# Israeli Navy Storms Palestinian Aid Flotilla



## Tleilaxu (May 30, 2010)

> By TIA GOLDENBERG, AP
> 50 minutes ago
> 
> HAIFA, Israel — Israeli warships attacked at least one of six ships carrying pro-Palestinian activists and aid for the blockaded Gaza Strip, killing at least two and wounding an unknown number of people on board, an Arabic satellite news channel and a Turkish TV network reported early Monday.
> ...




Most recent link...^^

I hope these hippies get what's coming to them if they violate orders, you do not try to break a blockade. Especially when the two nations are at WAR. Also who want to bet there are weapons in the ships? 

In before Hamas and Palistine supporters and all that extremist crap  Also in before Megaharrison epic pwnage.(Assuming he needs to waste his time here)


----------



## Psycho (May 30, 2010)

what's the problem with cement, bricks, pre-built homes and wheel chairs? what's with all the hate?


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 30, 2010)

Because the cement/bricks will be confiscated by Hamas and used for the war effort. Thats why.


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

Tleilaxu said:


> Because the cement/bricks will be confiscated by Hamas and used for the war effort. Thats why.



does that risk mean that more and more residents of gaza should be left homeless?


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

Anything to help encorage the Gazans to over throw their government which does not care for them is to be encoraged. The faster Hamas collapses the better the Palistinians will be.


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

Tleilaxu said:


> Anything to help encorage the Gazans to over throw their government which does not care for them is to be encoraged. The faster Hamas collapses the better the Palistinians will be.



when one side has the guns, the food, the power, the money and the housing, there's not much you can fight back with


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

That would be true but allowing these things into gaza will only strengthen Hamas and make Israel security unstable.


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

Tleilaxu said:


> That would be true but allowing these things into gaza will only strengthen Hamas and make Israel security unstable.



israeli life are worth just as much as palestinian life, blocking housing materials and supplies will only kill more and more palestinians indirectly


----------



## Ennoea (May 31, 2010)

> Palistine supporters and all that extremist crap



Its nice to see you made that link


> Also who want to bet there are weapons in the ships?



Unless you have evidence keep your nonesense to yourself.



> Because the cement/bricks will be confiscated by Hamas and used for the war effort. Thats why.



Israel has confiscated many a thing that I doubt would aid Hamas in its war efforts. Many were claimed to be witheld because they were "luxuries". 



> Anything to help encorage the Gazans to over throw their government which does not care for them is to be encoraged. The faster Hamas collapses the better the Palistinians will be.



If only it was that easy, what people fail to figure out Hamas is only a name to a radical movement, getting rid of Hamas won't change anything, its not as simple as if Hamas was destroyed everything would be fine and dandy. The pain and anguish of the Palestinians would only breed more cells that would loathe Israel and its state. Having said that a revolt is probably what we all hope for but won't materialise, peopel are trying hard to survive as it is. Who knows what the situation in gaza is like at this point?

I understand Israels predicament, but I will never suppourt their blockade.


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

Unfortunetly things have taken a turn for the worst.

Reports: Israeli ships attack aid flotilla, 2 dead


> HAIFA, Israel — Israeli warships attacked at least one of the six ships carrying pro-Palestinian activists and aid for blockaded Gaza, killing at least two and wounding an unknown number of people on board, an Arabic satellite service and a Turkish TV network reported early Monday.
> 
> The Israeli military denied that its forces attacked the boats but said they would enforce the decision to keep them away from Gaza.
> 
> ...



Well they got attacked, cant say they were not aware of the risks.



Most of the story is the same, this is just a snippet. 

Though Hamas claiming and crying about brutality is epic especially since they want Israel destroyed and only attack civilians, fight amoung them and hide weapons near them.


----------



## Ennoea (May 31, 2010)

Oh this is not going to end well, was it necessery to shoot at them with live bullets? We need credible info, I hope BBC report soon.


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

Tleilaxu said:


> Unfortunetly things have taken a turn for the worst.
> 
> Reports: Israeli ships attack aid flotilla, 2 dead
> 
> ...



they killed 2 in an aid boat, that is not acceptable under any circumstances other than "those 2 were armed"


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

Psycho said:


> what's the problem with cement, bricks, pre-built homes and wheel chairs? what's with all the hate?



Israel already let those types of materials in earlier as a sign of good faith for the indirect talks with the Palestinians.

Of course, Israel already offered to deliver these goods to Gaza.

There's also the fact that one aid group has some ties to terrorist groups.


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

It will be interesting to see if those boats were smuggling weapons as well, though it sucks that shots were fired, lets hope they were warned beforehand and this was a case of the boats playing chicken with the Israeli navy and losing.

BTW I asked a mod to edit the title and remove the thumbs up sign, its tasteless now that lives have been lost.


----------



## Ennoea (May 31, 2010)

> lets hope they were warned beforehand and this was a case of the boats playing chicken with the Israeli navy and losing.



I really hope the Navy werent stupid enough to fire on unarmed activists. If they were armed then those idiots had it coming.


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

Tleilaxu said:


> It will be interesting to see if those boats were smuggling weapons as well, though it sucks that shots were fired, lets hope they were warned beforehand and this was a case of the boats playing chicken with the Israeli navy and losing.



you make taking supplies and resources to a region in need sound like a attempt at trolling


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

Excuse me? Its not unheard of the smuggle weapons in with supposed humanitarian aid. The USA tried this with theand they paid for it.



> The fact that Lusitania had been carrying shells and cartridges was not made known to the British public at the time.


----------



## Megaharrison (May 31, 2010)

Ennoea said:


> I really hope the Navy werent stupid enough to fire on unarmed activists.



I've been watching the livestream of this thing as it unfolded. It was a melee as they boarded. On the primary ship's deck as IDF soldiers roped themselves down onto the ship via Helicopter, You see multiple activists armed with clubs/knives and physically fighting with the soldiers. Turkish TV has been replaying the videos of the battles over and over. However as of about 2 hours ago all videos have just been recycled, indicating the cameramen stopped broadcasting. 

2 Israel soldiers were also wounded in the battle.




Also injured activists are being transferred to Israeli hospitals, and apparently some tried to grab weapons away from soldiers:




What happened was the flotilla was "ambushed" in the night at a much further distance then the activists expected (90 miles instead of 20) and were surrounded by (from what I saw in the livestream) a Saar 5 Class Corvette, at least 2 Zodiac Class Commando Boats, a Zaharon Torpedo Boat, as well as Blackhawk and Eurocopter Panther helicopters. They ignored calls to turn around and all 6 ships were boarded simultaneously. According to Israel's Channel 10 all 6 ships are on their way to the Israeli port city of Ashdod.

More reading on this:


http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64T21820100531

Anyway I'm going to be busy for a bit so can't enjoy the shitstorm that's going to result here from this.


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

Well there we have it from credible sources the people were armed and indeed warned before being boarded.


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

Blockades are kind of ineffective if you don't enforce them. They've been warned, they got shot down, end of story.

Try the same shit from the Egyptian side of the Gaza border and see if they let you pass.


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

Tleilaxu said:


> Well there we have it from credible sources the people were armed and indeed warned before being boarded.



makeshift clubs and knives =/= fully automatic assault riffles


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

Psycho said:


> makeshift clubs and knives =/= fully automatic assault riffles



So the Israeli forces should not fire because they're being attacked and stabbed with melee weapons as opposed to guns?

EDIT: Not to mention trying to steal their automatic rifles?


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

There still armed and resisting, and anyone under 10 feet with a knife can be a deadly threat.


*Spoiler*: __ 





> HAIFA, Israel — Israeli warships attacked at least one of six ships carrying pro-Palestinian activists and aid for the blockaded Gaza Strip, killing at least two and wounding an unknown number of people on board, an Arabic satellite news channel and a Turkish TV network reported early Monday.
> 
> The Israeli military spokesman's office denied that its forces attacked the boats but said they would enforce the decision to keep them away from Gaza.
> 
> ...



Most recent link...


----------



## The Space Cowboy (May 31, 2010)

Oh the lulz.  Can't wait to see how this shitstorm will turn out.  They were warned weren't they?  Generally running blockades gets you shot at.


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

NanoHaxial said:


> So the Israeli forces should not fire because they're being attacked and stabbed with melee weapons as opposed to guns?
> 
> EDIT: Not to mention trying to steal their automatic rifles?



multiple teams of special ops trained in CQB can easily handle unorganized ship crew without shooting at them


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

Psycho said:


> multiple teams of special ops trained in CQB can easily handle unorganized ship crew without shooting at them



Because Israel only puts special ops on ordinary navy ships, amirite? 

Also they killed only two so they did handle them pretty well.


----------



## Elim Rawne (May 31, 2010)

Psycho said:


> multiple teams of special ops trained in CQB can easily handle unorganized ship crew without shooting at them



Yeah, they got special ops teams stationed right there anyway 
Besides, why should they put themselves in risk ?


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

Diceman said:


> Yeah, they got special ops teams stationed right there anyway
> Besides, why should they put themselves in risk ?



if it wasn't their job to put themselves at risk, they would just level the whole country and kill everyone that manages to survive

EDIT: that reminds me, if it wasn't a soldier's job to put themselves in risk, your country would've been destroyed by romans a couple thousand years ago


----------



## makeoutparadise (May 31, 2010)

Tleilaxu said:


> Because the cement/bricks will be confiscated by Hamas and used for the war effort. Thats why.


 The way I see it: 
Improved Palestinian civilian infrastructure would technically improve the war effort anyway even if Hamas didn't take them.
If Isreal is at war with Palestine then it would not be wise for them to let the  lives of the civilians in places to improve from its current status. That's the whole point of the blockade, and the regulation of aid coming into Palestine.
The Israelis want to deplete not only Hama's supplies but also it's power source: the civilians who give them both political and military support.
The Israelis best hope is if they can wear down the morale of the Palestinian people they will either overthrow the Hamas government or the entire political infrastructure will collapse at which point Isreal will step in and use what influence it has in the region to steer Palestine into a direction more pleasing to the eyes of Isreal.


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

Psycho said:


> multiple teams of special ops trained in CQB can easily handle unorganized ship crew without shooting at them



Yeah, people with axes and knives are easy to handle without defending yourself, especially in a flotilla of over 700 people.


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

NanoHaxial said:


> Yeah, people with axes and knives are easy to handle without defending yourself, especially in a flotilla of over 700 people.



do you fucking know what CBQ stands for? i'm not saying "stand there and get stabbed", i'm saying "punch the guy but don't kill him"




makeoutparadise said:


> The way I see it:
> Improved Palestinian civilian infrastructure would technically improve the war effort anyway even if Hamas didn't take them.
> If Isreal is at war with Palestine then it would not be wise for them to let the  lives of the civilians in places to improve from its current status. That's the whole point of the blockade, and the regulation of aid coming into Palestine.
> The Israelis want to deplete not only Hama's supplies but also it's power source: the civilians who give them both political and military support.
> The Israelis best hope is if they can wear down the morale of the Palestinian people they will either overthrow the Hamas government or the entire political infrastructure will collapse at which point Isreal will step in and use what influence it has in the region to steer Palestine into a direction more pleasing to the eyes of Isreal.



still doesn't make it right to leave thousands homeless and short on food and water, best way to win this war is by shifting the views of the general population and making israel look good, blocking supplies is not the right way to go


----------



## OmniStrife (May 31, 2010)

Israel offered to ship the materials by themselves, but no they refused.
All they want is a cheap provocative propaganda.


----------



## Elim Rawne (May 31, 2010)

Psycho said:


> do you fucking know what CBQ stands for? i'm not saying "stand there and get stabbed", i'm saying "punch the guy but don't kill him"
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's CQC, not CQB. When you are outnumbered by people welding melee weapons, you don't want to go all CQC on them, especially since they could swarm you


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

> do you fucking know what CBQ stands for? i'm not saying "stand there and get stabbed", i'm saying "punch the guy but don't kill him"



So you think the Israeli forces should take on people wielding axes and knives unarmed in hand-to-hand combat while outnumbered in the close quarters of a boat that provide a good number of hiding places? And you seriously believe they can do this effectively and without being injured/harmed? 

At least two members of the Israeli forces were already wounded, with one as being a confirmed stabbing. There may even be more. That's with them defending themselves with the rifles.


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

Diceman said:


> It's CQC, not CQB. When you are outnumbered by people welding melee weapons, you don't want to go all CQC on them, especially since they could swarm you



CQC is close-quarters combat, CBQ is close-quarters battle, while CQC is only about wrestling your opponents, CBQ is the strategy used to secure tight rooms and narrow hallways

CQC is a part of CQB



OmniStrife said:


> Israel offered to ship the materials by themselves, but no they refused.
> All they want is a cheap provocative propaganda.



and we all know how well israel is at sending housing materials into gaza

of course they're after cheap provocative propaganda, and israel is supplying it by the truck load, only countries in the world that support israel are U.S., U.S.' bitches, germany and italy


----------



## Elim Rawne (May 31, 2010)

Psycho said:


> CQC is close-quarters combat,* CBQ* is close-quarters battle, while CQC is only about wrestling your opponents, *CBQ* is the strategy used to secure tight rooms and narrow hallways
> 
> CQC is a part of CQB



It's amazing how you can misspell the acronym, while you're fully explaining what it stand


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

Psycho said:


> if it wasn't their job to put themselves at risk, they would just level the whole country and kill everyone that manages to survive
> 
> EDIT: that reminds me, if it wasn't a soldier's job to put themselves in risk, your country would've been destroyed by romans a couple thousand years ago



It's not their job to put themselves at *unnecessary* risks. Fighting on the front is a huge risk, but it's one that a soldier has to take. Trying to subdue someone who comes running at you with an axe without seriously hurting him is also a huge risk and there's absolutely no reason to take it.

Soldiers follow orders and unless those orders include "don't kill anyone, even if they attack you with a knife", there really is no need to go nice on them. Most media outlets will criticize Israel regardless of how they deal with the situation, so why bother?


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

Diceman said:


> It's amazing how you can misspell the acronym, while you're fully explaining what it stand



wow, you're able to ignore what i said and complain about my typing

oh, and "what it *STANDS FOR*" is the correct


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

> and we all know how well israel is at sending housing materials into gaza
> 
> of course they're after cheap provocative propaganda, and israel is supplying it by the truck load, only countries in the world that support israel are U.S., U.S.' bitches, germany and italy



Egypt made a similar offer to deliver the aid to Gaza. Israel also said they'd allow in the construction materials if it was for a specific project.


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

NanoHaxial said:


> Egypt made a similar offer to deliver the aid to Gaza. Israel also said they'd allow in the construction materials if it was for a specific project.



you can't show a project without first verifying the terrain and the demand, and you can't verify the terrain and demand from the other side of the sea


----------



## Elim Rawne (May 31, 2010)

Psycho said:


> wow, you're able to ignore what i said and complain about my typing
> 
> oh, and "what it *STANDS FOR*" is the correct* form*



And you make another mistake

I ignored the point, because if you actually knew CQB entailed, you wouldn't be using as a way of limiting civilian casualties, since you know, firearms are being used in CQB


----------



## The Space Cowboy (May 31, 2010)

Please stay on topic folks.  And refrain from fighting/provoking each other.  Mmmk?  If you lot could dig up additional info, instead of namecalling it'd make this thread 10x cooler.


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

The Space Cowboy said:


> Please stay on topic folks.  And refrain from fighting/provoking each other.  Mmmk?  If you lot could dig up additional info, instead of namecalling it'd make this thread 10x cooler.












http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64T21820100531

These are mega's links.


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

Psycho said:


> you can't show a project without first verifying the terrain and the demand, and you can't verify the terrain and demand from the other side of the sea



All you have to do is make contact with the UN or another organization that builds stuff in Gaza *before* you hop onto your fucking boat for a cheap publicity stunt.


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

Diceman said:


> And you make another mistake
> 
> I ignored the point, because if you actually knew CQB entailed, you wouldn't be using as a way of limiting civilian casualties, since you know, firearms are being used in CQB



firearms are used in CQB, but they are not necessary to subdue a sailor with a knife


----------



## Elim Rawne (May 31, 2010)

Psycho said:


> firearms are used in CQB, but they are not necessary to subdue a sailor with a knife



CQB is based on fast action, shooting someone is usually fast and effective


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

Diceman said:


> CQB is based on fast action, shooting someone is usually fast and effective



CQB is based on fast action to maximize efficiency, it may be effective, but it's not good for PR to shoot a guy with a knife, if they had firearms i'd be siding with israel in this one, and if they proof that they were carrying firearms in that boat i will, but for now it was a operation to keep gaza homeless


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

Psycho said:


> you can't show a project without first verifying the terrain and the demand, and you can't verify the terrain and demand from the other side of the sea



You say "it's for such-and-such project" and the Israeli's can verify the information.

There were numerous alternatives for the flotilla and aid group to take.They could have delivered the aid through the U.N., Israel itself, or Egypt. Instead, they choose confrontation and at least some of their members choose to use weapons and violence.


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

Wilders FTW said:


> This is just sick. Ten dead already. Fucking Nazi's...



thank you, you just enacted godwin's law, independent of who'se right or wrong, the side you're on (that seems to be the side i'm on) just lost the debate, congratulations

i'm changing sides now!


----------



## Wilders FTW (May 31, 2010)

More censorship? I guess the Israeli government has infiltrated this forum too huh? Don't want anybody to know there's 10 dead now? Or that the uprising against tiranny and genocide has finally begun with the storming of the Israeli ambassy in Ankara?

And you better not compare the Israeli's with Nazi's on this forum! Oh no, that doesn't sit well at all here. And don't mention 9/11 either, you'll be banned before you know it...


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

Wilders FTW said:


> More censorship? I guess the Israeli government has infiltrated this forum too huh? Don't want anybody to know there's 10 dead now? That the uprising against tiranny and genocide has finally begun with the storming of the Israeli ambassy in Ankara?
> 
> And you better not compare the Israeli's with Nazi's on this forum! Oh no, that doesn't sit well at all here. And don't mention 9/11 either, you'll be banned before you know it...



no, it's because godwin's law is an illogical fallacy, you can't compare anyone to nazis, not even neo-nazis

after he reads it, mind deleting this post?


----------



## Wilders FTW (May 31, 2010)

So if a country keeps a specific enthnic group within it's borders behind a big barbwire fence, robs them of their freedom, and denies them basic supplies, this does not compare at all to nazi concentration camps emprisoning jews during WWII?

You call it an illogical fallacy. I call it a pretty accurate analogy...


----------



## Altron (May 31, 2010)

I don't see why people keep trying to tempt fate and risk their lives trying to break an Israeli blockade of all places after being warned, rather than going through U.N. approved channels. That flotilla should have known what Israel would do if they pressed on despite being warned not to cross the blockade considering the volatile situation that area is in. 

I mean really would you try to break a Russian blockade in a "Time of War"?

It doesn't really help the situation if you give Israel an excuse to take punitive measures which usually end up with casualties.


----------



## Elim Rawne (May 31, 2010)

Altron said:


> I mean really would you try to break a Russian blockade in a "Time of War"?



That would require the sissies actually making a protest against Russia, close to Russian soil.


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

Altron said:


> I mean really would you try to break a Russian blockade in a "Time of War"?



russia has 100 times the arsenal of israel and is twice as insane as iran... i wouldn't poke them from half-way across the world


----------



## Wilders FTW (May 31, 2010)

> I don't see why people keep trying to tempt fate and risk their lives trying to break an Israeli blockade of all places after being warned, rather than going through U.N. approved channels.



Perhaps because some people actually care about the Palastinians Israel emprisons? And official channels do not allow vital materials in, that's why they are willing to risk their lives in this way for a just cause. These people are heroes.

And this is no "war". If it was the palastinians would be treated humanely according to the geneva convention. You can't be selective about when you do or do not want a conflict to be called a war whenever it benefits you...

And sissies? I'd have more fate making it out alive in a protest against Russia, than one against Israel! Dropping a bunch of bloodthirsty commando's in the middle of a humanitarian mission killing over 14 protesters is as brutal as anything Russia has ever done.


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

Some video showing passengers using weapons and attacking/beating the Israeli forces.


----------



## The Hypocrite (May 31, 2010)

Psycho said:


> CQC is close-quarters combat, CBQ is close-quarters battle, while CQC is only about wrestling your opponents, CBQ is the strategy used to secure tight rooms and narrow hallways
> 
> CQC is a part of CQB
> 
> ...



Israeli Navy officers are human beings just like me or you. Even with a lot of training, when somebody charges you with a knife and you feel your life is in danger, it is a human instinct to fire.

Also, give me evidence that Israel wouldn't send the housing equipment to Gaza.


----------



## N120 (May 31, 2010)

News: 10-16 people reported killed, many injured delivering aide...

and you introduce such a news by saying:


Tleilaxu said:


> in before Megaharrison epic pwnage.



 I know this is NF, but wtf?


----------



## Altron (May 31, 2010)

NanoHaxial said:


> Some video showing passengers using weapons and attacking/beating the Israeli forces.


Attacking armed soldiers who have no qualms about killing someone if the situation arises and attacking them with metal rods and chairs, Gee what a bright idea. Surely there will be no consequences for such a decision. 
*
Hey gaiz, I decided that I am gonna try and storm the North Korean border by myself from China tomorrow armed with an a plastic AK-47 Airsoft gun with the orange tip colored black. I mean nothing can possibly go wrong?*


----------



## Smokahontas (May 31, 2010)

Altron said:


> Attacking armed soldiers who have no qualms about killing someone if the situation arises and attacking them with metal rods and chairs, Gee what a bright idea. Surely there will be no consequences for such a decision.
> *
> Hey gaiz, I decided that I am gonna try and storm the North Korean border by myself from China tomorrow armed with an a plastic AK-47 Airsoft gun with the orange tip colored black. I mean nothing can possibly go wrong?*



The bold.part.
...True.


----------



## N120 (May 31, 2010)

Altron said:


> Attacking armed soldiers who have no qualms about killing someone if the situation arises and attacking them with metal rods and chairs, Gee what a bright idea. Surely there will be no consequences for such a decision.
> *
> Hey gaiz, I decided that I am gonna try and storm the North Korean border by myself from China tomorrow armed with an a plastic AK-47 Airsoft gun with the orange tip colored black. I mean nothing can possibly go wrong?*



except there were no fire-arms onboard, not even plastic ones.

but i see your point, it's easy to confuse a wheel chair for i dont know a tank, how were they to know even though they knew what was being shipped.


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

NanoHaxial said:


> Some video showing passengers using weapons and attacking/beating the Israeli forces.



those are some angry motherfuckers


----------



## Altron (May 31, 2010)

N120 said:


> except there were no fire-arms onboard, not even plastic ones.
> 
> but i see your point, it's easy to confuse a wheel chair for i dont know a tank, how were they to know even though they knew what was being shipped.


Because breaking through an Israeli blockade after being warned is just as stupid as trying to storm North Korea with an AK-47 BB Gun? Considering both situations will more than likely end up with someone dead.

Try and go an attack armed Israeli soldiers with a metal rod or chair and see what the result gets you. If you end up surviving I'll buy you a cookie


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

Supposedly an activist got a hold of one of the weapons:



> An Israeli army spokesman accused activists on the ships of arming themselves with knives and clubs. The spokesman said at least a dozen activists had been injured, as well as 10 Israeli military personnel, in the fighting. He said activists stole a gun from one Israeli personnel and started firing on the soldiers.


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

NanoHaxial said:


> Supposedly an activist got a hold of one of the weapons:



there's one justified kill, you're still missing one


----------



## Orion (May 31, 2010)

Since they decided to arm themselves and fight back they are all justified.


----------



## N120 (May 31, 2010)

Altron said:


> Because breaking through an Israeli blockade after being warned is just as stupid as trying to storm North Korea with an AK-47 BB Gun? Considering both situations will more than likely end up with someone dead.



 i understand that, told to turn around they refused and forced their hands, i get that.

 implying they were carrying unidentifiable objects that can be mistaken for a weapon however is not okay because its not true, not even the israeli authorities themselves claimed such a thing.

but why a weapon? why not stick to the topic and use humanitarian aid going to NK as an example? it would make more sence.


----------



## Zaru (May 31, 2010)

Psycho said:


> there's one justified kill, you're still missing one



They said 10 people died in the whole thing.


----------



## N120 (May 31, 2010)

Zaru said:


> They said 10 people died in the whole thing.



reuters gave a higher figure, might have to wait a few hours before we get all the info on the casualties.


----------



## Edo (May 31, 2010)

Tleilaxu said:


> That would be true but allowing these things into gaza will only strengthen Hamas and make Israel security unstable.



lol the biggest bullshit I've read.....well expected from you 

*So bravo Israel, once again killing unarmed people for security reasons.....hmm I wonder how Hitler fits to this??? 
*

I hope Turkey fucks Israel...well it is the only one that can really...


----------



## Altron (May 31, 2010)

N120 said:


> i understand that, told to turn around they refused and forced their hands, i get that.
> 
> implying they were carrying unidentifiable objects that can be mistaken for a weapon however is not okay because its not true, not even the israeli authorities themselves claimed such a thing.


Did you miss the video where the protesters *attacked armed Israeli commandos* and tried to steal their weapons? I am pretty sure that is a pretty dumb move considering that Israel has shown that it has no problems shooting down someone especially if they try and attack Israeli soldiers.



> but why a weapon? why not stick to the topic and use humanitarian aid going to NK as an example? it would make more sence.


Oh I don't know, probably the fact that North Korean soldiers would shoot me down with no hesitation if I tried to stupidly run across the border and give them a reason to fire on me.


----------



## hcheng02 (May 31, 2010)

Psycho said:


> makeshift clubs and knives =/= fully automatic assault riffles





Psycho said:


> do you fucking know what CBQ stands for? i'm not saying "stand there and get stabbed", i'm saying "punch the guy but don't kill him"



Even if you were a civilian cop, if a guy comes rushing at you with a knife you are allowed to shoot to kill. A guy with a knife at close range is still considered a deadly threat to a guy with a gun. Keep in mind a cop has to show much more restraint in lethal force than a soldier. 



> still doesn't make it right to leave thousands homeless and short on food and water, best way to win this war is by shifting the views of the general population and making israel look good, blocking supplies is not the right way to go



Actually blockade is a great way to change hearts and minds. I'll let General Tecumseh Sherman explain the logic:

"We cannot change the hearts of those people [of the South], but we can make war so terrible...[and] make them so sick of war that generations would pass away before they would again appeal to it."


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

biased terrorist supporting palestine activists stupid enough to physically attack armed soldiers with blunt weapons and knives, trying to take their weapons from them...while trying to break through a blockade. 


the world can need fewer of them. no harm done.




Psycho said:


> there's one justified kill, you're still missing one



cops dont use that much restraint, yet somehow soldiers should show FAR more restraint?? 

ridiculous. 

your ideals would lead to soldiers being overwhelmed and stabbed/beaten to death, as there were already wounded and they needed the escalation to control the situation. 

assailants believing they can defeat the israeli's would increase the numbers participating and level of violence. Guns would then be taken and used and then you find yourself in a full scale fight leading to far more dead on both sides. 




Either apply your standards also to yourself or shut up. (its easy to judge when never in the situation yourself) 

Seing how applying it, would lead to you wising up fast or your death, in both cases you would stop crying about unrealistic idiotic rules of engagement.


----------



## Edo (May 31, 2010)

Zabuzalives said:


> biased terrorist supporting palestine activists stupid enough to physically attack armed soldiers with blunt weapons and knives, trying to take their weapons from them...while trying to break through a blockade.
> 
> 
> the world can need fewer of them. no harm done.



Yet another stupid post from you...I missed you  I wonder if the world would be a better place without you 


Israel has violated national waters and there is no justification for that, unless you are stupid of course


----------



## hcheng02 (May 31, 2010)

Edo said:


> Yet another stupid post from you...I missed you  I wonder if the world would be a better place without you
> 
> 
> Israel has violated national waters and there is no justification for that, unless you are stupid of course



Israel had a naval blockade on Gaza. If anything it was the activists who violated Israel's naval waters. They got what they had coming.


----------



## Edo (May 31, 2010)

hcheng02 said:


> Israel had a naval blockade on Gaza. If anything it was the activists who violated Israel's naval waters. They got what they had coming.



But they never reached Israel waters, the confrontation happened on international waters.


----------



## xenopyre (May 31, 2010)

hcheng02 said:


> Israel had a naval blockade on Gaza. If anything it was the activists who violated Israel's naval waters. They got what they had coming.


But israel's blockade doesnt obligate the other countries to follow it too , if israel
dont want to have economical relationship with Gaza then they have the right to do so but that doesnt mean that every country in the world have to follow thier decision hell there are countries who dont even acknowledge the existence of israel why would they have to fllow thier decisions?


----------



## hcheng02 (May 31, 2010)

xenopyre said:


> But israel'blockade doesnt obligate the other countries to follow it too , if israel
> dont want to have economical relationship with Gaza then they have the right to do so but that doesnt mean that every country in the world have to follow thier decision hell there are countries who dont even aknowledge the existence of israel why would they have to fllow thier decisions?



No, the point of a military blockade is to force other countries from trading with Gaza. Especially those countries who don't recognize Israel. War is not meant to be friendly or fair.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

Wow. Just wow. At least 10 dead. They massacred people on an aid boat. 

Reprehensible. I really didn't expect this, expected them to be stopped or turned around, not massacred. In international waters, no less, making it a pirate incident. 



> At least 10 activists killed in Israel Navy clashes onboard Gaza aid flotilla


----------



## xenopyre (May 31, 2010)

hcheng02 said:


> No, the point of a military blockade is to force other countries from trading with Gaza. Especially those countries who don't recognize Israel. War is not meant to be friendly or fair.


Who gave Israel the right to force thier decisions on other countries ? if my country declare blockade on say the US then it have the right to hijack every US cargo ship that passes by ?


----------



## OmniStrife (May 31, 2010)

The righteousness in this thread sickens me...

Oh well, the Jews probably killed them for their organs.


----------



## zoff (May 31, 2010)

Edo said:


> But they never reached Israel waters, the confrontation happened on international waters.



If that's the case, can someone tell me if Israel storming the flotilla counts as piracy?


----------



## Altron (May 31, 2010)

> "We fully intend to go to Gaza regardless of any intimidation or threats of violence against us," she said. *"They are going to have to forcefully stop us."*


Well obviously Israel did


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

OmniStrife said:


> The righteousness in this thread sickens me...
> 
> Oh well, the Jews probably killed them for their organs.



Are you seriously defending the killing of 10 aid workers?


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

Edo said:


> But they never reached Israel waters, the confrontation happened on international waters.



Israel did this to catch the activists unprepared and with minimal resistance/conflict 

its a minor thing. Especially for Israelis seeing how all the peacetime internation laws dont apply to their situation and do little to adress transgressions by their enemies.


And Edo, we wouldnt know cause im not stupid enough to try and kill armed soldiers with a knife because they interfere with my support for Hamas.


----------



## hcheng02 (May 31, 2010)

xenopyre said:


> Who gave Israel the right to force thier decisions on other countries ? if my country declare blockade on say the US then it have the right to hijack every US cargo ship that passes by ?



Israel gave the right to itself when Hamas declared war on it. 

And yeah, if your country declared war on the US it would indeed have the right to attack Us vessels. And the US would have the right to blow your navy off the face of the Earth, along with the rest of your country. Thats how war works.


----------



## Jin-E (May 31, 2010)

Holy fuckshit, i expected a tussle and perhaps a few injuries, but fatalities and above 10 too boot? Holy damn, what a PR disaster for Israel. 

Due to the sensitivity and the diplomatic Hurrha that would inevitably come out of it, the soldiers should have teargassed the people or used stun guns/water cannons, not lethal force until IT WAS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY.

Also WTF? The activist actually believed they would succeed reaching that port? I thought they knew all along that they wouldnt be able to reach Gaza and that the whole point was to get captured just so they could score political points and showcase Israels "brutality".


----------



## N120 (May 31, 2010)

Altron said:


> Did you miss the video where the protesters *attacked armed Israeli commandos* and tried to steal their weapons? I am pretty sure that is a pretty dumb move considering that Israel has shown that it has no problems shooting down someone especially if they try and attack Israeli soldiers.



Did you miss the part where the israeli soldiers opened fire, jumped into a crowded civilian ship while they were sailing in international waters?  



> Oh I don't know, probably the fact that North Korean soldiers would shoot me down with no hesitation if I tried to stupidly run across the border and give them a reason to fire on me.



 That would happen.

but, maybe if you did what the envoy did and announced your arrival beforehand and maybe let them know in advance that your going to cross their border and be armed with a wheel chair and water purifier, then that wouldve made dear leader thinks twice about messing with you.
 just like:


> Naval commandos have *been training for days in anticipation of the standoff*. Military officials, speaking on condition of anonymity under official guidelines, said the forces would likely take over the boats under the cover of



but then again you were never going to Nk were you, Dear leader wouldnt have minded if you were, he'd be more pissed if you told them your visiting the south and shoot you down.


----------



## xenopyre (May 31, 2010)

hcheng02 said:


> Israel gave the right to itself when Hamas declared war on it.
> 
> And yeah, if your country declared war on the US it would indeed have the right to attack Us vessels. And the US would have the right to blow your navy off the face of the Earth, along with the rest of your country. Thats how war works.


Israel giving itself the right the cut the economical relationship with Gaza thats understandable but forcing all the other countries in the world to cut thier relationships with Gaza without a UN resolution is absurd , any militaristic dicision made by israel only applies to israel and its allies .


----------



## Edo (May 31, 2010)

Zabuzalives said:


> Israel did this to catch the activists unprepared and with minimal resistance/conflict
> 
> its a minor thing. Especially for Israelis seeing how all the peacetime internation laws dont apply to their situation and do little to adress transgressions by their enemies.



Again that is bullshit, it did it because it knows nobody can strip it from doing anything it wants not matter what...but I wish there will be repercussions from Turkey.

Most killed are actually Turkish volunteers.

It is not a minor thing, for Israel it is because it is used to killing. Israel itself has always violated international laws and ignored many UN resolutions against it, it only takes what suits her of course because it always has the US blind support.

Anyways, there is not justification to this not matter how hard you try. Attacking unarmed aid ships in international waters in wrong period! Trying to justify it is rather stupid.


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Wow. Just wow. At least 10 dead. They massacred people on an aid boat.



""massacre"" just like the palestinian ""genocide"" right?? 

are you just that sensitive? or are you doing it on purpose of attacking Israel? 


I the latter is the case, you using these hugely exaggerated and misplaced words is an insult to all those who died in a real massacre or genocide.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

Zabuzalives said:


> ""massacre"" just like the palestinian ""genocide"" right??
> 
> are you just that sensitive? or are you doing it on purpose of attacking Israel?
> 
> ...



Your defense of this crime is robotic in its predictability. How many people would they have to kill before your Israel Defense Mechanism™ is overridden by humanity and decency?

This was truly one of the dumbest things Israel has ever done in its history from a PR standpoint. And that's saying a lot.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

The world is watching as the Zionist regime show their true colors one more time.

Pathetic to see all the people that tries to defend Israel's actions. Have you no moral fucking conscious? Where's MH? I'd love to see him defend killing 10 civilians.

Hopefully people will understand what kind of people the Palestinians are dealing with.


----------



## Edo (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> The world is watching as the Zionist regime show their true colors one more time.
> 
> Pathetic to see all the people that tries to defend Israel's actions. Have you no moral fucking conscious? Where's MH? I'd love to see him defend killing 10 civilians.
> 
> Hopefully people will understand what kind of people the Palestinians are dealing with.



Don't worry MG always finds a way to defend the killing of people, unless they are Israelis of course 

I am sure these ships had terrorists and arms to Hammas....they were a major security issue to Israel! Like if Turkey would allow any of its ship to carry arms to Gaza....they are not stupid.


----------



## hcheng02 (May 31, 2010)

xenopyre said:


> Israel giving itself the right the cut the economical relationship with Gaza thats understandable but forcing all the other countries in the world to cut thier relationships with Gaza without a UN resolution is absurd , any militaristic dicision made by israel only applies to israel and its allies .



