Israel intercepts Gaza flotilla, says Hamas

Agent Ferris · Jun 6, 2010

Khayembii Communique said:
Self defense against lethal force has always been an acceptable contingency of non-violent resistance.

I completely agree the IDF was perfectly justified in replying to the lethal force initiated by the jihadists on the flotilla.

Agent Ferris · Jun 6, 2010

Andalublue said:
What's obscene is the denial of passage of building materials to allow the Gazans to rebuild their homes. Proof positive that the Israelis are clearly anti-cementic*!

Well considering that the concrete would be used to build tunnels for arms smuggeling or to build bunkers I see nothing obscene about it. If they wanted building materials for housing they should have asked for pre-fab aluminum houses like what the Katrina victims got.

pragmatic · Jun 6, 2010

kaya'08 said:
Taking advantage of the situation!

If the story materializes into reality, the US will not have the option of remaining spectators. Would/will be interesting to see how the Obama administration reacts.....

.

Agent Ferris · Jun 6, 2010

Cassandra said:
Well, my husband is a seaman. If the commandos did not follow peaceful procedures, by definition the boarding was not peaceful. The Turks on board the ship were not peaceful either but they were behaving violently defensive. To suggest that the armed, trained Commandos were innocent victims is illogical. The only question is how the Mossad or the I.D.F. could be so incompetent/unprepared- dropping these Commandos one by one in a hostile environment and expectthere would be no bloodshed?!

The IDF had every right to board the ship to inspect it for weapons, Israel exhausted every peaceful avenue open short of letting them break the blockade. The Israelis offered to allow the ship to be inspected in an Israeli port from where the goods would then be transferred to Gaza, this offer was rejected since this was never about humanitarian aid.

deltabtry · Jun 6, 2010

Cole said:
The plot thickens.....

"In another development on Sunday, a senior Iranian military figure said the country's elite Revolutionary Guards were ready to escort aid flotillas to Gaza if ordered to by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

"The Revolutionary Guards' naval forces are fully prepared to escort freedom and peace flotillas carrying humanitarian aid from all over the world to the oppressed people of Gaza," Ali Shirazi, Ayatollah Khamenei's naval representative, told Mehr news agency."

BBC News - Israel 'to reject international ship raid inquiry'

.

Not a good idea on Iran's behalf, it appears that the Iranian leadership is pushing for a all out war. Then again perhaps it would be a good idea, it would give the Israelis the excuse to finally rid themselves of this threat. Although that said it would have to involve the U.S. and currently we have the wrong leadership presently. Iran would have a hard time convincing the world that it is not trying to incite a war in the gulf(that would be reasonable thinking people), although I believe would get sympathy from the U.N. and the usual suspects. That said, Iran really doesn't have a dog in this fight and inciting a war and eventually involving the U.S. would then eventually involve NATO. These are perilous times and we just might find ourselves in a world war. I think some one by the name of Nostradamus predicted this, strange I really never took his predictions seriously but, I think I am beginning to. I think the world better wise up and take the blinders off and realize why this conflict goes on and on, and who is continually pulling the strings and are unwilling to sit down and discuss peace.

Agent Ferris · Jun 6, 2010

RyrineaHaruno said:
Nope he is an lie, since an American was killed in the raid who had been killed trying to run away, since he was shot in the back...

Rachel Corrie was also an American, and this girl right here was also an American....

Rachel Corrie was a Jihadist supporter who was working with the Jihadist affiliated ISM and was attempting to interfere with an IDF bulldozer clearing explosives at the time. Tristan Anderson from your 2nd article was likewise working with the jihadist affiliated ISM and the Turkish-American citizen on the flotilla was working with the jihadist affiliated IHH.

deltabtry · Jun 6, 2010

kaya'08 said:
Rightfully so. But we will always be having people on one side saying "terrorists" and on the other saying "aid activists". I for one know that the insan vakfi thing is not a jihadist organization and is not extremist. But as i said, mistakes where made from both sides on that flotilla. Things will blow over eventually, America just needs to apply pressure to the governments of both Israel and Turkey to avoid this ongoing crisis which is battering our friendship.

Now this makes sense to me and you couldn't be more on the money but, the U.S. has the wrong leadership inplace, our current leadership experience really doesn't go past the Chicago city limits.

StevenA59 · Jun 6, 2010

deltabtry said:
Not a good idea on Iran's behalf, it appears that the Iranian leadership is pushing for a all out war. Then again perhaps it would be a good idea, it would give the Israelis the excuse to finally rid themselves of this threat.

