run Anatolia News Agency that he had identified his son's body and that he had been shot through the forehead. Still, he said, the family was not sad because they believed Furkan had died with honor.

Not sad? Does kind of have a blessed martyr tone to it.... :(


.
 
Reading through parts of this thread and other news sources it seems that anti-Zionist feelings have clouded the arguments in a haze of bias. If Israel was viewed in a historical and objective context and if it was treated like any other western country, all this would be much simpler.

But maybe that is just me.
 
So in your world peaceful protest is not allowed.

There is nothing peaceful about running a blockcade and attacking with flash grenades, knives and pipes.

Those are the little details you keep glossing over.

Still waiting for you to answer my question:

If aid was the goal why did they ignore both offers by Egypt and Israel to offload their supplies?

Care to answer it this time?
 
As pointed out, it is possible to have more than one goal with an action. Aid and publicity where to goals.

Of course it is but you cannot hide behind humanitarian aid if that was not your true goal because if it was, the supplies would have been taken to a port. That is the lie they are telling.

Israel was really in a no win situation here. They could not let the ships land, and if, as seems likely, the people on the one ship planned to attack the Israeli forces who tried to stop them, it guaranteed publicity in a manner Israel does not really want.

I wonder if the US has a battle group in the Med, and maybe asking them to intercept the flotilla might not have been a safer course of action from a PR standpoint.

Not the US. They would draw as much criticism as Israel. The solution is to stop them in Israeli waters not international. If international is necessary, bring along some UN lapdogs to "supervise"
 
-- Inhumane would be allowing terrorists to receive weapons to use against Israeli citizens

Nobody so far on this thread has advocated this. There are links posted earlier by myself explaining that most weapons already come through the tunnels between Egypt and Gaza - these tunnels are controlled by Hamas and Hamas has no interest in bringing in aid. The ordinary Gazan is hurt twice by what is described as "collective punishment" - i.e. being punished for crimes they did not commit. I can post the links yet again if you haven't read the whole thread.

-- Are you under the impression no aid gets to Gaza at all?

Also something covered earlier. Israel lets in aid - the UN has said that it's only about a quarter of what is necessary. There's an Israeli human rights group called Gisha who have won through the Israeli Supreme Court the publication of the list of what is allowed and what is not allowed into Israel. This is all earlier in the thread.

I linked to a Gisha .pdf file too which shows why they think the Israeli Blockade isn't legal - Apocalypse was going to critique it and show that they are wrong but hasn't gotten around to it.

According to former diplomat, Ann Wright, who was on the scene( speaking today on Democracynow) these ships were inspected beforehand and cement is not easy to use as a weapon. Do they build giant trebuches to sling great gobs of it at unsuspecting Israeli citizens?--

I'm afraid Ann Wright isn't up to date - Hamas use cement and steel to build the support structure for their rocket launchers. That's why cement and steel are severely restricted.
 
Neither can I actually - probably because that's a line I have not pushed / explored or tried in this thread. You know that so I'm curious to know why you said this?

I have perceived your arguments as an obvious attempt to justify the attack on the soldiers.
If that is not so however then I apologize.
 
Also something covered earlier. Israel lets in aid - the UN has said that it's only about a quarter of what is necessary.
Yeah I really like that UN statement.
Do you know that the availability of the items that those humanitarian aids consist of in places such as Haiti and other third world nations is about the same if not worse?
Saying that it's only a quarter of what is needed is fine, the question is what do they mean to by "what is needed".
If 15,000 tons of humanitarian aid per week is a quarter, then certainly what is needed according to them is 60,000 tons of humanitarian aid to be let into the Strip per week.
Now that is quite ****ing a lot for a small place such as Gaza, and if that is what the UN refers to by "what is needed" for the strip, it means that there is no simple lack of humanitarian aid in the strip, but that the Strip is completely empty from those stuff.
Secondly I have to assume that this "what is needed" is adjusted to the developed-world standards, and not to the developing world standards, and hence the lack of proportionality in the UN expectations.
I linked to a Gisha .pdf file too which shows why they think the Israeli Blockade isn't legal - Apocalypse was going to critique it and show that they are wrong but hasn't gotten around to it.
You said you'll repost it, so do so please.
If I'm not wrong it's all about the reference to dual use items not being let into the Strip.
Items that can be used for both civilian and combatative purposes.
 
I have perceived your arguments as an obvious attempt to justify the attack on the soldiers.
If that is not so however then I apologize.

Your apology is accepted. I had personally thought we'd shown far greater mutual respect till then.

Yeah I really like that UN statement.
Do you know that the availability of the items that those humanitarian aids consist of in places such as Haiti and other third world nations is about the same if not worse?
Saying that it's only a quarter of what is needed is fine, the question is what do they mean to by "what is needed".

The UN has based that judgement on the amounts of food etc that was imported into Gaza before the blockade – and I’m not justifying the continuation of supplies of weapons into Gaza – in comparison the blockade.

-- If 15,000 tons of humanitarian aid per week is a quarter, then certainly what is needed according to them is 60,000 tons of humanitarian aid to be let into the Strip per week.
Now that is quite ****ing a lot for a small place such as Gaza, and if that is what the UN refers to by "what is needed" for the strip, it means that there is no simple lack of humanitarian aid in the strip, but that the Strip is completely empty from those stuff.
Secondly I have to assume that this "what is needed" is adjusted to the developed-world standards, and not to the developing world standards, and hence the lack of proportionality in the UN expectations.

Firstly Israel (if you read the BBC link posted before and here again) has apparently worked out the calorie intake it thinks is necessary to keep the citizens alive and that is what it bases its restrictions on.