This has nothing to do with rights. Israel is at war with Gaza, and when you are at war you deny the enemy resources -its literally warfare 101. The blockade was part of that. If anyone wants to give supplies to Gaza without going through the proper channels, then they better be willing to pay the price. Which is exactly what happened here. 



Edo said:


> Again that is bullshit, it did it because it knows nobody can strip it from doing anything it wants not matter what...but I wish there will be repercussions from Turkey.
> 
> Most killed are actually Turkish volunteers.
> 
> ...



International laws are worth jack fucking shit. Same with UN resolutions. We have seen the competition between two different laws here: one that can not be enforced (UN resolutions) VS one that can be enforced (Israel's blockade). Israel won.

This is bad PR, but a reasonable guy who read up on these activists history would cut Israel slack. Trying to break a military blockade and then attacking soldiers rather than surrender peacefully? Yeah, Darwinism at work here folks.


----------



## OmniStrife (May 31, 2010)

Fuck this shit.
Weapons were found on the boat.
Weapons were used against the soldiers.
The intent was not to help Gaza, but to cause provocative violence.

They were warned multiple times and were offered by Israel to ship the aids by Israel itself.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

Edo said:


> Don't worry MG always finds a way to defend the killing of people, unless they are Israelis of course
> 
> I am sure these ships had terrorists and arms to Hammas....they were a major security issue to Israel! Like if Turkey would allow any of its ship to carry arms to Gaza....they are not stupid.



Just imagine what Cafe would say if China did this. 

If China killed 10 people in an aid convoy to blockaded Taiwan, my god there would be hell to pay. The people who have defended this would go bonkers with outrage (as of course they should.) If Hamas, heaven forbid, did this to an Israeli aid convoy to help starving people in Jordan, what would they say instead? 

The hypocrisy would be hilarious if 10 people hadn't died. And who have been killed? I haven't seen the bodies identified. Heaven help you Israel if you killed 10 Brits.


----------



## Edo (May 31, 2010)

hcheng02 said:


> This has nothing to do with rights. Israel is at war with Gaza, and when you are at war you deny the enemy resources -its literally warfare 101. The blockade was part of that. If anyone wants to give supplies to Gaza without going through the proper channels, then they better be willing to pay the price. Which is exactly what happened here.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




You know what the problem with your post is? the dual standards, had this been done by some other country against Israel, you would have been all against it.

In your reply, you are also giving Hamas the reason to attack Israel. after all they have no choice....darwinism huh...


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Edo said:


> Don't worry MG always finds a way to defend the killing of people, unless they are Israelis of course
> 
> I am sure these ships had terrorists and arms to Hammas....they were a major security issue to Israel! Like if Turkey would allow any of its ship to carry arms to Gaza....they are not stupid.


Shut your mouth till you have those evidence.

Israel is brutal. Did the world forget everything that Israel has done till now? Where have you guys been for the last six decades?

11 Swedes civilian were on the Gaza Flotilla boat, did you think that they were planning to go through the blockade with weapons to Hamas, are you really this dumb?

Aftermath;


> The European Union has called for an inquiry into the attack. Individual European governments are also starting to issue statements: Sweden's foreign minister, Carl Bildt, said his government summoned the Israeli ambassador "to get information."





> The Syrian government has called for an Arab League meeting to discuss the attack.





> Kuwait's parliament is due to hold an emergency meeting today to discuss the raid. Waleed al-Tabtabai, a member of parliament, was one of 16 Kuwaiti nationals on board the ships.


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> Shut your mouth till you have those evidence.
> 
> Israel is brutal. Did the world forget everything that Israel has done till now? Where have you guys been for the last six decades?
> 
> ...



if all that is true, israel just dug a hole for itself


----------



## hcheng02 (May 31, 2010)

Edo said:


> You know what the problem with your post is? the dual standards, had this been done by some other country against Israel, you would have been all against it.
> 
> In your reply, you are also giving Hamas the reason to attack Israel. after all they have no choice....darwinism huh...



Hamas does attack Israel, which in turn leads to Israel attacking back. Since the IDF is way more effective, its the Palestinians who get fucked over. So yeah, Darwinism for the win. 

And am I supposed to believe that its OK for activists to knife IDF soldiers now?


----------



## Edo (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> Shut your mouth till you have those evidence.
> 
> Israel is brutal. Did the world forget everything that Israel has done till now? Where have you guys been for the last six decades?
> 
> ...



lol/....I was being *sarcastic*, read my post again as well as my other posts...


----------



## Jin-E (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> This was truly one of the dumbest things Israel has ever done in its history from a PR standpoint. And that's saying a lot.



I have to agree here. WTF were they thinking?

Yes, some of the activists were clearly aggresive, but still, this was clearly an overreaction and this will mar Israel's image for a long time.


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

Edo said:


> Again that is bullshit, it did it because it knows nobody can strip it from doing anything it wants not matter what...but I wish there will be repercussions from Turkey.
> 
> Most killed are actually Turkish volunteers.



It did not do it ""for the lulz"" like you are basically saying. Cause that does not fit their actions at all.  

International support and opinion still affects Israel, as such they tried to enforce the blockade with minimal resistance. Before the activists were prepared against boarding. Before the publication and tv would be in full force knowing there would be a confrontation. 

But thanks to activists trying to murder soldiers with clubs and knives it turned into a publicity disaster anyway. 




Edo said:


> It is not a minor thing, for Israel it is because it is used to killing.



that makes sense.....We do it cause were used to killing...were Jew terminators bleep bleep!!! were programmed this way booop! 



Edo said:


> Israel itself has always violated international laws and ignored many UN resolutions against it, it only takes what suits her of course because it always has the US blind support.



Israels creation was supported by international law and the UN, then Israels enemies tried to DESTROY the country and ethnically cleanse the israelis while they were at it. 

The UN stoop aside and watched. 

No wonder they care little for what minor international law tells them when they do not apply this to their enemies  



Edo said:


> Anyways, there is not justification to this not matter how hard you try. Attacking unarmed aid ships in international waters in wrong period! Trying to justify it is rather stupid.



its wrong but understandable. And i do not see it as that immoral either. breaking a minor law that does not fit in a war situation.


----------



## hcheng02 (May 31, 2010)

Zabuzalives said:


> It did not do it ""for the lulz"" like you are basically saying. Cause that does not fit their actions at all.
> 
> International support and opinion still affects Israel, as such they tried to enforce the blockade with minimal resistance. Before the activists were prepared against boarding. Before the publication and tv would be in full force knowing there would be a confrontation.
> 
> *But thanks to activists trying to murder soldiers with clubs and knives it turned into a publicity disaster anyway. *



I wish this was true but keep in mind the double standards for being "peaceful" these activists have. These guys can cause riots and attack soldiers with impunity in Israel. The UN is probably going to ignore the fact that these activists provoked the situation and knifed soldiers because its an opportunity to slam on Israel.


----------



## OmniStrife (May 31, 2010)

Two handguns were fired at Israeli soldiers.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

hcheng02 said:
			
		

> And am I supposed to believe that its OK for activists to knife IDF soldiers now?


Do you believe in the statements of the IDF? *The Free Gaza movement said that Israel opened fire as soon as they boarded the ship.*

We've seen how sinister Israel can be when it comes to "international waters", as they bombed the USS liberty with napalm, torpedoes, gunfire and bombs, despite knowing that it was American.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

Jin-E said:


> I have to agree here. WTF were they thinking?
> 
> Yes, some of the activists were clearly aggresive, but still, this was clearly an overreaction and this will mar Israel's image for a long time.



I pretty much expected what you did. Some tussling in open water, maybe a ship rammed and, at worse, a few people in the water and rescued. In all likelihood this aid convoy was doomed to ignominious failure probably as a back-page story. 

Am as shocked as you right now at the massive PR victory Israel handed over. Those 10 people have become martyrs for their cause. A back-page story to international incident.

Very perplexing to say the least.


----------



## xenopyre (May 31, 2010)

hcheng02 said:


> This has nothing to do with rights. Israel is at war with Gaza, and when you are at war you deny the enemy resources -its literally warfare 101. The blockade was part of that. If anyone wants to give supplies to Gaza without going through the proper channels, then they better be willing to pay the price. Which is exactly what happened here.


War ? I thought Isarel and Hamas signed a cease fire ? and no they dont have the right to hijack other countries aid ship especially if it was a humanitarian aid .


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

you guys are ridiculous, you talk about how the UN means nothing and has no authority, then complain about how it does nothing to stop genocides and war crimes


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Your defense of this crime is robotic in its predictability. How many people would they have to kill before your Israel Defense Mechanism? is overridden by humanity and decency?
> 
> This was truly one of the dumbest things Israel has ever done in its history from a PR standpoint. And that's saying a lot.



PR standpoint means nothing to the issue of morality at hand. 

Numbers of dead alone is only a part to the immorality of the action leading to the deaths. Intent, reason, circumstance, matter. This can make 1 murder completely immoral, but justify the killing of thousands. 

try to bring up actual arguments instead of this BS please. 


Also nice ignoring my question. I guess you intentionally try to exaggerate to play on emotion. GJ pissing on the graves of all those dying in actual massacres and genocides  




Shinigami Perv said:


> Just imagine what Cafe would say if China did this.
> 
> If China killed 10 people in an aid convoy to blockaded Taiwan, my god there would be hell to pay. The people who have defended this would go bonkers with outrage (as of course they should.) If Hamas, heaven forbid, did this to an Israeli aid convoy to help starving people in Jordan, what would they say instead?
> 
> The hypocrisy would be hilarious if 10 people hadn't died. And who have been killed? I haven't seen the bodies identified. Heaven help you Israel if you killed 10 Brits.



the only hypocrite i see is you. 

nice FAIL comparisons. 

Taiwan is not a terrorist organisation intent to destroy China. 

Palestinians arent ""starving"" again, stop pissing on the graves of those who did. (look at africa and NK)


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

hcheng02 said:


> I wish this was true but keep in mind the double standards for being "peaceful" these activists have. These guys can cause riots and attack soldiers with impunity in Israel. The UN is probably going to ignore the fact that these activists provoked the situation and knifed soldiers because its an opportunity to slam on Israel.



Which is exactly why so much critiscism and outrage about this should be ignored as the biased pile of shit it is.




Psycho said:


> you guys are ridiculous, you talk about how the UN means nothing and has no authority, then complain about how it does nothing to stop genocides and war crimes



Its the other way around o brilliant one....

The UN standing on the sidelines while genocides and war crimes happened, or adressing them only in a biased way....is what discredits the UN, and lowers its authorative standing on moral matters. 

pretty logical no?? try to catch up.....


----------



## hcheng02 (May 31, 2010)

OmniStrife said:


> Two handguns were fired at Israeli soldiers.



Really? Source for this?



Degelle said:


> Do you believe in the statements of the IDF? *The Free Gaza movement said that Israel opened fire as soon as they boarded the ship.*
> 
> We've seen how sinister Israel can be when it comes to "international waters", as they bombed the USS liberty with napalm, torpedoes, gunfire and bombs, despite knowing that it was American.



The USS Liberty? You mean during the 6 Day War? That was an accident. The Israelis apologized and paid compensation, which the US accepted. Case closed. 



xenopyre said:


> War ? I thought Isarel and Hamas signed a cease fire ? and no they dont have the right to hijack other countries aid ship especially if it was a humanitarian aid .



Ceasefire =/= end of war. They are till formally at war and fighting can start again at anytime. 

Humanitarian aid comes through Gaza all the time through the UN. This convoy wasn't about humanitarian aid, since they refused to send the materials through the UN. 



Psycho said:


> you guys are ridiculous, you talk about how the UN means nothing and has no authority, then complain about how it does nothing to stop genocides and war crimes



Its because the UN can't stop genocides and war crimes that the UN means nothing. If you can't enforce your laws and edicts then nobody is going to care what you think.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

hcheng02 said:


> The USS Liberty? You mean during the 6 Day War? That was an accident. The Israelis apologized and paid compensation, which the US accepted. Case closed.



Answer my question. Do you believe in the statements of the IDF?

The USS liberty was _*not *_an accident. Just as this attack was _*not *_an accident.


			
				Dean Rusk said:
			
		

> I was never satisfied with the Israeli explanation. Their sustained attack to disable and sink Liberty precluded an assault by accident or some trigger-happy local commander. Through diplomatic channels we refused to accept their explanations. *I didn't believe them then, and I don't believe them to this day. The attack was outrageous.*


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

Zabuzalives said:


> PR standpoint means nothing to the issue of morality at hand.
> 
> Numbers of dead alone is only a part to the immorality of the action leading to the deaths. Intent, reason, circumstance, matter. This can make 1 murder completely immoral, but justify the killing of thousands.
> 
> ...



I'm sorry, it's just not believable. Logically, intent and circumstance should mean a lot. And it does. 

But not when the dead are international aid workers in an aid convoy. Nobody is going to believe that these aid workers were secretly international terrorists bent on Israel's destruction. It's just not believable. Nobody in their right mind thinks that these people deserved to die. There is just no logical defense for the outcome regardless of the circumstances. Aid workers, like women, children, and priests, are generally presumed inviolable. 

Trying to defend it just makes the situation worse regardless of circumstance. And now you've decided to neg me, hell bent as you are on defending the killing of innocents. You seriously need to take a look at yourself in the mirror.


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

Zabuzalives said:


> Its the other way around o brilliant one....
> 
> The UN standing on the sidelines while genocides and war crimes happened, or adressing them only in a biased way....is what discredits the UN, and lowers its authorative standing on moral matters.
> 
> pretty logical no?? try to catch up.....



every time the UN passes a resolution quite a few members in this forum go "lol, UN" and say it means nothing, the UN is not a country, it does not have citizens do speak up or an army to defend it, it's powers go only as far as the country they're in allow it, the government in congo didn't give the UN peace corps any authority, so they had to stand by as thousands were massacred; this happens every single time


----------



## OmniStrife (May 31, 2010)

hcheng02 said:


> Really? Source for this?


It's not an objective one, but for what it's worth. it's straight from the minister of foreign affairs.


----------



## Trias (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> I'm sorry, it's just not believable. Logically, intent and circumstance should mean a lot. And it does.
> 
> But not when the dead are international aid workers in an aid convoy. Nobody is going to believe that these aid workers were secretly international terrorists bent on Israel's destruction. It's just not believable. Nobody in their right mind thinks that these people deserved to die. There is just no logical defense for the outcome regardless of the circumstances. Aid workers, like women, children, and priests, are generally presumed inviolable.
> 
> Trying to defend it just makes the situation worse regardless of circumstance. And now you've decided to neg me, hell bent as you are on defending the killing of innocents. You seriously need to take a look at yourself in the mirror.




 Oh yes, mind to know that these "INternational Aid Workers" are mostly raging radical islamists and catholics that actively preach destruction of Israel whenever possible?

 It's on IHH's own website that it calls for total destruction of Israel, that everyone should take up arms and fight till Israeli nation is no more.

 Nobody is going to believe that? Yes probably, because most of the world likes to blame jews as always; but anyone that can read turkish and is not a palestinianophile/islamophile knows that these people are indeed secretly international terrorists bent on Israel's destruction. To be more precise, they're on propoganda and logistics front.

 Many of the supporters also claim "the aid was not the aim" that it was to show how Israel is heartless and merciless and bla bla bla. 

 Did these people deserve to die? Normal ones didn't, but the ones who attacked Israeli soldiers right away after they boarded, knew this would happen. Just like the Hamas who knows Israel is going to retaliate, yet still attacks. These people share the same train of thought for sure; there's a 1 year old baby on ship. Please tell me which humanitarian or logical reasons are there for bringing a 1 year old baby when you expect Israel to attack.

 In their raging anti-semitism, indeed neo-nazis in this thread are still spitting bullshit propoganda around them.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

Sky News already pronouncing the Israeli excuse "they tried to seize our guns" as "not convincing." Evidence of iron bars and gas masks, but no knives. Up to 19 dead. Wow... just wow.



Trias said:


> Oh yes, mind to know that these "INternational Aid Workers" are mostly raging radical islamists and catholics that actively preach destruction of Israel whenever possible?
> 
> It's on IHH's own website that it calls for total destruction of Israel, that everyone should take up arms and fight till Israeli nation is no more.
> 
> ...



You can type 1,000 paragraphs, but even the media are dismissing this nonsense. Nobody believes these aid workers evil terrorists when their ships were boarded in international waters and fired upon. Nobody is believing the dead were somehow responsible. 

It's just not buyable. Just flimsy and threadbare. Give it up.


----------



## hcheng02 (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> Answer my question. Do you believe in the statements of the IDF?
> 
> The USS liberty was _*not *_an accident. Just as this attack was _*not *_an accident.



The USS Liberty was an accident. There were certainly many accusations flying around, Rusk among them, but records and common sense showed that Israel did not want to attack the Liberty. Why the hell would Israel attack the vessel if not by accident?



> But t*he United States was holding its own investigations into the affair,* beginning with the Navy Court of Inquiry held in Malta shortly after the attack. The hearings revealed *basic contradictions in the testimonies of McGonagle and other officers regarding the length and sequence of the attack, and raised the possibility that, due to light winds, the flag might well not have been visible to Israeli pilots*. Furthermore, Rear-Adm. Isaac C. Kidd, Jr., the presiding officer, found no evidence that the attack was in any way intentional, calling it "a case of mistaken identity." Subsequent closed-door inquiries were conducted by the CIA, the NSA, the JCS, as well as by both houses of Congress. All reached the same conclusion: *That the Israeli attack upon the USS Liberty had been the result of error, and nothing more.*


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

^ This is why you pro-Zionist posters should wait for MH.



hcheng02 said:


> The USS Liberty was an accident. There were certainly many accusations flying around, Rusk among them, but records and common sense showed that Israel did not want to attack the Liberty. Why the hell would Israel attack the vessel if not by accident?



Of course the congress declared that the Israeli attack was an error, were they suppose to declare war against their strongest ally in the ME? Try to think, it usually helps. Who in there right mind would ever believe in politicians to begin with?



			
				Ward Boston & Admiral Kidd said:
			
		

> The evidence was clear. Both Admiral Kidd and I believed with certainty that this attack, which killed 34 American sailors and injured 172 others, was a deliberate effort to sink an American ship and murder its entire crew. Each evening, after hearing testimony all day, we often spoke our private thoughts concerning what we had seen and heard. I recall Admiral Kidd repeatedly referring to the Israeli forces responsible for the attack as 'murderous bastards.' It was our shared belief, based on the documentary evidence and testimony we received first hand, that the Israeli attack was planned and deliberate, and could not possibly have been an accident.



Going offtopic, last post about it.


----------



## Razgriez (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Sky News already pronouncing the Israeli excuse "they tried to seize our guns" as "not convincing." Evidence of iron bars and gas masks, but no knives. Up to 19 dead. Wow... just wow.





> *They opened fire after passengers attacked them with axes and knives*, said Israeli private channel 10 television.
> 
> The Israeli army said at least 10 activists - believed to be Turkish nationals - were among the dead.



I thought this part was interesting.

How dare those evil imperialistic Israeli monsters shoot people that attacked them with melee weapons.


----------



## Kobe (May 31, 2010)

If Israel can't provide evidence for offensive act from those people on-board in that ships, it's going to get ugly.

It's easy to create complo theories this time when there is no objective source, but the fact 16 people are killed is awful. 

We'll see what happens from now on.. I expect Turkey to get serious on this issue.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

Razgriez said:


> I thought this part was interesting.
> 
> How dare those evil imperialistic Israeli monsters shoot people that attacked them with melee weapons.



Yes, watch the video of the Sky correspondent who was there. He said there was no evidence of any knives, just iron bars and gas masks. 

I'm quoting what he said, not an Israeli channel quoted in the article.


----------



## hcheng02 (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> ^ This is why you pro-Zionist posters should wait for MH.



Care to back up your claims that the Liberty attack was intentional then? 



Psycho said:


> every time the UN passes a resolution quite a few members in this forum go "lol, UN" and say it means nothing, the UN is not a country, it does not have citizens do speak up or an army to defend it, it's powers go only as far as the country they're in allow it, the government in congo didn't give the UN peace corps any authority, so they had to stand by as thousands were massacred; this happens every single time



Thats because its true. The UN doesn't have any civilians to speak up or an army to defend and enforce its edicts. And lots of times it does stand in the sidelines and watch people they are supposed to protect get slaughtered. How does this weaken our claim? If anything it strengthens it.


----------



## Psycho (May 31, 2010)

hcheng02 said:


> Thats because its true. The UN doesn't have any civilians to speak up or an army to defend and enforce its edicts. And lots of times it does stand in the sidelines and watch people they are supposed to protect get slaughtered. How does this weaken our claim? If anything it strengthens it.



don't complain about it's lack of power or efficiency when you're the ones unwilling to give it the power it needs to function


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

*As I said, The Free Gaza Movement, the organizers of the flotilla, said the troops opened fire as soon as they stormed the ships. I've heard that there were actual footage as the soldiers entered the boats.*

But people here seem to rather believe in IDF, a military branch that have been caught lying a billion times.


----------



## hcheng02 (May 31, 2010)

Psycho said:


> don't complain about it's lack of power or efficiency when you're the ones unwilling to give it the power it needs to function



Yeah because Britain, France, China, and Russia are all so willing to give the UN power. If the UN doesn't have the power, its their responsibility to tone down their sanctimonious bullshit and stick to what they can do.


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> But not when the dead are international aid workers in an aid convoy. Nobody is going to believe that these aid workers were secretly international terrorists bent on Israel's destruction. It's just not believable.



did i say that?

however there is a good deal of hamas supporting/israel haters among the ACTIVISTS.

when will you stop playing with words or literally accepting biased propaganda. (they are all international aid workers know, thats why they went past UN...thats why they sought conflict and publicity) 



Shinigami Perv said:


> Nobody in their right mind thinks that these people deserved to die. There is just no logical defense for the outcome regardless of the circumstances.



when they are knifing soldiers during a blockade run? 

when a lot of these activists are agressive and biased anti-israelis? 

yeah its insane.....




Shinigami Perv said:


> Trying to defend it just makes the situation worse regardless of circumstance.



maybe in your little world of BS. 

defending it with facts and solid arguments generally makes an action look better.



Shinigami Perv said:


> And now you've decided to neg me, hell bent as you are on defending the killing of innocents. You seriously need to take a look at yourself in the mirror.




yes...cause i see you for what you are now. 

you play with words far to much, too much Bullshit for you to be sincere. 

you are a hypocrite who feigns to be an objective person with high moral standings. 


now its the ""massacre of innocents"" right?? 

you just ignored the fact that activists were attacking armed soldiers with blunt objects and knives 


how about you look at yourself in the mirror and see the devious, lying manipulating hypocrite that you are??


----------



## Razgriez (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> *As I said, The Free Gaza Movement, the organizers of the flotilla, said the troops opened fire as soon as they stormed the ships. I've heard that there were actual footage as the soldiers entered the boats.*
> 
> But people here seem to rather believe in IDF, a military branch that have been caught lying a billion times.



So we have a he said she said argument.

Awesome!

This is only natural both sides are going to push the blame onto the other. The only real thing we can hope for is some forensic investigators which I dont think is going to happen and they are probably going to be biased for Israel.

Point is dont be fucking dumb and encroach on a god damn blockade and act like you can go where ever you fucking want! No thats how you get your stupid ass killed.



> Yes, watch the video of the Sky correspondent who was there. He said there was no evidence of any knives, just iron bars and gas masks.
> 
> I'm quoting what he said, not an Israeli channel quoted in the article.



Well I could go into detail on what ifs and other dumb shit but Im not since there is no point. Iron bars can be used a lethal force but the soldiers said knives whatever.

Ive got no sympathy for these idiots. They decided they could "peacefully" enter the area but instead the obvious happened and they were stopped. Good job!


----------



## dreams lie (May 31, 2010)

The situation here is rather simple.  Israel blockades Palestine as they are in state of war with each other.  A ship tries to get through regardless, and it was captured.  The end.  

If this was any other country, no one would give a damn.  I love how the group involved openly commented on waiting for daylight for better publicity.  I love how people are ignoring how Israel decided to distribute any non-contraband aid to the Palestinian people.


----------



## hcheng02 (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> *As I said, The Free Gaza Movement, the organizers of the flotilla, said the troops opened fire as soon as they stormed the ships. I've heard that there were actual footage as the soldiers entered the boats.*
> 
> But people here seem to rather believe in IDF, a military branch that have been caught lying a billion times.



Yeah and obviously these activists have no incentive to lie whatsoever. Lol for the neg rep though, I happen to also be American as well as Chinese. 

Lets see where the video evidence takes us though. In any case, attacking soldiers with melee weapons is a big no-no.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

Zabuzalives said:


> did i say that?
> 
> however there is a good deal of hamas supporting/israel haters among the ACTIVISTS.
> 
> ...



I'm sorry, but when even Sky is saying that they saw no knives and think Israel's excuse is "not convincing," you've lost. There isn't an excuse for gunning down international aid workers. 

The more you defend the killing of innocent aid workers, the more ridiculous you look. Keep going, though, as it just looks insane. If China, Iran, Mexico, or any number of other countries had done this, your tune would be completely the opposite. Hypocrite!



dreams lie said:


> If this was any other country, no one would give a damn.



Are you attempting to be serious, or did I miss the /sarc? If China had fired on an international aid convoy in international waters and killed over a dozen people, there would be hell to pay. 

You can't seriously argue that any country would get away with it. More flimsy nonsense.


----------



## The Pink Ninja (May 31, 2010)

*Sigh*

I was under the impression no one was supposed to be killed Israel. Would rubber bullets have killed you?

That said, what did the flotilla expect? Israel said you were free to give it to the UN. Did you think Israel would give up? That you could bully them away?



> If China had fired on an international aid convoy in international waters and killed over a dozen people, there would be hell to pay.



If it was China no one would have gone. The fleet would have been four people in an old row-boat, max.

It's only because it's Israel people think they get get away with this shit.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

hcheng02 said:


> Yeah and obviously these activists have no incentive to lie whatsoever.


But you rather believe in IDF, than civilians? Just answer the question already.

And yeah, I was just saying, you're defending a state which might as well be the Grand Dragon of the KKK.



The Pink Ninja said:


> *Sigh*
> 
> I was under the impression no one was supposed to be killed Israel. Would rubber bullets have killed you?
> 
> That said, what did the flotilla expect? Israel said you were free to give it to the UN. Did you think Israel would give up? That you could bully them away?



According to Israeli law, under the adoption of British Mandate Laws related to naval interdictions/blockades, Israel cannot simply "take" the items and transfer them to Gaza. This is not legal because taking possession of a cargo is considered piracy without proper procedure. Israel is required under IT'S OWN LAW as adopted by the High Court, to conduct a "Prize Court" judicial procedure in order to have the rights to take/transfer possession of the cargo. As for the international law matter, if the siege of Gaza is against Geneva 4 etc., then humanitarian aid is legal in the face of the military blockade. Israel can, of course, interdict these ships, but how they do it and what they do is tightly prescribed. From what they have said publicly, it appears they aren't aware of their own laws. The court of world opinion will judge their piracy.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

The Pink Ninja said:


> *Sigh*
> 
> I was under the impression no one was supposed to be killed Israel. Would rubber bullets have killed you?
> 
> ...



Blame the victim. Blame the 10-19 aid workers who were gunned down. In robotic fashion, no less. 

Like clockwork you defend the indefensible. So freaking predictable. A laugh if not for the dead; instead it's frighteningly slavish.


----------



## hcheng02 (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> But you rather believe in IDF, than civilians? Just answer the question already.
> 
> And yeah, I was just saying, you're defending a state which might as well be *the Grand Dragon of the KKK.*



Pretty rich coming from a neo-Nazi who says Germany invaded Poland for its own good. 



> According to Israeli law, under the adoption of British Mandate Laws related to naval interdictions/blockades, Israel cannot simply "take" the items and transfer them to Gaza. This is not legal because taking possession of a cargo is considered piracy without proper procedure. Israel is required under IT'S OWN LAW as adopted by the High Court, to conduct a "Prize Court" judicial procedure in order to have the rights to take/transfer possession of the cargo. As for the international law matter, if the siege of Gaza is against Geneva 4 etc., then humanitarian aid is legal in the face of the military blockade. Israel can, of course, interdict these ships, but how they do it and what they do is tightly prescribed. From what they have said publicly, it appears they aren't aware of their own laws. The court of world opinion will judge their piracy.



Israel still works on British Mandate laws?


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

hcheng02 said:


> Pretty rich coming from a neo-Nazi who says Germany invaded Poland for *its own good.*


Well, obviously. Why else would they invade Poland, for fun? 



hcheng02 said:


> Israel still works on British Mandate laws?



Yeah, go to fucking school.


----------



## Razgriez (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> I'm sorry, but when even Sky is saying that they saw no knives and think Israel's excuse is "not convincing," you've lost. There isn't an excuse for gunning down international aid workers.
> 
> The more you defend the killing of innocent aid workers, the more ridiculous you look. Keep going, though, as it just looks insane. If China, Iran, Mexico, or any number of other countries had done this, your tune would be completely the opposite. Hypocrite!
> 
> ...


Oh geez. After watching the video and seeing what you mean I cant believe your actually using that as a arguing point.

The video they were showing was obviously of them not during the conflict. Why would you have knives out then? I was hoping to see footage of the ship being cleaned up. By then any weapons would of been picked up as evidence.

This would mean the Israeli commandos have the knives and iron bars which are just as deadly as a knife I might add.

Grabbing a rifle definitely warrants the use of deadly force as well. You forget these are military as well and not police forces so rules of engagement may actually be more loose then actual police use of force standards. This is also Israel we are talking about.

These damn activists got what was coming to them. Enough said. Cry, mourn, bitch, protest, whatever. What do you think happens when you attempt to break a blockade?


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> *As I said, The Free Gaza Movement, the organizers of the flotilla, said the troops opened fire as soon as they stormed the ships. I've heard that there were actual footage as the soldiers entered the boats.*
> 
> But people here seem to rather believe in IDF, a military branch that have been caught lying a billion times.



yes and the ""free gaza movement"" is completely objective in this??? 
activists have been caught lying and exaggerating to suit their goals countless times as well. 

so far no ones immediately rejecting certain reports...you are the only one to blatantly reject everything the IDF reports

From the videos and reporters we know the soldiers were being besieged by activists with blunt weapons. someone carrying a shank or knife among melee weapons is not unlikely then. 

in the struggle and wrestling, someone grabbing on a weapon or the soldiers interpreting it as someone trying to take their weapon is likely as well...giving credence to part of the reports. 

Even hcheng02, who often defends israel in discussions asked for a source on the reports of activists shooting or carrying their own firearms....

its funny that the one with the biggest bias (our litle degelle) is the one trying to blame others of bias.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

Razgriez said:


> *These damn activists got what was coming to them. Enough said.*



Sums it up right here. They got what's coming to them. They deserved to die. The responses here are Orwellian.


----------



## Trias (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Sky News already pronouncing the Israeli excuse "they tried to seize our guns" as "not convincing." Evidence of iron bars and gas masks, but no knives. Up to 19 dead. Wow... just wow.
> 
> You can type 1,000 paragraphs, but even the media are dismissing this nonsense. Nobody believes these aid workers evil terrorists when their ships were boarded in international waters and fired upon. Nobody is believing the dead were somehow responsible.
> 
> It's just not buyable. Just flimsy and threadbare. Give it up.



 Yeah, I bet the world media consists of Sky News, how didn't I know that? Ignorant me. Are you kidding or something?

 One of the soldiers are CONFIRMED to be stabbed with a knive. But of course, this is from Israeli Military, so it can't be trusted, what's why we should take for granted what "passengers claim" right?

 Bah, neo-nazis really can't make any arguments.

 Also, I really wonder where this "not convincing" is stated in this article, and by whom. Sorry, but no one really cares if spokesman for IHH (not that even that exists in the article) thinks this is not very convincing. we're talking about the guys who took a 1 year old baby on a ship, and actually wanted to get attacked in daylight so they'd film it better.

 Baww cry me ariver.



Degelle said:


> *As I said, The Free Gaza Movement, the organizers of the flotilla, said the troops opened fire as soon as they stormed the ships. I've heard that there were actual footage as the soldiers entered the boats.*



 OH SO THEY SAID SO? Ok it's concluded guys, Degelle's right.



> But people here seem to rather believe in IDF, a military branch that have been caught lying a billion times.



 Oh rly?



Shinigami Perv said:


> I'm sorry, but when even Sky is saying that they saw no knives and think Israel's excuse is "not convincing," you've lost. There isn't an excuse for gunning down international aid workers.
> 
> The more you defend the killing of innocent aid workers, the more ridiculous you look. Keep going, though, as it just looks insane. If China, Iran, Mexico, or any number of other countries had done this, you're tune would be completely the opposite. Hypocrite!


 
 And can you highlight where does it exactly say it's not convincing and stuff?

 Look, you simply have no right to call anyone hypocrite when a full board of people that actively say Israel should be destroyed are called "humanitarian aid" even when they claim it has nothing to do with humanitarian aid, but has to do with political propoganda. 

 You are the hypocrite. I love how modern world gives these fucktards power to use words that were created to describe them. You're a hypocrite raging neo-nazi, a radical islamist that has a boner for palestinians. That's all.

 Oh also, props for Hamas for crying about how Brutal this attack was. Bawww.


----------



## Razgriez (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Sums it up right here. They got what's coming to them. They deserved to die. The responses here are Orwellian.



They didnt deserve to die. But when you go into a bear's cave to mess with the bears dont expect to come out alive.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Zabuzalives said:


> From the videos and reporters we know the soldiers were being besieged by activists with blunt weapons. someone carrying a shank or knife among melee weapons is not unlikely then.


Which video???? Link!!

Edit: Israel still shooting on the boat despite the white flags, class move.



Razgriez said:


> They didnt deserve to die. But when you go into a bear's cave to mess with the bears dont expect to come out alive.


What on earth are you talking about? "Bear's cave"?? They were in international water, steering directly into Palestinian water.

Israel breached international law. They killed officials from Kuwait, and Sheikh Salah, along with civilians, they will hopefully be held accountable for this.


----------



## Trias (May 31, 2010)

Bah, they've not even watched the videos but trying to argue. How funny.


----------



## dreams lie (May 31, 2010)

Can someone explain to me why Israel is accountable to the rules that do not apply to anyone else in warfare?  This concept has always bothered me, and combined with the ridiculous fascination with Israel over all other global issues, it really helps alienate people away from the Palestinians.


----------



## xenopyre (May 31, 2010)

Razgriez said:


> These damn activists got what was coming to them. Enough said. Cry, mourn, bitch, protest, whatever. What do you think happens when you attempt to break a blockade?


:rofl this kind of arguement is exactly "women shouldnt dress as they want becouse they can get rapped and they got it coming " your basically defending a rapist beocuse the women wore a reveiling dress .Israel had no right  to threaten nor prevent the ship from attaining Gaza in the first place .


----------



## Razgriez (May 31, 2010)

dreams lie said:


> Can someone explain to me why Israel is accountable to the rules that do not apply to anyone else in warfare?  This concept has always bothered me, and combined with the ridiculous fascination with Israel over all other global issues helps alienate people away from the Palestinians.



Since Israel is perceived to be just like the west they are held to a MUCH higher standard that is impossible to live up to when it comes to conflict.

We already expect the opposition to not follow international rules when it comes to violence so no one cares. Plus every little idiot feels the need to root for the underdog and the opposed victim of imperialism. Blah bleh blah bleeh blah.



> this kind of arguement is exactly "women shouldnt dress as they want becouse they can get rapped and they got it coming " your basically defending a rapist beocuse the women wore a reveiling dress .Israel had no right to threaten nor prevent the ship from attaining Gaza in the first place .



No. Just no. That was bad and full of fail.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

Trias said:


> And can you highlight where does it exactly say it's not convincing and stuff?