I would say Iran continues to position itself as leader of the Arab world. Its resistance to the West earns it that title. I doubt Iran would risk all-out war. Rather they will continue to fund and arm terrorist nations like Hamas and Hezbollah to do their dirty work. At some point, hopefully sooner not later, Israel and the U.S. will need to clean house. Terrorism has reached the shores of the U.S. and it isn't going away.

deltabtry · Jun 6, 2010

StevenA59 said:
I would say Iran continues to position itself as leader of the Arab world. Its resistance to the West earns it that title. I doubt Iran would risk all-out war. Rather they will continue to fund and arm terrorist nations like Hamas and Hezbollah to do their dirty work. At some point, hopefully sooner not later, Israel and the U.S. will need to clean house. Terrorism has reached the shores of the U.S. and it isn't going away.

I agree but you really have to wonder what a country which has put it's self back 500 years in terms of is political ideals, and which is currently holding advancing it desire to possess 21 century weapons. Didn't get the last sentence thought about Israel, it appears it was cut off.

deltabtry · Jun 6, 2010

Cole said:
If the story materializes into reality, the US will not have the option of remaining spectators. Would/will be interesting to see how the Obama administration reacts.....

.

The Obama administration will dither as it always does, this administration foreign policy is a very weak one and probably the reason why we are witnessing these current events in the Middle East. Obama has already profiled himself amongst the leaderships in the M.E. has weak and inexperienced IMO.

Infinite Chaos · Jun 6, 2010

Agent Ferris said:
I completely agree the IDF was perfectly justified in replying to the lethal force initiated by the jihadists on the flotilla.

Israel has successfully handled flotillas in the past without deaths on either side. This was a **** up and a huge PR boost to those who want the blockade brought down.

Agent Ferris said:
Well considering that the concrete would be used to build tunnels for arms smuggeling or to build bunkers I see nothing obscene about it. If they wanted building materials for housing they should have asked for pre-fab aluminum houses like what the Katrina victims got.

I believe pre-fab houses have been refused in the past. There were many posters earlier in this thread saying they should have just complied and handed the aid over to Israel - however Israel has a ban on many items and Hamas controls or steals or destroys much else that gets through.

There was no easy out for the aid flotilla. Certainly, having some protestors who wanted to cause trouble didn't help either but in a strange way, their deaths have really brought the position of the blockade to the world's attention. Israel has allowed other blockades through and nobody noticed or cared. It took violent protestors and poor planning by the IDF to change all that.

Apocalypse said:
Irrelavent.

Your opinion does not sway me I'm afraid. You want me to take your subjective opinion over that of an international agency because...?

Apocalypse said:
Point is that the UN is not referring to Gazan government(Hamas) imported goods but to the tons of humanitarian aid inserted by the UN.

There are no industries in Gaza, very few people have any money (courtesy of Hamas and Israel) to buy things with so 80% have to rely on UN aid. (The same UN aid you've repeatedly tried to say is more than enough)

And if you bothered to read the BBC Q & A on Gaza (posted yet again here0 you'll see it's not just food that's blockaded but electricity, fuel, sewage out etc.

Apocalypse said:
I don't think that there was such a need to begin with in Gaza for the huge amount of humanitarian aid (60,000 tons per week), but that simply means that it's not about what Gazans can afford but about how much does the UN push into the strip.

Firstly it's 15,000 tons (BBC) not 60,000 and I find your argument just as weak as your denial of Gisha's points against the blockade. Wholly subjective.

Apocalypse said:
Absolutely false.

Yes, the BBC and other agencies that have reported this must be posting falsehoods too... Your personal subjective opinion is backed only by the Israeli Govt. Moderate Israeli groups (including human rights groups say different)

Apocalypse said:
1) What Hamas brings through the tunnels is nothing in comparison to what it'd bring into the Strip if there was no blockade on it.

If you bothered to read my posts on this subject, I've already explained that Hamas has no interest in bringing in Aid. It doesn't serve their purpose. You yourself posted the link once Hamas refused entry to the Aid that the flotilla brought in. I don't know why I have to explain this.

You only seem to believe Israeli and Israeli Govt sources – here's Ron Prosor writing in 2008 for the Guardian about how Hamas abuses the Gazan people and prevents aid getting through by attacking the storage depots and people trying to deliver aid. (Ron Prosor is the Israeli Ambassador to the UK.

Israel last Saturday permitted two boats of protesters to land on the shores of Gaza. This disappointed the more aggressive agitators in the party, as they hankered for a confrontation with the Israeli navy that never came. Yvonne Ridley, on board making a documentary for an Iranian state-funded broadcaster, must have been particularly frustrated.

--snip--

Hamas's enslavement of Gaza continues, as does the silent complicity of the protesters.
Observers should be wary. The portrayal of Israel as pantomime villain and as sole cause of conflict in the Middle East is jeopardising the search for real solutions to complex problems. Sections of liberal society risk sleepwalking into the service of those who represent the antithesis of liberal values, namely Iran, Hizbullah and Hamas.
In Gaza, Hamas has ruthlessly crushed its rivals, stifling criticism and ransacking its opponents. Hamas seized power in a bloody coup d'etat in June last year, during which its Fatah rivals were brutalised and murdered, a fact evocatively illustrated by the sight of a Palestinian Authority official being hurled from a fifth-floor window.

