• 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

danarhea said:
I have often called Israel's tactics heavy-handed and needless, but in this instance, I have to side with Israel.

1) All Israel was demanding was that the shipments to Gaza be inspected. In the past, shipments have been diverted to Israel, which inspected them to make sure there were no weapons, then the shipments were sent into Gaza. Some shipments have been held up, but that is because weapons were found in them.
Click to expand...

Not true. Building material has been limited big time into the Gaza strip as well as many other things. Dont believe everything you hear on US news and from the IDF, it is usually far from the truth, just as the information from Al Jazerra (in Arabic) and other Arabic news outlets are highly biased.

2) Also, when Israel boarded the main ship, their soldiers were immediately attacked, and the soldiers responded. This is what accounts for the deaths and injuries.
Click to expand...

Of course, pirates were attacking the ship.. they have a right to defend themselves. Or dont you accept this just because they are Palestinian supporters? Does that mean you also oppose companies and countries defending themselves off the coast of Somalia? Or else where around the world where pirates attack ships in international waters or even in non-international waters?

Let us not forget that the Palestinians have never recognized Israel's right to exist,
Click to expand...

They have long ago. Hamas is another thing, but the PLO accepted Israel's right to exist long ago.... 1988 I believe. This was done when the Palestinians accepted a two state solution.

and have never stopped planning and carrying out attacks on Israel.
Click to expand...

And Israel continues to build new settlements, steal land and cut off Palestinians in the west bank with large walls and security fences. On top of that there is nothing done about the radical settlers that attack and beat up Palestinians on a daily basis and of course the racist attitudes of the IDF in the West Bank.

Both sides are at fault.. that is a fact.

That does give Israel the right to inspect shipments in order to make sure that they consist of humanitarian supplies, and that no weapons are hidden among them. IMHO, that is not too much to ask for.
Click to expand...

The hell it does. Isreal has NO bloody right to inspect shipments in international waters.. sure if the boats were in Israeli waters then that is their right, but they were not as far as I know and what has been reported. Not even the US under freaking Bush boarded suspected weapons ships in international waters for god sake.
 
Last edited:
PeteEU said:
Of course, pirates were attacking the ship.. they have a right to defend themselves. Or dont you accept this just because they are Palestinian supporters? Does that mean you also oppose companies and countries defending themselves off the coast of Somalia? Or else where around the world where pirates attack ships in international waters or even in non-international waters?
Click to expand...

just on that point, Israel had a legal right to board that ship, as it had the clearly stated purpose of violating a blockade, and was given warning to turn aside or be boarded

Mark Regev, spokesman for the Prime Minister of Israel, has stated that "the San Remo memorandum states, specifically 67A, that if you have a boat that is charging a blockaded area you are allowed to intercept even prior to it reaching the blockaded area if you've warned them in advance, and that we did a number of times and they had a stated goal which they openly expressed, of breaking the blockade. That blockade is in place to protect our people."[55] The San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea was adopted in June 1994 after a series of round tables of naval and legal experts convened by the International Institute of Humanitarian Law. In paragraph 67 it permits belligerents to attack merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral States if they "are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture". Paragraph 146 permits the capture of neutral merchant vessels outside neutral waters if they are engaged in any of the activities referred to in paragraph 67.[56]
Click to expand...

from: Gaza flotilla clash - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Apocalypse said:
Do you realize that over 10 soldiers were injured, two of them seriously injured?

They were shot, stabbed, and brutally lynched by a big crowd.
Click to expand...

danarhea said:
I have often called Israel's tactics heavy-handed and needless, but in this instance, I have to side with Israel.

1) All Israel was demanding was that the shipments to Gaza be inspected. In the past, shipments have been diverted to Israel, which inspected them to make sure there were no weapons, then the shipments were sent into Gaza. Some shipments have been held up, but that is because weapons were found in them.

2) Also, when Israel boarded the main ship, their soldiers were immediately attacked, and the soldiers responded. This is what accounts for the deaths and injuries.

Let us not forget that the Palestinians have never recognized Israel's right to exist, and have never stopped planning and carrying out attacks on Israel. That does give Israel the right to inspect shipments in order to make sure that they consist of humanitarian supplies, and that no weapons are hidden among them. IMHO, that is not too much to ask for.
Click to expand...