Watch the video. I gave a direct quote from the reporter who was there. 



> You are the hypocrite.



You are a monster. 

You defend the gunning down of international aid workers. Monstrous. The fact that you even reply in defense should be cause for self-examination on your part.


----------



## Razgriez (May 31, 2010)

> What on earth are you talking about? "Bear's cave"?? They were in international water, steering directly into Palestinian water.
> 
> Israel breached international law. They killed officials from Kuwait, and Sheikh Salah, along with civilians, they will hopefully be held accountable for this.



Oh my god cant you see its a fucking analogy to the situation?

Ok Ill break it down for you!

The bears are the Israelis.

The cave is the blockade.

You enter it and BOOM you get hit. If Israel REALLY didnt give 2 shits about these people they would of just blown the boat up. At least then it would be clear about their stance on the situation instead of this stupid "he said she said shit".


----------



## dreams lie (May 31, 2010)

xenopyre said:


> :rofl this kind of arguement is exactly "women shouldnt dress as they want becouse they can get rapped and they got it coming " your basically defending a rapist beocuse the women wore a reveiling dress .Israel had no right  to threaten nor prevent the ship from attaining Gaza in the first place .



They are at war.  Hamas, the ruling faction in Gaza, has declared their intentions to make Israel disappear off the face of the earth.  Why do they not have the right to blockade a dangerous state as a means of self defense?  Do not try to pin the responsibility of the Palestinian people on Israel because the Israelis did not elect the extremists into power.  The Palestinians did, and if anything, Hamas should be taking care of their own people as opposed to perpetuating a war they cannot hope to win.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Razgriez said:


> Oh my god cant you see its a fucking analogy to the situation?



A retarded one, yes, I was just about to ask what the fuck you were thinking.


----------



## id_1948 (May 31, 2010)

Thats a very very stupid action by the israelis

The whole point of this exercise in the end was never about breaking the siege (not going to happen with a few boats getting to gaza), or strengthening hamas (also not really going to happen)

Its about who will win in the media... will the activists be able to move the media towards portraying the suffering that happens to the palestinians and the disproportionate response of the israelis
Or
will the israelis show the world that they are firm and will not budge from their position... but at the same time show the world how they will deal with these activists in international water in a fair and respected manner

Unfortunately once 10 activists were shot dead- youve lost the media battle

You have MP on these ships along with prominent politicians, you have media as well who showed footage and telephone calls that were suddenly cut off with screams of hebrew

Im not sure what the israelis were thinking... this was just stupid over the top behavior that will alienate more of the world against them and show them in a more negative light 

Its exactly actions like this, along with the over the top bombing of gaza in 2009, the use of civillian identities with foreign passports from friendly countries to conduct overseas assassinations  along with the usual occupation and repression of the palestinians that in the long harm will do more harm to israel than anything else

Still cant believe they killed them... incredibly foolish


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> I'm sorry, but when even Sky is saying that they saw no knives and think Israel's excuse is "not convincing," you've lost. There isn't an excuse for gunning down international aid workers.
> 
> The more you defend the killing of innocent aid workers, the more ridiculous you look. Keep going, though, as it just looks insane. If China, Iran, Mexico, or any number of other countries had done this, your tune would be completely the opposite. Hypocrite!



care to link it better, cause i dont see it on that report. 

1 sky reporter not seeing a knife is not suprising seeing how they can be inconspicuous and lost during the chaos. 

from your own fucking link: 
The pictures make the operation look cack-handed from the start. Commandos rappel down ropes straight into a crowd of activists wielding bars. They appear overwhelmed at first and in insufficient numbers, unable to seize control.
Sky's Middle East correspondent Dominic Waghorn 

we also have fucking video proof of activists BEATING on a soldier with blunt weapons. 

this is where soldiers and cops alike get panicky and fear for their safety, overwhelmed by agressive activists in a melee struggle. 

your asking for a higher level of restraint from soldiers then would be required even from cops. 



unlike you, where your bias clearly shows from your exaggerated and twisted words when israel is concerned (massacre/genocide/innocent aid workers) i am waiting for you to quote me on doing similar. 

your ""you would act different in this future/theoretical example"" is nothing but guess-work...that you put it forward as an argument is just sad. 

No i would not change my tune under similar circumstances. Activists assaulting armed forces causing them to panick and use lethal force for their safety and to regain control is something that happens more often and is understandable.


----------



## Razgriez (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> A retarded one, yes, I was just about to ask what the fuck you were thinking.



Obviously we dont think alike at all.

Your going to continue to hate Israel and everything they stand for.

Im just pointing out maybe JUST maybe you shouldnt just blindly hate and look deeper into the situation and use whatever little intellectual capacity your feeble little brain can produce to actually assess the situation and make a educated decision.


----------



## xenopyre (May 31, 2010)

dreams lie said:


> They are at war.  Hamas, the ruling faction in Gaza, has declared their intentions to make Israel disappear off the face of the earth.  Why do they not have the right to blockade a dangerous state as a means of self defense?  Do not try to pin the responsibility of the Palestinian people on Israel because the Israelis did not elect the extremists into power.  The Palestinians did, and if anything, Hamas should be taking care of their own people as opposed to perpetuating a war they cannot hope to win.


what does hamas have to do with this ? the aid was distinated to the Palistinains not hamas and also , israel forcing a blockade on Gaza only apllies to them they cant prevent other countries form helping Gaza , to do so they have to make a UN resolution .


----------



## dreams lie (May 31, 2010)

> Thats a very very stupid action by the israelis
> 
> The whole point of this exercise in the end was never about breaking the siege (not going to happen with a few boats getting to gaza), or strengthening hamas (also not really going to happen)
> 
> ...


Oh please.  The Israel never stood a chance to win the hearts and minds of the global community.  Despite all of the talk of the dreaded Zionists' media, the vast majority of the world views the Jewish state negatively, and it is unlikely such a small incident would change entire attitudes.  You have a billion people in the earth using Israel as a political scapegoat with dozens of representing countries condemning Israel at every single turn.  You expect Israel to give a darn what the world thinks about them?



> what does hamas have to do with this ? the aid was distinated to the Palistinains not hamas and also , israel forcing a blockade on Gaza only apllies to them they cant prevent other countries form helping Gaza , to do so they have to make a UN resolution .



This is exactly what I am talking about.  We need a U.N. resolution to grant nations at war the right to blockade each other?  You cannot separate the elected government from the people.  Ultimately, they are responsible for each other.  They made their bed, now they can lie in it.  Even with the greatest intentions (and the intentions here were purely political propaganda), some of the contraband will find its way into the hands of people actively working to kill Israeli citizens.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Razgriez said:


> Obviously we dont think alike at all.
> 
> Your going to continue to hate Israel and everything they stand for.
> 
> Im just pointing out maybe JUST maybe you shouldnt just blindly hate and look deeper into the situation and use whatever little intellectual capacity your feeble little brain can produce to actually assess the situation and make a educated decision.


You're suppose to think before you type, not the other way around.

You've basically said that the 10+ civilians that were killed deserved it. And, I don't know if you're this stupid or just this gullible, but the flotilla goal was to get media attention to the situation in Gaza, not in their wildest dreams did they think they would ever reach the shore.

This is piracy and murder, period. You don't have a single "intellectual" argument that can defend it, nothing.

The aftermath is as follows;


> The European Union has called for an inquiry into the attack. Individual European governments are also starting to issue statements: Sweden's foreign minister, Carl Bildt, said his government summoned the Israeli ambassador "to get information."





> The Syrian government has called for an Arab League meeting to discuss the attack.





> Kuwait's parliament is due to hold an emergency meeting today to discuss the raid. Waleed al-Tabtabai, a member of parliament, was one of 16 Kuwaiti nationals on board the ships.





> Update, 7:47am: We're getting reports of a protest planned for later this morning outside the prime minister's office in Amman, Jordan. The organisers are reportedly demanding the closure of the Israeli embassy in Amman.





> Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu is scheduled to visit Washington later this week to visit US president Barack Obama. Ha'aretz reports that he may cancel the trip in the wake of the flotilla attack (though we should note the Ha'aretz report isn't actually sourced to anyone).





> Ismail Haniya, the Hamas leader in Gaza, wrapped up a speech to journalists a few minutes ago. He called on the Palestinian Authority to end its indirect talks with Israel, demanded a United Nations Security Council meeting to discuss the attack on the flotilla, and called for a general strike tomorrow (Tuesday) in the West Bank and Gaza.


----------



## Razgriez (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> You're suppose to think before you type, not the other way around.
> 
> *You've basically said that the 10+ civilians that were killed deserved it.* And, I don't know if you're this stupid or just this gullible, but the flotilla goal was to get media attention to the situation in Gaza, not in their wildest dreams did they think they would ever reach the shore.
> 
> ...



I could of sworn I already said something about them deserving it.

They definitely accomplished their goal. Their sacrifice will most definitely be in their favor since Israel cant do anything right at all. EVEN if the situation was as the Israeli's said they will still be perceived as wrong to you and others just like you.


----------



## id_1948 (May 31, 2010)

dreams lie said:


> Oh please.  The Israel never stood a chance to win the hearts and minds of the global community.  Despite all of the talk of the dreaded Zionists' media, the vast majority of the world views the Jewish state negatively, and it is unlikely such a small incident would change entire attitudes.  You have a billion people in the earth using Israel as a political scapegoat with dozens of representing countries condemning Israel at every single turn.  You expect Israel to give a darn what the world thinks about them?



You dont realise that israel actually relies alot on the world opinion and takes it very seriously... preparing in advance for worst case scenarios

Similar thing happened in the Gaza war in 09- there was great effort and preplanning on what to say to the media.. how to describe it and so forth

This was one of them... the prime minister and the cabinet even had plans on how to confront this fleet... from pulling these vessels to Ashdod port and showing them the rockets shot onto the israeli towns with pictures of shalit... along with numerous suggestions to how to paint this to the media 

In this end this was a media battle

The activists wanted to highlight the plight of the palestinians to the world and israeli brutality

The israelis realised that confronting civillians in international waters is a problem and dilemma... especially when you have MPs and the news following every movement

Once you kill 10 civillians who could be european or americans then youve lost the battle- everything from now will be shown in context of these killings... 

I know the israelis have done really stupid things in the past... but really what were they thinking??? in my opinion allowing the fleet to reach gaza would have been better for the israelis in the long term then this....


----------



## xenopyre (May 31, 2010)

dreams lie said:


> This is exactly what I am talking about.  We need a U.N. resolution to grant nations at war the right to blockade each other?  You cannot separate the elected government from the people.  Ultimately, they are responsible for each other.  They made their bed, now they can lie in it.  Even with the greatest intentions (and the intentions here were purely political propaganda), some of the contraband will find its way into the hands of people actively working to kill Israeli citizens.


If country A is at war with country B they have the absolute right to blockade them , but you need a UN resolution to force other countries who are not currently at war with country B to cut thier relationships with country B


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> Which video???? Link!!





seeing how in my country some hooligans were shot by cops for exactly this behaviour and even with our pussy laws it was deemed justifiable I really dont understand all the BAAAWWING about this.




this is what i suppose went down: 

Israel boards in the night in international waters to take the boat by suprise, so there would be little resistance, and ofcourse little media. instead of the long publicised face-off that was gonna take place if they tried to stop it later.

This enfuriates the activists who try to stop the boarding and a struggle/fight breaks out. 

the soldiers, being outnumbered and attacked by melee weapons, being tugged on, people trying to wrestle away their weapons or soldiers perceiving it as such when people grab onto them in th struggle, fear for their safety, and panicky react with gunfire to control the situation. result=wounded on both sides, and dead activists.


Which is the middle ground between Free Gaza reports and IDF reports...and likely based on the video facts we have. 


im waiting for more reports and proof before fully buying either IDF (they had firearms and knives and were attacking us) or the Free Gaza.(israeli soldiers starting shooting people at the start....which seems by far the most unlikely btw)


----------



## Razgriez (May 31, 2010)

Zabuzalives said:


> seeing how in my country some hooligans were shot by cops for exactly this behaviour and even with our pussy laws it was deemed justifiable I really dont understand all the BAAAWWING about this.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thats the same video Shim posted.



> If country A is at war with country B they have the absolute right to blockade them , but you need a UN resolution to force other countries who are not currently at war with country B to cut thier relationships with country B



The UN is also a joke of an organization more powerful nations selectively agree to follow from time to time.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Zabuzalives said:


> seeing how in my country some hooligans were shot by cops for exactly this behaviour and even with our pussy laws it was deemed justifiable I really dont understand all the BAAAWWING about this.


Sorry, I don't see any "hooligan" activity.

 <-(Audio) Claims that there were no gunfire, and she never saw any axes or knifes.


----------



## Razgriez (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> Sorry, I don't see any "hooligan" activity.
> 
> <-(Audio) Claims that there were no gunfire, and she never saw any axes or knifes.



So 10 people just fell over and died for no reason when the Israelis boarded?


----------



## Toby (May 31, 2010)

It seems that a lot of the morality here centers around attacking the innocent and unarmed, but there has yet to be any proof about whether or not these ships were armed or not. The ships were searched before leaving for Gaza, but the official Israeli response for taking force was that they were shot at when they approached the fleet. So they need to search those ships again clearly, and that's why the inquiry is needed. It would be a shame if someone did smuggle arms aboard and harm the peace mission.

I'm not sure really what to think about the deaths though. It's just so annoying that it had to come to this because it ruins the international mood for a peaceful solution. It damages Israel because it reinforces Hamas' reputation in Gaza, and Hamas and Gaza by extension is going to be in a pretty bad spot if this aid isn't moved on via Israel. I think that is the only way for Israel to regain face from this. And of course they did offer to transport the aid this way, but because it is so insanely important to make a show of these aid fleets, they stuck to it.

5000 tons of aid goes into Gaza every week. This float had approx. 10000 tons. All of this could have been transported into Gaza via the roads, and yet this was how it went down. It's what happens when you put two incredibly stubborn people next to each other. I'm not surprised because these disasters just get worse and worse, and we get accustomed to watching the most innocent kinds of people being gunned down in all parts of the world, justified in the name of security. It's bloody annoying and everybody wants this conflict to end, but the supporters of both sides are so insanely fuelled by this stubbornness that I sometimes wonder if it is at all possible to make peace possible there.


----------



## id_1948 (May 31, 2010)

Zabuzalives said:


> this is what i suppose went down:
> 
> Israel boards in the night in international waters to take the boat by suprise, so there would be little resistance, and ofcourse little media. instead of the long publicised face-off that was gonna take place if they tried to stop it later.
> 
> ...



Isnt it silly for the israels to board the ship with few numbers??

They had a few agents grabble down from helicopters

Were they really expecting the people on board the ships to move aside and hand them the keys???

I mean these are international waters... these werent israeli waters or even the waters that legally belong along the gaza border

The activists were perfectly entitled to resist

What most likely happened was that the israelis boarded... they were too few in numbers... and the activists started pushing them around

They panicked... and started firing- people died

In an area which israel has no jurisdiction (international waters)- civillians from various countries were killed

These was very stupid tactic from the israels... couldnt they disable the engines and tug the boats to there ports??? couldnt they board in large numbers and overwhelm and subdue the passengers???

I mean they just gave a free card to every israeli basher in the world, confirmed that they use excessive violence against civillians... and people who are impartial will now look at the situation differently

What were the israelis objectives through all this??? i dont think they know what theyre doing anymore


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> Sorry, I don't see any "hooligan" activity.
> 
> <-(Audio) Claims that there were no gunfire, and she never saw any axes or knifes.



fix your eyes?  (they moved it) 21 seconds in

at the start you can see activists hitting a armed soldier with sticks etc.  



And its 1 eyewitness report..... there were hundreds of people on board, the israelis landed on several sites, knives are incredibly easy to conceal. Dont fucking pretend she has an all seeing eye like shinigami perv does???? its retarded. 

also i believe there was 1 israeli wounded from a stab wound? that means the number of knives was few and most just had blunt weapons...which can kill you just as well btw. 
combined with the chaos, large numbers, several sites, and small object its no suprise she did not see any knives. Not that it even matters that much..you want to see what i can do to someones face with a lead pipe?


from sky

The pictures make the operation look cack-handed from the start. Commandos rappel down ropes straight into a crowd of activists wielding bars. They appear OVERWHELMED at first and in insufficient numbers, unable to seize control.
Sky's Middle East correspondent Dominic Waghorn


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

id_1948 said:


> Isnt it silly for the israels to board the ship with few numbers?? They had a few agents grabble down from helicopters



kinda hard to drop 100 soldiers out of helicopters at once. 

but yeah..it was not smart..they probably thought they would take them by suprise and their heavily armed commando's would not be opposed. 



id_1948 said:


> Were they really expecting the people on board the ships to move aside and hand them the keys???



yes.

which was a mistake. 


clearly they did not intended for this to go down this way as it is a huge publicity disaster. 



id_1948 said:


> I mean these are international waters... these werent israeli waters or even the waters that legally belong along the gaza border
> 
> The activists were perfectly entitled to resist



within common sense. trying to lynch the soldiers is an action that gets you killed...with only yourself to blame for your death for a large part....



id_1948 said:


> What most likely happened was that the israelis boarded... they were too few in numbers... and the activists started pushing them around
> 
> They panicked... and started firing- people died



meh, eating them with sticks and steel pipes is not mere ""pushing"" 

but yeah, thats what i expect. crowd control gone bad. 



id_1948 said:


> In an area which israel has no jurisdiction (international waters)- civillians from various countries were killed



yep, should have waited really. 



id_1948 said:


> These was very stupid tactic from the israels... couldnt they disable the engines and tug the boats to there ports??? couldnt they board in large numbers and overwhelm and subdue the passengers???
> 
> I mean they just gave a free card to every israeli basher in the world,



yep, but then again, no matter what israel does it will get bashed by these peple. 



id_1948 said:


> confirmed that they use excessive violence against civillians... and people who are impartial will now look at the situation differently



mwoah. not if they know the full picture. I mean its not like not caring about international waters is the worst what israel has done in the past. 

but yeah, most left papers will go ""poor innocent aid workers massacred"" and it will effect general view. 



id_1948 said:


> What were the israelis objectives through all this??? i dont think they know what theyre doing anymore



meh just overestimated the common sense of the activists.


----------



## FrostXian (May 31, 2010)

Turkey's president has tried to be a hero for the eastern world, bu he's apparently too stupid to know that you do NOT fuck with Israel.


----------



## The Pink Ninja (May 31, 2010)

There's a great deal to be made from how fast this thread has grown and how intense people are about it. Last thread I remember growing this fast was Cast Lead... and the last one before that was 2006 Lebanon War.



Shinigami Perv said:


> Blame the victim. Blame the 10-19 aid workers who were gunned down. In robotic fashion, no less.
> 
> Like clockwork you defend the indefensible. So freaking predictable. A laugh if not for the dead; instead it's frighteningly slavish.



Yes yes, me so dumb, you so smart. You so moral, I suck Satan's thorny cock. You're thoughtful and I just copy pasta from Glenn Beck. Got anything other than ad hominem? Think your "" emote makes your post more convincing? Think it makes you like anything but a petulant child? Anything you said in there I couldn't apply to you?

And can we please have a civil debate now?

These "victims" were told repeatedly for days (Weeks?) that if they tried to run the blockade they would be boarded. What did they think would happen? Israel didn't just pick someone at random, they didn't storm their houses while they were drinking coco and telling stories from their native lands. Israel warned them and warned them and warned them. They said they would stop the boats, they said they would enforce the blockade. They said if they gave the aid to the UN it could all go through.

What was Israel supposed to do? If they didn't enforce the blockade it'd be the cue for every boat in the world to run it, surely some of which would be carrying arms. Think people are going to try and run it now? (Admittedly it could go either way: This could be the incident that launches a thousand ships. It is however still a maybe compared to a certainty).

Likewise, what did they think they were doing? If they wanted to give aid, hand it over to the UN. If they wanted a PR coup, well hey, they just got one. If they wanted to save some lives they should have gone to somewhere in Africa where people are actually starving, as opposed to Gaza where about 30 people have died from the blockade in three years, none of them by starvation. If Israel was actively starving the Gazans to death I'd be giving Free Gaza my own money (Theoretically), but they weren't

Also what official inquiry report are you reading? You seems to have some very specific details, like that the IDF troops "Gunned them down robotically". The thing just happened, everything is hazy and chaotic but you seem sure of exactly what went down. What do you know that I don't know? (Actually, don't answer that last one).

For Israel it's a simple equation. If they don't enforce the blockade this time, it's useless. If there's no blockade Hamas will re-arm more easily. If they do more Israel's will get killed. For any country the choice of your own citizens or someone else's is an easy decision.

You would surely characterise me as "Pro-Israel". I would characterise myself as realistic. Israel is gonna do what it's gonna to do make itself as safe as possible. If they were working to an absolutely ethical standard they'd raise the blockade, let the ships through and prepare their bunkers for the inevitable rocket salvo. The first goal of any state is to assure it's security and right now, with the blockade, Israel is more secure than it has ever been. First and foremost people want to be alive and able to go about their day without feeling like death could fall from the sky or the shop they're in might blow up. Gaza doesn't really have that, but for Israel, it's always going to be a secondary concern. At best.

You've called this a massacre. Not the word I would have chosen but not an incorrect use. I've seen incidents where fewer died that were still called massacres. But for Israel this wasn't about a hand for a row-boats or some bags of cement or some boxes of baby formulae. It was feeling like you're constantly under assault, from the Arab countries, from Muslims who've never been to Israel/Palestine, from European liberals who hold you to an impossibly high standard (And only you). This while there are still Israelis with Auschwitz tattoos on their arms. I'd call them paranoid but that implies irrationality. They have a country you could spit across and a population you can count on your hands. The IDF is designed around three separate commands with the idea they will need to fight off three invasions at once. That's the kind of reality Israelis live with.

They're not going to take risks with their safety, they're not going to let anyone push them around and they're not going to allow their incredibly successful blockade just flop at the first provocation.


----------



## Darth (May 31, 2010)

Sooo... Israel shot and killed more than 10 people who were trying to take aid to Gaza?

And there were no weapons on board?



Cut and dry, this is pretty typical action for Israeli's. Mow down innocent bystanders who are trying to save lives.

Brilliant.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Zabuzalives said:


> fix your eyes?  (they moved it) 21 seconds in
> 
> at the start you can see activists hitting a armed soldier with sticks etc.


That was not the video you gave me, how am I suppose to be able to see footage that's not inside the footage?

I can see a couple of activist hitting soldiers with sticks. Sorry, where are the axes, the knifes and "live ammunition"? The activist has every right to defend themselves, Israel has no right to board the ship. No right what-so-ever. 

Let alone to kill 10+ civilians because of some sticks. Also, according to the sources Israel was also shooting from the helicopter, and afterwards the soldiers boarded the ship. No wonder that they were getting hit with sticks.



Razgriez said:


> So 10 people just fell over and died for no reason when the Israelis boarded?



I thought you were able to think on your own, perhaps I should make it so that even the most dimwitted individual can grasp it; There is no evidence of any gunfire from the flotilla(as you can see in the video as well), or any knives or axes other than the statements from IDF.


----------



## vivEnergy (May 31, 2010)

Fail operation is fail. Oh and too many people are watching this thread.

Plus what did the people attacking the commandos with crowbars were expecting, gummybears ?

I really don't understand those people, it's been 40 years and they are still at the throwing rocks phase, if that isn't love i wonder what is


----------



## OmniStrife (May 31, 2010)

2 officers are hospitalized with gunshot wounds.
One in the knee and one in the stomach.
Humanitarians for sure....


----------



## Blue (May 31, 2010)

> "We fully intend to go to Gaza regardless of any intimidation or threats of violence against us," she said. "They are going to have to forcefully stop us."





No sympathy for fools throwing their lives to the wind in the name of politics instead of morality. None.


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> That was not the video you gave me, how am I suppose to be able to see footage that's not inside the footage?



thats why i said they moved it. this video was posted on the 3rd page of this thread though and several times after. 



Degelle said:


> I can see a couple of activist hitting soldiers with sticks. Sorry, where are the axes, the knifes and "live ammunition"?



just as how the sky reporter is not an all seeing eye, this video only shows a part of the complete event. 

ofcourse i expect the IDF to exaggerate. 

however with the wounded soldier and the easy way to acquire or bring along a shank or stabbing weapon, i can see people using knifes as possible/likely. 



Degelle said:


> The activist has every right to defend themselves, Israel has no right to board the ship. No right what-so-ever.



they were not defending themselves. 

they were defending the ship from being boarded...by attacking the soldiers. 

what happens if you corner and attack cops or soldiers in such a way they fear for their safety?? 

exactly..

stop BAAAWWWING, what do you expect the soldiers to do after being dropped? get seriously wounded or beaten to death? hand over their weapons so their comrades are in even greater threath? 



Degelle said:


> Let alone to kill 10+ civilians because of some sticks.



unlike riot police these guys had nothing to shield themselves.


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> No sympathy for fools throwing their lives to the wind in the name of politics instead of morality. None.



the sad part is those hippies actually think they are heroes because of antics like that. i dont understand how they can be so black and white in their stance.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Zabuzalives said:


> thats why i said they moved it. this video was posted on the 3rd page of this thread though and several times after.
> 
> just as how the sky reporter is not an all seeing eye, this video only shows a part of the complete event.
> 
> ...



"Bawwwing", are you mentally ill? Civilians got killed. Have you no moral fucking compass? You would surely have to be an Israeli or Jewish, or in some way connected to Israel, to have such bias as to call it "BAWWWING", disgusting.

As I said, Israel had no right to board the ship, no matter what you might want to think and believe. The activist, protected by humanitarian laws nad international laws are entitled to self defense.

Israel broke international law the minute they intercepted the boat and boarded it. It is piracy and murder, PERIOD. Not a single argument you can come up with can justify or defend it.


----------



## FrostXian (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> "Bawwwing", are you mentally ill? Civilians got killed. Have you no moral fucking compass? You would surely have to be an Israeli or Jewish, or in some way connected to Israel, to have such bias as to call it "BAWWWING", disgusting.
> 
> As I said, Israel had no right to board the ship, no matter what you might want to think and believe. The activist, protected by humanitarian laws nad international laws are entitled to self defense.
> 
> Israel broke international law the minute they intercepted the boat and boarded it. It is piracy and murder, PERIOD. Not a single argument you can come up with can justify or defend it.


You don't know if that's true. You actually believe the protesters were so brave and borderline superhuman that they rushed against people shooting at them with advanced weaponry, stole their pistols and shot them?

Really.


----------



## xenopyre (May 31, 2010)

FrostXian said:


> You don't know if that's true. You actually believe the protesters were so brave and borderline superhuman that they rushed against people shooting at them with advanced weaponry, stole their pistols and shot them?
> 
> Really.


They were brave enough to defy Israel's blockade so my guess would be yes


----------



## Ƶero (May 31, 2010)

Slaughtering innocent civilians yet again with disproportionate force. No surprise that they're known as fucking scumbags. 

Seriously Israel, only 16 ?
I expected more, tsk tsk.


----------



## Trias (May 31, 2010)

Wow, when I thought these couldn't get any more ridiculous, this is really getting.

 So apparently these evil Israeli soldiers were able to drop onto the board, and somehow attack at sleeping civilians even though the whole thing was being filmed, and the clash had started BEFORE they boarded the ship.

 Wow, really ridiculous.


----------



## OmniStrife (May 31, 2010)

Zero? said:


> Slaughtering innocent civilians yet again with disproportionate force. No surprise that they're known as fucking scumbags.
> 
> Seriously Israel, only 16 ?
> I expected more, tsk tsk.



Innocent civilians don't attack with knives, clubs and firearms.
Strangely, death and injury occurred on only a single boat.


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> "Bawwwing", are you mentally ill? Civilians got killed.



civilians that pick up weapons to try and kill an enemy with..arent really ""civilians"" anymore. 

just adding the tag ""civilians"" to the victims does not mean they are completely innocent and played no part in their resulting death. 

the hooligans that tried to lynch cops are also ""civilians"". poor poor hooligans  



Degelle said:


> Have you no moral fucking compass?



do you have it? you are selective in your empathy and outrage...which is disgusting. 

that is also why you can make such a huge deal out of relatively small things. 
If you were consistent and fair you would be to busy being outraged about the greater evils and tragedies. 

instead you ignore those, excuse those (disgusting) or brush those aside
in favor of making a fuss out of anything israel related. Cause you hate israel.


nice moral compas....your nothing but a hatefull ..... (you fill in the blank) 



Degelle said:


> You would surely have to be an Israeli or Jewish, or in some way connected to Israel, to have such bias as to call it "BAWWWING", disgusting.



try common sense. 

attacking armed commando's to the point they fear for their life=not smart. 

boarding the ship was wrong, but you cant blame the soldiers for not wanting to get their head smashed in....




Degelle said:


> As I said, Israel had no right to board the ship, no matter what you might want to think and believe. The activist, protected by humanitarian laws nad international laws are entitled to self defense.



they were not defending themselves. 

they were defending the ship from being boarded...by attacking the soldiers. 

who in turn had to defend themselves from getting lynched. 




Degelle said:


> Israel broke international law the minute they intercepted the boat and boarded it.



yep. bad but i save my energy for the real tragedies.  



Degelle said:


> It is piracy



not really, when they are putting a blockade in a war situation and giving ample warning and alternatives for the shipment. 



Degelle said:


> and murder,



jurys stll out on that one. self-defense, premeditated or not? etc. 



Degelle said:


> PERIOD. Not a single argument you can come up with can justify or defend it.



keep telling yourself that and some magical day it may come true!! 

if that was true why are you still arguing?


----------



## T.D.A (May 31, 2010)

Let's all hate on Israel today, 

them dickheads.


----------



## butcher50 (May 31, 2010)

Barak is such a fucking dumbass, NO ONE goes into a melee range to solve problems as the first action, they Should have by all common sense blocked the line from a distane and scrambled their motor.

but no, that dumbass sends our boys down there into a melee range to show off our dick, really big mistake, BIG mistake.

Barak needs to be fired, he is unfit to manage anything at all.

what the fuck did he expected opting to solve things at a point-blank contact? of course those french turks went nuts.


----------



## Charlotte D. Kurisu (May 31, 2010)

1) If this was actually a publicity stunt by the flotilla than they have succeeded and Israel are idiots. ppl claim the flotilla "deserved it".. while if another country did the same thing they would claim to be "smart" or "unintentional" ...

2) if this was really just aid to Gaza, than this incident has only shown a side of israel 85% of the world already knew but did nothing about it.

this won't change shit imo, if israel is backed up by the US and UK, nothing can stand against it.

this will blow in a few days/weeks maximum..


may the lost souls rest in peace..


also LOL NF, i thought it was normal to justify racism or religious discrimination.. but justify deaths in international waters? lol thats a new low NF..


----------



## Blue (May 31, 2010)

While they probably didn't expect to die, these inveterate idiots picked a fight with armed soldiers of the IDF (an organization not known for its restraint) specifically to cause an incident and provide fuel for the controversy, which is the only weapon the Palestinians have left against the state they tried to destroy three times in the past.

And those making "waaaaahh moral compass" noises in this thread are their witting or unwilling tools.

Explain to me why exactly I should shed a tear? These people got what they wanted.


----------



## T.D.A (May 31, 2010)

lol NF is made of a bunch of Zionists.


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

butcher50 said:


> Barak is such a fucking dumbass, NO ONE goes into a melee range to solve problems as the first action, they Should have by all common sense blocked the line from a distane and scrambled their motor.
> 
> but no, that dumbass sends our boys down there into a melee range to show off our dick, really big mistake, BIG mistake.
> 
> ...



this, couldnt they just sabotaged the ships propellor with a scuba team, or if moving, just span a metal/steel cable underneath the ship to disable it that way??


one of the dumbest operation in ages from israel. throw in soldiers at close range to a mob of fanatical activists.


----------



## butcher50 (May 31, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> While they probably didn't expect to die, these inveterate idiots picked a fight with armed soldiers of the IDF (an organization not known for its restraint) specifically to cause an incident and provide fuel for the controversy, which is the only weapon the Palestinians have left against the state they tried to destroy three times in the past.
> 
> And those making "waaaaahh moral compass" noises in this thread are their witting or unwilling tools.
> 
> Explain to me why exactly I should shed a tear? These people got what they wanted.



none the less, our israel command made an very dumb mistake trying to solve the problem by going into close-touch contact with those deaf hippies.

and now we gotta answer for this dumb mistake.


----------



## T.D.A (May 31, 2010)

butcher50 said:


> none the less, our israel command made an very dumb mistake by trying to solve the problem by going into close-touch contact with those deaf hippies.
> 
> and now we gotta answer for this dumb mistake.



OMG you must be a genius. No doubt you are on 6 figure salary.


----------



## Blue (May 31, 2010)

T.D.A said:


> lol NF is made of a bunch of Zionists.



Sry bro, they warned me about 9/11 and got me out of the WTC. I'm kind of indentured to them.


----------



## butcher50 (May 31, 2010)

T.D.A said:


> OMG you must be a genius. No doubt you are on 6 figure salary.



my sarcasm sensor is off these days, what do you mean?


----------



## Blue (May 31, 2010)

butcher50 said:


> my sarcasm sensor is off these days, what do you mean?



He's making fun of your poor grammar, I assume, implying that because English clearly isn't your first language, your opinion must be wrong. (it isn't, these stupid boat people are to blame, but Israel could help by not shooting first and shooting again later).


----------



## butcher50 (May 31, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> He's making fun of your poor grammar, I assume, implying that because English clearly isn't your first language, your opinion must be wrong. (it isn't).



well excuse me, i'm russian.

english is my third language.


----------



## T.D.A (May 31, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> Sry bro, they warned me about 9/11 and got me out of the WTC. I'm kind of indentured to them.



Tis shame, sometimes you got to say "Hey you were right for that thing, thanks" "You suck for that though".


----------



## OmniStrife (May 31, 2010)

And finally people will shut the fuck up now.

IDF has just released footage from the operation.
The bastards were armed to their teeth, through shock grenades, molotov cocktails all over the place.

I'll send a link once it's online.


----------



## OmniStrife (May 31, 2010)

Now what??



			
				ynet said:
			
		

> A brutal ambush at sea
> 
> Ron Ben Yishai recounts bloody clash aboard Gaza-bound vessel: The lacking crowd-dispersal means, the brutal violence of ‘peace activists,’ and the attempt to bring down an IDF helicopter
> 
> ...


----------



## Charlotte D. Kurisu (May 31, 2010)

19 deaths because of rifle shots to the legs?

how's that hard to believe?


----------



## MonkeyMallet (May 31, 2010)

Trias said:


> Wow, when I thought these couldn't get any more ridiculous, this is really getting.
> 
> So apparently these evil Israeli soldiers were able to drop onto the board, and somehow attack at sleeping civilians even though the whole thing was being filmed, and the clash had started BEFORE they boarded the ship.
> 
> Wow, really ridiculous.



I would just love to see photos of those crazy fanatic activists with weapons just one picture, please
.....those humanitarian Catholics, man, they're the worst! They're worse than those Korean missionaries held hostage by the Taliban!

With at least 15 dead and 60 injured, it's the humanitarian workers who are evil... give me a break


----------



## OmniStrife (May 31, 2010)

Khris said:


> 19 deaths because of rifle shots to the legs?


Never been on a military operation have you?
Only in a movie probably.

But once there's a threat on your life including live fire you have to stop it by all means.

I'm sure that no one there got killed that didn't intend to kill a soldier himself.

LIKE ON ALL OTHER BOATS. No one was scratched.

You don't shoot live fire on IDF commandos, injuring a couple of officers and expect to receive a pet on your head.


----------



## Megaharrison (May 31, 2010)

Alrighty I see this thread is fun. Unfortunately I'm not gonna go through the motions with this due to time constraints:


One of our soldiers is currently in serious condition in Haifa Hospital for a knife wound to the stomach. His own gut discredits any claims that the soldiers were not attacked with knives. Moreover, if you see the livestream videos themselves that are everywhere now you see that this erupted into a huge melee. In this situation it's not surprising that people died.  We gave them every available option, go to the UN, go to Egypt, go to Israel but they refused. 