Apocalypse said:
2) Hamas cannot get into and outside of Israel through the tunnels, they are connected to Egypt not to Israel, hence your point is invalid.

If I had made such a stupid and fundamental geographical error, I would agree with you. As I did not – you are either deflecting or only half reading what I say for whatever purpose suits your argument.

Apocalypse said:
Although we can guess that the amount is about 60,000 tons per week, since that's the UN definition of "what's needed". (X4 Israeli aid amount)

Apocalypse said:
Exactly which report that I have apparently posted are you referring to, and what is your point?

Your post – you find it. Not my job, however I read it as I read most if not all the links given against my position.

Apocalypse said:
Hamas members cannot get into Israel through the tunnels. Please strengthten your knowledge about the Gazan tunnels.

You're way more intelligent than that. If you haven't read my posts properly just say so and I won't bother discussing with you if you intend to make false claims rather than discuss the subject.

Apocalypse said:
Hamas has launched way more rockets before the blockade than it did before.
Hamas' rockets capabilities are not gone, but they were dramatically decreased.

That doesn't negate my point. The blockade has not stopped the rocket launches – besides which, the rocket launches are more of a psychological weapon than a real weapon. The current blockade is simply an extension of the one started after the Second Intifada of 2000-2001. In 10 years that some form of blockade or restriction has been in place – it hasn't stopped weapons being fired at Israel.

Apocalypse said:
I didn't make an analogy chaos, I gave an example of another militant organization doing the same thing Hamas does. (Stealing goods and then selling them to the population)

Noted, however that is not reason enough to stop imports of essential goods and food. Anyhow – I'm really certain Israel cares so much about ordinary Gazans that they'd rather see them starve on the absolute minimum than see them exploited by Hamas...

Apocalypse said:
It's the major source of income for Hamas and cutting it is a devestating blow to the terror financing in the Gaza Strip.

Weak argument, compared to the money that Iran must be prepared to send?

Apocalypse said:
Is there another specific point made by them that you'd like me to counter?

You've already misread or half read my previous posts if you think I'm convinced the Gaza tunnels are from Israel into Gaza, you've not remembered your own posts and links, you've half read the Gisha link obviously – why should I spell things out any further for you?

Apocalypse said:
Again, what link?

Sorry, your own link – not my job to check back on what you say or post.

Apocalypse said:
Necessities are allowed in.
The fact that Israel calculates the required calories proves that it takes care to prevent a humanitarian crisis in the strip.

I have that Déjà vu feeling regarding giving you links.... the calorific assessment is for the bare minimum above starvation. It's in all the BBC posts on the blockade that I and others have posted. That same assessment is on many other neutral sites like Reuters etc.

deltabtry said:
The Obama administration will dither as it always does, this administration foreign policy is a very weak one and probably the reason why we are witnessing these current events in the Middle East. Obama has already profiled himself amongst the leaderships in the M.E. has weak and inexperienced IMO.

NY Times Article Israel has done this to itself – Obama had nothing to do with the events last Monday.

WASHINGTON — Some topics are so inflammatory that they are never discussed without first inserting a number of caveats. And so, when Anthony Cordesman, a foreign policy dignitary in this town’s think tank circuit, dropped an article on Wednesday headlined*“Israel as a Strategic Liability,”*he made sure to open with a plethora of qualifications.
First, he noted, America’s commitment to Israel is motivated by morality and ethics — a reaction to the Holocaust, to Western anti-Semitism and to American foot-dragging before and during World War II that left European Jews slaughtered by the Nazis. Second, Israel is a democracy with the same values as the United States. Third, the United States will never abandon Israel, and will help it keep its military edge over its neighbors. And America will guard Israel against an Iranian nuclear threat.
But once Mr. Cordesman had dispensed with what in the newspaper world is called the “to-be-sure” paragraphs, he laid out a dispassionate argument that has gained increased traction in Washington — both inside the Obama administration (including the Pentagon, White House and State Department) and outside, during forums, policy breakfasts, even a seder in Bethesda. Recent Israeli governments, particularly the one led by Prime MinisterBenjamin Netanyahu, Mr. Cordesman argued, have ignored the national security concerns of its biggest benefactor, the United States, and instead have taken steps that damage American interests abroad.

StevenA59 · Jun 6, 2010

besides which, the rocket launches are more of a psychological weapon than a real weapon.

You were kind of making sense up until that statement. Terrorism is a psychological weapon.

I'm really certain Israel cares so much about ordinary Gazans that they'd rather see them starve on the absolute minimum than see them exploited by Hamas.

1) Gazans are not starving.
2) Israel trucks in 15 tons of supplies a day to the same people committed to Israel's destruction. Why?
3) Last time I checked, nobody eats cement.
4) If Gazans want peace, there's a simple and direct route: stop trying to kill Israelis.