The Israeli authorities also confirm the existence of four documents related to how the blockade works: how they process requests for imports into Gaza, how they monitor the shortages within Gaza, their approved list of what is allowed in, and a document entitled "Food Consumption in the Gaza Strip - Red Lines" which sets out the minimum calorie intake needed by Gaza's million and a half inhabitants, according to their age and sex.
BBC Link here

From a liberty point of view – I’d personally prefer to not to have my food choices dictated if I have the means to buy them. Secondly, “UN expectations” is nothing to do with what a population can afford – if they could afford the (legal) items before the blockade they should be allowed them after. Haiti is a different kettle of fish – if the Haiti economy cannot afford certain items they go without – this was not the case in Gaza. Those items are dictated. The BBC link has the .pdf file Gisha submitted to the Israeli Supreme Court but I’ll post the link again BBC Link here.


You said you'll repost it, so do so please.

Repost of Gisha Document

The nice thing about this document is it fully references Israeli and International Law – and has links within that you might find useful.


-- If I'm not wrong it's all about the reference to dual use items not being let into the Strip.
Items that can be used for both civilian and combatative purposes.

I’m afraid you are wrong – here’s some quick examples –

GOODS ALLOWED INTO GAZA
Canned meat and tuna, but not canned fruit
Mineral water, but not fruit juice
Sesame paste (tahini) but not jam
Tea and coffee but not chocolate

Jam, fruit juice and chocolate are deadly weapons against most people’s expanding waistline – not against IDF soldiers though unless you know something I don’t?

You may remember my light hearted reference to why coriander was banned when we first discussed the issue of the limits imposed on Gazan citizens?
 
Last edited:
The UN has based that judgment on the amounts of food etc that was imported into Gaza before the blockade – and I’m not justifying the continuation of supplies of weapons into Gaza – in comparison the blockade.
I think they're referring to the amount of aid inserted into the Gaza Strip by organizations such as the UN before the blockade, not to the amount of goods imported by the Hamas government before the blockade.
Firstly Israel (if you read the BBC link posted before and here again) has apparently worked out the calorie intake it thinks is necessary to keep the citizens alive and that is what it bases its restrictions on.
Yes I know that.
From a liberty point of view – I’d personally prefer to not to have my food choices dictated if I have the means to buy them.
Well yeah it's a blockade we're speaking about, certainly it's going to greatly affect the population within the blockaded territory.
Secondly, “UN expectations” is nothing to do with what a population can afford – if they could afford the (legal) items before the blockade they should be allowed them after. Haiti is a different kettle of fish – if the Haiti economy cannot afford certain items they go without – this was not the case in Gaza. Those items are dictated. The BBC link has the .pdf file Gisha submitted to the Israeli Supreme Court but I’ll post the link again BBC Link here.
Once more I'd like a reference to those details about the pre-Blockade Gaza Strip.
Repost of Gisha Document

The nice thing about this document is it fully references Israeli and International Law – and has links within that you might find useful.
That document makes many baseless assumptions.
For example, it states that because Israel enforces movement restriction on civilians from and into the Gaza Strip it means that Israel seeks to place pressure over the Gazan population and decrease their support for the militants.
The real reason is more around the threat of militants imposing as civilians getting into and outside the Gaza Strip.

Another example would be the claim that Israel has no real military objective in that blockade.
Clearly the objective of the blockade is to drastically decrease the power of Hamas, whether by the blockage of weapons or by the blockage of supplies for the constructions of bunkers and rockets.
The organization claims that Israel has no declared objective - that, once it will be achieved, the blockade could be lifted - and that this somehow causes the blockade to become a collective punishment rather than the cutting of supplies to the terrorist organizations in control of the territory.
Israel did however inform Hamas that the release of the abducted soldier, Gilad Shalit, would result in the immediate lifting of the blockade - sort of a compriomising by Israel.
Besides that it is clear that if Hamas revokes terrorism the blockade would immediately end.
I’m afraid you are wrong – here’s some quick examples –



Jam, fruit juice and chocolate are deadly weapons against most people’s expanding waistline – not against IDF soldiers though unless you know something I don’t?

You may remember my light hearted reference to why coriander was banned when we first discussed the issue of the limits imposed on Gazan citizens?
Now the other issue with the blockade is the above, the blockading of what is considered to be "civilians goods" and the way this organization refers to it as a clear evidence for collective punishment.
The blockade on the strip allows only necessities into it, such as water and canned meat.
As you were saying before, Israel calculates the required calories for the Gazan population and assembles the blockaded goods list in accordance with that calculation.

Why does Israel then blockade non-necessities?
The Israeli reasoning seems to be that Hamas(As many other insurgent/militants organizations around the world do) takes over the goods that are considered non-necessities, such as fuel for example, and then sells them to the Gazan population at its declared price, gaining all of the money from those goods.
You may remember a while back when we were debating about the NATO air strike on the fuel tanks hijacked by a group of Afghan insurgents (The Taliban IIRC).
The reasons why civilians have died in that air strike was that those insurgents were selling the stolen fuel to the civilians.
Basically, those non-necessities, if let in, provide the majority of the regular income for the terrorist organization of Hamas, and by allowing it in Israel allows the continued sponsoring of it by the Gazan population.
That is why the blockade seems to be allowing in only goods that are considered necessities, although from time to time Israel does indeed allow goods such as chocolate in.
 
Last edited:
Neither of us were there so neither of us know how the guys death came about. Did think this was a fascinating quote from Furak's father:

"Dogan's father told Turkey's state-run Anatolia News Agency that he had identified his son's body and that he had been shot through the forehead. Still, he said, the family was not sad because they believed Furkan had died with honor.

Not sad? Does kind of have a blessed martyr tone to it.... :(


.

Oh christ cut the crap will you?
 
Back
Top Bottom