These people are not genuine humanitarian activists but rather extremists and those complicit to extremism. There were members of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Hamas fundraisers, the Islamic Movement, etc.. on board, people who openly advocate violence against Israel. The group that organized this whole thing is the same, they're not a legitimate "human rights" organization. They've been banned in the past for funding Hamas. Their leader has regularly met and befriended Ishmail Haniyeh (just look at all the photoops with them). They are not genuine humanitarians, if they did they would have done these things for a great myriad of countries that are actually starving, not Gaza. The Palestinian territories have a standard of living superior to Egypt. We had to check these ships given the type of suspicious individuals/groups involved and it's tragic people had to die in what was an avoidable incident. 

All the violence/deaths was isolated to 1 ship. This indicates that the IDF did not have a deliberate policy of "massacring the protesters". If we did, then it simply makes no sense that all 5 other ships were boarded without significant incident. Moreover the video itself you see the _first wave_ of Israeli soldiers immediately coming under attack physical, the activists initiated hostilities first. If you assaulted a bunch of SWAT teams with clubs and knives and were shot over it few would see a problem. You can say "OH WELL THEY HAD A RIGHT TO ATTACK THE SOLDIERS WITH KNIVES IT WAS SELF-DEFENSE", in which case you can not criticize the IDF for firing back (if you can attack soldiers you can also attack back if you're being stabbed, natural human instinct dictates it). Moreover if you believe in violence for self-defense then this can easily be applied to boarding the flotilla in the first place.

Moreover you can say "why didn't they shoot them in the legs", "why didn't they board more then a few soldiers at once", "why didn't they use a kamehameha" etc. but combat/raids are a very confusing and complicated event and these things are easier said then done. Also I don't think we expected these people to get as violent as they did. 

However at the end of the day all this is futile. We shall be demonized on this for decades to come and it's a PR disaster. The only real avoidable thing in all this I've seen was the decision to board the ships in international waters, whoever made that decision should be purged. 

Moreover the other Israeli error is in the IDF we're not taught enough non-lethal techniques, the ISF (Internal Security Forces) get the vast majority of this kind of training. The IDF itself has an obsession to avoid becoming a civilian police force, and while Israeli soldiers actually receive more non-lethal training then American counterparts Israeli soldiers are put in far more situations where they're expected to use non-lethal techniques as nobody applies the same standards to the IDF that are applied to the rest of the world.

And that is all I'm going to say on the matter. Tragic but we couldn't let a fleet of Islamists simply dock in Gaza. We fucked up by boarding it international waters, they fucked up by being irresponsible.


----------



## Charlotte D. Kurisu (May 31, 2010)

OmniStrife said:


> Never been on a military operation have you?
> Only in a movie probably.
> 
> But once there's a threat on your life including live fire you have to stop it by all means.
> ...



you also don't board ships on international waters.. 

we have opposing stories.. but the commandos are still to blame for boarding the ship in the first place..


----------



## Gelu (May 31, 2010)

It does appear that shooting asleep civilians was a lie.


----------



## MonkeyMallet (May 31, 2010)

The people on that boat have every right to defend themselves against anyone boarding their ship on international waters. IDF or pirates, you don't have a right to dick around with other ships.
Again, I would love to see photos of any of those humanitarian workers with weapons.

EDIT: Actually, if some jerk swooped down into my boat, I would probably kick the daylights out of them too... so there!


----------



## Nyasi (May 31, 2010)

No wonder so many people hate "Israel".


----------



## OmniStrife (May 31, 2010)

Gelu said:


> It does appear that shooting asleep civilians was a lie.



Obviously all the humanitarians were sleep walking/stabbing/shooting.

I mean they came to aid...


----------



## Megaharrison (May 31, 2010)

Oh yeah I forgot.





That isn't a kitchen knife, that's a combat knife.


----------



## OmniStrife (May 31, 2010)

Megaharrison said:


> Oh yeah I forgot.



It's a knife for cutting bread for the Palestinian children don't you see?



*AND IT'S ALL SO FUCKING SILENT HERE ONCE THE FOOTAGE IS POSTED*


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

Gelu said:


> It does appear that shooting asleep civilians was a lie.



well duh, you had to be devoid of all objective and rational thought to think that report was the likely truth.........right Degelle??


----------



## Squall Leonhart (May 31, 2010)

The IDF was too naive, next time the IDF should just shoot down these ships.


----------



## OmniStrife (May 31, 2010)

Squall Leonhart said:


> The IDF was too naive, next time the IDF should just shoot down these ships.



There was only one rogue ship, the other 5 complied, and miraculously weren't harmed by the savages that are the Israeli Commandos.


----------



## MonkeyMallet (May 31, 2010)

yeah that means get the hell off my boat


*Spoiler*: __ 




Defending your boat is perfectly normal.

Remember what happened when that squid attacked the boat in Naruto?







It wasn't wrong for them to defend themselves in that ^^^, what makes it wrong now?


----------



## iander (May 31, 2010)

I would hope this would lead to bad consequences for Israel but they will just get a tap on the wrist and in a week or so things will go back to usual.


----------



## OmniStrife (May 31, 2010)

MonkeyMallet said:


> yeah that means get the hell off my boat
> 
> 
> *Spoiler*: __
> ...



Sure, defend it with knives and stones or whatever, just don't bitch about it when the Commando soldier decides to throw his paint-ball gun away and draw a real one to save himself.


----------



## butcher50 (May 31, 2010)

MonkeyMallet said:


> yeah that means get the hell off my boat
> 
> 
> *Spoiler*: __
> ...



[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKOmLP4yHb4&feature=channel[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## FrostXian (May 31, 2010)

MonkeyMallet said:


> EDIT: Actually, if some jerk swooped down into my boat, I would probably kick the daylights out of them too... so there!



You would get shot to death, too.
And it would be funny, too.


----------



## OmniStrife (May 31, 2010)

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKOmLP4yHb4&feature=channel[/YOUTUBE]
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bU12KW-XyZE[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## iander (May 31, 2010)

Who would have known commando raids on aid convoys in international waters would get the world community pissed off.  Even with Israel's PR machine going, its going to be a little difficult to shrug this one off.


----------



## Edward Newgate (May 31, 2010)

THOSE EVIL ISRAELI SOLDIERS! Attacking "innocent" peace activists like that!?


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

they needed that molotov cocktails to warm the starving palestinian childrens fireplaces at night!!


----------



## MonkeyMallet (May 31, 2010)

I'm driving down the hiway and someone with a gun jumps through the window of my car. My passenger tries to stab them, then the gunman shoots everyone in the car and injures me.
How am I at fault?


----------



## OmniStrife (May 31, 2010)

MonkeyMallet said:


> I'm driving down the hiway and someone with a gun jumps through the window of my car. My passenger tries to stab them, then the gunman shoots everyone in the car and injures me.
> How am I at fault?



You carry a knife while driving to the gunman's house.
After the gunman had suggested and urged you numerous times to make a U-Turn.
Heck, he even offered to send your goods for you.

Yes, you are at fault.


----------



## Watchman (May 31, 2010)

MonkeyMallet said:


> I'm driving down the highway *which has been closed to all traffic due to a state of war, although an alternative route has been provided, and I have been made aware of this alternative route* and *a person enforcing the road closure* with a gun jumps through the window of my car. My passenger tries to stab them, then the gunman shoots everyone in the car and injures me.
> How am I at fault?



Do you not understand the concept of a blockade? I added some helpful little parts in bold to try and make your analogy work.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Kunoichi no Kiri said:


> Sry bro, they warned me about 9/11 and got me out of the WTC. I'm kind of indentured to them.


Ironic since it was more or less because of USA's support of Israel murder, oppression and persecution that you got attack.


----------



## OmniStrife (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> Ironic since it was more or less because of USA's support of Israel murder, oppression and persecution that you got attack.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

I fail to see the point of your facepalm, please elaborate.

Instead of listening to Israel, they should've listened to the terrorists.


----------



## Watchman (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> I fail to see the point of your facepalm, please elaborate.
> 
> Instead of listening to Israel, they should've listened to the terrorists.




Degelle, buying into Al-Qaeda's Propaganda since 2001.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Watchman said:


> Degelle, buying into Al-Qaeda's Propaganda since 2001.


LMAO.

What propaganda? That terrorist attack USA because USA was meddling in ME affairs and supporting "puppet regimes"? Is that propaganda?  I though that was common knowledge.

I'll happily listen to  your theory as to why they attack USA. Was it because of MTV? :rofl

As I said earlier, to anyone that supports Israel's crimes, leave the talking to MegaHarrison, he at least as an idea how to twist facts with fiction.


----------



## OmniStrife (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> LMAO.
> 
> What propaganda? That terrorist attack USA because USA was meddling in ME affairs and supporting "puppet regimes"? Is that propaganda?  I though that was common knowledge.
> 
> I'll happily listen to  your theory as to why they attack USA. Was it because of MTV? :rofl



Apparently Islamic Jihad all around the world is killing by the hundreds every year in 4 continents people from many ethnic groups and from all religions, for the same reason... Israel's evil occupation.


----------



## iander (May 31, 2010)

OmniStrife said:


> You carry a knife while driving to the gunman's house.
> After the gunman had suggested and urged you numerous times to make a U-Turn.
> Heck, he even offered to send your goods for you.
> 
> Yes, you are at fault.



The problem here is that you categorize international waters as the gunman's house when it does not belong to Israel and their blockade of Gaza is illegal.  A gunman can tell a concerned neighbor that it can't deliver needed help to the person the gunman attacked but it doesn't make what the gunman is doing any less illegal.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

OmniStrife said:


> Apparently Islamic Jihad all around the world is killing by the hundreds every year in 4 continents for the same reason... Israel's evil occupation.



That might be the case, but hey, explain the facepalm. Am I wrong in stating that USA got attacked, partly, because of their support and aid to Israel?


----------



## Watchman (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> LMAO.
> 
> What propaganda? That terrorist attack USA because USA was meddling in ME affairs and supporting "puppet regimes"? Is that propaganda?  I though that was common knowledge.
> 
> I'll happily listen to  your theory as to why they attack USA. Was it because of MTV? :rofl



Ah, there you go, because of the USA meddling in the Islamic world as a whole (or at least that's their justification for it, it's just as likely that they do actually believe they're the first soldiers in a war to bring a single radical Islamist Caliphate over the world). In any case, it's not just LOLISRAEL like you, with your one-track mind would love to portray it.



> [T]he ruling to kill the Americans and their allies—civilians and military—is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque [in Jerusalem] and the holy mosque [in Makka] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty Allah, 'and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together,' and 'fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah



EDIT: Degelle, you only changed your story to "it was partly due to that" after you got called on your nonsense.


----------



## mayumi (May 31, 2010)

what most likely happened is activists out numbered the isreali milatary and took their guns and shot at them as stated here - 



it was the israelis who were dumb enough to board a ship on international waters and not expect any resistance.


----------



## Coteaz (May 31, 2010)

So to recap:

- Flotilla of bleeding-heart pro-Palestinian activists attempt to run Israeli blockade.

- Israel stops and boards ships.

- The crew of one ship attacks Israeli troops with melee weapons, firebombs, etc.

- Israeli troops respond to force with force, killing several enemy combatants.

- International community gets wet panties over the chance to bash Israel again.

Did I miss anything?


----------



## Watchman (May 31, 2010)

Degelle's Neg Comment said:
			
		

> I don't even know what you're talking about, you're totally lost in this conflict.



Tsk, tsk, Degelle, saying this in a topic where you were making judgements on how the situation progressed without even *reading the OP or watching the news videos*?

I swear, you make this too easy.


----------



## OmniStrife (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> That might be the case, but hey, explain the facepalm. Am I wrong in stating that USA got attacked, partly, because of their support and aid to Israel?



No, it got attacked because it's the symbol of the modern western world, the biggest enemy of the extremist Islamic Jihad.

Heck, if they attacked US because it helps Israel, why bother attacking a behemoth of a nation that is on the other side of the globe, if they can attack the source of all evil (Israel) right away? Which is waaaaay closer and easier to attack.


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

This thread is fucking hilarious.

This incident just reminded of why I no longer give a flying fuck about the Isreal-Palestine conflict. Both sides are constantly in the wrong but neither side will ever admit it, meanwhile we have two different sides of posters convinced one side is "evuallll" and the other is not.

Jesus christ. Hahahahahahaha.

Come back to when when this conflict even comes close to the likes of the Second Congo War, which barely got any news coverage.


----------



## vivEnergy (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> I fail to see the point of your facepalm, please elaborate.
> 
> Instead of listening to Israel, they should've listened to the terrorists.



Could we have a serious discussion here,oh wait ... NVM

Kill'em all MEGA !


----------



## The Hypocrite (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> LMAO.
> 
> What propaganda? That terrorist attack USA because USA was meddling in ME affairs and supporting "puppet regimes"? Is that propaganda?  I though that was common knowledge.
> 
> ...



So maybe America should bomb major buildings in most Middle East Countries because they meddled with American architecture and supported "puppet military organizations".

Your logic is more two sided than your politicians.


----------



## OmniStrife (May 31, 2010)

Coteaz said:


> So to recap:
> 
> - Flotilla of bleeding-heart pro-Palestinian activists attempt to run Israeli blockade.
> 
> ...


Nope, I think you've nailed it.


----------



## iander (May 31, 2010)

Israel threads always get derailed by Degelle and her "fans" .


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Watchman said:


> Ah, there you go, because of the USA meddling in the Islamic world as a whole (or at least that's their justification for it, it's just as likely that they do actually believe they're the first soldiers in a war to bring a single radical Islamist Caliphate over the world). In any case, it's not just LOLISRAEL like you, with your one-track mind would love to portray it.
> 
> EDIT: Degelle, you only changed your story to "it was partly due to that" after you got called on your nonsense.


You havnt even asked yourself the question: Why does the terrorist hate USA? - If your answer is: It's because we have freedom and they simply hate us, then you are lost. The answer is that USA have been meddeling, playing games with others lives and others nations, support Israel in their continued abuse of the Palestinians, etc, etc, etc. I could go on all day why these groups hate USA with passion.

If you were to flipp around the American would react in the exact same way that they are. They're terrorist because you're occupier, period.

I thought the American people certainly would grasp the term "too much blow back" by know, lmao



OmniStrife said:


> No, it got attacked because it's the symbol of the modern western world, the biggest enemy of the extremist Islamic Jihad.
> 
> Heck, if they attacked US because it helps Israel, why bother attacking a behemoth of a nation that is on the other side of the globe, if they can attack the source of all evil (Israel) right away? Which is waaaaay closer and easier to attack.


Okay, so you believe that Islam bluntly hates USA for no other reason than USA's culture and "way of live"? How utterly stereotypical. Is this the reason that 60% of the Israels want to deport all Arabs and Muslims from Israeli soil?

The various Jihad group usually hold the same belief that Israel is just a puppet state of USA, thus they attacked USA directly.


----------



## Mathias124 (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> LMAO.
> As I said earlier, to anyone that supports Israel's crimes, leave the talking to MegaHarrison, he at least as an idea how to twist facts with fiction.



I believe you are twisting facts with fiction.. touch?


----------



## Hi Im God (May 31, 2010)

I'm pretty sure Degalle is right and maybe others can post they're own opinions of why 9/11 happened.

I'm sure you have more than they hate our freedomz to go on.


----------



## Mathias124 (May 31, 2010)

9/11 happened because some muslims were pissed off.

There are 6 billion people, some terrible attack is bound to happen once in a while because a bounch of pissed off people decided to take action


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

Watchman said:


> Tsk, tsk, Degelle, saying this in a topic where you were making judgements on how the situation progressed without even *reading the OP or watching the news videos*?
> 
> I swear, you make this too easy.



yeah it really is no contest. God knows why Degelle wants Mega to join seeing the threads already done and she showed nothing but blind bias.

it is ironic all he Israel bashers are suprisingly quiet now..or try to derail the thread to another subject.

and once again my prediction was pretty close on the mark, hell it turned out that the activists were a lot more violent then i expected. And i didnt know the Israelis wanted to allow the activist to overlook the transport through Israel by land if they chosen to. 


The only thing they got left to cry about is the international waters. Though Israel probably broke the rule to minimize conflict so only a bureaucrat would really care that much and its something that will blow over much like the assasination.


----------



## IBU (May 31, 2010)

Omnistrife is right.

While meddling in the Middle East is not something that is welcomed by the Jihadi groups, and in some sense serves to further legitimate them among local populations. Even in the absence of this meddling these groups would want to destroy the West because of their interpretation of radical islam.


----------



## Watchman (May 31, 2010)

Make another topic if you want a debate about the causes of 9/11 - I'm not derailing this thread further for you, Degelle - my aim was to point out once again the disproportionate blame you put on Israel for, well, _everything_, which has been achieved.


----------



## Zaru (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> support Israel in their continued abuse of the Palestinians



So what
Middle Eastern countries have done worse things to each other(speak: large scale war) and I bet my white european ass that most of these countries that use exactly your quoted argument to fuel rage against the US wouldn't give a shit about Palaestina if it was oppressed by another muslim country with the same harshness. 

Palaestina is a reasoning scapegoat, not a reason.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

AestheticizeAnalog said:


> Omnistrife is right.
> 
> While meddling in the Middle East is not something that is welcomed by the Jihadi groups, and in some sense serves to further legitimate them among local populations. Even in the absence of this meddling these groups would want to destroy the West because of their interpretation of radical islam.



Wow, AA, that was blunt. So, if we were to erase all American activity in the ME, do you still think "radical" Muslim would hate USA? 

What created these terrorist organization to begin with? Are Arabs and Persians just evil by nature?



			
				Osama Bin Laden 1998 said:
			
		

> Your position against Muslims in Palestine is despicable and disgraceful.  America has no shame.  ...  We believe that the worst thieves in the world today and the worst terrorists are the Americans.  Nothing could stop you except perhaps retaliation in kind.  We do not have to differentiate between military or civilian.  As far as we are concerned, they are all targets, and this is what the fatwah says ...  .  The fatwah is general (comprehensive) and it includes all those who participate in, or help the Jewish occupiers in killing Muslims. "





Watchman said:


> Make another topic if you want a debate about the causes of 9/11 - I'm not derailing this thread further for you, Degelle - my aim was to point out once again the disproportionate blame you put on Israel for, well, _everything_, which has been achieved.


Just stating facts, if that's too much for you, oh well, none is forcing you to reply or read my comments, you can always hit that ignore button

I don't really care, you're just another of those badly educated Americans, dumbed down by a broken educational system that have been fed propaganda and fiction, repeated a thousand times over which you today see as truth.


----------



## Mathias124 (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> Wow, AA, that was blunt. So, if we were to erase all American activity in the ME, do you still think "radical" Muslim would hate USA?
> 
> What created these terrorist organization to begin with? Are Arabs and Persians just evil by nature?
> 
> Just stating facts, if that's too much for you, oh well, none is forcing you to reply or read my comments, you can always hit that ignore button



Dude, there is always somebody willing to hate.

Im stating a fact here.

A bounch of hippies wanted to transport goods into what they believe is a war zone, they were then told to GTFO by a navy, the retards then proceeded to sail even though a NAVY was telling GTFO, and then they start bitching when something bad happens.

That is fact


----------



## iander (May 31, 2010)

Mathias124 said:


> Dude, there is always somebody willing to hate.
> 
> Im stating a fact here.
> 
> ...



Why should they comply with an illegal blockade? Just because they knew the consequences could be violent doesn't make the violence any more justified.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Mathias124 said:


> A bounch of hippies wanted to transport goods into what they believe is a war zone, they were then told to GTFO by a navy, the retards then proceeded to sail even though a NAVY was telling GTFO, and then they start bitching when something bad happens.
> 
> That is fact


This is a fact: Israel has no right to board the ships. The blockade itself is against international law and protected by the highest judicial body in the world, which Israel for some reason has the right to ignore. The flotilla was in international water steering right into Palestinian water, never passing into Israeli water, again, Israel had no right to board or block the ships. The activist, protected by international law and humanitarian laws have all the right in the world to protect themselves. 

Israel will be found guilty of piracy and murder, but probably will not have to face the crimes. 

These are all facts.

I understand that people feel the need to defend Israel, but here civilians got killed not one, not two, but 16 as it is now. And over 60 civilians injured. These were civilians from nations like Sweden, USA, Australia, etc, etc.

I hope, for Israels sake that the evidence of knives, axes and guns on the ship will be found else they will be in deep trouble, not that USA will ever let them pay for any of their crimes though, so I guess they perhaps don't really care.


----------



## Eboue (May 31, 2010)

bbc say they killed twelve people last i saw, and they had 2 knives and a gun. The maths dont add up really, seems pretty awful by israel.

Your a twat if you think its ok to shoot people because they didnt "gtfo".


----------



## Mathias124 (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> This is a fact: Israel has no right to board the ships. The blockade itself is against international law and protected by the highest judicial body in the world, which Israel for some reason has the right to ignore. The flotilla was in international water steering right into Palestinian water, never passing into Israeli water, again, Israel had no right to board or block the ships. The activist, protected by international law and humanitarian laws have all the right in the world to protect themselves.
> 
> Israel will be found guilty of piracy and murder, but probably will not have to face the crimes.
> 
> These are all facts.



We are not debating whether or not their blockade is illegal.

Im stating this fact, a bounch of people decided to play dare with the Isreali army.

If you dont want to get hurt, dont mess with an "enemy" army, FACT


----------



## IBU (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> Wow, AA, that was blunt. So, if we were to erase all American activity in the ME, do you still think "radical" Muslim would hate USA?
> 
> What created these terrorist organization o begin with? Are Arabs and Persians just evil?



I think they would certainly exist, but I don`t think they would be as large as they are, nor nearly as capable of drawing in people. 

Also, I do think radical islamic groups would hate the US. The simple fact is that if you oppose commerical society on principle in favour of some form of puritan theocracy, than you are going to hate the US. 

The leaders of many Jihadi groups believe that any form of rule not based on Islam is illegitimate. This in part stems from the influence of Quttb on their work. 

What created these organizations were certain educated elites who were not willing to give in to the notions of pluralism, tolerance, and commercial order. Why they were not going to give in to these is because there is something to the thought that the West is decadent and sick. Radical Islamists in many ways are right to point to the decadence and superficiality of western culture, but wrong to think that Islamic Rule is essentially the solution. More than the military meddling of the US, the forces of modernization are responsible for the Jihadi ideology.


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

From what I've seen so far, it looks like Isreal fucked up bad here. 

Still, I have no sympathy for the idiots who died here. Who the hell would mess with a country's Navy and not expect to get hurt by doing it? Morons.


----------



## Mathias124 (May 31, 2010)

Darth said:


> So...
> 
> It seems the facts support Israel for once.
> 
> ...



Precisely, who the hell decides "fuck what the millitary tells me even though i know they arent afraid of enforcing violence ill do the exact opposite of what they tell me and even though i dont even have firepower to win no matter what"


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Mathias124 said:


> We are not debating whether or not their blockade is illegal.
> 
> Im stating this fact, a bounch of people decided to play dare with the Isreali army.
> 
> If you dont want to get hurt, dont mess with an "enemy" army, FACT


Are you unable to understand English? Vill du att jag ska ta det p? svenska ist?llet?

Everything that Israel did today was illegal, that's all you need to know. Whetever a bunch of people decided to play "dare" or not. It is beyond contestation.

As I said, let MH deal with the zionist-bullshit theme, you're just helping me with your ridiculous claims and statements.



AestheticizeAnalog said:


> I think they would certainly exist, but I don`t think they would be as large as they are, nor nearly as capable of drawing in people.
> 
> Also, I do think radical islamic groups would hate the US. The simple fact is that if you oppose commerical society on principle in favour of some form of puritan theocracy, than you are going to hate the US.
> 
> ...



You have to face the facts: USA is largely responsible for the Anti-American theme in the Islamic world. It's VERY understandable. 

If violence escalates, you bring seeds and water for terrorism. You kill someone's brother or mother, and you will just get more crazy people. They hate you because of what you do, and it seems to contradict who you say your are. The major issue that your policy seems to contradict your own basic values.

And I'd say that about 90% of the American popluation have no idea what their government is reponsible for, as I said, I think the term "blow back" would have been implanted into the skull of Americans by now.

Secondly, you need value consensus between the West and Islam on democracy and human rights to combat Islamic fundamentalism. You can't do it with bombs and shooting, that will only exacerbate the problem.


----------



## Gelu (May 31, 2010)

Exactly whats happening now. Media shitstorm and PR nightmare for Israel which will accomplish nothing except completely destroy any chance of progress in that region. 

And all it took was a bunch of people dieing. We live in an awesome world don't we.

Edit: Darth deleted his post.


----------



## iander (May 31, 2010)

Mathias124 said:


> Precisely, who the hell decides "fuck what the millitary tells me even though i know they arent afraid of enforcing violence ill do the exact opposite of what they tell me and even though i dont even have firepower to win no matter what"



Not everyone shares your acceptance of unjust military force.


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

Mathias124 said:


> Precisely, who the hell decides "fuck what the millitary tells me even though i know they arent afraid of enforcing violence ill do the exact opposite of what they tell me and even though i dont even have firepower to win no matter what"



dude its not the blockade running that got them killed. look at the other ships stopped. 

no its the blockade running that got them boarded...its the trying to kill the military boarding party what got them killed.


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> Israel will be found guilty of piracy and murder, but probably will not have to face the crimes.



It's not really murder if someone attacks you and threatens your life. I think that's called self-defense.


----------



## Eboue (May 31, 2010)

Han Solo said:


> From what I've seen so far, it looks like Isreal fucked up bad here.
> 
> Still, I have no sympathy for the idiots who died here. Who the hell would mess with a country's Navy and not expect to get hurt by doing it? Morons.



This view is disgraceful. They were pretty brave an unarmed just because they had balls to do what they think is right doesnt mean its ok to be shot. at all. There are plenty of ways israel could have peacefully ended this. Or through non-lethal force.


----------



## MonkeyMallet (May 31, 2010)

Mathias124 said:


> We are not debating whether or not their blockade is illegal.
> 
> Im stating this fact, a bounch of people decided to play dare with the Isreali army.
> 
> If you dont want to get hurt, dont mess with an "enemy" army, FACT



If the "Israeli army" decides to play bully over international waters, should everyone just sit back and take it?
Does this military think they're divine and can do w/e the hell they they want, wherever they want?

I know violence is wrong. However, from a non-Ghandi/MLK stand point, I can understand why the activists fought: If someone with a gun comes onto my boat, I would kick there butt. There is no way it can be my fault because they are on MY BOAT (on international waters)


----------



## iander (May 31, 2010)

Saufsoldat said:


> It's not really murder if someone attacks you and threatens your life. I think that's called self-defense.



You can't claim self-defense when you attack a boat in international waters but then again Israel claims self-defense when occupying another country and colonizing its land so I guess it really isn't surprising.


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

Eboue said:


> This view is disgraceful. They were pretty brave an unarmed just because they had balls to do what they think is right doesnt mean its ok to be shot. at all. There are plenty of ways israel could have peacefully ended this. Or through non-lethal force.



They _attacked_ a navy boarding force. I'm not saying they deserved to die for it, but that's just idiotic. Not brave, just stupid.

I have a hard time believing a professionally trained military could not have arrested and detained these people rather than kill them, so yeah, like I said, the Israelis fucked up. _Bad._


----------



## Watchman (May 31, 2010)

Eboue said:


> This view is disgraceful. *They were pretty brave an unarmed* just because they had balls to do what they think is right doesnt mean its ok to be shot. at all. There are plenty of ways israel could have peacefully ended this. Or through non-lethal force.



Wrong. The ship was carrying weapons, and _they_ attacked the IDF troops who went in there.

Look what happened to the other ships. Israel dealt with them through non-lethal force, and if their goal was simply "KILL DEM ALL" they could have easily torpedoed the ships from afar.

It's just this one ship in particular where lethal force was used *in response* to the soldiers being attacked there.


----------



## Gelu (May 31, 2010)

Eboue said:


> This view is disgraceful. They were pretty brave an unarmed just because they had balls to do what they think is right doesnt mean its ok to be shot. at all. There are plenty of ways israel could have peacefully ended this. Or through non-lethal force.



Watch the youtube videos at the top of page 12 mate.


----------



## Mathias124 (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> Are you unable to understand English? Vill du att jag ska ta det p? svenska ist?llet?
> 
> Everything that Israel did today was illegal, that's all you need to know. Whetever a bunch of people decided to play "dare" or not. It is beyond contestation.
> 
> As I said, let MH deal with the zionist-bullshit theme, you're just helping me with your ridiculous claims and statements.



Dont you understand english?

Er det bedre hvis jeg snakker dansk din lille svenske abe?

A bounch of people decided to transport weapons through a millitary blockade and they got caught!


Maybe you should let someone else debate? i mean, you are just helping me by saying things like illegal arms trafficing is okay


----------



## Mathias124 (May 31, 2010)

Watchman said:


> Wrong. The ship was carrying weapons, and _they_ attacked the IDF troops who went in there.
> 
> Look what happened to the other ships. Israel dealt with them through non-lethal force, and if their goal was simply "KILL DEM ALL" they could have easily torpedoed the ships from afar.
> 
> It's just this one ship in particular where lethal force was used *in response* to the soldiers being attacked there.



The logic is unquestionable.


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

Okay, I just saw that video at the top of page 12...

They assulted and could have killed Israel soldiers. No wonder they had a lethal response up they're asses....


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

iander said:


> You can't claim self-defense when you attack a boat in international waters but then again Israel claims self-defense when occupying another country and colonizing its land so I guess it really isn't surprising.



They didn't "attack" the ship, they boarded it and arrested those on the ship because they're under suspicion of supplying an enemy with goods.


----------



## Mathias124 (May 31, 2010)

Han Solo said:


> Okay, I just saw that video at the top of page 12...
> 
> They assulted and could have killed Israel soldiers. No wonder they had a lethal response up they're asses....



No, because the Isreali regime have an illegal blockade and they were trafficing weapons, therefore its okay to attack soldiers with guns.

/.sarcasm off


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Mathias124 said:


> Dont you understand english?
> 
> Er det bedre hvis jeg snakker dansk din lille svenske abe?
> 
> ...


...The Gaza Flotilla did not try to smuggle weapons into Gaza. Jesus Christ. 



Saufsoldat said:


> They didn't "attack" the ship, they boarded it and arrested those on the ship because they're under suspicion of supplying an enemy with goods.


How is Israel allowed to block and board a vessel in international water? That's PIRACY.


----------



## dummy plug (May 31, 2010)

im sure them hippies had it coming, they just didnt realize it because they are, well, hippies


----------



## Mathias124 (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> ...The Gaza Flotilla did not try to smuggle weapons into Gaza. Jesus Christ.



They just had weapons and decided to attack the soldiers with weapons boarding the ship in order to make sure they dont transport weapons.

To me it sounds like they had weapons on that boat.. since they used weapons.

Do you understand what im saying?


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> ...The Gaza Flotilla did not try to smuggle weapons into Gaza. Jesus Christ.



Who the hell has a stun grenade when transporting supplies?


----------



## iander (May 31, 2010)

Saufsoldat said:


> They didn't "attack" the ship, they boarded it and arrested those on the ship because they're under suspicion of supplying an enemy with goods.



They landed military commandos on a ship to take control of the ship.  How is that any different than a pirate? Since when does Israel have the authority to arrest people in international waters? They can consider them enemies all they want but an illegal blockade is still illegal.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Mathias124 said:


> They just had weapons and decided to attack the soldiers with weapons boarding the ship in order to make sure they dont transport weapons.
> 
> To me it sounds like they had weapons on that boat.. since they used weapons.
> 
> Do you understand what im saying?





"The IDF said Monday that international activists aboard a ship of the Gaza flotilla were found with handguns.

The weapons were stolen from soldiers who boarded the ship early Monday.

The organizers of the flotilla have denied that activists aboard the ships had weapons or that they partook in violence against the Israeli soldiers."

Not even the IDF states that they were smuggling weapons, yet you claim otherwise? Excuse me while a laugh directly in your face.


----------



## Charlotte D. Kurisu (May 31, 2010)

Han Solo said:


> From what I've seen so far, it looks like Isreal fucked up bad here.
> 
> Still, I have no sympathy for the idiots who died here. Who the hell would mess with a country's Navy and not expect to get hurt by doing it? Morons.





Mathias124 said:


> Precisely, who the hell decides "fuck what the millitary tells me even though i know they arent afraid of enforcing violence ill do the exact opposite of what they tell me and even though i dont even have firepower to win no matter what"



it might be a strategy to publicly hurt israel's image even more.. for one, if it was true i would call it successful on their part.. still that does not mean israel should just be ignored of their crimes.. which they will, ofcourse being backed up by the US and UK..




Saufsoldat said:


> It's not really murder if someone attacks you and threatens your life. I think that's called self-defense.



and its not "attacking" when someone boards your ship on international waters? 


ppl amaze.. the double standards are really blunt sometimes..




i am pretty sure its morally wrong of the flotilla on their part... BUT there's still no confirmation of illegal doings by them.. making israel 100% wrong in this, legally ofcourse..


----------



## IBU (May 31, 2010)

> You have to face the facts: USA is largely responsible for the Anti-American theme in the Islamic world. It's VERY understandable.
> 
> If violence escalates, you bring seeds and water for terrorism. You kill someone's brother or mother, and you will just get more crazy people. They hate you because of what you do, and it seems to contradict who you say your are. The major issue that your policy seems to contradict your own basic values.



I have never even said what my preferred policy is. At most if I have to support someone I will support the forces fighting in the name of values of enlightenment values, rather than those fighting for the value of Islam. But I would prefer if dialogue and law was used rather than bombing. 

My preferred policy is a policy based on democratic dialogue and the rule of law, but the trouble is that even if we had dialogue now given that international law has very little capacity to be enforced, it would essentially be pointless. Unless countries can be held accountable for signing Human Rights documents, dialogue will just give free reign to those who have power. 

There would be tons of interference both in Israel and in Arabic countries if they were actually held to account for the legal documents they have signed. And the Westphalian Doctrine of Sovereignty still has far too much hold in the minds of leaders and populations for these forms of interference to have democratic legitimacy. 



> And I'd say that about 90% of the American popluation have no idea what their government is reponsible for, as I said, I think the term "blow back" would have been implanted into the skull of Americans by now.
> 
> Secondly, you need value consensus between the West and Islam on democracy and human rights to combat Islamic fundamentalism. You can't do it with bombs and shooting, that will only exacerbate the problem.



There are problems with the military option, and it will not be successful, but the approach based on dialogue will not work until there are sufficient transnational legal institutions such that countries do not just agree because of expediency or social pressure and then run their country however they wish. But until those institutions exist it is better imo to support those groups defending against certains forms of fundamentalism, than to take a pedestrian attitude to the conflict. 

Take China. China has signed the UN Human Rights Declaration, but it is quite obvious they do not take it seriously, and thus because I take human security seriously until the approach to International Politics has sufficient institutional backing, the military option must remain an option to be used where necessary.


----------



## Mathias124 (May 31, 2010)

Whats up with the international borders? 

The activists had criminal intention of smuggling (its smuggling not transporting when its illegal) and therefore the Isreali army decided to take action.

That is perfectly legal


----------



## dummy plug (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> "The IDF said Monday that international activists aboard a ship of the Gaza flotilla were found with handguns.
> 
> The weapons were stolen from soldiers who boarded the ship early Monday.
> 
> The organizers of the flotilla have denied that activists aboard the ships had weapons or that they partook in violence against the Israeli soldiers."



you seriously think they'd admit having weapons onboard huh?


----------



## Charlotte D. Kurisu (May 31, 2010)

those weapons could be justified as a means of self-defense.. just sayin..


----------



## Gelu (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> "The IDF said Monday that international activists aboard a ship of the Gaza flotilla were found with handguns.
> 
> The weapons were stolen from soldiers who boarded the ship early Monday.
> 
> ...



and you expect people to respect that quote?


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

AestheticizeAnalog said:


> I have never even said what my preferred policy is. At most if I have to support someone I will support the forces fighting in the name of values of enlightenment values, rather than those fighting for the value of Islam. But I would prefer if dialogue was used rather than bombing.
> 
> My preferred policy is a policy based on democratic dialogue and the rule of law, but the trouble is that even if we had dialogue now given that international law has very little capacity to be enforced, it would essentially be pointless. Unless countries can be held accountable for signing Human Rights documents, dialogue will just give free reign to those who have power.
> 
> ...


First, the relations between Islamic countries and the U.S. were profoundly affected by the west's cold war on communism. U.S. foreign policy promoted the creation and training of terrorist, gorilla, and military units. Usama Bin Laden's group was originally trained by the CIA <--- Notice the term, FUCKING BLOW BACK.

Secondly, the U.S. fought the growth of a pan-Arab nationalism in the region. Rather than supporting it as a cohesive force, a source of stability, throughout the Middle East, the U.S. encouraged divisions among Islamic states. 

Lastly, the West created the modern Middle East, from its rotten regimes down to its ridiculous borders, and it did so with contemptuous disregard for the wishes of the local people. It is indeed a problem that most Arab governments are corrupt autocracies that breed hatred and despair in their own people, which then fuels terrorism against the West, but it was the West that created the problem, and invasion of Iraq didn't solve it, nor will the warmongering vs Iran. If the U.S. really wants to foster Arab democracy, it might try making all that aid to Egypt conditional on prompt democratic reforms. But I wouldn't hold my breath.



dummy plug said:


> you seriously think they'd admit having weapons onboard huh?


I think that IDF would admit if the activist had guns on board, yes  What were you thinking?


----------



## Mathias124 (May 31, 2010)

Khris said:


> those weapons could be justified as a means of self-defense.. just sayin..



Self defense? from what.

If they didnt want to do anything illegal they wouldnt have tried to sail through a blockade but instead sent the goods the legal route.

They had criminal intentions and the Isreali navy decided to act in international waters, given the circumstances it wasnt even an illegal act on the navy's part.

Do you guys even know which rules apply to international waters in the Midterrean


----------



## Altron (May 31, 2010)

> "We fully intend to go to Gaza regardless of any intimidation or threats of violence against us," she said. "They are going to have to forcefully stop us."


They pretty much knew the risks of what could happen should they attempt to bypass the Israeli blockade after being warned. The flotilla was denied 8 times in the past, what did they think would happen? Israel would just magically open up and let them past despite preventing them from doing so back then?


Degelle said:


> *"The IDF said Monday that international activists aboard a ship of the Gaza flotilla were found with handguns.
> 
> The weapons were stolen from soldiers who boarded the ship early Monday.*
> 
> ...


Because obviously stealing IDF weapons and more than likely planning to use them against Israeli commandos in the case of a hostile boarding is a smart idea, I mean there can be no possibility of death when trying to take down someone who has no hesitation in shooting you dead if you give him a reason too? You have to wonder if Israel was hell bent on stopping these flotillas with full force, why there were casualties on only one ship, while the other ships were in fact perfectly fine despite being boarded as well?


Khris said:


> those weapons could be justified as a means of self-defense.. just sayin..


Why would a flotilla have weapons stolen from IDF on board and also do the normal thing everyone does and deny everything?

And those weapons could have been the reason the Israeli Commandos used live rounds on them feeling threatened, Just saying.


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

MonkeyMallet said:


> If the "Israeli army" decides to play bully over international waters, should everyone just sit back and take it?
> Does this military think they're divine and can do w/e the hell they they want, wherever they want?
> 
> I know violence is wrong. However, from a non-Ghandi/MLK stand point, I can understand why the activists fought: If someone with a gun comes onto my boat, I would kick there butt. There is no way it can be my fault because they are on MY BOAT (on international waters)



Man with gun: im warning you, dont smuggle resources and weapons to terrorists, please disembark the goods and we an transport it supervised by land. 

You: No

Man with gun: he is my enemy, send the goods through UN channels, i cannot just let you run the blockade

You: No

Man with Gun: ok then i will try to stop you

You:go ahead, im bringing a camera so everyone can see what a nazi you are. And what a peaceful humanitarian i am.

Man with Gun: there i boarded your vessel, time to go back. 

You: Nazi!! where are my knives, im gonna fucking kill you! 

Man with gun: stop attacking me! its over (and werent you a peacefull humanitarian) 

You: im gonna take your gun so i can shoot down your buddies hahaaaa! 

Man with gun: *bang*

You: *dead*


you got it coming. Thats the whole point. You pushed the man with the gun into a corner where he had to resort to using force to defend his life. 

Yes he was being an ass for boarding your ship in international waters. But tell me..how do you look here??? 

Like a piece of shit looking for conflict and getting your ass killed in the end. 



And im supposed to care about your fate?? please, the world is better off without rabid insanely biased activists


----------



## dummy plug (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> I think that IDF would admit if the activist had guns on board, yes  What were you thinking?



well im thinking that hippies would deliberately piss military activities and knowingly put their lives in danger, then get shocked when they get it really hard. what a bunch of ^ (not the meaning of the word "respect".) out there. 

like stealing weapons would make matters better right? lame hippies. well it takes one to know one i suppose


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Altron said:


> Because obviously stealing IDF weapons and more than likely planning to use them against Israeli commandos in the case of a hostile boarding is a smart idea, I mean there can be no possibility of death when trying to take down someone who has no hesitation in shooting you dead if you give him a reason too? You have to wonder if Israel was hell bent on stopping these flotillas with full force, why there were casualties on only one ship, while the other ships were in fact perfectly fine despite being boarded as well?


I was just making the point that the activist were not trying to smuggle in weapons into Gaza. Not only would be utterly insane and stupid but it would go against their entire goal.

And we've still haven't been verified whetever or not the Israeli soldiers were shot, actually we have no verification of weapons of any other kinds than sticks and possibly a knife from the activist, at this moment.

I think one soldier is currently in the hospital because of a knife wound.

We have on the other hand 16 civilians shot dead, how they were able to kill 16 civilians and injuring 60+, I have no idea, but I'm sure the investigation will sort all of this out.


----------



## Charlotte D. Kurisu (May 31, 2010)

Mathias124 said:


> Self defense? from what.
> 
> If they didnt want to do anything illegal they wouldnt have tried to sail through a blockade but instead sent the goods the legal route.



i have said this before, it could have been a publicity stunt, to bring more people against israel.. its morally wrong, but not illegal.. they were still on international waters..



> They had criminal intentions and the Isreali navy decided to act in international waters, given the circumstances it wasnt even an illegal act on the navy's part.


it was, boarding ships on international waters is piracy.. the flotilla had every right to attack the soldiers that boarded the ship.. 

can i attack a person stating "he had criminal intentions"? 



> Do you guys even know which rules apply to international waters in the Midterrean



both sides admitted this all happened outside territories, and on international waters


----------



## IBU (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> First, the relations between Islamic countries and the U.S. were profoundly affected by the west's cold war on communism. U.S. foreign policy promoted the creation and training of terrorist, gorilla, and military units. Usama Bin Laden's group was originally trained by the CIA <--- Notice the term, FUCKING BLOW BACK.
> 
> Secondly, the U.S. fought the growth of a pan-Arab nationalism in the region. Rather than supporting it as a cohesive force, a source of stability, throughout the Middle East, the U.S. encouraged divisions among Islamic states.
> 
> Lastly, the West created the modern Middle East, from its rotten regimes down to its ridiculous borders, and it did so with contemptuous disregard for the wishes of the local people. It is indeed a problem that most Arab governments are corrupt autocracies that breed hatred and despair in their own people, which then fuels terrorism against the West, but it was the West that created the problem, and invasion of Iraq didn't solve it, nor will the warmongering vs Iran. If the U.S. really wants to foster Arab democracy, it might try making all that aid to Egypt conditional on prompt democratic reforms. But I wouldn't hold my breath.



I don`t think you realize that I do not deny any of this, but I don`t think you can (a) explain everything significant by reference to these events (there are more general structural forces at work and (b) what we need now is a feasible solution. And quite frankly I don`t see anything constructive coming from simply pointing to the evils of the U.S. Certainly history needs to be known, but it is not enough to know history, but to have a feasible alternative so that the mistakes of history are not made.

Also, I never said that the US really wanted to foster democracy. All I have ever said is that the US is more friendly to enlightenment interests than Jihadis.


----------



## mayumi (May 31, 2010)

NF the place of serious isreali-paliestininan discussion 
you don't go and attack people on international waters. period.


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

Honestly this is one the most obvious examples of two wrongs don't make a right.

Yes Israel is in the wrong for having a illegal blockade and trying to detain people trying to get supplies in. That doesn't somehow magically justify these same people being allowed to attack Israeli soldiers with lethal force.


----------



## Charlotte D. Kurisu (May 31, 2010)

Altron said:


> Why would a flotilla have weapons stolen from IDF on board and also do the normal thing everyone does and deny everything?
> 
> And those weapons could have been the reason the Israeli Commandos used live rounds on them feeling threatened, Just saying.




i said it could be justified.. they didn't attack first.. as far as they're concerned that can just say "we had weapons on international waters meant for self-defense".. nothing illegal about that..


----------



## Charlotte D. Kurisu (May 31, 2010)

Han Solo said:


> Honestly this is one the most obvious examples of two wrongs don't make a right.
> 
> Yes Israel is in the wrong for having a illegal blockade and trying to detain people trying to get supplies in. That doesn't somehow magically justify these same people being allowed to attack Israeli soldiers with lethal force.



legally it was the israeli soldiers that attacked the flotilla by boarding the ship..


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

AestheticizeAnalog said:


> I don`t think you realize that I do not deny any of this, but I don`t think you can (a) explain everything significant by reference to these events (there are more general structural forces at work and (b) what we need now is a feasible solution. And quite frankly I don`t see anything constructive coming from simply pointing to the evils of the U.S. Certainly history needs to be known, but it is not enough to know history, but to have a feasible alternative so that the mistakes of history are not made.
> 
> Also, I never said that the US really wanted to foster democracy. All I have ever said is that the US is more friendly to enlightenment interests than Jihadis.


If you don't deny is, how the fuck can you say: Omnistrife is correct?


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

Khris said:


> legally it was the israeli soldiers that attacked the flotilla by boarding the ship..



I'll remember to stab the next cop that illegally arrests and detains me then.

And that has happened to me before.


----------



## iander (May 31, 2010)

Han Solo said:


> Honestly this is one the most obvious examples of two wrongs don't make a right.
> 
> Yes Israel is in the wrong for having a illegal blockade and trying to detain people trying to get supplies in. That doesn't somehow magically justify these same people being allowed to attack Israeli soldiers with lethal force.



I agree that using force was a bad idea for the activists.  I don't blame people for defending themselves but their interests would be better served with non-violent resistance.


----------



## Mathias124 (May 31, 2010)

Khris said:


> i have said this before, it could have been a publicity stunt, to bring more people against israel.. its morally wrong, but not illegal.. they were still on international waters..
> 
> 
> it was, boarding ships on international waters is piracy.. the flotilla had every right to attack the soldiers that boarded the ship..
> ...



It is not piracy if said boat or ship or whatever intend to transport goods illegaly.

So yeah, international waters.. doesnt matter.

If a guy tells you he is going to kill you right in your face its legal to beat him up in many countries..

You made some very bad examples


----------



## xenopyre (May 31, 2010)

Altron said:


> They pretty much knew the risks of what could happen should they attempt to bypass the Israeli blockade after being warned. The flotilla was denied 8 times in the past, what did they think would happen? Israel would just magically open up and let them past despite preventing them from doing so back then?


So you have no sympathy for the civil prisoners taken by the talibans and a qaeda i guess , they knew the risks before going there ? also the flotilla didnt chose to send the goods with the UN becouse it symbolizes the Gazian freedom from the blockade ,becouse no country in the world have the right to blockade a country even at war , just becouse they dont like their attitude .



> Because obviously stealing IDF weapons and more than likely planning to use them against Israeli commandos in the case of a hostile boarding is a smart idea, I mean there can be no possibility of death when trying to take down someone who has no hesitation in shooting you dead if you give him a reason too? You have to wonder if Israel was hell bent on stopping these flotillas with full force, why there were casualties on only one ship, while the other ships were in fact perfectly fine despite being boarded as well?
> 
> Why would a flotilla have weapons stolen from IDF on board and also do the normal thing everyone does and deny everything?
> 
> And those weapons could have been the reason the Israeli Commandos used live rounds on them feeling threatened, Just saying.


In the video the crue attcked with steel bars and then they managed to take some soldiers down  and it's not the difficult to take their weapons , the ship was under attack from an foreign military force and they had the right to retaliate with whatever means they have on their possessions , so the soldiers lost their weapons and then accuse the crue of having weapons all way long ,that's circular logic for you .


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

iander said:


> I agree that using force was a bad idea for the activists.  I don't blame people for defending themselves but their interests would be better served with non-violent resistance.



Not to mention it would have gotten their point across much better.


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

Khris said:


> legally it was the israeli soldiers that attacked the flotilla by boarding the ship..



there is something about disproportioal response. If someone enters my house, i cant just bash his skull in and be done. 

And to expect that just because he entered my house illegally, he should not stop me from murdering him is ridiculous as well.


----------



## Elim Rawne (May 31, 2010)

Han Solo said:


> Not to mention it would have gotten their point across much better.



I disagree. Doing this has benefited them more.


----------



## Mathias124 (May 31, 2010)

xenopyre said:


> So you have no sympathy for the civil prisoners taken by the talibans and a qaeda i guess , they knew the risks before going there ? also the flotilla didnt chose to send the gods with the UN becouse it symbolizes the Gazian freedom from the blockade ,becouse no country in the world have the right to blockade a country even at war , just becouse they dont like their attitude .
> 
> 
> In the video the crue attcked with steel bars and then they managed to take some soldiers down  and it's not the difficult to take their weapons , the ship was under attack from an foreign military force and they had the right to retaliate with whatever means they have on their possessions , so the soldiers lost their weapons and then accuse the crue of having weapons all way long ,that's circular logic for you .



If i go to through a village controlled by the talibal with filled with supplies and a flag that says "these things are going to the americans"...

Yeah.. beat me up if a do that, i dont mind,... fuck the legality if i decide to do something so stupid for the love of god dont tell people i did such a fuckup


----------



## magholor (May 31, 2010)

Wait, people are actually defending Israeli?


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

Diceman said:


> I disagree. Doing this has benefited them more.



I dunno, it's made bigger news sure, but the idea of a bunch of peaceful activists getting illegally arrested and detaind for trying to do a good thing is a much more sympathetic position for the public.


----------



## IBU (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> If you don't deny is, how the fuck can you say: Omnistrife is correct?



I never said the U.S did not have an impact, but Omnistrife is still correct to point out that even if the U.S had not engaged in the activities they did, these groups would have still tried to attack the U.S because of their Jihadi ideology.

I am essentially rejecting your reductionism, while agreeing that these things did in fact happen and did have a significant, albeit not a totalizing, impact.

You cannot really take my statement out of the context of what followed it. Which was something to the effect of saying that U.S involvement has made Jihadi ideology far more attractive to local peoples, although even without this proponents of Jihadi ideology would want to damage the U.S.

I apologize if I wasn`t clear, but it seems to me my statement conveyed that Omnistrife was in my view correct with certain qualifications....


----------



## Altron (May 31, 2010)

xenopyre said:


> So you have no sympathy for the civil prisoners taken by the talibans and a qaeda i guess , they knew the risks before going there ? *also the flotilla didnt chose to send the gods with the UN becouse it symbolizes the Gazian freedom from the blockade ,becouse no country in the world have the right to blockade a country even at war , just becouse they dont like their attitude .*


And because of that mentality people ended up dying here




> In the video the crue attcked with steel bars and then they managed to* take some soldiers down  and it's not the difficult to take their weapons , the ship was under attack from an foreign military force and they had the right to retaliate with whatever means they have on their possessions , *so the soldiers lost their weapons and then accuse the crue of having weapons all way long ,that's circular logic for you .


*Then according to your logic *the Israeli soldiers had the right to fight back since they were under attack from a foreign enemy. My how you shot down your own argument.


----------



## Elim Rawne (May 31, 2010)

Han Solo said:


> I dunno, it's made bigger news sure, but the idea of a bunch of peaceful activists getting illegally arrested and detaind for trying to do a good thing is a much more sympathetic position for the public.



Yeah, but having martyr is a lot better for them. The public loves martyrs


----------



## Mathias124 (May 31, 2010)

Altron said:


> And because of that mentality people ended up dying here
> 
> 
> 
> *Then according to your logic *the Israeli soldiers had the right to fight back since they were under attack from a foreign enemy. My how you shot down your own argument.



Yeah, but they didnt want to engage in combat, they were attacked first

They just boarded a boat illegaly trying to cross their waters.

See how the argument still works?


----------



## makeoutparadise (May 31, 2010)

Psycho said:


> still doesn't make it right to leave thousands homeless and short on food and water, best way to win this war is by shifting the views of the general population and making israel look good, blocking supplies is not the right way to go



 I didn't say it was  right or wrong to leave thousands  of people in squalor just to meet an end


----------



## xenopyre (May 31, 2010)

Mathias124 said:


> Yeah, but they didnt want to engage in combat, they were attacked first
> 
> They just boarded a boat illegaly trying to cross *their waters.*
> 
> See how the argument still works?


*it wasnt their water , if the opperation accured in the Israeli water i would have no problem with it but the flotilla trajectory dont even come close to the israeli water unless you consider the Gaza water  israeli  * , and how is taking control of  boat  with military power doesnt fall under the definition of "engaging in combat" see how your logic stil work too .


----------



## Eboue (May 31, 2010)

UN just called emergency meeting bout it. Looking worse and worse for israel. How can they kill twelve if there was one gun and 2 knives. To be honest im starting to doubt whether they actually fought against the israeli's in the first place. If you think about it logically it seems unlikely.


----------



## Gelu (May 31, 2010)

Eboue said:


> UN just called emergency meeting bout it. Looking worse and worse for israel. How can they kill twelve if there was one gun and 2 knives.* To be honest im starting to doubt whether they actually fought against the israeli's in the first place.* If you think about it logically it seems unlikely.



You stilll havn't watched the videos on page 12 have you?

If you think about it logically Israel has nothing to gain by killing these men and a hell of alot to lose.


----------



## Mathias124 (May 31, 2010)

xenopyre said:


> *it wasnt their water , if the opperation accured in the Israeli water i would have no problem with it but the flotilla trajectory dont even come close to the israeli water unless you consider the Gaza water  israeli  * , and how is taking control of  boat  with military power doesnt fall under the definition of "engaging in combat" see how your logic stil work too .



It's not illegal to board a ship with confirmed criminal intend towards your nation.

The Isreali didnt do any piracy nor did they break any laws..

Do you guys know how many drug transports are stopped every year in internation waters by navies/coast guards?


----------



## Wesker (May 31, 2010)

How much aid is the U.N. giving to african countries and congo in comparison to those involved in the Israeli - Palestine conflict?


----------



## hcheng02 (May 31, 2010)

xenopyre said:


> *it wasnt their water , if the opperation accured in the Israeli water i would have no problem with it but the flotilla trajectory dont even come close to the israeli water unless you consider the Gaza water  israeli  * , and how is taking control of  boat  with military power doesnt fall under the definition of "engaging in combat" see how your logic stil work too .



How is Gaza water not under IDF jurisdiction during a blockade? And why the fuck are people calling the blockade illegal? Illegal under what law? The UN? Since when did armies need to ask the UN for permission to create a blockade or any other military action while at war? Does Turkey ask for permission from the UN to attack the PKK in Iraq?

If some guy drives up to a police blockade and then tries to knife a police officer and ends up getting shot, nobody would say its the fault of the police.


----------



## Eboue (May 31, 2010)

Gelu said:


> You stilll havn't watched the videos on page 12 have you?
> 
> If you think about it logically Israel has nothing to gain by killing these men and a hell of alot to lose.



But even the israelis said they had what two guns at most and iron bars. are you seriously telling me they would charge men with machine guns with that.  Even if you deludedly think they would then that still begs the question of how they can justify killing as many as they have when they had so few weapons.

thats the shittest video i have ever seen to use as evidence.


----------



## Watchman (May 31, 2010)

Eboue said:


> But even the israelis said they had what two guns at most and iron bars. *are you seriously telling me they would charge men with machine guns with that*.  Even if you deludedly think they would then that still begs the question of how they can justify killing as many as they have when they had so few weapons.



If you saw the videos then yes, you would have seen they did just that.


----------



## Edward Newgate (May 31, 2010)

The soldiers came with paintball guns, but with concelled guns of their own too as a last resort.

Though I already knew about it before it was said in the news, since a friend of mine told me


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

> – The Israeli troops "were not expecting to be attacked," said Jonathan Peled, minister-counselor at the Israeli embassy in Washington. *He said the soldiers came aboard carrying paintball pistols*, but were attacked with knives and metal bars. One naval commando was stabbed, prompting the soldiers to open up with live fire, killing the nine, he said.





> – Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Monday Israeli soldiers were attacked as they attempted to stop a convoy headed to Gaza to deliver aid. *The soldiers were beaten and stabbed*, and there was also a report of gunfire, Netanyahu said, appearing in Ottawa, Canada, with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Four Israeli soldiers were injured, he said.





> – All six boats in a Gaza-bound aid flotilla were boarded by Israeli naval commandos, according to the Israel Defense Forces. Only one, the Mamara, offered resistance; the other five surrendered peacefully, the military said.





> – An Israeli senior military official speaking on condition of anonymity said 15 soldiers aboard several commando boats were involved in the incident. An Israeli commando said upon descending into a boat with ropes, he was immediately attacked by a group of people. "They beat us up with metal sticks and knives," he said. "There was live fire at some point against us ... They were shooting at us from below deck."





> – A senior Israeli military official, speaking on condition of anonymity in an independent account cleared by military censors, said Israeli troops were planning to deal with peace activists on a Gaza-bound flotilla, "not to fight." The official displayed a box from the boat containing switchblade knives, slingshots, metal balls and metal bats. "This was not spontaneous," he said. "This was planned."





> Some of the soldiers were tossed from the top deck to a lower deck by the activists, and jumped in the water to save themselves, he said.
> 
> Activists grabbed soldiers and tried to hold them hostage, stripping them of their helmets and equipment, he said. About 30 activists, all speaking Arabic, carried out the attack, he said.





Video evidence clearly shows the claim that Israeli soldiers opened fire immediately upon boarding the ship as patently false. Rather, it shows that they were attacked/beaten the second they boarded.

The Israelis did bring non-lethal weapons, but as a result of the violence and threats switched to live fire. The attack by the activists was planned.

Of course, the only ship where there was an issue was the one that violently attacked the soldiers. The others had no incidents or death/injuries.


----------



## Eboue (May 31, 2010)

Watchman said:


> If you saw the videos then yes, you would have seen they did just that.



No you can see nothing from the videos and its bullshit to say you can. their fucking really far away and you cant tell whats going on. Also still you should shoot them in the face if they have a melee weapon should you. why not the leg?


----------



## Wesker (May 31, 2010)

Can someone answer my question?


----------



## Elim Rawne (May 31, 2010)

Eboue said:


> No you can see nothing from the videos and its bullshit to say you can. their fucking really far away and you cant tell whats going on. Also still you should shoot them in the face if they have a melee weapon should you. why not the leg?



You do realize that you can kill someone by shooting them in the leg ?


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

Eboue said:


> No you can see nothing from the videos and its bullshit to say you can. their fucking really far away and you cant tell whats going on. Also still you should shoot them in the face if they have a melee weapon should you. why not the leg?



You can blatantly see them throwing a soldier down a deck, and attacking another with a metal pole or something like that.


----------



## hcheng02 (May 31, 2010)

Mathias124 said:


> It's not illegal to board a ship with confirmed criminal intend towards your nation.
> 
> The Isreali didnt do any piracy nor did they break any laws..
> 
> *Do you guys know how many drug transports are stopped every year in international waters by navies/coast guards?*



And I think we have the IDF's legal justification to board right here.



Eboue said:


> No you can see nothing from the videos and its bullshit to say you can. their fucking really far away and you cant tell whats going on. *Also still you should shoot them in the face if they have a melee weapon should you. why not the leg?*



Shooting someone in the leg can hit a major artery/vein or shatter the bone, leading to death from blood loss. This ain't the movies kid.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

magholor said:


> Wait, people are actually defending Israeli?



Shocking, ain't it? 

Imagine if China had gunned down people in an aid convoy. The robots who fall in lock step would be marching the other way.


----------



## magholor (May 31, 2010)

NanoHaxial said:


> Video evidence clearly shows the claim that Israeli soldiers opened fire immediately upon boarding the ship as patently false. Rather, it shows that they were attacked/beaten the second they boarded.
> 
> The Israelis did bring non-lethal weapons, but as a result of the violence and threats switched to live fire. The attack by the activists was planned.
> 
> Of course, the only ship where there was an issue was the one that violently attacked the soldiers. The others had no incidents or death/injuries.



If someone boarded my boat do you think I would just say oh well, might as well lie on the ground and do nothing? No. I would attack them. How did Israel not expect that to happen?


----------



## Eboue (May 31, 2010)

hcheng02 said:


> Shooting someone in the leg can hit a major artery/vein or shatter the bone, leading to death. This ain't the movies kid.



Ok, or because you know more than me about shooting people, you could assume you know what i mean and then answer the actual question of why they couldnt debilitate them. instead of being petty immature and to top it all of say "kid" in a strange and mildly sad attempt at condescension.


----------



## Wesker (May 31, 2010)

Wesker said:


> How much aid is the U.N. giving to african countries and congo in comparison to those involved in the Israeli - Palestine conflict?



Can someone at least try and answer this question?


----------



## Watchman (May 31, 2010)

Because China has a totally analagous situation to Israel, right?

Not to mention nobody would be *stupid* enough to do this to China or Russia or anyone else.  It's just Israel, that for some reason is given the full scrutiny of the global media whilst simultaneously attracting the largest number of misguided activists.

EDIT:

Give me 5 minutes, Wesker, I'll try and find out what I can.


----------



## Gelu (May 31, 2010)

Wesker said:


> Can someone answer my question?



According to Israel about 15,000 tons of aid reaches Gaza weekly. Not sure about the others.


----------



## Arishem (May 31, 2010)

Yes, soldiers should aim for the limbs with automatic weapons to avoid non-lethal injuries.


----------



## Mathias124 (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Shocking, ain't it?
> 
> Imagine if China had gunned down people in an aid convoy. The robots who fall in lock step would be marching the other way.



If a bounch of South Korean guys Fuck you to the chinese navy and got killed... i would have stood behind the Chinese because of the sole fact there'd be less retards in the world


----------



## Elim Rawne (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Shocking, ain't it?
> 
> Imagine if China had gunned down people in an aid convoy. The robots who fall in lock step would be marching the other way.



Indeed, you'd be rooting for the shooters that time


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

Diceman said:


> Indeed, you'd be rooting for the shooters that time



Obviously have never rooted for murderers of aid workers. Christ, at least troll better rather than the predictable copy/paste job.


----------



## hcheng02 (May 31, 2010)

Eboue said:


> Ok, or because you know more than me about shooting people, you could assume you know what i mean and then answer the actual question of why they couldnt debilitate them. instead of being petty immature and to top it all of say "kid" in a strange and mildly sad attempt at condescension.



Alright smartass give a me a good method for these commandoes - who were attacked with lethal force - to debilitate these activists without significant risk of killing them. They shot paintballs at them and it didn't work. You can't take out a crowd with hand to hand when they outnumber you and are coming at you armed with knives and shit. ONly recourse left is shooting them and shooting someone with live ammo anywhere can lead to death through shock and blood loss.


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

LOL people are bitching, they be hating.



> By SELCAN HACAOGLU and LEE KEATH, AP
> 25 minutes ago
> 
> Israel boat raid sparks condemnations, protests
> ...


----------



## Arishem (May 31, 2010)

I'd murder aid workers, too, if they came at me wielding knives and clubs. Wait, wouldn't that make it self defense not murder?


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Some statements;



			
				William Hague said:
			
		

> I deplore the loss of life during the interception of the Gaza Flotilla. Our embassy is in urgent contact with the Israeli government. We are asking for more information and urgent access to any UK nationals involved.
> 
> We have consistently advised against attempting to access Gaza in this way, because of the risks involved. But at the same time, there is a clear need for Israel to act with restraint and in line with international obligations. It will be important to establish the facts about this incident, and especially whether enough was done to prevent deaths and injuries.
> 
> ...





			
				Statement from the Turkish foreign ministry said:
			
		

> The interception on the convoy is unacceptable ... Israel will have to bear the consequences of its actions.
> 
> We strongly condemn it and await an immediate explanation.
> 
> ...





			
				Ismail Haniya said:
			
		

> The government of Hamas call on Palestinians to carry out a total strike in Gaza and West Bank to show solidarity and protest the Israeli crimes.
> 
> We request emergency session for the UN Security Council, Arab League and Islamic Conference and we demand the Palestinian Authority to stop all forms of negotiations.
> 
> ...





			
				Spokesperson for EU's foreign policy chief said:
			
		

> High Representative Catherine Ashton expresses her deep regret at the news of loss of life and violence and extends her sympathies to families of the dead and wounded.
> 
> On behalf of the European Union she demands a full enquiry about the circumstances in which this happened.
> 
> The continued policy of closure is unacceptable and politically counter-productive. She calls for an immediate, sustained and unconditional opening of the crossing for the flow of humanitarian aid, commercial goods and persons to and from Gaza.





			
				Navi Pillay said:
			
		

> I am shocked by reports that humanitarian aid was met with violence early this morning reportedly causing death and injury as the boat convoy approached the Gaza coast.
> 
> The blockade keeps undermining human rights on a daily basis.
> 
> ...



As for my own nation, 9 swedes have been arrested.

Four of them are; 
• Member of Parliament - Mehmet Kaplan

• senior physician - Viktoria Strand

• Writer - Henning Mankell

• Artist - Dror Feiler


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

magholor said:


> Again, people are defending Israel?
> 
> If someone boarded my boat do you think I would just say oh well, might as well lie on the ground and do nothing? No. I would attack them. How did Israel not expect that to happen?



These people purposefully moved to create an confrontation with the Israelis. Not just the people on the one boat who carried out attacks, but the entire flotilla. They fully expected and wanted the Israelis to storm their boats for the publicity and PR.

Additionally, they've been through this kind of thing before. They know what to expect. They know they aren't in danger. Attacking Israeli forces would do nothing but make the situation worse for everyone involved.

They claim to be a humanitarian mission to deliver aid. They have no business trying to provoke confrontations or break blockades. They have no business violently attacking the Israeli forces (and five ships did not attempt it). They should have surrendered and let the international community take action at that point. Five ships did. The last one did not, and now there is a host of injured and dead as a result.


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

> Netanyahu: Flotilla raid was self defense
> By ROB GILLIES, AP
> 51 minutes ago
> 
> ...


----------



## Eboue (May 31, 2010)

These are commandos there meant to be elite highly trained troops. Are you seriously telling me there is no way to stop these people without killing them? then your an idiot. you act like the military buff yet you fail to think of a way to stop them? People on the israeli side on this thread have quoted 30 activists involved in the violence. how many marines were there? Enough easily. Rubber bullets for a start, tear gas and im sure you can think of more.


----------



## Wesker (May 31, 2010)

You know as far as comparisons with China go, I'm pretty sure if activists did this with a Chinese blockade the Chinese probably wouldn't even bother boarding the ship they would probably just blow the thing up.


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

Eboue said:


> These are commandos there meant to be elite highly trained troops. Are you seriously telling me there is no way to stop these people without killing them? then your an idiot. you act like the military buff yet you fail to think of a way to stop them? People on the israeli side on this thread have quoted 30 activists involved in the violence. how many marines were there? Enough easily. Rubber bullets for a start, tear gas and im sure you can think of more.



Did you not read the articles or watch the video? They were clearly outnumbered. Anywhere from 600-700 people were on the six ships. There were only 15 Israeli commandos on the helicopter, and a few small boats. They did bring non-lethal weapons, but faced a life-threatening situation they didn't expect. At least one soldier was stabbed, and another two were shot.


----------



## mayumi (May 31, 2010)

Picture 12, when US activists get hurt and US does not care.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

Wesker said:


> You know as far as comparisons with China go, I'm pretty sure if activists did this with a Chinese blockade the Chinese probably wouldn't even bother boarding the ship they would probably just blow the thing up.



Nah, they would probably use their brains and not create an international fiasco. Tear gas, rubber bullets, or merely shooting the motors come to mind. 

Obviously they wouldn't be caught dead gunning down aid workers.

If China had done this, there would be hell to pay from the robots on this forum.


----------



## Eboue (May 31, 2010)

NanoHaxial said:


> Did you not read the articles or watch the video? They were clearly outnumbered. Anywhere from 600-700 people were on the six ships. There were only 15 Israeli commandos on the helicopter, and a few small boats. They did bring non-lethal weapons, but faced a life-threatening situation they didn't expect. At least one soldier was stabbed, and another two were shot.



5 ships went peacefully. so your stupid attempt is shit.


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Nah, they would probably use their brains and not create an international fiasco. Tear gas, rubber bullets, or merely shooting the motors come to mind.
> 
> Obviously they wouldn't be caught dead gunning down aid workers.
> 
> If China did this, there would be hell to pay from the robots on this forum.



They did use tear gas. Also, what would destroying the motors accomplish? They'd still have to board the ships or leave them stranded.



> International law allows for countries to ask suspicious boats to identify themselves. The vessels' passengers did not cooperate and called the move "scare tactics" on their streamed broadcasts.
> 
> The IDF searched the boats for arms immediately after the takeover. *The soldiers were forced to use tear gas after they were attacked with knives, daggers and cudgels, putting their lives in danger.* Unofficial reports that ten persons have been killed and another ten wounded were admitted to Rambam Hospital in Haifa were changed by the Arab television station Al Jazeera, to two killed and four wounded. An Al Jazeera reporter on one of the boats reported hearing gunshots.


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

Eboue said:


> 5 ships went peacefully. so your stupid attempt is shit.



So you have no real response. Of course, like I just posted, they also did use tear gas.


----------



## hcheng02 (May 31, 2010)

Eboue said:


> These are commandos there meant to be elite highly trained troops. Are you seriously telling me there is no way to stop these people without killing them? then your an idiot. you act like the military buff yet you fail to think of a way to stop them? People on the israeli side on this thread have quoted 30 activists involved in the violence. how many marines were there? Enough easily. Rubber bullets for a start, tear gas and im sure you can think of more.



Rubber bullets can also kill in close range. Bet ya didn't know that either.

And like I said, this ain't a kung fu flick. No commando can take on a dozen armed assailants by himself without intent to kill.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

NanoHaxial said:


> They did use tear gas. Also, what would destroying the motors accomplish? *They'd still have to board the ships or leave them stranded.*



Wasn't the purpose to prevent them from getting to Gaza? Shoot the motors, they're adrift and need rescue.

Where were the rubber bullets? Hell, why did these morons attempt to board a ship full of 700 people in international waters. Doesn't that also make them pirates?


----------



## makeoutparadise (May 31, 2010)

Mathias124 said:


> They just boarded a boat illegaly trying to cross *their waters.*



Their waters?  those are Palestinian waters that Isreal is blockading thats why its called a blockade!!!


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Wasn't the purpose to prevent them from getting to Gaza? Shoot the motors, they're adrift and need rescue.



And you still have to deal with boarding and passenger transfer of some six ships containing 600-700 people.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

NanoHaxial said:


> And you still have to deal with boarding and passenger transfer of some six ships containing 600-700 people.