Apocalypse · Jun 6, 2010

Infinite Chaos said:
Israel has successfully handled flotillas in the past without deaths on either side. This was a **** up and a huge PR boost to those who want the blockade brought down.

Not just that, Israel has also handled this flotila, by its majority, without any casualties.
5 out of those 6 ships have had no casualties at all on them, including no injuries.
The rachel corrie ship was suffering no wounded and no violence at all.
This strongly implies that the only reason for the deads was the violence from the merceneries group.

Your opinion does not sway me I'm afraid. You want me to take your subjective opinion over that of an international agency because...?

I've given the explanation for that right below this line, why did you feel the need to respond to it that way?

There are no industries in Gaza, very few people have any money (courtesy of Hamas and Israel) to buy things with so 80% have to rely on UN aid. (The same UN aid you've repeatedly tried to say is more than enough)

The 80% figure, provided by Amnesty, is implying that 80% of Gazans are depeneding on the aid instead of sponsoring themselves.
That does not mean that they aren't capable of sponsoring themselves.

And if you bothered to read the BBC Q & A on Gaza (posted yet again here0 you'll see it's not just food that's blockaded but electricity, fuel, sewage out etc.

Electricity is still being provided.
Your article states that "Gaza's electricity supply is made up of 144MW from Israel, 17MW from Egypt and the rest from an EU-run power plant in Gaza which can generate up to 80MW. ".
You're constantly getting the facts wrong.

Firstly it's 15,000 tons (BBC) not 60,000 and I find your argument just as weak as your denial of Gisha's points against the blockade. Wholly subjective.

Are you acting dumb?
15,000 is what Israel provides now, since I was referring to what Gaza was supplied with before the blockade, and since your precious UN claims that what Israel provides is a quarter of what Gaza was provided with, it is safe to assume that the estimated amount would be 60,000 tons.

If I were you, I'd start questioning my own opinions, seeing how many times you keep getting the facts wrong.
You claim my arguments to be weak and that seems to be making the whole of your counter-arguments.
It's pathetic.

Yes, the BBC and other agencies that have reported this must be posting falsehoods too... Your personal subjective opinion is backed only by the Israeli Govt. Moderate Israeli groups (including human rights groups say different)

Frankly IT it is your subjective opinion that is backed only by the radical left.

If you bothered to read my posts on this subject, I've already explained that Hamas has no interest in bringing in Aid.

I didn't suggest that's what you've said, take your own advice and read my posts before responding.

It doesn't serve their purpose. You yourself posted the link once Hamas refused entry to the Aid that the flotilla brought in. I don't know why I have to explain this.

I don't know why you think that you have to explain this.
I have never claimed anything that could be mistaken by a functioning human mind as the statement that you accuse me of making.

If I had made such a stupid and fundamental geographical error, I would agree with you. As I did not – you are either deflecting or only half reading what I say for whatever purpose suits your argument.

Quite dishonest there.
You have been making the ridiculous claim that Hamas is still able to enter Israel freely, using the tunnels.
No tunnels are connecting between Israel and the Gaza Strip, hence your statement is exposed as false.

Your post – you find it. Not my job, however I read it as I read most if not all the links given against my position.

You are accusing me of posting a report, and when I'm saying that I don't know what report you're talking about you're telling me to go and look for it?
How am I supposed to find a report that I can't recall posting?
Clearly even you can see how illogical that request is?
Am I to prove the existence that which I claim is non-existent?

You're way more intelligent than that. If you haven't read my posts properly just say so and I won't bother discussing with you if you intend to make false claims rather than discuss the subject.

I've read your posts in their entireness, I didn't waste those useful minutes from my life reading those comments just so you'd tell me I haven't, because you refuse to see the sense in my arguments.

That doesn't negate my point. The blockade has not stopped the rocket launches

The blockade has never hoped to entirely stop the rocket launchers, but by trying its best it dramatically decreases their amount.

besides which, the rocket launches are more of a psychological weapon than a real weapon.

Tell that to the dozens who've died from them.
A rocket like that filled with nails and metal shards falling 25 meters away from you and your brain is most likely to be all over the place.
The only reason why there are no high casualties is because of the billions of money Israel has invested in security from rockets.
Shelters and sound alarms drop the chances of getting killed by hundreds of percents.

I think this claim, that the rockets are merely psychological weapons and not killing weapons, implies you are already brainwashed by the European media and cannot be reasoned with.
You've taken to a belief that the rockets can't kill anyone, merely because they don't kill many.
A nuke is a weapon that could kill millions of people, shoot it down while it's not endangering anyone, and it will cause no casualties at all.
Does that mean that a nuke is not a real weapon? Abso-****ing-lutely not.

The current blockade is simply an extension of the one started after the Second Intifada of 2000-2001. In 10 years that some form of blockade or restriction has been in place – it hasn't stopped weapons being fired at Israel.

The current blockade has begun in 2005, has became an actual blockade in 2006, and has became a full blockade in 2007.
It is one of the biggest security promoters for the Israeli state and its citizens.

Noted, however that is not reason enough to stop imports of essential goods and food. Anyhow – I'm really certain Israel cares so much about ordinary Gazans that they'd rather see them starve on the absolute minimum than see them exploited by Hamas...

It's most likely to be Israel not wishing to see Hamas getting money that it would use later for the development of rockets and the building of bunkers and tunnels.

Weak argument, compared to the money that Iran must be prepared to send?

Yours is the weak counter-argument my kind sir. These actions make the majority of the income amongst militants from all around the world, not donors.

You've already misread or half read my previous posts

I care not about your delusional statements.

If you think I'm convinced the Gaza tunnels are from Israel into Gaza

No, but I think you are convinced that Hamas militants can enter Israel through tunnels, which is pretty much the same statement is it not?

you've not remembered your own posts and links

You've given no basis to that statement, making it a baseless conclusion.

you've half read the Gisha link obviously

I've replied to the majority of their claims.

why should I spell things out any further for you?

Why should you believe you are spelling out anything for anyone?

Sorry, your own link – not my job to check back on what you say or post.

You can't just say "I think you're the one who posted that document" and then make it a fact that I've posted that document.
I denie posting it, point towards the document if you may and I will offer my apology, else I'd have to simply ignore these ridiculous claims.

I have that Déjà vu feeling regarding giving you links.... the calorific assessment is for the bare minimum above starvation. It's in all the BBC posts on the blockade that I and others have posted. That same assessment is on many other neutral sites like Reuters etc.

Neutral sites such as Reuters that completely neglect your claim that the flotila raid was done in violation of international law, if we're already at it:

WHAT ARE INTERNATIONAL WATERS?

Under the U.N. Convention of the Law of the Sea a coastal state has a "territorial sea" of 12 nautical miles from the coast over which it is sovereign. Ships of other states are allowed "innocent passage" through such waters.

There is a further 12 nautical mile zone called the "contiguous zone" over which a state may take action to protect itself or its laws.

"However, strictly beyond the 12 nautical miles limit the seas are the "high seas" or international waters," Roche said.

The Israeli navy said on Monday the Gaza bound flotilla was intercepted 120 km (75 miles) west of Israel. The Turkish captain of one of the vessels told an Istanbul news conference after returning home from Israeli detention they were 68 miles outside Israeli territorial waters.

Under the law of a blockade, intercepting a vessel could apply globally so long as a ship is bound for a "belligerent" territory, legal experts say.

CAN ISRAEL USE FORCE WHEN INTERCEPTING SHIPS?

Under international law it can use force when boarding a ship.

"If force is disproportionate it would be a violation of the key tenets of the use of force," said Commander James Kraska, professor of international law at the U.S. Naval War College.

Israeli authorities said marines who boarded the Turkish vessel Mavi Marmara opened fire in self-defense after activists clubbed and stabbed them and snatched some of their weapons.

Legal experts say proportional force does not mean that guns cannot be used by forces when being attacked with knives.

"But there has got to be a relationship between the threat and response," Kraska said.

The use of force may also have other repercussions.

"While the full facts need to emerge from a credible and transparent investigation, from what is known now, it appears that Israel acted within its legal rights," said J. Peter Pham, a strategic adviser to U.S. and European governments.

"However, not every operation that the law permits is necessarily prudent from the strategic point of view."

Q&A: Is Israel's naval blockade of Gaza legal? | Reuters

deltabtry · Jun 6, 2010

First, he noted, America’s commitment to Israel is motivated by morality and ethics — a reaction to the Holocaust, to Western anti-Semitism and to American foot-dragging before and during World War II that left European Jews slaughtered by the Nazis.

Taking a sentence out of the quote you posted from the NYT, I can hardly give any credibailty to the NYT in this regard. The NYT owner before and during WW2 was Jewish yet news accounts and photo's of the Holocaust never made the A section of the NYT until 1944, not to mention how the NYT had treated our current conflicts in such a regard that it could be called treasonous. That said, I suppose it depends on which side one wished to promote and it's clear where the NYT stands although from time to time the NYT will release a excellent oped piece but this is rare indeed. I think it is as plain as the nose on my face that Obama is clearly inexperienced, what I don't understand is why Obama keeps appointing this radicals in high positions when there are much more experienced politicians in such matters. What I see here is a President who wishes to appease our adversaries in the hopes they will come along to our way of thinking. this isn't going to happen, I believe President Carter already tried this.
Now the second Paragraph I can believe but, one must ask why Natenyahu has taken this path, the world does show a double standard and how can this region resolves it issues when those in charge at the U.N are bigger violators than Israel could ever be. I think the world community are the ones guilty of seeing this conflict in a perpetual state of war without ending. If the U.N., NATO, Russia, China and the world community and all it allies had the gumption to end this conflict it could be achieved in short order, so why hasn't it been achieved. Israel offered up to 90 percent of Arafat's demands yet he refused as well as his predecessors...why? Where is the U.N., perhaps if the U.N. did achieve peace in this region then it would be put out of business. I believe the U.N. has no interest in peace in this region, it to has it's own interest in mind, just look who sits on the councils.

Agent Ferris · Jun 6, 2010

Infinite Chaos said:
Israel has successfully handled flotillas in the past without deaths on either side. This was a **** up and a huge PR boost to those who want the blockade brought down.

Were the previous Flotillas owned and operated by Jihadist organizations whose crew was armed to the teeth and had dreams of becoming Shahid who attempted to murder the Israelis when they attempted to inspect the cargo?

deltabtry · Jun 6, 2010

StevenA59 said:
You were kind of making sense up until that statement. Terrorism is a psychological weapon.

1) Gazans are not starving.
2) Israel trucks in 15 tons of supplies a day to the same people committed to Israel's destruction. Why?
3) Last time I checked, nobody eats cement.
4) If Gazans want peace, there's a simple and direct route: stop trying to kill Israelis.

Well one thing for sure Gaza doesn't look like Mogadishu.

Agent Ferris · Jun 6, 2010

Infinite Chaos said:
That doesn't negate my point. The blockade has not stopped the rocket launches – besides which, the rocket launches are more of a psychological weapon than a real weapon.

That's bull****, Katusha rockets are packed with high explosives, if it were not for the advanced early detection mechanisms and the building code which mandates that at least one bomb shelter or fortified room be built into dwellings within range of Hamas rockets there would be thousands of Israeli's killed. But hey do you mind if I come into your neighborhood and fire off thousands of rockets packed with high explosives into it?

deltabtry · Jun 6, 2010

Agent Ferris said:
That's bull****, Katusha rockets are packed with high explosives, if it were not for the advanced early detection mechanisms and the building code which mandates that at least one bomb shelter or fortified room be built into dwellings within range of Hamas rockets there would be thousands of Israeli's killed. But hey do you mind if I come into your neighborhood and fire off thousands of rockets packed with high explosives into it?

Not to mention that blockades will not alleviate the the smuggling of weapons 100 percent, some still get through. Katusha rockets are relatively small compared to other munitions.

Infinite Chaos · Jun 6, 2010

Apocalypse said:
Not just that, Israel has also handled this flotila, by its majority, without any casualties.
5 out of those 6 ships have had no casualties at all on them, including no injuries.

Sorry, unless things have changed since the links were posted by myself and Alexa last week – there were reports of violence, beatings and electric shock on the other boats.

Apocalypse said:
The rachel corrie ship was suffering no wounded and no violence at all.
This strongly implies that the only reason for the deads was the violence from the merceneries group.

Yeah, and in a perverse way (as I said in my previous) that raised the blockade back into conciousness in a way that previous flotillas failed. Israel previously allowed other flotillas to get through and because they were peaceful – there was no international outrage.

Apocalypse said:
-- The 80% figure, provided by Amnesty, is implying that 80% of Gazans are depeneding on the aid instead of sponsoring themselves.
That does not mean that they aren't capable of sponsoring themselves.

And how do you prove this? Amnesty and the UN aren't just giving away the aid and sitting around in Gaza because they have nothing better to do?

Apocalypse said:
Electricity is still being provided.
Your article states that "Gaza's electricity supply is made up of 144MW from Israel, 17MW from Egypt and the rest from an EU-run power plant in Gaza which can generate up to 80MW. ".
You're constantly getting the facts wrong.

Hahahaha! Why do you quote one bit and then leave all the pertinent bits out?

Gaza's electricity supply is made up of 144MW from Israel, 17MW from Egypt and the rest from an EU-run power plant in Gaza which can generate up to 80MW.
The power plant's fuel is usually brought in through the main fuel entry point, the Nahal Oz crossing. The plant has shut down completely several times after running out of fuel because the crossing was closed. It was out of fuel for most of the Israeli operation in January 2009, leaving two-thirds of Gazans without power at the height of the crisis.
Since early 2008, the power plant has received enough fuel to operate at only about two-thirds of its capacity - in line with an Israeli Supreme Court ruling which set a minimum amount of fuel that Israel must allow into Gaza.
Figures monitored by international agencies show fuel deliveries dropped even below these minimums at several points in the first half of 2008.
In late 2009, the responsibility for funding the fuel was transferred from the EU to the Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority - since then the amount of fuel supplied has declined. In April and May 2010, fuel supply fluctuated, with the plant able to operate at between 20 and 50% of its capacity.
Power cuts remain frequent. Research by Oxfam in April 2010 showed houses across Gaza without power for 35-60 hours a week.