Apocalypse said:
I believe your video shows those peaceful activists lynching soldiers and attacking them with crowbars?
Besides, do you seriously believe the soldiers have shot themselves?
Click to expand...

ido_ said:
There was at least one assult rifle firing on the soldiers, 2 pistols were grabed from the soldiers and used against them as well. The first soldier who slide down the rope was jumped by 4-6 people and thrown over the bar to the bottom deck, their own footage clearly shows people with crawbars preforming a lynch in a soldier, the UAV footage shows a molotov cocktail thrown on the soldiers, two soldiers are suffering from gunshot wounds, two from fructured skull. Those weren't harmless peace activists
Click to expand...

Do you agree that it was in international waters?

If the answer is yes, then Israel is the agressor since they didn't have the right to board the ships, while the ships (which would probably have broken the blockade later) had not done anything illegal before being boarded.
 
PeteEU said:
Not true. Building material has been limited big time into the Gaza strip as well as many other things. Dont believe everything you hear on US news and from the IDF, it is usually far from the truth, just as the information from Al Jazerra (in Arabic) and other Arabic news outlets are highly biased.



Of course, pirates were attacking the ship.. they have a right to defend themselves. Or dont you accept this just because they are Palestinian supporters? Does that mean you also oppose companies and countries defending themselves off the coast of Somalia? Or else where around the world where pirates attack ships in international waters or even in non-international waters?



They have long ago. Hamas is another thing, but the PLO accepted Israel's right to exist long ago.... 1988 I believe. This was done when the Palestinians accepted a two state solution.



And Israel continues to build new settlements, steal land and cut off Palestinians in the west bank with large walls and security fences. On top of that there is nothing done about the radical settlers that attack and beat up Palestinians on a daily basis and of course the racist attitudes of the IDF in the West Bank.

Both sides are at fault.. that is a fact.



The hell it does. Isreal has NO bloody right to inspect shipments in international waters.. sure if the boats were in Israeli waters then that is their right, but they were not as far as I know and what has been reported. Not even the US under freaking Bush boarded suspected weapons ships in international waters for god sake.
Click to expand...
Israel has done nothing illegal there.
There is nothing that forbids Israeli from inspecting ships on international waters when they declare that they intend to break the blockade and supply Gaza with uninspected materials.
Not to mention that soldiers have every right to respond with live fire when they're being engaged with live fire, they weren't even equipped for a live-ammunition battle, their pistols were the only thing available and they were told to use it only at the risk of life.

One of the soldiers who was lynched by 6-8 of them has nearly lost his life before he has managed to pull out his pistol while on the ground and shoot the legs of those who were beating him with crowbars, it was insane.
 
PeteEU said:
The hell it does. Isreal has NO bloody right to inspect shipments in international waters.. sure if the boats were in Israeli waters then that is their right, but they were not as far as I know and what has been reported. Not even the US under freaking Bush boarded suspected weapons ships in international waters for god sake.
Click to expand...
You should brush up on maritime law and immunity from boarding. Try post #58.

The US Navy frequently boards ships in international waters inspecting for illicit drugs, counterfeit commercial goods, black-market weapons, nuclear proliferation materials, and human cargo (slave ships).
 
Apocalypse said:
Israel has done nothing illegal there.
There is nothing that forbids Israeli from inspecting ships on international waters when they declare that they intend to break the blockade and supply Gaza with uninspected materials.
Not to mention that soldiers have every right to respond with live fire when they're being engaged with live fire, they weren't even equipped for a live-ammunition battle, their pistols were the only thing available and they were told to use it only at the risk of life.

One of the soldiers who was lynched by 6-8 of them has nearly lost his life before he has managed to pull out his pistol while on the ground and shoot the legs of those who were beating him with crowbars, it was insane.
Click to expand...

According to the witnesses on the ship itself, Israel came out shooting the moment they landed, and that the people on the ship were just defending themselves.

And from the video that Israel itself released there was no visible gunfire coming from the ship to the soldiers. You can't come to conclusions till we first find out who is telling the truth.
 