No, you don't. You wait until they request rescue and tugboat. Obviously they can't remain out there indefinitely. 700 people can only remain on a ship for so long until they run out of essentials or realize they're hopelessly adrift. 

You really think boarding and gunning down people is preferable to my common sense solution?


----------



## Mathias124 (May 31, 2010)

makeoutparadise said:


> Their waters?  those are Palestinian waters that Isreal is blockading thats why its called a blockade!!!



Yeah, and when they have control of the waters they are under the supervision of the Isreali millitary..

So yeah, its THEIR waters and some idiots tried to break through the blockade, attacked some soldiers who tried to stop them and then.. they got shot..

Woop the fricking due, if i ever run against a soldier with a knife please do kill me, i deserve it


----------



## Eboue (May 31, 2010)

NanoHaxial said:


> So you have no real response. Of course, like I just posted, they also did use tear gas.



Your response involved them being outnumbered. but as far as any evidence and reports say is that there were 30 violent activists.  15 commandos. this isnt that bad odds. You cant kill with rubber bullets to certain areas close up though can you. These are trained people they dont just have to turn around and shoot people in the face, especially in this scenario.


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> No, you don't. You wait until they request rescue. Obviously they can't remain out there indefinitely.
> 
> You really think boarding and gunning down people is preferable to my common sense solution?



And then you still have to board the ships and transfer passengers.

The Israelis weren't expecting resistance or violence. They brought non-lethal weapons, but things didn't turn out that way.


----------



## Razgriez (May 31, 2010)

OmniStrife said:


> [YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKOmLP4yHb4&feature=channel[/YOUTUBE]
> [YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bU12KW-XyZE[/YOUTUBE]



Well thats some solid video evidence of who is the real aggressor here.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

NanoHaxial said:


> *And then you still have to board the ships and transfer passengers.*
> 
> The Israelis weren't expecting resistance or violence. They brought non-lethal weapons, but things didn't turn out that way.



No, you don't. 

What part of this is impossible for you to comprehend? Have you ever seen a tugboat in your life? Here is one:


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

Eboue said:


> Your response involved them being outnumbered. but as far as any evidence and reports say is that there were 30 violent activists.  15 commandos. this isnt that bad odds. You cant kill with rubber bullets to certain areas close up though can you. These are trained people they dont just have to turn around and shoot people in the face, especially in this scenario.



"Non-lethal" doesn't mean "won't kill". Rubber bullets have plenty of potential to kill, especially at close range. Tear gas canisters themselves can cause significant injury or death.

If you watch the video, these men are swarmed and attacked the minute they reach the ship. They don't come down as a group or have time to prepare. They can't take on a group of armed individuals by themselves with non-lethal means.


----------



## hcheng02 (May 31, 2010)

Eboue said:


> 5 ships went peacefully. so your stupid attempt is shit.



How does that work against NanoHaxai? If anything, it supports him since activists who didn't attack the commandoes were not attacked in turn.


----------



## makeoutparadise (May 31, 2010)

Mathias124 said:


> Yeah, and when they have control of the waters they are under the supervision of the Isreali millitary..
> 
> So yeah, its THEIR waters and some idiots tried to break through the blockade, attacked some soldiers who tried to stop them and then.. they got shot..



Fair enough.....


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> No, you don't.
> 
> What part of this is impossible for you to comprehend? Have you ever seen a tugboat in your life?



At some point the ships will have to be boarded and the people removed. That doesn't change.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

NanoHaxial said:


> At some point the ships will have to be boarded and the people removed. That doesn't change.



No, they won't. They'd be tugged into a harbor and they would disembark. 

What part of this is so fucking hard to understand? You ever seen a tanker or cruise ship tugged? You would never once need to board the ship.

People from tugboats don't storm the ship of tankers every time they need tugging.


----------



## Eboue (May 31, 2010)

hcheng02 said:


> How does that work against NanoHaxai? If anything, it supports him since activists who didn't attack the commandoes were not attacked in turn.



it helps me because he made out that about 3 commandos were attacked by 600 people. which is rubbish.


----------



## vivEnergy (May 31, 2010)

Wesker said:


> You know as far as comparisons with China go, I'm pretty sure if activists did this with a Chinese blockade the Chinese probably wouldn't even bother boarding the ship they would probably just blow the thing up.



by the way chech this


----------



## Gelu (May 31, 2010)

> Wasn't the purpose to prevent them from getting to Gaza? Shoot the motors, they're adrift and need rescue.



Yes shoot the motors of the aid fleet thats a good PR move. Israel thought that the ships would surrender peaceful so why bother shooting the motors?



> Where were the rubber bullets? Hell, why did these morons attempt to board a ship full of 700 people in international waters. Doesn't that also make them pirates?



Smugglers are intercepted in international waters all the time.


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> No, they won't. They'd be tugged into a harbor and they would disembark.
> 
> What part of this is so fucking hard to understand? You ever seen a tanker or cruise ship tugged? You would never once need to board the ship.



Unless some people refused to leave.

Not to mention a tugboat would take around 8 hours just to get the boats to Israel, discounting the travel time to the ships.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

Gelu said:


> *Yes shoot the motors of the aid fleet thats a good PR move.* Israel thought that the ships would surrender peaceful so why bother shooting the motors?
> 
> 
> 
> Smugglers are intercepted in international waters all the time.



Yeah, it was a fuckload better PR move to shoot the people instead of the motors, amirite? 

Jesus Christ.



NanoHaxial said:


> Unless some people refused to leave.
> 
> Not to mention a tugboat would take around 8 hours just to get the boats to Israel, discounting the travel time to the ships.



WHAT???

If they refuse to leave they'll starve like morons. Their point was to provoke a conflict and/or reach Gaza. Once that doesn't happen the show's over, even they knew this. 

Who the fuck cares if it takes 8 hours or 5?


----------



## Watchman (May 31, 2010)

Wesker said:


> Can someone at least try and answer this question?



Couldn't find a 2009-10 figure for aid to Africa. Here's the latest one I found:


----------



## T.D.A (May 31, 2010)

Razgriez said:


> Well thats some solid video evidence of who is the real aggressor here.



Err no it isn't.


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Yeah, it was a fuckload better PR move to shoot the people instead of the motors, amirite?
> 
> Jesus Christ.
> 
> ...



They're in giant aid ships loaded to support perhaps a hundred people per ship. I'm sure they've got a lot of supplies. More than enough to hold out for a long long time. I'm not sure "Israelis try to starve out humanitarian holdouts: week 3" is better PR than "Israelis seize humanitarian ships, deport activists".

Like I said, Israeli wasn't expecting resistance or violence. They weren't planning to use anything more deadly than a paintball.

EDIT: And tugboats are notoriously slow.


----------



## OmniStrife (May 31, 2010)

The flotilla is an act of war, that's all it was.


----------



## vivEnergy (May 31, 2010)

NanoHaxial said:


> "Non-lethal" doesn't mean "won't kill". Rubber bullets have plenty of potential to kill, especially at close range. Tear gas canisters themselves can cause significant injury or death.
> 
> If you watch the video, these men are swarmed and attacked the minute they reach the ship. They don't come down as a group or have time to prepare. They can't take on a group of armed individuals by themselves with non-lethal means.



Yeah i actually thought i was watching the trailer for 28 months later 
ultra-violence !!!!


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

How the hell is anyone defending the people who attacked the Israeli solderiers with lethal force?

Do I have the right to kill the next burglar who comes into my house? No, of course I don't. Unless my life was in danger, I should go to jail for murder, regardless if he was in the wrong in the first place.

Holy hell people, I repeat, two wrongs do not make a right.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

NanoHaxial said:


> They're in giant aid ships loaded to support perhaps a hundred people per ship. I'm sure they've got a lot of supplies. More than enough to hold out for a long long time. I'm not sure "Israelis try to starve out humanitarian holdouts: week 3" is better PR than "Israelis seize humanitarian ships, deport activists".
> 
> Like I said, Israeli wasn't expecting resistance or violence. They weren't planning to use anything more deadly than a paintball.



Oh FFS, they are not going into siege mode with crowbars after the conflict ends in international waters. You're literally making up an impossible scenario to 

1) Discount the most common-sense solution of disabling the motors and
2) Defend the worst solution of gunning down aid workers. 

Seriously, give it up. Disabling the motors, tugging them to shore, and disembarkation is preferable to gunning down aid workers in international waters. And you know it, so stop with the threadbare line of BS.


----------



## Razgriez (May 31, 2010)

Let me get this straight.

While it looks like Israel is not at fault for the aggression(just watch the thermal camera video, if you dont agree with that you shouldnt be in this thread anymore) Israel is now at fault for poorly choosing the right course of action and could of avoided the confrontation by shooting out the engine of a cruise ship.

I dont know about you but a cruise ship has a pretty fucking big engine to propel it across water. So save for some ballistic weaponry such as missiles and risking sinking the ship your not going to stop it without boarding the ship.

You cant shoot up the propellers either since modern bullets shred up after being shot into the water and become non-lethal after 3-4 inches(check out mythbusters on this).

So this really leaves them 1 option and that is to board the ship and take control of the ship itself which they did. They met hostile force and dealt with it the best they could. Unfortunately they had to put a few people down for the best interest of their lives.

This is my current assessment with the current evidence provided to us at this time.



> Err no it isn't.



Watch the video. Hell they are even so nice to point everything out to you. Its a pretty solid piece of evidence of what happened.


----------



## Ennoea (May 31, 2010)

> The Israelis weren't expecting resistance or violence. They brought non-lethal weapons, but things didn't turn out that way.



Oh c'mon you can't possibly believe this?!!! Israel knew there would be resistance, they would be foolish not to. Taking live bullets on to a ship of angered protesters was never going to end well, they should have been smarter than to try it. Shoot the engines, take all those off who want off and restrain the rest. Heck use rubber bullets if you must but shooting at them was stupid and makes Israel to be the villain again.


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Oh FFS, they are not going into siege mode with crowbars after the conflict ends in international waters. You're literally making up an impossible scenario to
> 
> 1) Discount the most common-sense solution of disabling the motors and
> 2) Defend the worst solution of gunning down aid workers.
> ...



You act like they knew before hand that there would be resistance and violence or that they planned to gun them down. They didn't.


----------



## Arishem (May 31, 2010)

vivEnergy said:


> Yeah i actually thought i was watching the trailer for 28 months later
> ultra-violence !!!!



These so-called aid workers are about as smart as zombies for deciding to charge armed soldiers right off the bat.


----------



## Gelu (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Yeah, it was a fuckload better PR move to shoot the people instead of the motors, amirite?
> Jesus Christ.



Way to completely miss the damn point. 

Peacefully detaining the 6 ships with no shots being fired, *which is what israel expected to happen*, is better PRwise than shooting the motors of the aid fleet. 

They had no reason to believe this Humanatarian Aid convoy would give more than minor resistance. Let alone being armed to the teeth with knives, molotovs and stun grenades.


----------



## vivEnergy (May 31, 2010)

un aid to africa ~25 billions us dollars
un aid to pali refugees ~1 billions us dollars

watching israeli and arabs fighting ~priceless (i mean it's already 20 pages wtf wtf wtf)


----------



## Outlandish (May 31, 2010)

good stuff, shame about the dead & wounded.

This won't end well for Israel which i guess was the point of this journey.


----------



## Trias (May 31, 2010)

Razgriez said:


> Let me get this straight.
> 
> Watch the video. Hell they are even so nice to point everything out to you. Its a pretty solid piece of evidence of what happened.



 Videos look like they've been taken down. Care to give me any other links?

 P.S: Neo Nazi & Islamic Extremist Lobby is working much better than any hypothetical Zionist Lobby could do.



Arishem said:


> These so-called aid workers are about as smart as zombies for deciding to charge armed soldiers right off the bat.



 Lol, basically this.


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

Trias said:


> Videos look like they've been taken down. Care to give me any other links?



Think he meant this one:

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bU12KW-XyZE&feature=player_embedded[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## Eboue (May 31, 2010)

OmniStrife said:


> The flotilla is an act of war, that's all it was.



No, infact i would go as far as to say it pretty much fills no criteria as to be described an act of war.

@razgriez

hardly good evidence. First of all the title is evidently bias. second of all it shows little of the over all actions. It is not good evidence.  I could make a video of the israelis shooting the people just put that up but could i call it good evidence. no i couldnt.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

NanoHaxial said:


> You act like they knew before hand that there would be resistance and violence or that they planned to gun them down. They didn't.



They brought live ammunition. If they're carrying an automatic weapon with live ammunition, obviously they're preparing to defend themselves with lethal force. 

Fuck, you can even stop a motor with rope. You can stop people with rubber bullets. 

Boarding a ship in international waters and firing on aid workers with live ammunition is just the most idiotic thing imaginable. The only thing more monstrous would be simply blowing up the whole ship.


----------



## The Pink Ninja (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> If China had done this,



False comparison.

Few other states in the world would have this kind of shit forced on them an be expected to swallow it. No other state has this kind of attention on its every move or stir up so much energy in people who have nothing to do it or have so many against them. This wouldn't happen anywhere except except states to small or weak to protect themselves or really for most people to know where they are.

And China pulls shit all the time without this furore. They put pressure on anyone having anything to do with the Dalai Lama or Taiwan, even when it's a domestic matter that has nothing to do with. They even harangued the Miss World competition because Taiwan entered as Miss Taiwan than whatever stupid name China wants them to use. That's the level of interference they go to with Taiwan (A Free and Democratic country): From the UN all the way down to miss world and local Australian film festivals.

Even the USA tip toes around China for fear of provoking them, even before the whole debt debacle. That's what Israel wants: Not to have to board ships but for people to know Israel won't back down.

You know if Israel deported journalists and human rights activists from their country or the territories there'd be Lefty Rage, which you would join in. That's standard practice in China.

Bullshit comparison, but should be expected from someone who hates Israel and loves China as much as you.



> there would be hell to pay from the robots on this forum.



God, will you quit it with this robot stuff. You're not original SP: All your posts are the same and the same as everyone else arguing your side and the same as every other liberal lefty and Muslim in the entire internet and world and eminently predictable.

The only difference right now is you're not waving a burning Israeli flag, so why don't you give your superiority complex a rest and grow up.


----------



## hcheng02 (May 31, 2010)

Eboue said:


> No, infact i would go as far as to say it pretty much fills no criteria as to be described an act of war.



Running into a military blockade despite repeated warnings and attacking soldiers with lethal force tends to fit the bill.


----------



## Ennoea (May 31, 2010)

I lolled hard at the Arab nations claiming Israel wasn't ready for peace, pot calling Kettle black.



> These so-called aid workers are about as smart as zombies for deciding to charge armed soldiers right off the bat.



Alot of Palestinian aid workers tend to be quite emotional.


> Running into a military blockade despite repeated warnings and attacking soldiers with lethal force tends to fit the bill.



No matter how much you wish it to be it isn't an act of war, act of violent protest yes.


----------



## Razgriez (May 31, 2010)

Trias said:


> Videos look like they've been taken down. Care to give me any other links?
> 
> P.S: Neo Nazi & Islamic Extremist Lobby is working much better than any hypothetical Zionist Lobby could do.
> 
> ...



The video still works for me. The 1st one is whatever. The 2nd one is the good one.


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> They brought live ammunition. If they're carrying an automatic weapon with live ammunition, obviously they're preparing to defend themselves with lethal force.
> 
> Fuck, you can even stop a motor with rope. You can stop people with rubber bullets.
> 
> Boarding a ship in international waters and firing on aid workers with live ammunition is just the most idiotic thing imaginable.



They also brought and used non-lethal weapons. The idea that they brought lethal weapons because they _expected_ to use them is nonsense. This flotilla was supposedly unarmed and non-violent by their own admission. The Israelis had no reason to expect or way to know that they would need their live fire weapons beforehand.


----------



## Mael (May 31, 2010)

Still believing in tabula rasa folks.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

The Pink Ninja said:


> False comparison.
> 
> Few other states in the world would have this kind of shit forced on them an be expected to swallow it.



Ha! You need the "Israel is the special victim incomparable with every other nation on earth" to dismiss this. I love it "b-b-but it's not the same when Israel does it!! WAAAAA!!!"

Face it, if it had been China, you'd be outraged. Priceless. 



NanoHaxial said:


> They also brought and used non-lethal weapons. The idea that they brought lethal weapons because they _expected_ to use them is nonsense. This flotilla was supposedly unarmed and non-violent by their own admission. The Israelis had no reason to expect or way to know that they would need their live fire weapons beforehand.



Why did they bring live ammunition then? Obviously because they were prepared to use lethal force. I don't think anyone on earth expected Israel to do actually use it, but they should never underestimate the brutality and stupidity of the average Israeli soldier.


----------



## Eboue (May 31, 2010)

hcheng02 said:


> Running into a military blockade despite repeated warnings and attacking soldiers with lethal force tends to fit the bill.



ha, thought you were some military buff. obviously not. War is between to states. If it was their fault as you seem to think it is and the firing was justified then it would be an act of terrorism.


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Face it, if it had been China, you'd be outraged. Priceless.



No I would not.

I'm outraged that Israel has a blockade in the first place, but this specific incident is soldiers responding to having their lives being put in danger.


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

why is this still being discussed?? 

Israel boarded a ship in international waters, happens more often. 

the rest is at the hands of the ""aid workers"" who were trying to murder the boarding party. Israel did screw up with the boarding. 



And no shinigami perv, if this was done by China and you had activists trying to murder a chinese boarding party i would say the exact thing. 

Idiots got it coming


----------



## hadou (May 31, 2010)

According to CNN, these ships were in international waters. I do not want to take any sides, but if this incident took place in international waters, then this would constitute an act of piracy.


----------



## Arishem (May 31, 2010)

Ennoea said:


> Alot of Palestinian aid workers tend to be quite emotional.



There is a proper time and place for emotions, this wasn't one of them. Though I would imagine that "KILL TEH JOOB!" is hard to resist when just such a person lands in your midst after years of dreaming of committing the act.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

Han Solo said:


> No I would not.
> 
> I'm outraged that Israel has a blockade in the first place, but this specific incident is soldiers responding to having their lives being put in danger.



Uh huh. You'd have all these same people defending China gunning down aid workers? 

Russia? Iran? 

Not a chance in hell. Not sure about you personally, but the notion that they all would is laughable. Priceless hypocrisy.



Zabuzalives said:


> Idiots got it coming



You're right, they deserved to die.


----------



## Ennoea (May 31, 2010)

> Iran, one of Israel’s staunchest enemies, said the killings were “inhuman” and would help bring about an end to the state of Israel.
> 
> “All these acts indicate the end of the heinous and fake regime and will bring it closer to the end of its existence,” President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told the state broadcaster IRIB. The country called on the world to cut ties with Israel.
> 
> “The minimum step that the international community should take regarding this horrible crime by the Zionist regime is to fully boycott it and to fully cut diplomatic, economic and political ties with the Zionist regime,” said the Defence Minister Ahmad Vahidi.



Thank you Iran for pointing out the "inhuman" acts, its nice to see you don't see the irony there


----------



## Watchman (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Face it, if it had been China, you'd be outraged. Priceless.



Not really. If it had been China, I'd have wondered who the fuck was stupid enough to play chicken with them.


----------



## mayumi (May 31, 2010)

hadou said:


> According to CNN, these ships were in international waters. I do not want to take any sides, but if this incident took place in international waters, then this would constitute an act of piracy.



sush, israeli soldiers were attacked by a mob. don't you know?


----------



## Arishem (May 31, 2010)

Charging Chinese soldiers with any kind of weapon is asking for a lethal dose of lead.


----------



## Eboue (May 31, 2010)

people justifying death because they were stupid is disgraceful. Only an idiot would ever say such a thing, the sad thing is i dont even think half the people are trolling when they say it.


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

> Why did they bring live ammunition then? Obviously because they were prepared to use lethal force. I don't think anyone on earth expected Israel to do actually use it, but they should never underestimate the brutality and stupidity of the average Israeli soldier.


Like I said, they had no way to know beforehand that they would need to use those weapons as you suggested.

Cops carry their weapons at all times as well, in the event that they may need them. That doesn't mean that they expect to or know beforehand that they will need them when the time comes.

Of course, I suppose defending yourself from lethal force in a life-threatening situation with lethal force is now stupid and brutal.


----------



## Ennoea (May 31, 2010)

Im surprised that people advocated that protesters could be shot dead too. So aslong as any nation gave a warning to a bunch of protesters before it shot them dead people would be okay? Since they obviously they "had it coming".



> Like I said, they had no way to know beforehand that they would need to use those weapons as you suggested.



The army guards itself against children. They expect agression from everyone.


----------



## hadou (May 31, 2010)

mayumi said:


> sush, israeli soldiers were attacked by a mob. don't you know?



If these ships were attacked in international waters, then this is an act of piracy. International waters are not under any country's jurisdiction. I do not take any sides, but I know there is a long history between these two groups, and if Israel soldiers though they would not encounter resistance, then they were very ignorant.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Zabuzalives said:


> Israel boarded a ship in international waters, happens more often.



Shut your trap already, okay? Boarding and blocking a vessel in international water is strictly against international law, and it does not happen often.


----------



## HolyHands (May 31, 2010)

Watchman said:


> Not really. If it had been China, I'd have wondered who the fuck was stupid enough to play chicken with them.



This.

Anyone who knows the slightest thing about China knows that you do not fuck with them in any situation if they're armed.


----------



## Razgriez (May 31, 2010)

Eboue said:


> people justifying death because they were stupid is disgraceful. Only an idiot would ever say such a thing, the sad thing is i dont even think half the people are trolling when they say it.



Not everything is bubble gum and candy.

The reality of the fact is people needlessly throw their lives away for their own stupid stubbornness. If they just listened to the Israelis and went to another port so the aid they wanted to provide could get there.

I dont think that was their intention though. I think these people wanted something like this to happen.

These people didnt deserve to die. But when you throw yourself into conflict this happens. People that shouldnt die get killed.



> Shut your trap already, okay? Boarding and blocking a vessel in international water is strictly against international law, and it does not happen often.



So would you like to start a class action law suit against Israel to bring justice against them? Or would you like to provoke a world war and have everything utterly destroy the state of Israel and anything related to Jews.


----------



## R00t_Decision (May 31, 2010)

Israeli commando's killed 10 people, with no threats going by the video, *in International Waters.*

Doing this sort of thing outside jurisdiction is a big fucking no no. I hope severe punishment comes from this.


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> How is Israel allowed to block and board a vessel in international water? That's PIRACY.



They're allowed to because they're at war and in a war you don't normally let enemy ships sail around freely collecting supplies for the enemy. Did anyone complain during WWII when the German Navy boarded an allied ship or vice versa? You should really rethink your attitude here, the world isn't always black and white.



R00t_Decision said:


> Israeli commando's killed 10 people, with not threats going by the video, in International Waters.
> 
> Doing this sort of thing outside jurisdiction is a big fucking no no. I hpe severe punishment comes from this.



It's already been pretty much established that they were attacked by some of the crew (you can even see it on some of the videos in other articles).


----------



## Blue_Panter_Ninja (May 31, 2010)

Seems like there is a new war underway.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

NanoHaxial said:


> Like I said, they had no way to know beforehand that they would need to use those weapons as you suggested.
> 
> Cops carry their weapons at all times as well, in the event that they may need them. That doesn't mean that they expect to or know beforehand that they will need them when the time comes.
> 
> Of course, I suppose defending yourself from lethal force in a life-threatening situation with lethal force is now stupid and brutal.



Right, the cops carry their guns because they are prepared to use them. Obviously, boarding a vessel and carrying machine guns indicates that this isn't without peril. People who carry automatic weapons are obviously prepared to use them even if they don't think it's likely they'll need to. 

How does this in any way justify taking the most risky, and ultimately tragic, course over a safer alternative?


----------



## Kobe (May 31, 2010)

Saufsoldat said:


> They're allowed to because they're at war and in a war you don't normally let enemy ships sail around freely collecting supplies for the enemy. Did anyone complain during WWII when the German Navy boarded an allied ship or vice versa? You should really rethink your attitude here, the world isn't always black and white.



how was that enemy ship? It had Turkish flag. Last time I checked Turkey & Israel weren't at war, well maybe this will cause that.. and we'll own those sionist bitches.


----------



## |)/-\\/\/|\| (May 31, 2010)

I don't know why everyone is making a big deal out of it. Israel, kicked millions of people out of their land, massacred thousands in the process and now we are worried/surprised/outraged about storming a boat? Is that what matter now? Would it have been all nice if the boat went safely? Give me a break.


----------



## OmniStrife (May 31, 2010)

Kobe said:


> how was that enemy ship? It had Turkish flag. Last time I checked Turkey & Israel weren't at war, well maybe this will cause that.. and we'll own those sionist bitches.


----------



## Morati (May 31, 2010)

Another prime example of how Israel regards human life and how the world goes on ignoring it.


----------



## R00t_Decision (May 31, 2010)




----------



## Eboue (May 31, 2010)

Saufsoldat said:


> They're allowed to because they're at war and in a war you don't normally let enemy ships sail around freely collecting supplies for the enemy. Did anyone complain during WWII when the German Navy boarded an allied ship or vice versa? You should really rethink your attitude here, the world isn't always black and white.
> 
> 
> 
> It's already been pretty much established that they were attacked by some of the crew (you can even see it on some of the videos in other articles).



there not at war. palestine isnt technically a country.

Even if  palestine was a country and the boats aint from palestine anyway so in international waters it  still is piracy.


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

Kobe said:


> how was that enemy ship? It had Turkish flag. Last time I checked Turkey & Israel weren't at war, well maybe this will cause that.. and we'll own those sionist bitches.



Any ship that supplies your enemy is an enemy ship, it's as simple as that. Again, in any other war this would be a no-brainer.



Eboue said:


> there not at war. palestine isnt technically a country.
> 
> Even if they palestine was a country and the boats aint from palestine anyway so in international waters it  still is piracy.



Gaza has its own democratically elected government which is still at war with Israel. As for the official nationality of the ships, any ship that supplies an enemy is the enemy.


----------



## Arishem (May 31, 2010)

Dying for nothing seems to be the fad in this part of the world. Perhaps the violence will stop once the participants realize that nothing awaits you past death.


----------



## Oldy (May 31, 2010)

makeoutparadise said:


> Their waters?  those are Palestinian waters that Isreal is blockading thats why its called a blockade!!!


It was neither their waters nor the Palestinian, the question of the legitimacy of the blockade isn't even the problem here. The problem is the Israeli attaqued when the ships were still in international waters which is an act of war.


Gelu said:


> Smugglers are intercepted in international waters all the time.


Not by the military they aren't. It's only possible by law enforcement agencies in a few cases like drug drug trafficking and even then they can't do it without asking the authorization of the vessel's flag nation.


Razgriez said:


> Let me get this straight.
> 
> While it looks like Israel is not at fault for the aggression(just watch the thermal camera video, if you dont agree with that you shouldnt be in this thread anymore) Israel is now at fault for poorly choosing the right course of action and could of avoided the confrontation by shooting out the engine of a cruise ship.


You are wrong, the Israeli are completely at fault here regardless of whom attaqued first once they were on board because the boarding itself was the  aggression in the first place. The Israeli should have waited for the ship to be out of international waters. They choose not to either for short view tactical efficiency or long term planning in order to display their lack of concern for international law.


Outlandish said:


> This won't end well for Israel which i guess was the point of this journey.


Nothing will change for Israel about this, in a few months at best the shitstorm will be over.


----------



## Ennoea (May 31, 2010)

> They're allowed to because they're at war and in a war you don't normally let enemy ships sail around freely collecting supplies for the enemy. Did anyone complain during WWII when the German Navy boarded an allied ship or vice versa? You should really rethink your attitude here, the world isn't always black and white.



WW2? Really? You're comparing two completely different scenarios.


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

Eboue said:


> people justifying death because they were stupid is disgraceful. Only an idiot would ever say such a thing, the sad thing is i dont even think half the people are trolling when they say it.



There is a difference between stupid and attacking someone with intent to kill. A large one.


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

R00t_Decision said:


> Israeli commando's killed 10 people, with no threats going by the video, *in International Waters.*
> 
> Doing this sort of thing outside jurisdiction is a big fucking no no. I hope severe punishment comes from this.



Your not getting what a _blockade_ is I see.

It's bullshit I agree, but Israel will not stop.


----------



## Razgriez (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Right, the cops carry their guns because they are prepared to use them. Obviously, boarding a vessel and carrying machine guns indicates that this isn't without peril. People who carry automatic weapons are obviously prepared to use them even if they don't think it's likely they'll need to.
> 
> How does this in any way justify taking the most risky, and ultimately tragic, course over a safer alternative?



First and foremost the safest alternative in that situation was using deadly force, at least for the Israeli commandos. Any other lesser means of force after the tear gas would of been pointless and most likely got the commandos killed. They start getting into a physical altercation with the people on the ship they run the risk of having one of their weapons getting jacked.

They are also severely out numbered and with so many people on board and with a lot of them attacking them you cant really immediately know who are the aggressors and who are just frozen bystanders.

Rubber bullets "might" of helped but they are only a temporary solution that only cause pain and most likely dont stop the aggressor. This leads to the only real alternative and that is to use deadly force.

We can monday morning quarter back it all day but keep in mind you've never been in a situation like this. Hell, your not trained in a situation like this either. So the best way to put it for you is to simply look back at a altercation you may of had in the past. There are most likely things you would of done in the situation after you think about it and the real actions you took were most likely not necessarily the best ones. This happens to everyone even the most skilled to handle the situation and it happens all the time.

How they just is was it a reasonable course of action taken by the individual to deal with the situation and I say for what they had going on it was a reasonable course of action.



> You are wrong, the Israeli are completely at fault here regardless of whom attaqued first once they were on board because the boarding itself was the aggression in the first place. The Israeli should have waited for the ship to be out of international waters. They choose not to either for short view tactical efficiency or long term planning in order to display their lack of concern for international law.


I believe this has been covered repeatedly and dealing with something about war.



> WW2? Really? You're comparing two completely different scenarios.



Germany sunk many American merchant ships despite us not being initially in the conflict with U boats all across the Atlantic. That is the point hes making.


----------



## Altron (May 31, 2010)

Kobe said:


> how was that enemy ship? It had Turkish flag. Last time I checked Turkey & Israel weren't at war, well maybe this will cause that.. and we'll own those sionist bitches.


I hope not in the same way you would own the US?


----------



## Outlandish (May 31, 2010)

19 dead according to Aljezera BBC coverage was lame so any statements from Obama ? 

and lol @ international condemnation lets hope it leads to a change


----------



## Kobe (May 31, 2010)

Saufsoldat said:


> Any ship that supplies your enemy is an enemy ship, it's as simple as that. Again, in any other war this would be a no-brainer.



how did it have Israel's enemy? are you a retard? just becuase Israel is governed by bunch of psycho & complo theorists, how does that justify the death of 10+ Turkish civilian in that ship? and they were nowhere related to Hamas or vice versa.

The fact that Turkish ship got stopped in INTERNATIONAL SEAS & Turkish people got killed is a reason for war in normal circumstances.. Israel has always been asshole in diplomatic relations, and that bullshit they are spitting about how those who were in that ship attacked first is again a part of that.. This won't be forgotten and Israel is gonna severely suffer from that.


----------



## R00t_Decision (May 31, 2010)

Han Solo said:


> Your not getting what a _blockade_ is I see.
> 
> It's bullshit I agree, but Israel will not stop.


Doesn't give them the right to board a ship in International Waters. They can take their blockade into their own waters.  It's piracy, don't like it, leave the ship alone and just monitor it. Shoot them in your own waters, at least that way you have leeway.  You can't block crap in what you don't own.


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

Ennoea said:


> WW2? Really? You're comparing two completely different scenarios.



No and that's the fucking point I'm trying to make. In any other war nobody would complain about shit like this, the only difference in this war is that Israel is involved and thus all the idiotic Israel-haters crawl out of their holes and try to find new reasons to hate the country.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

Saufsoldat said:


> Gaza has its own democratically elected government which is still at war with Israel. As for the official nationality of the ships, any ship that supplies an enemy is the enemy.



No, it's not. By that reasoning Egypt had justification for sinking US ships for supplying Israel with weapons during the Yom Kippur war. Russia would have had numerous justifications for sinking US ships supplying Afghan rebels. China would currently have justification to sink US ships for supplying the "rebellious" Taiwanese. 

@Oldy, ran out of rep. Great post.


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

R00t_Decision said:


> Doesn't give them the right to board a ship in International Waters. They can take their blockade into their own waters.  It's piracy, don't like it, leave the ship alone and just monitor it. Shoot them in your own waters, at least that way you have leeway.  You can't block crap in what you don't own.



Israel has blockaded international waters before and will continue to do so.


----------



## R00t_Decision (May 31, 2010)

Han Solo said:


> Israel has blockaded international waters before and will continue to do so.


And risk international embarrassment and trade, isolation from which will continue to become a problem.  I think it's an excellent strategy. Hell, I think it's an excellent strategy to go to war with countries that don't neighbour either.  Israel, in charge of the safety of it's own people, by using guns as the only resort.


----------



## perman07 (May 31, 2010)

Why does so many people insist on picking a side in both this incident and the Israel/Palestine conflict in general? In a battle between 2 gladiators, is one of them more morally just? This is war, both sides are doing what they can to fight the other side.

The way I see it, neither Israel or Palestine are right in doing what they're doing in general, and they're both wrong (one is probably more wrong than the other, but I find it hard to evaluate which). However, Israeli officials are keeping Palestinians down in order to minimize war efforts against them, thus they are doing the job they were elected to, regardless of whether that's morally acceptable.

Wars usually aren't moral, they're about minimizing losses for your side.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

Razgriez said:


> First and foremost the safest alternative in that situation was using deadly force, at least for the Israeli commandos. Any other lesser means of force after the tear gas would of been pointless and most likely got the commandos killed. They start getting into a physical altercation with the people on the ship they run the risk of having one of their weapons getting jacked.
> 
> They are also severely out numbered and with so many people on board and with a lot of them attacking them you cant really immediately know who are the aggressors and who are just frozen bystanders.
> 
> ...



Right, and the safest course for police during a hostage crisis is to eat doughnuts in a safe area and let the hostages die. Obviously we have not lost our humanity sufficiently to believe that is the best course. 

Boarding a ship in international waters is bad enough. Doing so when there are safer alternatives is worse. Using live ammunition on aid workers after an illegal boarding is inexcusable.

The best course was just to let the boats land in Gaza. The aid was essentially insignificant. Are they going to make weapons out of vegetables and children's books?


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Saufsoldat said:


> They're allowed to because they're at war and in a war you don't normally let enemy ships sail around freely collecting supplies for the enemy. Did anyone complain during WWII when the German Navy boarded an allied ship or vice versa? You should really rethink your attitude here, the world isn't always black and white.



No, Israel is violating the rules of warfare with its blockade stopping people and goods from moving in or out of the Gaza Strip. The blockade is illegal, get it through your thick Arab hating skull: i,l,l,e,g,a,l. 

Why is this concept so hard for you to understand?


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

Its illegal to target civilians but the Palistinians do that too 

Lets be real clear here: Israel is at war with Palistine, a blockade is a legitiment warfare tactic. These fuckers tried to run a blockade, they paid for it.

Also note five out of the six boats surrendered peacefully.


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

Kobe said:


> how did it have Israel's enemy? are you a retard? just becuase Israel is governed by bunch of psycho & complo theorists, how does that justify the death of 10+ Turkish civilian in that ship? and they were nowhere related to Hamas or vice versa.
> 
> The fact that Turkish ship got stopped in INTERNATIONAL SEAS & Turkish people got killed is a reason for war in normal circumstances.. Israel has always been asshole in diplomatic relations, and that bullshit they are spitting about how those who were in that ship attacked first is again a part of that.. This won't be forgotten and Israel is gonna severely suffer from that.



Your not even reading my goddamn post, you just regurgitate your anti-Israel bullshit. I'll make it very nice and clear:

Israel is at war with Gaza. There's a ship that brings supplies to Gaza of which some will be used by Hamas against Israel, thus Israel intercepts the ship and arrests those on board. The people on board attack armed soldiers and get shot. Darwin rejoices, the international community is butthurt.

Also funny how you can invalidate any objective evidence because "Israel is an asshole".


----------



## R00t_Decision (May 31, 2010)

The kicker is here, that Britain and Turkish were involved. Excellent Job Israel military!
You kicked yourself in the teeth once again.


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

R00t_Decision said:


> And risk interntional embarrassement and trade which will continue to become a problem.  I think it's an excellent strategy. Hell, I think it's an excellent strategy to go to war with countries that don't neighbour either.  Israel, in charage of the safety of it's own people, by using guns as the only resort.



Israel does not care about interntional embarrassement. All the countires that would be willing to trade embargo them already do that to some degree or another.

Israel and Hamas will continue to do illegal and immoral attacks on each other, and people on the two different sides with continue to believe that somehow only one of them is to blame while the other has a squeky clean record like the idiotic morons they are.

I've come to care very little for this conflict. There are *far, far, far* worse things happening right now that get little to no media coverage for whatever reason. I care about them alot more.


----------



## Razgriez (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Right, and the safest course for police during a hostage crisis is to eat doughnuts in a safe area and let the hostages die. Obviously we have not lost our humanity sufficiently to believe that is the best course.
> 
> Boarding a ship in international waters is bad enough. Doing so when there are safer alternatives is worse. Using live ammunition on aid workers after an illegal boarding is inexcusable.



What other other means of alternative force was readily available to the Israelis? Im curious to hear this. Consider the fact they cant necessarily produce the tool immediately.

The tug boat thing is ridiculous since chances are the tug boats will come under attack by flash grenades and firebombs and whatever other objects the people on the ship could throw at them. Not to mention they could just take their big ship and use it engines to counter the tug boats.

I already pointed out that shooting their engine out is just a ridiculous method. Your going to need some powerful guns to stop that thing.



> The best course was just to let the boats land in Gaza. The aid was essentially insignificant. Are they going to make weapons out of vegetables and children's books?



Maybe it would of been. But Israel doesnt want to be pushed around. Stubbornness from both sides is what let this conflict take place and they will continue to clash.

Dont put it above the Hamas to want to use a foreign aid ship to help run supplies as well. You forget they would easily use civilians as shields to protect them and prevent the opposition from doing anything about it.

So essentially for the sake of defending their stand and the blockade and the small chance the shipment could be used for smuggling contraband Israel did what they had to do. They gave alternatives for the ship but they stuck around and BAM disaster.


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> No, it's not. By that reasoning Egypt had justification for sinking US ships for supplying Israel with weapons during the Yom Kippur war. Russia would have had numerous justifications for sinking US ships supplying Afghan rebels. China would currently have justification to sink US ships for supplying the "rebellious" Taiwanese.



Umm, yes all of those are completely justified but nobody wants to mess with the US, that's the difference. Although I don't think China is at war with Taiwan, they just don't recognize it as a sovereign country.



Degelle said:


> No, Israel is violating the rules of warfare with its blockade stopping people and goods from moving in or out of the Gaza Strip. The blockade is illegal, get it through your thick Arab hating skull: i,l,l,e,g,a,l.
> 
> Why is this concept so hard to you do understand?



They offered to bring the goods via land and no it's not violating any Geneva conventions (if that's what you're trying to get at) since Israel doesn't occupy Gaza.


----------



## Ennoea (May 31, 2010)

> Israel is at war with Gaza. There's a ship that brings supplies to Gaza of which some will be used by Hamas against Israel,



What Hamas will attack Israel with footballs and books? You should say that the supplies will most likely sustain Hamas.


> I've come to care very little for this conflict. There are far, far, far worse things happening right now that get little to no media coverage for whatever reason. I care about them alot more.



But the influence of those conflicts in minimal especially in the West. This conflict for decades has nothing more than an ideological conflict where both sides are still trying to prove that they have divine right over a piece of crappy land. We're all sick of it.


----------



## Dyon (May 31, 2010)

Even if the activists fought for a good thing, they did it the wrong way and their plan was in the end nothing but somehow crazy, stupid and extremely provocative.

First, I took the incident as an accident and and overreaction of the Israeli army but what I got later mad about is that most of the Israeli press and especially Netanyahu stand behind the actions of the navy, don't claim it as an accident and don't apologize for it.


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

> What Hamas will attack Israel with footballs and books? You should say that the supplies will most likely sustain Hamas.



The goal is to deprive Hamas of all supplies that they would use to threaten Israel.


----------



## Kobe (May 31, 2010)

Saufsoldat said:


> Your not even reading my goddamn post, you just regurgitate your anti-Israel bullshit. I'll make it very nice and clear:
> 
> Israel is at war with Gaza. There's a ship that brings supplies to Gaza of which some will be used by Hamas against Israel, thus Israel intercepts the ship and arrests those on board. The people on board attack armed soldiers and get shot. Darwin rejoices, the international community is butthurt.
> 
> Also funny how you can invalidate any objective evidence because "Israel is an asshole".



You can NOT stop Turkish ship in international seas, got that ? Who gives that right to Israel? It's called piracy, and same thing the Somalians did last year.

Israel could be at war with Gaza, who the fuck cares? There were not just Turkish people in that ship, there were Europeans too.. and they were trying to supply aid, an humanitarian act which Israel have NONE of it in their whole history.

don't gimme that bullshit about they attacked first etc. There was probably a warning to Israelis about how they CAN'T enter to ship the way they wanted in INTERNATIONAL SEAS.. If Israel ignored that and gave response by attacking with rifles, it's their goddamn stupidity which cost 19 civilians life.. How in hell you can justify something like that is amazing, though I could expect such thing from those you sionists' little brains.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

Razgriez said:


> What other other means of alternative force was readily available to the Israelis? Im curious to hear this. Consider the fact they cant necessarily produce the tool immediately.
> 
> The tug boat thing is ridiculous since chances are the tug boats will come under attack by flash grenades and firebombs and whatever other objects the people on the ship could throw at them. Not to mention they could just take their big ship and use it engines to counter the tug boats.
> 
> I already pointed out that shooting their engine out is just a ridiculous method. Your going to need some powerful guns to stop that thing.



Dude, rope around the rotors stops an engine. Any solid object touching the propeller breaks it. Rubber bullets, likewise, tend to stop people. 

And the aid they were carrying was insignificant. Part of it was likely to be forwarded to Gaza anyway. Shooting aid workers with live ammunition is not an alternative, like shooting people who chain themselves to trees is not an alternative. It's inhumane and shows a complete disregard for life. And in this case, it's not even legal to board the ship.



Saufsoldat said:


> Umm, yes all of those are completely justified but nobody wants to mess with the US, that's the difference. Although I don't think China is at war with Taiwan, they just don't recognize it as a sovereign country.



Yes, they are a rebellious province. And no, it is not justified for China to fire on US ships supplying Taiwan with goods, ffs.


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

> humanitarian act which Israel have NONE of it in their whole history.



Israel supplies plenty of food and water to Gaza which in its self is bizzare since where at war with someone your not obligated to supply them anything. Nor allow supplies in. Israel has done both.


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

Ennoea said:


> What Hamas will attack Israel with footballs and books? You should say that the supplies will most likely sustain Hamas.



You're denying that there were any supplies on board that Hamas could've used to attack Israel? That's a rather extraordinary claim as you can use lots of stuff to sustain war efforts. And even so Israel offered to let the legitimate supplies for the civilian population through, but across the land border.


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

Tleilaxu said:


> Israel supplies plenty of food and water to Gaza which in its self is bizzare since where at war with someone your not obligated to supply them anything. Nor allow supplies in. Israel has done both.



It's not really bizarre.

They want to be in total control of everything that comes in and out of Gaza. It makes sense.


----------



## Shasta McNasty (May 31, 2010)

geopolitics .....yawn


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

Han Solo said:


> It's not really bizarre.
> 
> They want to be in total control of everything that comes in and out of Gaza. It makes sense.



No what I meant was its Bizzare that a nation at war with another would even ALLOW basic supplies into an _enemy_ country. Thats pretty damn _generous_ if you ask me.


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

Tleilaxu said:


> No what I meant was its Bizzare that a nation at war with another would even ALLOW basic supplies into an _enemy_ country. Thats pretty damn _generous_ if you ask me.



But my point is that they have no intention of wanting to starve out the enemy, they just want to have absolute control of what does and does not go in.


----------



## hadou (May 31, 2010)

This is all ridiculous. So many people in this thread have mentioned the fact that this attack was carried out in INTERNATIONAL WATERS, but those that are with Israel are apparently deaf to this fact. Is like you are telling them the sky is blue, but they refuse to admit it and say the sky is green. Talk about being biased.


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

Kobe said:


> You can NOT stop Turkish ship in international seas, got that ?



Yes, yes you can. Hell, a pirate you could up an American flag, would that make him untouchable? I don't think so. The US stopped Russian ships during the Cuba crisis and those two countries weren't even at war.



> Who gives that right to Israel? It's called piracy, and same thing the Somalians did last year.



This isn't the fucking 18th centuries, war isn't a friendly sport between rivaling noblemen. You don't stop supplies that the enemy will use to kill your people? Well guess what, then they'll use those supplies to kill your people.



> Israel could be at war with Gaza, who the fuck cares? There were not just Turkish people in that ship, there were Europeans too.. and they were trying to supply aid, an humanitarian act which Israel have NONE of it in their whole history.



If their intent was to help the civilian population, they should've accepted Israels offer to get the supplies to Gaza via land, but all those fucks cared about was some cheap publicity, now there are almost 20 dead and nobody got anything out of it. Russian ships with nuclear weapons on board also the goods they brought to Cuba were a humanitarian act, did the thought that people can lie ever cross your mind? Or are you too busy hating Israel?



> don't gimme that bullshit about they attacked first etc. There was probably a warning to Israelis about how they CAN'T enter to ship the way they wanted in INTERNATIONAL SEAS.. If Israel ignored that and gave response by attacking with rifles, it's their goddamn stupidity which cost 19 civilians life.. How in hell you can justify something like that is amazing, though I could expect such thing from those you sionists' little brains.



Firstly, it's Zionist (which I am not, thank you).

Secondly, knives can kill, in case nobody ever told you. Four Israeli soldiers were wounded so obviously the use of lethal force is justified if you are being attacked with a knife or an axe.



hadou said:


> This is all ridiculous. So many people in this thread have mentioned the fact that this attack was carried out in INTERNATIONAL WATERS, but those that are with Israel are apparently deaf to this fact. Is like you are telling them the sky is blue, but they refuse to admit it and say the sky is green. Talk about being biased.



So you can't board ships that want to supply a nation you're at war with just because they're in international waters? What kind of fucked up reasoning is that? It's 100% justified when you're at war.


----------



## Kojiro Ganryu Sasaki (May 31, 2010)

Tleilaxu said:


> No what I meant was its Bizzare that a nation at war with another would even ALLOW basic supplies into an _enemy_ country. Thats pretty damn _generous_ if you ask me.



Doing anything else would be genocide.


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

Not to mention the fleet had weeks and weeks of warning to turn back as well.



> Doing anything else would be genocide.


No it would not. It would be war plain and simple. We did the same to Japan and Germany.


----------



## Asmodeus (May 31, 2010)

The ideal result is what happened on the OTHER 5 AID BOATS.

They had no reason to believe that there would be any violence or aggression. Yet, they encountered it, and from  what the VIDEO FOOTAGE of the incident has shown...yeah, the people on the boat started the fighting. You expect to attack soldiers, commandos at that, with lethal force, and there be no consequence to that?

If you are that stupid, you honestly deserved to die in the first place. World is better off without that kind of absurd ignorance in it.


----------



## perman07 (May 31, 2010)

Tleilaxu said:


> Israel supplies plenty of food and water to Gaza which in its self is bizzare since where at war with someone your not obligated to supply them anything. Nor allow supplies in. Israel has done both.


It's bizarre to not let civilians inside what is essentially their own country die?


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Saufsoldat said:


> They offered to bring the goods via land and no it's not violating any Geneva conventions (if that's what you're trying to get at) since Israel doesn't occupy Gaza.


And yes, under international law the blockade is illegal, grab a fucking book or two.

Also, according to Israeli law, under the adoption of British Mandate Laws related to naval interdictions/blockades, Israel cannot simply "take" the items and transfer them to Gaza. This is not legal because taking possession of a cargo is considered piracy without proper procedure. Israel is required under IT'S OWN LAW as adopted by the High Court, to conduct a "Prize Court" judicial procedure in order to have the rights to take/transfer possession of the cargo. As for the international law matter, if the siege of Gaza is against Geneva 4 etc., then humanitarian aid is legal in the face of the military blockade. Israel can, of course, interdict these ships, but how they do it and what they do is tightly prescribed. From what they have said publicly, it appears they aren't aware of their own laws. The court of world opinion will judge their piracy.


----------



## Outlandish (May 31, 2010)

meh the way i see it, Israel had two options to let the soldiers (who are trained to kill) try and police an aid ship (which they are not trained to do) and use force to subdue the aid workers.

Or 

Let the ship into Gaza and give them supplies. 

either way Israel is now under more pressure to end the illegal siege & end the blockade than it was yesterday. A nice kick in the front teeth if you ask me.


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

perman07 said:


> It's bizarre to not let enemy civilians die?



Its Bizzare to allow food and water to a nation your at war with? Yes. I dont recall the USA sending aide flights to Germany after bombing Berlin.


----------



## Razgriez (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Dude, rope around the rotors stops an engine. Any solid object touching the propeller breaks it. Rubber bullets, likewise, tend to stop people.
> 
> And the aid they were carrying was insignificant. Part of it was likely to be forwarded to Gaza anyway. Shooting aid workers with live ammunition is not an alternative, like shooting people who chain themselves to trees is not an alternative. It's inhumane and shows a complete disregard for life. And in this case, it's not even legal to board the ship.



Im just saying consider the logistical aspect. We arent privy to all that information but chances are these commandos were probably not outfitted or had the option to carry every piece of riot control equipment made by man for this type of incident. They used what they had and the incident is done.

There is little we can do about it either.

The activists were just stupid to push Israel and see what they would do.

Maybe Israel could of just let them float on through and drop off their cargo. Maybe the activists could of listened and just went to another port to get their supplies to Gaza. Maybe the crew could of not of attacked the Israeli commandos as they boarded but they chose that course of action. This is what happens when you choose to refuse to listen. Violence eventually ensues and people get hurt and killed.


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

hadou said:


> This is all ridiculous. So many people in this thread have mentioned the fact that this attack was carried out in INTERNATIONAL WATERS, but those that are with Israel are apparently deaf to this fact. Is like you are telling them the sky is blue, but they refuse to admit it and say the sky is green. Talk about being biased.



Israel can request the ships identify themselves and provide documentation verifying that they are permitted to fly the flag they display under international law. The flotilla refused to identify themselves or provide said documentation.

The question is what permissions the refusal grants Israel, if any. I haven't really come across the answer for such a scenario in the UN Maritime Laws. If the refusal renders the ships as if they were flying no flag, then a search would likely be permissible (and the violence once boarding grounds for seizure/arrests). However, if the ships were still considered to be of whatever country as the flag they displayed, they'd be subject to whatever laws apply in that nation.

Additionally, if the ships were flying more than one flag, it'd be the same as if they were flying no flag.


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

It's pretty damn obvious that the hippies started the fight, why else would there be only deaths on one ship? If the Israelis had any intentions of killing them, why not do it on more than one ship? Just killing 19 civilians for the hell of it and risking both international reputation ( not like they have any) and soldiers (4 were wounded after all).


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

Outlandish said:


> meh the way i see it, Israel had two options to let the soldiers (who are trained to kill) try and police an aid ship (which they are not trained to do) and use force to subdue the aid workers.
> 
> Or
> 
> ...



Not one that's worth the lives of 19 people, even if they did attack them.

And even if by some miracle this works, you'd still have Hamas doing illegal bullshit and attacking Israel anyway. Both sides have to stop at the same time, not just Israel.

This won't help.


----------



## Outlandish (May 31, 2010)

Tleilaxu said:


> Its Bizzare to allow food and water to a nation your at war with? Yes. I dont recall the USA sending aide flights to Germany after bombing Berlin.



i don't recall America stealing land from germans and rehousing them in camps and expect them to be all hokaydokay about it.


----------



## Ennoea (May 31, 2010)

> No it would not. It would be war plain and simple. We did the same to Japan and Germany.



Seriosuly you're comparing Palestine to Germany?

Harp on all you want but theres something called International Law, and Israel has no right to starve anyone.


----------



## hadou (May 31, 2010)

Saufsoldat said:


> So you can't board ships that want to supply a nation you're at war with just because they're in international waters? What kind of fucked up reasoning is that? It's 100% justified when you're at war.



My friend, no country has jurisdiction in international water, and the ships were Turkish nationality.


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> And yes, under international law the blockade is illegal, grab a fucking book or two.
> 
> Also, according to Israeli law, under the adoption of British Mandate Laws related to naval interdictions/blockades, Israel cannot simply "take" the items and transfer them to Gaza. This is not legal because taking possession of a cargo is considered piracy without proper procedure. Israel is required under IT'S OWN LAW as adopted by the High Court, to conduct a "Prize Court" judicial procedure in order to have the rights to take/transfer possession of the cargo. As for the international law matter, if the siege of Gaza is against Geneva 4 etc., then humanitarian aid is legal in the face of the military blockade. Israel can, of course, interdict these ships, but how they do it and what they do is tightly prescribed. From what they have said publicly, it appears they aren't aware of their own laws. The court of world opinion will judge their piracy.



 Again with the piracy... THEY'RE AT WAR, TRY AND UNDERSTAND IT.

And it was illegal until Israel withdrew their troops from Gaza, thus ending the occupation.



Outlandish said:


> meh the way i see it, Israel had two options to let the soldiers (who are trained to kill) try and police an aid ship (which they are not trained to do) and use force to subdue the aid workers.
> 
> Or
> 
> ...



In the first case they risked soldiers' lives because there were about 600 hippies, which vastly outnumbered the Israelis.

In the second case they risked the lives of both Israeli soldiers and civilians getting killed as a result of Hamas getting more supplies.


First option still seem the most reasonable if your aim is to ensure the safety of your country.


----------



## Outlandish (May 31, 2010)

Han Solo said:


> Not one that's worth the lives of 19 people, even if they did attack them.
> 
> And even if by some miracle this works, you'd still have Hamas doing illegal bullshit and attacking Israel anyway. Both sides have to stop at the same time, not just Israel.
> 
> This won't help.



If Israel followed through with what they said Hamas would stop attacking, did you know before operation cast-lead that it was Israel who broke the cease fire causing Hamas to fire rockets into Israel ? (yes i can provide BBC sources for that if you require)


----------



## Kobe (May 31, 2010)

Saufsoldat said:


> Yes, yes you can. Hell, a pirate you could up an American flag, would that make him untouchable? I don't think so. The US stopped Russian ships during the Cuba crisis and those two countries weren't even at war.



USA - Russia relations were always fucked up, it's no-brainer if they don't want to cause any other big war.

Israel can't stop a neutral Turkish ship and board all those commandos in international seas, period.



> This isn't the fucking 18th centuries, war isn't a friendly sport between rivaling noblemen. You don't stop supplies that the enemy will use to kill your people? Well guess what, then they'll use those supplies to kill your people.



since when knives are considered as deadly war weapons? you don't fucking know what was in that ship, just talking from your ass reading those bullshit reports by Israeli government.




> If their intent was to help the civilian population, they should've accepted Israels offer to get the supplies to Gaza via land, but all those fucks cared about was some cheap publicity, now there are almost 20 dead and nobody got anything out of it. Russian ships with nuclear weapons on board also the goods they brought to Cuba were a humanitarian act, did the thought that people can lie ever cross your mind? Or are you too busy hating Israel?



Why would they accept it?  It's an humanitarian act, it has a purpose to deliver aid which Israel is causing the reason for it.. 




> Firstly, it's Zionist (which I am not, thank you).



I'm sure you are NOT..


> Secondly, knives can kill, in case nobody ever told you. Four Israeli soldiers were wounded so obviously the use of lethal force is justified if you are being attacked with a knife or an axe.



yeah knives can kill, very good way to justify death of 20 innocent civilian.. Those are commandos trained in professional ways and armed with lots of rifles & guns, how the fuck are they gonna hurt them huh? Are you that stupid to believe such thing? It's obviously a fucking lie.  After Israelis attacked with rifles of course they are gonna answer one way or another, it's called self-defense which Israel is using that term to justify their actions for 50 years.. It's fucked up how human life's value is decreased like that.. If that was 20 Israeli people, Israel would go all attack which they are doing it all the years against Palestine.


----------



## mayumi (May 31, 2010)

Turkey is part of NATO. what Israel did was attack a NATO member's ship. what did they not expect condemnation on international waters?


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

Outlandish said:


> If Israel followed through with what they said Hamas would stop attacking, did you know before operation cast-lead that it was Israel who broke the cease fire causing Hamas to fire rockets into Israel ? (yes i can provide BBC sources for that if you require)



Israel did something to justify Hamas _rocketing a goddamn country and basically declaring war?_

By all means, post them.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Saufsoldat said:


> It's pretty damn obvious that the hippies started the fight, why else would there be only deaths on one ship? If the Israelis had any intentions of killing them, why not do it on more than one ship? Just killing 19 civilians for the hell of it and risking both international reputation ( not like they have any) and soldiers (4 were wounded after all).


Israel has already been caught with killing people "just for the hell of it."

I find it very disturbing that so many people defend this. I understand that the forum is dominated with ignorant Americans and hardcore atheist, but wow, you have such inferior characters.

Either way, to the people that read this thread, please understand that the world at large does not defend this, but is rather full of criticism for Israel actions. In other words, this thread does not present the view of the world very well.

As the statement of countless of nations tell us, the investigation and judgment will hopefully be swift and just.


----------



## Razgriez (May 31, 2010)

Well I gotta call it quits here and finally start doing shit. Going out. Its been fun Shini but I cant continue the debate.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (May 31, 2010)

I think it's worth pointing out that there was only trouble on one ship which makes me doubt the idea that Israeli soldiers started shooting as soon as they boarded. Apparently the first wave were armed with paint-ball guns and then some morons on board decided to attack them so the second wave used real guns. Also Israel had offered to deliver the aid themselves so if they'd just done as Israel asked, Gaza would still have received the aid and this mess wouldn't have occurred.

Edit: Well OK I can understand them not trusting Israel to deliver the aid but I do think the morons who attacked the soldiers are more to blame than anyone else. It would be nice if Israel had just let the convoy through but I can see why they didn't.


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

hadou said:


> My friend, no country has jurisdiction in international water, and the ships were Turkish nationality.



Jurisdiction, are you fucking kidding me? Do you know what a war is? Has anybody ever told you what war is like? There's no fucking jurisdiction in war. The very idea is retarded. 

Israel didn't board the ships because the people on board committed a crime (which is what would require jurisdiction), they did it because they were about to supply a nation that Israel is at war with.


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

> the forum is dominated with ignorant Americans and hardcore atheist, but wow, you have such inferior characters..



Actually its the opposite its dominated by muslim defenders, religious extremists, and anti Americans/Israeli and other "cool groups." Common sense and moderates are lacking, though there are a few. Now back on topic.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

Razgriez said:


> Im just saying consider the logistical aspect. We arent privy to all that information but chances are these commandos were probably not outfitted or had the option to carry every piece of riot control equipment made by man for this type of incident. They used what they had and the incident is done.
> 
> There is little we can do about it either.
> 
> ...



This is pretty much what I'm thinking. Even if the boats had gotten through, the aid was not really significant for a population the size of Gaza (1.5 million, I think.) They had videos of reporters going through the cargo, and I saw mostly perishable foods, cement sufficient to build one school, schoolbooks, and water filtration systems. If the whole flotilla had gotten through, the average Gaza resident would be unaffected, let alone a threat to Israel.

Except for symbolic purposes, the aid was a drop in the bucket. Neither Israeli soldier nor Gaza militant would have noticed a difference had it passed.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Tleilaxu said:


> Actually its the opposite its dominated by muslim defenders, religious extremists, and anti Americans/Israeli and other "cool groups."



It's like me, usually, against the rest, what are you talking about?


----------



## Ennoea (May 31, 2010)

> Jurisdiction, are you fucking kidding me? Do you know what a war is? Has anybody ever told you what war is like? There's no fucking jurisdiction in war. The very idea is retarded.



Its not the 20s anymore, wake up. 



> Actually its the opposite its dominated by muslim defenders, religious extremists, and anti Americans/Israeli and other "cool groups."



Anyone who doesn't outright support Israel must be some religious extremist nut? Grow up.



> I understand that the forum is dominated with ignorant Americans and hardcore atheist,



Its easy to catogorize everyone but sorry you're wrong.


----------



## perman07 (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> Israel has already been caught with killing people "just for the hell of it."
> 
> I find it very disturbing that so many people defend this. I understand that the forum is dominated with ignorant Americans and *hardcore atheist*, but wow, you have such inferior characters.
> 
> ...


What does atheism have to do with any of this?


----------



## mayumi (May 31, 2010)

interesting stuff -


----------



## hadou (May 31, 2010)

Saufsoldat said:


> Jurisdiction, are you fucking kidding me? Do you know what a war is? Has anybody ever told you what war is like? There's no fucking jurisdiction in war. The very idea is retarded.
> 
> Israel didn't board the ships because the people on board committed a crime (which is what would require jurisdiction), they did it because they were about to supply a nation that Israel is at war with.



My friend, the ship was of Turkish nationality. Turkey and Israel are not at war. There are many wrong acts committed in war, but they should not be justified, and this act can not be justified as being "right" simply by using the word "war". Two wrongs don't make a right.


----------



## Megaharrison (May 31, 2010)

Why live fire was used:




Our error was assuming the people on the largest ship were going to be peaceful like they were on the other 5. It's rather glaring who started the violence on the 6th ship (just look at the video, the first wave immediately comes under attack). It makes no sense to claim we deliberately massacred them, but only on 1 ship! Not to mention this picture again, of activists with combat weapons:



Also the death toll is now 9, not 19. 




Outlandish said:


> If Israel followed through with what they said Hamas would stop attacking, did you know before operation cast-lead that it was Israel who broke the cease fire causing Hamas to fire rockets into Israel ? (yes i can provide BBC sources for that if you require)



Hamas was digging an infiltration tunnel across the Israeli border, we had every right to bomb it. Hamas built hundreds of tunnels in the "ceasefire", Israel didn't bomb any of them. It only bombed this 1 tunnel close to the border. Why? It shows something was special about it. We're much happier with the current de facto Gaza ceasefire since Cast Lead then that old sham of a one anyway.


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

> Anyone who doesn't outright support Israel must be some religious extremist nut? Grow up.



Dont put words in my mouth I never said that, your the one that needs to grow up.

Mega nice post as usual.


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

Megaharrison said:


> Why live fire was used:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



TL;DR the soldiers were responding to their lives being put in danger.



Megaharrison said:


> Hamas was digging an infiltration tunnel across the Israeli border, we had every right to bomb it. Hamas built hundreds of tunnels in the "ceasefire", Israel didn't bomb any of them. It only bombed this 1 tunnel close to the border. Why? It shows something was special about it. We're much happier with the current de facto Gaza ceasefire since Cast Lead then that old sham of a one anyway.



This I admit I did not know. I'm not too sure about what to think about the Hamas rocket attacks now actually.

But regardless, those rockets could well have, and seemingly were aimed at, Israeli civilians. That part is still utterly unjustifiable to me.


----------



## vivEnergy (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> Israel has already been caught with killing people "just for the hell of it."
> 
> I find it very disturbing that so many people defend this. I understand that the forum is dominated with ignorant Americans and hardcore atheist, but wow, you have such inferior characters.
> 
> ...



The "world at large" doesn't care Degelle. And in one week you won't ever hear again about that incident.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Saufsoldat said:


> Again with the piracy... THEY'RE AT WAR, TRY AND UNDERSTAND IT.
> 
> And it was illegal until Israel withdrew their troops from Gaza, thus ending the occupation.



If they would've stopped the flotilla and claim that their action is legal, then they are admitting that they still occupy Gaza. In which case, the blockade is a war-crime, under the Fourth Geneva Convention. However, if they persist in denying that they occupy Gaza, then their action would be an act of war, enforcing a blockade which is itself an act of war.

The international community must defend its citizens even if it lacks the moral strength to defend the people of Palestine.

Is the Muslim immigration in Germany that bad so you must make up fiction in order perpetuate your hate for them?


----------



## Megaharrison (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> If they would've stopped the flotilla and claim that their action is legal, then they are admitting that they still occupy Gaza. In which case, the blockade is a war-crime, under the Fourth Geneva Convention. However, if they persist in denying that they occupy Gaza, then their action would be an act of war, enforcing a blockade which is itself an act of war.
> 
> The international community must defend its citizens even if it lacks the moral strength to defend the people of Palestine.



Gaza and Israel are already in a state of war. We've been over this before. Hamas is in a state of declared war with Israel (there's no ceasefire or peace agreement and they openly declare their "armed resistance") while Israel has declared Gaza to be an enemy entity, our equivalent of being in a state of war.

The de facto calm Israel has imposed on Hamas is not peace nor a formal ceasefire. 

Keep in mind it is physically impossible for Israel to "occupy Gaza" even if it wanted to. Basic geography dictates that Israel can not control all of Gaza's borders. Thus no matter what Israel does unless it invades the Sinai it can not put a real blockade on Gaza.


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

Kobe said:


> USA - Russia relations were always fucked up, it's no-brainer if they don't want to cause any other big war.



Well, it's up to Turkey but seeing how the ships weren't sent by the Turkish government, I see little reason for them to take any action. They could of course declare war like the US did in WWI when Germany sunk a civilian ship that brought military supplies to Britain, but I doubt they will. Once again, war is not a simple matter of justice, you can't sue a nation if you think your rights were violated.



> Israel can't stop a neutral Turkish ship and board all those commandos in international seas, period.



So all a country has to do to supply war zones is use ships of a country that's not involved and they're safe from the enemy? That would open all kinds of ugly possibilities for warfare.



> since when knives are considered as deadly war weapons? you don't fucking know what was in that ship, just talking from your ass reading those bullshit reports by Israeli government.



Knives and axes are deadly, period. You doubt that, you're a moron. Also, war supplies don't always have to be guns, simple stuff like cement can be used by Hamas to sustain their war effort, that's why Israel doesn't allow it unless it's bound to a specific project.



> Why would they accept it?  It's an humanitarian act, it has a purpose to deliver aid which Israel is causing the reason for it..



They're supplying Hamas, end of the story. The way to hell is paved with good intentions but I wouldn't be surprised if those hippies actually think Hamas is helping Palestine.



> yeah knives can kill, very good way to justify death of 20 innocent civilian.. Those are commandos trained in professional ways and armed with lots of rifles & guns, how the fuck are they gonna hurt them huh? Are you that stupid to believe such thing? It's obviously a fucking lie.  After Israelis attacked with rifles of course they are gonna answer one way or another, it's called self-defense which Israel is using that term to justify their actions for 50 years.. It's fucked up how human life's value is decreased like that.. If that was 20 Israeli people, Israel would go all attack which they are doing it all the years against Palestine.



They're ordinary soldiers, human beings with emotions. If somebody comes running at you with a knife, stabbing you, you're telling me you wouldn't fight back? You're trying pretty damn hard to blame Israel for everything bad that happens, but here you just don't have a case. They tried playing nice and it obviously worked on 5 out of 6 ships.



Degelle said:


> Israel has already been caught with killing people "just for the hell of it."



Yeah, they also poison wells and eat little children.



> I find it very disturbing that so many people defend this. I understand that the forum is dominated with ignorant Americans and hardcore atheist, but wow, you have such inferior characters.



Again with the victim complex and what the hell does atheism have to do with any of this? It's obvious that your blind hatred for Israel has crippled your ability for rational thought and critical thinking, in case you ever had any of those traits.



> Either way, to the people that read this thread, please understand that the world at large does not defend this, but is rather full of criticism for Israel actions. In other words, this thread does not present the view of the world very well.



"I'm the only one here defending the poor palis, the rest are pali-hating jews, BAAAAAW!"

Jesus Christ, get a psychiatrist.



> As the statement of countless of nations tell us, the investigation and judgment will hopefully be swift and just.



For publicity they'll condemn it (since the public is anti-Israel as you admitted yourself) but any rational politician would've given the same orders.



hadou said:


> My friend, the ship was of Turkish nationality. Turkey and Israel are not at war. There are many wrong acts committed in war, but they should not be justified, and this act can not be justified as being "right" simply by using the word "war". Two wrongs don't make a right.



It's not "right" - no war is ever right - but it is justified. If the lives of your people are threatened, you take action. That's what the Israeli military is there for, that's what the Gaza blockade is there for. Israel gave the hippies every option available to end this peacefully but those assholes opted for a publicity stunt and are directly responsible for the death of their comrades.


----------



## dreams lie (May 31, 2010)

Holy shit, 26th page.


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

dreams lie said:


> Holy shit, 26th page.



I like how the Turkish rocket attacks only have 1 page.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (May 31, 2010)

dreams lie said:


> Holy shit, 26th page.



Yeah...i don't even want to post here. too much passion in this thread.


----------



## Megaharrison (May 31, 2010)

dreams lie said:


> Holy shit, 26th page.



It's rather bizarre, isn't it? I mean, North Korea torpedoing that South Korean ship was a bit more concerning then this as that could risk nuclear war. Or all the massacres in the Congo that make this look like a picnic.

Yet as TPN has said, the only 2 threads that have been able to rival this ones level of activity was Cast Lead and the 2006 Lebanon War. There are a great many of people out there with a disturbing fetish for Israel. Degelle is one of them. I mean she never shuts up about Israel, yet has no real reason for such an obsession. I'm at least an Israeli and involved in the conflict.

In Israel some call this the "eternal erection" and one of the most baffling questions in Israeli society is "why does the world care about us so much?"


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> If they would've stopped the flotilla and claim that their action is legal, then they are admitting that they still occupy Gaza. In which case, the blockade is a war-crime, under the Fourth Geneva Convention. However, if they persist in denying that they occupy Gaza, then their action would be an act of war, enforcing a blockade which is itself an act of war.



They're at war with Gaza but they're not occupying Gaza. That's how easy the situation is.



> Is the Muslim immigration in Germany that bad so you must make up fiction in order perpetuate your hate for them?



What fiction exactly? The Turks in Germany aren't that bad, Swedes are the real problem


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

dreams lie said:


> Holy shit, 26th page.



It would be 4-5 pages of solid condemnation if Russia did it. 

But it's Israel, so half support the shooting of aid workers.


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> It would be 4-5 pages of solid condemnation if Russia did it.
> 
> But it's Israel, so half support the shooting of aid workers.



Killing aid workers who injure your comrades and try to kill you? Hell yeah, anything else would be ridiculous


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> It would be 4-5 pages of solid condemnation if Russia did it.
> 
> But it's Israel, so half support the shooting of aid workers.



I would say that a majority of aid workers are unarmmed and do not rush armed military people.


----------



## Kobe (May 31, 2010)

Saufsoldat said:


> Well, it's up to Turkey but *seeing how the ships weren't sent by the Turkish government, I see little reason for them to take any action.* They could of course declare war like the US did in WWI when Germany sunk a civilian ship that brought military supplies to Britain, but I doubt they will. Once again, war is not a simple matter of justice, you can't sue a nation if you think your rights were violated.




that's just retarded to highest degree.

There was no war between Turkey & Israel, if you are believing otherwise you're just a moron who has no idea about international relations.



> So all a country has to do to supply war zones is use ships of a country that's not involved and they're safe from the enemy? That would open all kinds of ugly possibilities for warfare.



Those people who died in there have nothing to do with Hamas or any other fucked up Islamic cult, even claiming such thing shows the idiocy.


> Knives and axes are deadly, period. You doubt that, you're a moron. Also, war supplies don't always have to be guns, simple stuff like cement can be used by Hamas to sustain their war effort, that's why Israel doesn't allow it unless it's bound to a specific project.



and rifles not? If you threaten one's life, you get a response, if that was by knives, it's not those idiot commandos' job to open fire with rifles to defenseless those who suffered from it.



> They're supplying Hamas, end of the story. The way to hell is paved with good intentions but I wouldn't be surprised if those hippies actually think Hamas is helping Palestine.



how come? Once the ship left the Turkish port, it was clear, it was nothing but goods to help those civilians in Gazza.



> They're ordinary soldiers, human beings with emotions. If somebody comes running at you with a knife, stabbing you, you're telling me you wouldn't fight back? You're trying pretty damn hard to blame Israel for everything bad that happens, but here you just don't have a case. They tried playing nice and it obviously worked on 5 out of 6 ships.



human beings with emotions my ass. What about those who got killed huh? Are they not human? Did Israelis deserve to live more than those?

Israel is gonna what's coming for them for what they did.. it's just a matter of context right now, either war or international act.


----------



## The Pink Ninja (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> It would be 4-5 pages of solid condemnation if Russia did it.
> 
> But it's Israel, so half support the shooting of aid workers.



If it was Russia it wouldn't get in the papers.


----------



## hcheng02 (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> It would be 4-5 pages of solid condemnation if Russia did it.
> 
> But it's Israel, so half support the shooting of aid workers.



Not really. If the Russians had acted like the Israelis did in this case people would be wondering:

1. Why are the Russians acting so nice by giving repeated warnings and offering to let the UN send the goods through to their enemies?

2. Who the fuck is stupid enough to piss off the Russians after all those warnings?

3. Why did the Russians only kill ~10 people? Keep in mind that they killed hundreds of their own citizens when the Chechens held a school hostage.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

Saufsoldat said:


> Killing aid workers who injure your comrades and try to kill you? Hell yeah, anything else would be ridiculous



Defending yourself from a helicopter raid throwing tear gas and stun grenades onto your ship... in international waters. Yeah, I think the term is piracy. And that's on top of gunning down aid workers. 

If China or, god forbid, Iran did this, the Cafe kids would pound keyboards in poutrage.


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> You're right, they deserved to die.



they didnt deserve to die, but they got little to blame but their own action. 

going apeshit and trying to murder the boarding crew in this situation is not behaviour i think highly of. 



Degelle said:


> Shut your trap already, okay? Boarding and blocking a vessel in international water is strictly against international law, and it does not happen often.



i didnt say it happened often, i sad it happens more often.


please try to read properly Degelle, if you can do that much at least. 

and if anyone needs to stop talking its you, nothing but nonsense comes out of your mouth. Keep posting biased links on how the israelis massacred sleeping unarmed aid workers from the start.




Eboue said:


> people justifying death because they were stupid is disgraceful. .



not just stupid, violent and possessing their share of immorality in their acts. (like trying to murder the boarding party who was armed with paintball rifles at first) 

seeing how their actions had such a huge hand in their deaths, there is no use starting a whole pity party. 

if you werent so biased you would realize this.


----------



## Arishem (May 31, 2010)

It's almost as if some of the members here live in a parallel universe where the aid workers didn't violently attack the commandos.


----------



## dreams lie (May 31, 2010)

China/Russia could be committing genocide, and we would only get perhaps two pages.  We are talking about the same religious groups in trouble too, so it is even more mind boggling.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Saufsoldat said:


> They're at war with Gaza but they're not occupying Gaza. That's how easy the situation is.



You still seem to be too dimwitted to grasp that it is international water, Israel has no right to block the ship, it has no right to board it. FUCKIN' PERIOD. 

I know that you hate Muslims with a passion, just like MH, raging hardcore atheist 

This is not even the first boat that arrived in Gaza, the Free Gaza Movement has successfully arrived in Gaza five times. For some obscure reason Israel decided to go with the ancient carnage policy.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (May 31, 2010)

Kobe said:


> and rifles not? If you threaten one's life, you get a response, if that was by knives, it's not those idiot commandos' job to open fire with rifles to defenseless those who suffered from it.



Oh for gods sake have you been paying any attention?

Isreali soldiers boarded with *paintball* guns and with those took control of 5/6 ships.
On one ship they were attacked by people with knives, poles and in one case a fire bomb. IE deadly weapons.
So the use of live fire was authorized.


----------



## The Pink Ninja (May 31, 2010)

Kobe said:


> that's just retarded to highest degree.
> 
> There was no war between Turkey & Israel, if you are believing otherwise you're just a moron who has no idea about international relations.



Exactly what special rights does being Turkish construe that I'm unaware of? Where in the UN Charter is your sovereign right to freely pass through blockades to give succour to one of the fighting parties?



> Israel is gonna what's coming for them for what they did.. it's just a matter of context right now, either war or international act.



Someone is going to make war with them? Over nine dead "Aid workers" who were giving a zillion warnings and other ways out?

Anyway, Israel is used to international abuse. Nothing new.


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> You still seem to be too dimwitted to grasp that it is international water, Israel has no right to block the ship, it has no right to board it. FUCKIN' PERIOD.
> 
> I know that you hate Muslims with a passion, just like MH, *raging hardcore atheist*
> 
> This is not even the first boat that arrived in Gaza, the Free Gaza Movement has successfully arrived in Gaza five times.



What does that have to do with anything?


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

hcheng02 said:


> Not really. If the Russians had acted like the Israelis did in this case people would be wondering:
> 
> 1. Why are the Russians acting so nice by giving repeated warnings and offering to let the UN send the goods through to their enemies?
> 
> ...



Are you really comparing a hostage situation with suicidal terrorists to aid workers on a relief mission?


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (May 31, 2010)

We're on an international forum. It would be interesting to compare how we receive this news by our medias.


----------



## Ennoea (May 31, 2010)

Is it just me or are we going in circles with the same argument being regurgitated agian and again?



> It's almost as if some of the members here live in a parallel universe where the aid workers didn't violently attack the commandos.



No we dont' live in parallel universes, we just have different viewpoints.


----------



## vivEnergy (May 31, 2010)

I blame Hitler


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

Aid workers on relief missions do NOT carry weapons. Period. They fact they took violent action shows they were not true aid workers.


----------



## The Pink Ninja (May 31, 2010)

Ennoea said:


> Is it just me or are we going in circles with the same argument being regurgitated agian and again?



Welcome to Israel's world dude, I'm sure they have T-Shirts.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (May 31, 2010)

Han Solo said:


> What does that have to do with anything?



Obviously atheists love Judaism but despise Islam. Don't you know anything?


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

Tleilaxu said:


> Aid workers on relief missions do NOT carry weapons. Period. They fact they took violent action shows they were not true aid workers.



Unless they expect to be attacked, I suppose. Which they were, with live ammunition in international waters. Fuck, at least the Somalis ransom people instead of opening fire.


----------



## Megaharrison (May 31, 2010)

The Pink Ninja said:


> Welcome to Israel's world dude, I'm sure they have T-Shirts.



Pretty much sums it up. This shit isn't even new for us, has been going on monthly since 1967. In 1973 we had over 20 countries _simultaneously cut relations with us_. People here are just too young to remember, it's why older people in Israel tend to react indifferently to the latest "DOOMSDAY INTERNATIONAL OUTCRY AGAINST ISRAEL" (outside of the media, who's just being the media again).


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Rob` said:


> Obviously atheists love Judaism but despise Islam. Don't you know anything?


99% of the Zionists are atheists, and should not be connected with the Jewish religion in anyway.

The most religious Jews are also the most anti-Zionist individuals in the world. Don't you know anything?


----------



## Ennoea (May 31, 2010)

> Aid workers on relief missions do NOT carry weapons. Period. They fact they took violent action shows they were not true aid workers.



They didn't have rocket launchers, they were just more agressive. Also you obviously don't know how passionate some aid workers can be, this isn't the first time there have been clashes like these.



> Welcome to Israel's world dude, I'm sure they have T-Shirts.



They be Haters since 67


----------



## dreams lie (May 31, 2010)

Le Male said:


> We're on an international forum. It would be interesting to compare how we receive this news by our medias.



The reactions in the United States are probably about the same as this forum.  The number of Americans against and for Israel are about 50/50.  The reactions in Europe or any other country are probably hugely in favor of the activists.  If you are talking about the reports by our news media, we expect them to be neutral, but bias is inevitable and most likely mirrors the populace they air to.


----------



## NanoHaxial (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Unless they expect to be attacked, I suppose. Which they were, with live ammunition in international waters. Fuck, at least the Somalis ransom people instead of opening fire.



The aid group has done this kind of thing nine times befores (and was actually let through five of those times). They knew they weren't going to be "attacked". They knew what was going to happen and that they wouldn't be in danger.

Some more video:


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

> They didn't have rocket launchers, they were just more agressive. Also you obviously don't know how passionate some aid workers can be, this isn't the first time there have been clashes like these.



Being passionate is one thing, attacking armed soliders who were not expecting to be attacked is not what an aid worker is supposed to do, if they truely were passionate about the palistinians they would have handed those supplies to the UN for proper distribution. Also aid workers are not supposed to have weapons nor would a true aid worker attack someone. They were given every oppertunity to cease and disist and even then when the Israelis boarded they could have surrendered like the FIVE other boats did, and look what happened they did not suffer losses.


----------



## hcheng02 (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Are you really comparing a hostage situation with suicidal terrorists to aid workers on a relief mission?



No, not really. More to compare the mindset between Russian and Israeli soldiers. Russia routinely kills human rights activists in broad daylight - as in they drive in vans, kidnap them, and then shoot a bullet in their head. Israel didn't just walk up and shoot these activists, there are five other ships to prove that. It was because they came under attack, as shown by Omnistrife's video. If you think Russia is worse than Israel in that regard, you need to read up more.


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

Kobe said:


> that's just retarded to highest degree.
> 
> There was no war between Turkey & Israel, if you are believing otherwise you're just a moron who has no idea about international relations.



I never claimed there was, you must've misread.



> Those people who died in there have nothing to do with Hamas or any other fucked up Islamic cult, even claiming such thing shows the idiocy.



Hamas is government of Gaza and they're known to abuse civilians for their own means. I'm not saying that the hippies wanted to support Hamas (though there's a good chance they did), I'm just saying that they do support them by giving supplies to the civilians, which Hamas will then take and use against Israel.



> and rifles not? If you threaten one's life, you get a response, if that was by knives, it's not those idiot commandos' job to open fire with rifles to defenseless those who suffered from it.



You're not defenseless when you have a knife and you're certainly not defenseless when you're the aggressor attacking an armed soldier while wielding a knife. Once again, look to the other 5 ships. There were no casualties there. Mega also posted a report showing how much Israel tried before they authorized the use of lethal force. The hippies had it coming, period.



> how come? Once the ship left the Turkish port, it was clear, it was nothing but goods to help those civilians in Gazza.



 Same as above, they cannot simply supply the civilian population and expect everything to work out fine. Why the hell do you think Israel is blockading most of Gaza? Just for shits and giggles? Because they like seeing the pali civilians suffer? People like degelle probably believe that, but if you really think about it and consider that Israeli are humans, too (yes degelle, jews are humans) you'll find that they're simply protecting their own country. If they let all the goods go freely to Gaza without checking them, Hamas will profit the most from it and kill more Israeli civilians.



> human beings with emotions my ass. What about those who got killed huh? Are they not human? Did Israelis deserve to live more than those?



Yes, they deserve to live more, because the Israelis weren't the aggressors. They arrested the hippies, they didn't try to kill them. The hippies are the ones who tried to kill the soldiers. You try to kill someone, you get shot. It's unfortunate but not undeserved.



> Israel is gonna what's coming for them for what they did.. it's just a matter of context right now, either war or international act.



Oh please, nobody will care in a few weeks. I'm willing to believe that you have the good of the Palestinians in mind, but you're on the side of the terrorists here. Israel is where it is and it won't go away, deal with it.


----------



## Ennoea (May 31, 2010)

> Being passionate is one thing, attacking armed soliders who were not expecting to be attacked is not what an aid worker is supposed to do, if they truely were passionate about the palistinians they would have handed those supllies to the UN for proper distribution. Also aid works are not supposed to have weapons nor would a true aid worker attack someone.



These guys are faux freedom fighters, the fact that they refused to comply showed that they were there for some sort of confrontation.


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

Ennoea said:


> These guys are faux freedom fighters, the fact that they refused to comply showed that they were there for some sort of confrontation.



Basically correct. They cared more about making Israel look bad, than helping people in need.


----------



## Watchman (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> It would be 4-5 pages of solid condemnation if Russia did it.
> 
> But it's Israel, so half support the shooting of aid workers.



Bull fucking shit.

Remember the thread about ? Something infinitely worse (at least I _hope_ you'll agree that was worse) than this. There was sporadic condemnation but mostly indifference or people saying that *Georgia brought it on itself*.

But wait! Isn't that the argument being used here in this thread? Oh noez~

Again, if Russia or China or Iran or Myanmar or North Korea did this, people's reactions would be in this order:

1 - "Wow, they actually warned them? That's odd."

2 - "What the fuck kind of moron attacks soldiers from that country?"


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

Nano, I think (if these people were Turkish,) it's possible they wouldn't mind martyrdom. This action played into the hands of any critic of Israel. It's pretty similar to Indians who baited the British into beating them in front if journalists. 

This was the most damaging thing imaginable, and frankly I beleived it was impossible yesterday. The Gazans can scarcely believe their fortune of Israeli stupidity.


----------



## IBU (May 31, 2010)

Okay people lets keep the personal attacks to a minimum. I know this gets heated, but no need to resort to posts simply engaging in ad homs...


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Tleilaxu said:


> Being passionate is one thing, attacking armed soliders who were not expecting to be attacked is not what an aid worker is supposed to do, if they truely were passionate about the palistinians they would have handed those supplies to the UN for proper distribution. Also aid workers are not supposed to have weapons nor would a true aid worker attack someone. They were given every oppertunity to cease and disist and even then when the Israelis boarded they could have surrendered like the FIVE other boats did, and look what happened they did not suffer losses.



The soldiers should have expected to be attack since the boarded a vessel in international water. They should've expected to get shot at even.

And how many times do we have to go through this "proper distribution", Israel does not even know it's own laws.



The Pink Ninja said:


> She saw me at one of the meetings.
> 
> She was the guest of honour.


Why would I want to attend to a bunch of former neo-nazi who have sided with Israel to fight the "terror religion of Islam"?


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Defending yourself from a helicopter raid throwing tear gas and stun grenades onto your ship... in international waters. Yeah, I think the term is piracy. And that's on top of gunning down aid workers.



Boarding a ship that intends to supply and enemy nation is not fucking piracy. .



> Piracy is a war-like act *committed by private parties (not affiliated with any government)* that engage in acts of robbery  and/or criminal violence at sea.





> If China or, god forbid, Iran did this, the Cafe kids would pound keyboards in poutrage.



Faulty analogy as neither Iran nor China are currently at war and/or partially blockading countries.



Degelle said:


> You still seem to be too dimwitted to grasp that it is international water, Israel has no right to block the ship, it has no right to board it. FUCKIN' PERIOD.



No fucking period. Again, this is a war situation. If they do not stop that ship, people Israeli civilians will die, that's the most likely scenario. How dare these soldiers do their job and protect the people? You were mad at me for not having a hard-on for soldiers of my country and now this?



> I know that you hate Muslims with a passion, just like MH, raging hardcore atheist



/sigh

You're for the Israel conflict what Believe It! was for... pretty much anything.



> This is not even the first boat that arrived in Gaza, the Free Gaza Movement has successfully arrived in Gaza five times. For some obscure reason Israel decided to go with the ancient carnage policy.



I'm not sure what this has to do with anything. So the blockade isn't perfect, we already know that since Egypt could open their border for supplies any day they want to.


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> Why would I want to attend to a bunch of former neo-nazi who have sided with Israel to fight the "terror religion of Islam"?



Would you attend if they sided with Islam against Israel like real Nazi's?


----------



## IBU (May 31, 2010)

One more flame and this thread is locked.


----------



## vivEnergy (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Nano, I think (if these people were Turkish,) it's possible they wouldn't mind martyrdom. This action played into the hands of any critic of Israel. It's pretty similar to Indians who baited the British into beating them in front if journalists.
> 
> This was the most damaging thing imaginable, and frankly I beleived it was impossible yesterday. The Gazans can scarcely believe their fortune of Israeli stupidity.



Remember the Goldstone report ? Yeah me neither.
The general consensus of the Un is watch and see, if it gets really ugly then send the peacekeepers (2006), anything else and it will just be brush aside in a flow unremarkable nonsense like "maybe you be more proportionate next time :/"


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (May 31, 2010)

AestheticizeAnalog said:


> One more flame and this thread is locked.



...no more post ? You solved the conflict here lol.


----------



## Dyon (May 31, 2010)

I think this video is quite shocking and proves that the "peace activists" didn't just play the role of the innocent victims [YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYjkLUcbJWo&feature=player_embedded[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## WizzzeR (May 31, 2010)

being Israeli i would say i am disappointed with every single fiasco on behalf of everyone. Erdoğan is much to blame as well, he didnt do anything to stop the flotilla, despite the Israeli warnings. 

Israel was reluctant to put soldiers armed with paintball rifles (they had green color mostly BTW, lol) in the hopes that the main ship filled with angry muslim turks would react peacefully. and i would say, i agree that we shouldnt have at LEAST started this operation in international water.

imagine if there would be Israeli fatalities? sure those are S-13 commandos, but nobody is immortal... how would Israeli supporting vessels would react? you know... those mini AEGIS ships that can take on jets....

but i would say that at least for this perticular event, the blame is mostly falling on the hands of those frenzied "peace activists" who literally waited there with axes, metal parts and a believe there was a report on a shotgun (could be a panic report...) for a lynch. 

i have absolutely no idea what could ever potentially go through the mind of those people while they were surrounded by the Israeli Navy.

in the end we will have to end the siege on Gaza, but people need to understand there is no so called expasionist zionist movement behind it. sure we started accupying that place in 67 when we shouldnt have. but we left in 05 way, way too early. Gaza is filled with armed millitias, not only Hammas (remember mickey mouse?)... and they are PISSED. its not exactly the type of area we can easily break our millitary presence from.

today its a millitary siege with the prime interest of security... otherwise Israel has no mean to controll such a massive area. its very expensive, nobody likes that in Israel either. we are barely glad it provieds security.

but its a doubld edged knife for us... our only real salvation is an emergance of understanding in Gaza, but that will never happen soon. 

so in the end, we dont have any expansionistic ideal feuling that siege, its just... its the SUCK that is reality that calls us to act ugly.

BTW.... ask an Israeli what is Zionism for him, he might scratch his head looking for an answer.


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 31, 2010)

vivEnergy said:


> Remember the Goldstone report ? Yeah me neither.
> The general consensus of the Un is watch and see, if it gets really ugly then send the peacekeepers (2006), anything else and it will just be brush aside in a flow unremarkable nonsense like "maybe you be more proportionate next time :/"



Goldstone? Last I heard they are referring it to the UNSC some time this year. Though I'm sure this will take precedence.


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Dyon said:


> I think this video is quite shocking and proves that the "peace activists" didn't just play the role of the innocent victims [YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYjkLUcbJWo&feature=player_embedded[/YOUTUBE]


They board a boat in international waters, the soldiers might as well have been shot on sight and they would have all been to blame. Self defense, period.


----------



## perman07 (May 31, 2010)

Megaharrison said:


> It's rather bizarre, isn't it? I mean, North Korea torpedoing that South Korean ship was a bit more concerning then this as that could risk nuclear war. Or all the massacres in the Congo that make this look like a picnic.
> 
> Yet as TPN has said, the only 2 threads that have been able to rival this ones level of activity was Cast Lead and the 2006 Lebanon War. There are a great many of people out there with a disturbing fetish for Israel. Degelle is one of them. I mean she never shuts up about Israel, yet has no real reason for such an obsession. I'm at least an Israeli and involved in the conflict.
> 
> In Israel some call this the "eternal erection" and one of the most baffling questions in Israeli society is "why does the world care about us so much?"


My interpretation of this... South/North Korea is very easy to pick a side for. Congo massacres are easy to pick a side for. China and Russia conflicts are easy to pick a side for.

But you guys are in a conflict where both sides are both wrong and right at the same time. Which is why this thread is so long, because people are arguing so much, because they can't find common ground.

I sympathize with Palestinians because they have it the worst. I sympathize with Israelians because it can't be easy finding a solution that is both efficient (in regards to limiting Palestinian war efforts)and humane (towards Palestinians), and thus a compromise must be made in favour of efficiency or humaneness.

Also, I do not sympathize with Palestinians because so many of them seem totally unreasonable when it comes to living together with Israelies in a country, and vote for parties like Hamas. I also do not sympathize with Israelies for seeming so confortable condemning so many people to squalor. 

Oth, there is nothing to argue about in a North-Korea thread.


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> They board a boat in international waters, the soldiers might as well have been shot on sight and they would have all been to blame. Self defense, period.



By that logic then the Israeli soldiers had the right to fight back.


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> They board a boat in international waters, the soldiers might as well have been shot on sight and they would have all been to blame. Self defense, period.



Utter bullshit.

If a robber is in my house, I don't suddenly have the right to kill him. That's retarded.

Bet you love Texas law.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (May 31, 2010)

It's funny how both side use us, internet users, as part of their battle. The battle of videos, first it was videos from Al Jazeera and now it's this video from Israel's youtube.


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

Shinigami Perv said:


> Defending yourself from a helicopter raid throwing tear gas and stun grenades onto your ship... in international waters. Yeah, I think the term is piracy. And that's on top of gunning down aid workers.
> 
> If China or, god forbid, Iran did this, the Cafe kids would pound keyboards in poutrage.



you keep talking about this hypothetical.
like it gives your point any value instead of being pure flawed guesswork. 


look at the fucking thread history in NF. When Russia or China pulls off far worse it gets far little reaction. 

no the only ones clearly showing bias are you lot. I remember how Degelled excused and justified Iran for being ""not very agressive"" when protesters died on the streets and they use terrorist proxies. 

Look at my post history. Or hcheng02 etc. we have a consistent harsh realistic look on war. No the one throwing baised hissy fits and ""pouting"" is you (you are repeating yourself over and over now, hoping someone will give your hurt ego some attention awwww)


----------



## Degelle (May 31, 2010)

Tleilaxu said:


> By that logic then the Israeli soldiers had the right to fight back.



They had no right to board the ship, period. They were the instigators, they intercepted the vessel knowing full well who was on board, officials from many different nations, writers, artist, politicians, etc.

As I said also, this is not the first boat that has been sent to Gaza. Five in total has made it there, so Israel knew fully well what was going on, but for some reason that wanted to make a statement or whatever.


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

Nonsense they were repeatedly violating orders, refusing to hand the supplies over to the proper authorites and tried to run a blockade against one nation which is at war with the other. You do NOT do these things expecting to get away with it.

It will be interesting to see if weapons intended for Hamas are found on these boats, or atleast the one who resisted, they they were truely carrying only supplies they should have had no issues with being boarded or redirecting their course.


----------



## Elim Rawne (May 31, 2010)

Isn't this the second time you're making the same thread ?


----------



## The Pink Ninja (May 31, 2010)

Why are people making a big deal out of the international waters thing? They made it very clear they intended to run the blockade so who cares where Israel stops them? Would you stop complaining if it was inside the blockade zone? You'd just complain it was in Palestinian waters, not Israelis.

You don't like the blockade, we get it, stop trying to create a pseudo-legalist justification.

They were given everyone opportunity to avoid getting boarded. This wasn't an aid mission, it was a PR stunt.



Shinigami Perv said:


> Nano, I think (if these people were Turkish,) it's possible they wouldn't mind martyrdom. This action played into the hands of any critic of Israel. It's pretty similar to Indians who baited the British into beating them in front if journalists.
> 
> This was the most damaging thing imaginable, and frankly I beleived it was impossible yesterday. The Gazans can scarcely believe their fortune of Israeli stupidity.



Megaharrison just said Israel's history is full of people saying "Oh now you're in trouble!" They're still here dude. Compared to the wars of survival, this is epically small beer. Actually compared to Cast lead just a year ago, this is small beer. Gazans can dance all they want to... but in a week they'll still be under a blockade in a hole of city ruled by a gang who regard them as fodder.

Differences between Indians and Gazans are huge not least the Indians never fought or attacked anyone. More importantly, successful insurgencies are fighting to get foreign occupiers off their land. Israel isn't occupying Gaza and the land they do occupy is (West Bank settlements excluded) is theirs with no Palestinian militants on it. Hence no insurgency.

As for the PR coup, the consumers of news of the Peaceful Indian Protests that mattered  were British. In your comparison, this would have to be effecting Israeli's minds. The rest of the world already hates Israel, that's nothing new.

Maybe the fact they get hated on by the International Community so much might get Israel to change their policies but I doubt it. Lately it's just made them more pissed off and paranoid and reactionary. Their last big push for peace got them more attacks, more dead Israelis and more international condemnation. It's what brought the right into power.

I don't see what the international community will do right now that is either just or constructive. With suck universal and irrational hatred I'd be scared that once they pull back and give concessions, new demands would be made, then news ones after that.

Also, two things about your they wanted to be martyrs.

First off that's kind of racist and anyone on "my side" making such comments about Muslims would get lambasted.

Secondly, either it was an AID mission or a PR stunt designed to provoke a hostile response. It can't be both.



Diceman said:


> Isn't this the second time you're making the same thread ?



It's the same thread 

Anyway, since making it no one has made peace so it's still a valid topic, ney?

Anyway, I want to see if there was anything more to this thread than anti-Semitism or Islamaphobia.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (May 31, 2010)

Helsinki Principles on the Law of Maritime Neutrality

5.1.2(3) Merchant ships flying the flag of a neutral State may be attacked 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, capture or diversion.

Basically the boarding was legal.


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

Rob` said:


> Helsinki Principles on the Law of Maritime Neutrality
> 
> 5.1.2(3) Merchant ships flying the flag of a neutral State may be attacked 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, capture or diversion.
> 
> Basically the boarding was legal.



You just won the thread!


----------



## Elim Rawne (May 31, 2010)

The Pink Ninja said:


> It's the same thread
> 
> Anyway, since making it no one has made peace so it's still a valid topic, ney?
> 
> Anyway, I want to see if there was anything more to this thread than anti-Semitism or Islamaphobia.



Meh, this is pretty much the Cast Lead thread redux. I've already seen arguments from the first few pages repeated. This will die down in a week or so, your thread, possibly faster than that


----------



## Zabuzalives (May 31, 2010)

Degelle said:


> They board a boat in international waters, the soldiers might as well have been shot on sight and they would have all been to blame. Self defense, period.



nonsense our military doesnt even do that to real pirates in Somalia. 


there is no self defense from the activists, the boat was being boarded. 

they defended the boat, which is understandable, but did this by attacking the boarding party with murderous intent from the start which is an escalation and out of proportion. 

self defense fits the soldiers.  

nice to see your high moral fibre go out the window. its ok to brutally murder people for setting foot on your BOAT. well as long as they are jews ofcourse.




Rob` said:


> Helsinki Principles on the Law of Maritime Neutrality
> 
> 5.1.2(3) Merchant ships flying the flag of a neutral State may be attacked 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, capture or diversion.
> 
> Basically the boarding was legal.



cant be quoted enough.....


----------



## Han Solo (May 31, 2010)

Rob` said:


> Helsinki Principles on the Law of Maritime Neutrality
> 
> 5.1.2(3) Merchant ships flying the flag of a neutral State may be attacked 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, capture or diversion.
> 
> Basically the boarding was legal.



I'm ignorant on this, so can you tell me what the "Helsinki Principles on the Law of Maritime Neutrality" is?


----------



## mayumi (May 31, 2010)

Dyon said:


> I think this video is quite shocking and proves that the "peace activists" didn't just play the role of the innocent victims [YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYjkLUcbJWo&feature=player_embedded[/YOUTUBE]



personally i found this video hilarious. it gives a message that you don't fuck with people and ask them to do what you want just cause you have guns.

at then end of the video you clearly see isreali soldiers using their weapons. who gave israel the permission to enter the ships?


----------



## The Pink Ninja (May 31, 2010)

Diceman said:


> Meh, this is pretty much the Cast Lead thread redux. I've already seen arguments from the first few pages repeated. This will die down in a week or so, your thread, possibly faster than that



Oh, if any of these debate titans post a serious response in there I'll be surprised.

And yeah, this is pretty much same old same old. Mega gets a good workout cracking skulls though. And I of course am both original and insightful, as well as devastating to all who oppose me.


----------



## Coteaz (May 31, 2010)

I thought this thread ended on page 13 or something.

Guess not.


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

mayumi said:


> personally i found this video hilarious. it gives a message that you don't fuck with people and ask them to do what you want just cause you have guns.
> 
> at then end of the video you clearly see isreali soldiers using their weapons. who gave israel the permission to enter the ships?



They were running a blockade thats all the permission they need, the USA coast guard does not ask permission to board boats smuggling drugs.


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

mayumi said:


> at then end of the video you clearly see isreali soldiers using their weapons. who gave israel the permission to enter the ships?



The military leadership of course. That's what you get when you try to get through a blockade.


----------



## Elim Rawne (May 31, 2010)

mayumi said:


> at then end of the video you clearly see isreali soldiers using their weapons. who gave israel the permission to enter the ships?





Rob` said:


> Helsinki Principles on the Law of Maritime Neutrality
> 
> 5.1.2(3) Merchant ships flying the flag of a neutral State may be attacked 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, capture or diversion.
> 
> Basically the boarding was legal.



EEbil international lwas



The Pink Ninja said:


> Oh, if any of these debate titans post a serious response in there I'll be surprised.
> 
> And yeah, this is pretty much same old same old. Mega gets a good workout cracking skulls though. And I of course am both original and insightful, as well as devastating to all who oppose me.



This thread cannot the epicness that Cast Lead had. I mean, no one has told Mega to get himself captured 

Interesting tidbit: Most Cafe regulars are staying out of this thread.


----------



## DisgustingIdiot (May 31, 2010)

Han Solo said:


> I'm ignorant on this, so can you tell me what the "Helsinki Principles on the Law of Maritime Neutrality" is?



If I'm honest I don't really know. Someone posted it on another forum (where there's a thread on this story) so I just copied it here. They appear to be a set of international laws concerning this kind of thing but I don't know where they came from.


----------



## mayumi (May 31, 2010)

Tleilaxu said:


> They were running a blockade thats all the permission they need, the USA coast guard does not ask permission to board boats smuggling drugs.



according to whose standards? the ships were in international waters. where was israel's demand to either U.S or UN to help them out? when the crew on the ship was not just turkish but from other nations as well. i would think theat israel would be more careful and approach the situation diplomatically and not by force. sorry, but israel does not get to do what it wants on international water against a NATO member Turkey's ship.


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

mayumi said:


> according to whose standards? the ships were in international waters. where was israel's demand to either U.S or UN to help them out? when the crew on the ship was not just turkish but from other nations as well. i would think theat israel would be more careful and approach the situation diplomatically and not by force. sorry, but israel does not get to do what it wants on international water against a NATO member Turkey's ship.



According to this international law and the rules of WAR



> Helsinki Principles on the Law of Maritime Neutrality
> 
> 5.1.2(3) Merchant ships flying the flag of a neutral State may be attacked 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, capture or diversion.*
> 
> Basically the boarding was legal.


----------



## Coteaz (May 31, 2010)

mayumi said:


> according to whose standards? the ships were in international waters. where was israel's demand to either U.S or UN to help them out? when the crew on the ship was not just turkish but from other nations as well. i would think theat israel would be more careful and approach the situation diplomatically and not by force. sorry, but israel does not get to do what it wants on international water against a NATO member Turkey's ship.


Thorough Reading Equals?



> Helsinki Principles on the Law of Maritime Neutrality
> 
> 5.1.2(3) Merchant ships flying the flag of a neutral State may be attacked 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, capture or diversion.


Ah! There we go.


----------



## The Pink Ninja (May 31, 2010)

Diceman said:


> This thread cannot the epicness that Cast Lead had. I mean, no one has told Mega to get himself captured
> 
> Interesting tidbit: Most Cafe regulars are staying out of this thread.



That's true. I think they actually told Mega to get killed.

Mega actually fought in Cast Lead too whereas right now he's slumming it in America.

And I wish I could stay out. I've un-subscribed to this thread half a dozen times now.


----------



## Dyon (May 31, 2010)

mayumi said:


> at then end of the video you clearly see isreali soldiers using their weapons. who gave israel the permission to enter the ships?



pretty much this v



Rob` said:


> Helsinki Principles on the Law of Maritime Neutrality
> 
> 5.1.2(3) Merchant ships flying the flag of a neutral State may be attacked 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, capture or diversion.
> 
> Basically the boarding was legal.


 edit: oh well I'm not the only one to transmit that to you. I'm such a super- lame poster.

I never said that the actions of the Israeli Navy were legitim, but I can at least comprehend them regarding the propensity towards violence the "peace" activists revealed.


----------



## mayumi (May 31, 2010)

ah, finally got some evidence that israel gets to do what it wants. how suprising. good job on getting out of this israel 
you all must be feeling proud. well carry on.


----------



## Asmodeus (May 31, 2010)

I, for some reason, see Degelle and Shinigami Perv typing furiously with Swastika glued to their foreheads, foaming at the mouth anytime someone defends Israel in this thread.



> Helsinki Principles on the Law of Maritime Neutrality
> 
> 5.1.2(3) Merchant ships flying the flag of a neutral State may be attacked 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, capture or diversion.



Makes it a pretty cut-and-dried case. The other boats were boarded, but there were no injuries because the Israeli soldiers were not attacked. The videos have the passenger aggression in pretty plain view. You attack a soldier with a knife, you get your ass shot. If that comes as a surprise to you, remember to adjust your drool cup, because you are retarded.

Gaza and Israel are at war. Whether you agree with this, disagree with it, love Israel or want to see it utterly destroyed does not change that fact. They were given an opportunity to be diverted to another port, they did not. They were waiting for the boarding party to create a PR stunt. I doubt any of them wanted to die, but I would imagine the organizers of the event thought of it as a possibility.

I really hate to think of a Humanitarian aid mission being used as a publicity stunt, but all the evidence is in place for that.


----------



## The Pink Ninja (May 31, 2010)

Asmodeus said:


> I, for some reason, see Degelle and Shinigami Perv typing furiously with Swastika glued to their foreheads, foaming at the mouth anytime someone defends Israel in this thread.



Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand there's the third ad hominem strike!

AestheticizeAnalog, lock away 

Also to be fair me and Mega are the same. We just have dead Muslims babies on our hats.


----------



## Coteaz (May 31, 2010)

Yeah, let's get back to talking about Eurovision.

That was fun.


----------



## IBU (May 31, 2010)

Le Male said:


> ...no more post ? You solved the conflict here lol.



Most people about a page ago were not arguing with another, but name calling. That is not constructive, and really does not deal with the issue at hand.


----------



## Asmodeus (May 31, 2010)

The Pink Ninja said:


> Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand there's the third ad hominem strike!
> 
> AestheticizeAnalog, lock away
> 
> Also to be fair me and Mega are the same. We just have dead Muslims babies on our hats.



My pardon. I'll leave humor off the internet next time. 

/s.


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 31, 2010)

Noooo, it was so much fun D:


----------



## Tleilaxu (May 31, 2010)

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO This was my best thread, still no updates though.


----------



## Shasta McNasty (May 31, 2010)

Can we just nuke that entire region for the sake of enlightenment?


----------



## IBU (May 31, 2010)

Good job Asmodeus....for the sake of not having to ban half of the members who posted in this thread, this thread is locked.


----------