Apocalypse said:
Are you acting dumb?
15,000 is what Israel provides now, since I was referring to what Gaza was supplied with before the blockade, and since your precious UN claims that what Israel provides is a quarter of what Gaza was provided with, it is safe to assume that the estimated amount would be 60,000 tons.

You're trying to say Israel gives aid to Gaza? Source please! If you cannot prove it Ill await your apology and recognition it's you acting dumb.

Apocalypse said:
If I were you, I'd start questioning my own opinions, seeing how many times you keep getting the facts wrong.
You claim my arguments to be weak and that seems to be making the whole of your counter-arguments.
It's pathetic.

I'll agree it's all pathetic if you can prove as you claim that Israel actually gives aid to Gaza as opposed to what I've been saying which is “Israel allows in”.

Your facts will be an interesting read... and an acknowledgement of whose “facts” are “pathetic”

Apocalypse said:
-- I have never claimed anything that could be mistaken by a functioning human mind as the statement that you accuse me of making.

Um-hum...

Apocalypse said:
You have been making the ridiculous claim that Hamas is still able to enter Israel freely, using the tunnels.
No tunnels are connecting between Israel and the Gaza Strip, hence your statement is exposed as false.

No, I said “Gaza” and posted this link - Gaza tunnels and I remember making a comment about a cow being brought in. You later said something about a goat.

I do remember one post where I mistakenly said “Israel” but all my links are about the tunnels between Egypt and Gaza. You must be fixated on that one post and ignoring all the others.

Apocalypse said:
You are accusing me of posting a report, and when I'm saying that I don't know what report you're talking about you're telling me to go and look for it?
How am I supposed to find a report that I can't recall posting?
Clearly even you can see how illogical that request is?
Am I to prove the existence that which I claim is non-existent?

I'm moving on – I'm not searching back through 139 pages for you. There are bigger fish to fry.

Apocalypse said:
-- Tell that to the dozens who've died from them.
A rocket like that filled with nails and metal shards falling 25 meters away from you and your brain is most likely to be all over the place.
The only reason why there are no high casualties is because of the billions of money Israel has invested in security from rockets.
Shelters and sound alarms drop the chances of getting killed by hundreds of percents.

They're not guided rockets – they simply go up and then come back down. They're psychological in that nobody can tell where they will land – no even Hamas. As a rocket with a relatively small payload their effect is more psychological than actual. I agree dozens have died – but when you consider some 6-7000 plus have been launched – that's a poor return. And before anyone thinks I'm saying “if only Hamas had better rockets....”

Apocalypse said:
I think this claim, that the rockets are merely psychological weapons and not killing weapons, implies you are already brainwashed by the European media and cannot be reasoned with.
You've taken to a belief that the rockets can't kill anyone, merely because they don't kill many.
A nuke is a weapon that could kill millions of people, shoot it down while it's not endangering anyone, and it will cause no casualties at all.

Nice. A nuclear weapon usually (if we're talking US / Israeli / UK etc) has a guidance system that takes it to a predesignated target. I'm surprised I have to explain this.

Apocalypse said:
Does that mean that a nuke is not a real weapon? Abso-****ing-lutely not.

[/sigh]

Apocalypse said:
The current blockade has begun in 2005, has became an actual blockade in 2006, and has became a full blockade in 2007.

And is still an extension of economic and welfare blockades that began in 2001...

Apocalypse said:
-- I care not about your delusional statements.

We'll see what aid Israel gives to Gaza shall we?

Apocalypse said:
-- No, but I think you are convinced that Hamas militants can enter Israel through tunnels, which is pretty much the same statement is it not?

I wrote “Israel” in one post that I edited and forgot to change. If any of my links or other posts say the same thing, you're welcome to tar me with any brush you wish.

Apocalypse said:
-- I've replied to the majority of their claims.

Insufficiently I'm afraid. However, I'm not translating them for you – you were the one claiming you could rubbish everything they said in Israeli Supreme Court..

Apocalypse said:
-- Neutral sites such as Reuters that completely neglect your claim that the flotila raid was done in violation of international law, if we're already at it:
WHAT ARE INTERNATIONAL WATERS?

Good article however it's a report on the views of the law firm “Norton Rose” and by the partner Philip Roche. I've already posted a while ago a link to claims on both sides by international lawyers at different law firms and universities that it is undecided. This is one of those quoted in my earlier link.

StevenA59 said:
You were kind of making sense up until that statement. Terrorism is a psychological weapon.

That is what I meant - the terror of a weapon that could land anywhere vs the certainty of an accurate guided rocket (which thankfully Hamas have no access to.

StevenA59 said:
1)Gazans are not starving.
2) Israel trucks in 15 tons of supplies a day to the same people committed to Israel's destruction. Why?
3) Last time I checked, nobody eats cement.*
4) If Gazans want peace, there's a simple and direct route: stop trying to kill Israelis

1 – Not what the UN, savethe children, amnesty etc etc say...
2 – Israel ALLOWS in 15,000 tons because they have blockaded everything else. Why do they allow the bare minimum – well they already get away with collective punishment however even the US wouldn't allow Israel to starve 1.5million Palestinians to death.
3 – nobody said anyone eats cement....
4 – Hamas are trying to kill Israelis – not all of the 1.5 million. It would be a bit obvious even to you if 1.5million suddenly upped and tried to invade Israel bent on murder....

Agent Ferris said:
Were the previous Flotillas owned and operated by Jihadist organizations whose crew was armed to the teeth and had dreams of becoming Shahid who attempted to murder the Israelis when they attempted to inspect the cargo?

What has that got to do with what the Israeli Ambassador said?

Agent Ferris said:
That's bull****, Katusha rockets are packed with high explosives--

What use are high explosive rockets on an unguided weapon? Or let me put it another way – 6000+ rockets over how many years vs how many Israeli dead?

That's what I mean by “psychological” - the rockets could land anywhere – that's the terror.

Agent Ferris · Jun 6, 2010

Infinite Chaos said:
What has that got to do with what the Israeli Ambassador said?

It's got to do with what you said. This situation was completely different from previous humanitarian flotillas. This flotilla wanted a violent confrontation.

What use are high explosive rockets on an unguided weapon? Or let me put it another way – 6000+ rockets over how many years vs how many Israeli dead?

That's what I mean by “psychological” - the rockets could land anywhere – that's the terror.

This is not a psychological weapon the only reason why more Israelis aren't killed is because their homes have to have bomb shelters and they have a early warning mechanism, if they didn't tens of thousands would be killed, if these rockets were fired into the U.S. for or U.K. for example they would result in many many more casualties.

I believe pre-fab houses have been refused in the past. There were many posters earlier in this thread saying they should have just complied and handed the aid over to Israel - however Israel has a ban on many items and Hamas controls or steals or destroys much else that gets through.

The food stuffs would have made it in, the reason why concrete is banned is because Hamas uses it to create bunkers and tunnels for arms smuggeling. Israel is perfectly justified in not letting in the concrete.

There was no easy out for the aid flotilla. Certainly, having some protestors who wanted to cause trouble didn't help either but in a strange way, their deaths have really brought the position of the blockade to the world's attention. Israel has allowed other blockades through and nobody noticed or cared. It took violent protestors and poor planning by the IDF to change all that.

This wasn't just some of the protestors, 3 of the ships were owned and operated by the jihadist affiliated IHH.

Agent Ferris · Jun 6, 2010

Infinite Chaos said:
1 – Not what the UN, savethe children, amnesty etc etc say...

Palestinians are actually within the top 10 obese peoples in the world. They are not starving.

2 – Israel ALLOWS in 15,000 tons because they have blockaded everything else. Why do they allow the bare minimum – well they already get away with collective punishment however even the US wouldn't allow Israel to starve 1.5million Palestinians to death.

Israel allows merchant goods in as well and that is in addittion to the aid that is allowed through.

kaya'08 · Jun 6, 2010

Agent Ferris said:
Palestinians are actually within the top 10 obese peoples in the world. They are not starving.

There must be a lot of fat in the very little rations they receive then? You really cant use these arguments. Im just saying...plus, aren't computers not allowed into Gaza? How about chocolates? Chocolate is a human right.

Agent Ferris · Jun 6, 2010

kaya'08 said:
There must be a lot of fat in the very little rations they receive then? You really cant use these arguments. Im just saying...plus, aren't computers not allowed into Gaza? How about chocolates? Chocolate is a human right.

Palestinians have a higher Per Capita GDP than Jordan and Egypt and they receive more in international aid than any country on the planet.

kaya'08 · Jun 6, 2010

Agent Ferris said:
Palestinians have a higher Per Capita GDP than Jordan and Egypt and they receive more in international aid than any country on the planet.

And even then the absurd prices of basic commodities go beyond what most Palestinians can afford. Computers? Chocolates? Come on. Nobody wants to live like that.

Andalublue · Jun 6, 2010

kaya'08 said:
And even then the absurd prices of basic commodities go beyond what most Palestinians can afford. Computers? Chocolates? Come on. Nobody wants to live like that.

Kaya, you are debating with Grant/Picaro/Ferris. Are you expecting s/he is likely to accept your points?

Israel intercepts Gaza flotilla, says Hamas

Agent Ferris

Agent Ferris

pragmatic

"Pawn in game of life"

Agent Ferris

deltabtry

Agent Ferris

deltabtry

StevenA59

Member

deltabtry

deltabtry

Infinite Chaos

StevenA59

Member

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!

deltabtry

Agent Ferris

deltabtry

Agent Ferris

deltabtry

Infinite Chaos

Agent Ferris

Agent Ferris

kaya'08

Agent Ferris

kaya'08

Andalublue

Hello again!