Last edited:
bub said:
Do you agree that it was in international waters?

If the answer is yes, then Israel is the agressor since they didn't have the right to board the ships, while the ships (which would probably have broken the blockade later) had not done anything illegal before being boarded.
Click to expand...

Israel can and does board ships on international water and it's completely legitimate if they do not cooperate and their declared and practical direction is Gaza.
There's no law that prevents Israel from doing so and the US does that all the time as Tashah pointed out earlier(And Donsutherland before her)
 
ScottD said:
According to the witnesses on the ship itself, Israel came out shooting the moment they landed, and that the people on the ship were just defending themselves.

And from the video that Israel itself released there was no visible gunfire coming from the ship to the soldiers. You can't come to conclusions till we first find out who is telling the truth.
Click to expand...

There are enough videos to contradict that, so I can't see where your point is.

And the video clearly shows them throwing molotovs and lynching soldiers before anyone has opened fire.
 
Last edited:
ScottD said:
According to the witnesses on the ship itself, Israel came out shooting the moment they landed, and that the people on the ship were just defending themselves.

And from the video that Israel itself released there was no visible gunfire coming from the ship to the soldiers. You can't come to conclusions till we first find out who is telling the truth.
Click to expand...

Can we trust the crew on the boat who attacked and lynched Israeli soldiers? I heard on news radio that the IDF originally were armed with paintballs. It doesn't matter if the crew had guns, the fact is that they became aggressive and attacked the Israeli soldiers first, and thus the soldiers had to retaliate.

Edit: Apoc beat me to it ;)
 
digsbe said:
Can we trust the crew on the boat who attacked and lynched Israeli soldiers? I heard on news radio that the IDF originally were armed with paintballs. It doesn't matter if the crew had guns, the fact is that they became aggressive and attacked the Israeli soldiers first, and thus the soldiers had to retaliate.
Click to expand...


Because they were attacked first, and what a shock that people would defend themselves when pirates attack their ship in international waters. They have no rights too attack a another country ship in international waters, so this would mean it was pirates killing civilians who fought back in self defense.
 
Last edited:
digsbe said:
Can we trust the crew on the boat who attacked and lynched Israeli soldiers? I heard on news radio that the IDF originally were armed with paintballs. It doesn't matter if the crew had guns, the fact is that they became aggressive and attacked the Israeli soldiers first, and thus the soldiers had to retaliate.

Edit: Apoc beat me to it ;)
Click to expand...

We are talking about post-dramatic eye witness accounts here. There is no hard evidence on who attacked who first.
 
RyrineaHaruno said:
Because they attacked to defend themselves
Click to expand...
Reports show that the crew were the ones to attack first. I highly doubt that the IDF would land a shoot up a ship simply because they felt like killing people.

ScottD said:
We are talking about post-dramatic eye witness accounts here. There is no hard evidence on who attacked who first.
Click to expand...
There is video evidence and IDF reports that say that the crew became aggressive first and that initially the IDF were armed with non lethal ammunition.
 
ScottD said:
We are talking about post-dramatic eye witness accounts here. There is no hard evidence on who attacked who first.
Click to expand...

Do you really believe that the crew of an "aid flotila" would have managed to injure 10 ****ing commandos if they've had the intent to attack the crew?
Do you realize that if there was such an intent the chopper would be going bzzt and after two or three minutes according to wikipedia the entire ship would drop dead?
 
Tashah said:
No official statements from the Israeli government or Navy yet.

Israeli media are reporting that the convoy was instructed by radio to either return to Cyprus or head for the port city of Ashdod where humanitarian supplies would be off-loaded and then transfered to Gaza.

It seems that when neither directive was followed, Israeli helicopter-borne commandos boarded the convoy flagship. Apparently, activists then engaged them with lethal force and the commandos responded with lethal force.

No firm report on fatalities. It is reported that seven wounded (one critical) have been flown to a hospital in Haifa, but is is unknown at this time if these casualties are commandos or activists.

An ugly situation indeed :(
Click to expand...

I believe the salient point about this is were the Ships in International Waters at the time this incident took place.

If in fact they were in International Waters then what this incident amounts to is an act of PIRACY.

Obviously if the above is true then Israel have shot themselves in their ass, because no nation anywhere in the world can do other than condemn this unlawful action.
 
Update: 9 dead, not 15.
 
jujuman13 said:
I believe the salient point about this is were the Ships in International Waters at the time this incident took place.

If in fact they were in International Waters then what this incident amounts to is an act of PIRACY.

Obviously if the above is true then Israel have shot themselves in their ass, because no nation anywhere in the world can do other than condemn this unlawful action.
Click to expand...

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
 
jujuman13 said:
I believe the salient point about this is were the Ships in International Waters at the time this incident took place. If in fact they were in International Waters then what this incident amounts to is an act of PIRACY.
Click to expand...
I suggest you read up on International Maritime Law (immunity from boarding) and the San Remo Conference (running a blockade).
 
Posted by donaldsutherland1 (The following ships enjoy immunity in international waters: (1) warships (article 95) and (2) Ships owned or operated by a State and used only on government non-commercial service (article 96). Of course, if the warship is used for purposes of piracy, it is no longer immune (article 102). All other ships can be "visited." (article 110)

The flotilla was not comprised of warships nor ships owned/operated by a state government used only on government non-commercial service. It was not immune from boarding.)

So according to this argument the Pirates operating from Somalia are entitled to board any privately owned vessel and take control of it?
 
I take your point TASHAH.
Whether the remainder of the world does the same is doubtful.
I still say Israel has shot themselves.
 
jujuman13 said:
Posted by donaldsutherland1 (The following ships enjoy immunity in international waters: (1) warships (article 95) and (2) Ships owned or operated by a State and used only on government non-commercial service (article 96). Of course, if the warship is used for purposes of piracy, it is no longer immune (article 102). All other ships can be "visited." (article 110)

The flotilla was not comprised of warships nor ships owned/operated by a state government used only on government non-commercial service. It was not immune from boarding.)

So according to this argument the Pirates operating from Somalia are entitled to board any privately owned vessel and take control of it?
Click to expand...

do you not see the difference between a state stopping a flotilla from breaching a blockade and simple piracy?
 
jujuman13 said:
Posted by donaldsutherland1 (The following ships enjoy immunity in international waters: (1) warships (article 95) and (2) Ships owned or operated by a State and used only on government non-commercial service (article 96). Of course, if the warship is used for purposes of piracy, it is no longer immune (article 102). All other ships can be "visited." (article 110)

The flotilla was not comprised of warships nor ships owned/operated by a state government used only on government non-commercial service. It was not immune from boarding.)

So according to this argument the Pirates operating from Somalia are entitled to board any privately owned vessel and take control of it?
Click to expand...
Let me play Devil's advocate here. A while back, North Korea had sent "supplies" on a ship (not a warship, and not owned by a state government) to Iran, with a cargo that was ostensibly "construction materials", and supposedly not weapons. The US boarded it in international waters, and confiscated what turned out to be nuclear technology. Did the United States break international law?

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.
 
FinnMacCool said:
That's their justification for killing 16 unarmed civillians in international waters?!?! BS
Click to expand...

Israel found that the ships were carrying automatic weapons and explosives. What kind of aid did these ships plan to deliver? Doesn't sound like humanitarian aid to me. More like aid in the form of more terrorism, directed at Gaza. These commandoes were attacked with more than just knives and axes.
 
jujuman13 said:
So according to this argument the Pirates operating from Somalia are entitled to board any privately owned vessel and take control of it?
Click to expand...
Your analogy is erroneous. Pirates are non-state actors who intend to hijack a commercial ship for ransom (ship/cargo/crew).
 
Tashah said:
The Israeli Navy has boarded many ships before without incident or violence. There were no problems on any of the other five ships in this flotilla. It seems that mild protest was indeed anticipated... and the boarding party was equipped for such a contingency.

Unanticipated... was the prospect of deadly violence from self-proclaimed "peace activists".

When you start shooting at commandos, I guarantee that bad things are gonna happen.
Click to expand...

I'll agree with you, twice. The commanders knew full well what could happen.

Paul
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom