Israelis board aid ship

[magburner]

The same could be said of the British. Also of Americans, Palestinians... just about any category of people you choose to list.

Perhaps, but the only category of people that resort to wanton acts of violence like this are animals. So, I am quite sure that my country is not in the same category as those hypocrytical Israelis!

 

[Famine]

Well actually what happened was that when there was the British Mandate of Palestine, the Jews and Palestinians were all in the mandate. But, when Britain wanted to leave, they wanted to make the city of Jerusalem shared. But, both sides didn't agree and Britain decided to give up and leave the area without finding other solutions.

Well, what actually happened was nothing of the sort.

The British Mandate for Palestine was set up in the aftermath of World War 1 by the League of Nations, governed by Britain following British fighting against the Ottoman Empire in the Middle East. The area covered all of present day Israel and Jordan (then called Palestine and Transjordan).

The United Nations sought to divide the Mandate between Transjordan and a partitioned Palestine, between Jews and Arabs. Britain objected to this and, having sought to limit emigration from Europe to the new Jewish homeland in the aftermath of World War 2, found themselves subject to terrorist-style attacks on their forces in the Mandate from Jewish groups.

Ultimately it was the UN's plan to divide the Mandate that lead to British withdrawal on the grounds that the UN's partition plan would never be acceptable to both Jewish and Arabic sides. They refused to share administration of what was then Palestine with the UN. When the UN's plan came before the General Assembly for voting, the US and Russia voted in favour of the partitioning and the Arab League countries voted against it.


The UN created Israel. Britain opposed it, didn't believe it would be a satisfactory solution to either side and was forced out from the region (it's worth noting that, though most Jews favoured the partition and most Arabs did not, there were opposing groups on both sides). Israel is nothing to do with, nor the responsibility of Britain.

And even if it were, 1948 was not the start of an Arab/Jew conflict in the region. By quite a few decades.

 

[bullie77]

Perhaps, but the only category of people that resort to wanton acts of violence like this are animals. So, I am quite sure that my country is not in the same category as those hypocrytical Israelis!

Well, not taking sides (because in this kind of situations there's no right side nor wrong side), your country has its pretty share of wantom acts of violence, classified as animal-like by you, in Northern Ireland throughout the last 50 years or so.

My point is that I believe no country can ever assume a moral majority position towars another on this subject. As we say here in Portugal (we had our share too) every one (read: country) has a roof made of glass.

So your above statement is pretty much narrow-minded and ignorant (in regard of your own country's actions). If this isn't suffice as an example, please let me know what adjective other than "hypocrytical" would you use to classify UK's active support of Iraq invasion under the argument of the mass-destruction weaponry?

 

[LizMcQueen]

Unfortunately it seems Israeli–Palestinian conflict will continue until doomsday because both are too stubborn to reach a peaceful settlement.

 

[DK]

Some Israelis, are hypocrites and animals!

Aren't we all, to some extent? Seeing as all Israelis are humans (no matter what neo-Nazis think) and humans are members of the animal kingdom.

 

[Solid Lifters]

News tonight said a second boat is a coming and gonna try the same thing...

*Ding Ding* - round two

Can't say they haven't been warned... (or aren't aware of what could happen)

I'm not the bit surprised. The Palestinians just love to make themselves look like the victim by forcing aggression upon themselves.

"One should expect being mauled when poking the eye of a tiger." - I

 

[Touring Mars]

I'm not the bit surprised. The Palestinians just love to make themselves look like the victim by forcing aggression upon themselves.

Except the flotilla was an international contingent, primarily Turks and including German MP's, as well as activists from the USA, Britain, Australia, Greece, Canada, Malaysia, Algeria, Serbia, Belgium, Ireland, Norway, Sweden and Kuwait.

You are right, however - but it would also be true if you put the word "Israelis" in there too. But regardless of who exploits their role as victims the most, it would be quite unfair to dismiss the real suffering inflicted by both sides as anything less than the inhumanity it is.

 

[Kent]

Looks to me like most people here are anti-Israeli... Frankly, I couldn't care less. The pallys have been doing the same stuff for way too long now with no difference in their results. Maybe its time they resort to diplomacy just as the Israelis should do? I mean, both sides are killing people and generally (besides the hardware used) the only difference is the intended targets of the violence.

 

[Sureboss]

I think anti-massacre which was completely avoidable would be a better description.

 

[senamic]

Can I just put this up here, put it a few pages back, but I would seriously reccommend it for people involved in this discussion context-wise. It shows some of the atrocities on both sides, you can all make your own mind up:
Link
Also, I will get in before someone else goes and satisfies Godwin's Law and say that the major world nations appear to currently be pursuing a policy of appeasement towards Israel, which as we know through all too infamous precedent Does not successfully apply when the attrocities get bigger.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

White phosphorus.

What are white sulfur and white phosphor bombs, and what's the difference?

So "Israelis storm aid ships" is a little misleading. One ship from six was "stormed" after refusing to comply with blockade conditions and it wasn't carrying aid.

If true, then there shouldn't be any controversy at all. Israel intercepted a ship and found it carried weapons bound for Hamas territory.

 

[senamic]

What are white sulfur and white phosphor bombs, and what's the difference?

The Science Bit

The relevant bit
Article has accurate sources, so wiki for once is actually grand

 

[Solid Lifters]

Except the flotilla was an international contingent, primarily Turks and including German MP's, as well as activists from the USA, Britain, Australia, Greece, Canada, Malaysia, Algeria, Serbia, Belgium, Ireland, Norway, Sweden and Kuwait.

Hamas are the evil perpetrators of the Israelis suffering. The majority of Palestinians refuse to banish Hamas, therefor the majority of Palestinians support Hamas. Since the Palestinians support Hamas, they are guilty of perpetrating the suffering on the Israelis. Israelis have the inherent right to defend themselves and to end their suffering. The Palestinians (Hamas) are the attackers. The Israelis are the defenders. No question about that. The Israelis actions have always come in defence to the Palestinians offence.

How are the Israelis to stop their suffering, without causing the suffering of the Palestinians? Blockades cause suffering apparently as much as bombing raids, but are considered to be more 'humane.' I agree. But, why don't the 'international contingent' attack the true problem at hand which is the Palestinians support of evil acts against the Israelis? No, instead they support the evil acts against Israel and support Hamas by trying to bring them aid after a blockade had been decided. That makes the 'international contingent' as guilty as Hamas. The true path to end the Palestinians suffering is to banish Hamas so they both can live in peace with the Israelis. It is within the Palestinians to stop their own suffering, as well as the Israelis suffering. The contingent should aid in stopping the suffering, which I believe is their true intent, but they're not. Not by their recent actions.

You are right, however - but it would also be true if you put the word "Israelis" in there too. But regardless of who exploits their role as victims the most, it would be quite unfair to dismiss the real suffering inflicted by both sides as anything less than the inhumanity it is.

The Israelis aren't trying to victimize themselves. It may only appear so to you and others.

 

[Famine]

What are white sulfur and white phosphor bombs, and what's the difference?

White phosphorus is quite unpleasant. It spontaneously burns in contact with air and can be aerosolised. Net result is that anyone near the explosion can breathe in fire. It's also toxic, so if it's in contact with your skin, it'll melt it until it runs out of oxygen and then you absorb the phosphorus through the exposed areas and can lead to severe organ damage.

The chief difference between white phosphorus and white sulphur/sulfur is that white phosphorus actually exists.

If true, then there shouldn't be any controversy at all. Israel intercepted a ship and found it carried weapons bound for Hamas territory.

Yet the weapons found weren't particularly useful for waging war. Hand-to-hand, yes. Nuisance, yes. Rocket attacks on Israeli territory from Hamas positions... no.

 

[LizMcQueen]

Looks to me like most people here are anti-Israeli...

No, most people here think this attack was stupid, they could have stopped the ship in another way and victimless.
Also there is a sense that Israel can do what it wants without fear of international sanctions.
To say Israel has gone too far in its own defense, or not supporting Israel in everything it does it's not anti-semitism as I read in other forums.

 

[Touring Mars]

Hamas are the evil perpetrators of the Israelis suffering. The majority of Palestinians refuse to banish Hamas, therefor the majority of Palestinians support Hamas. Since the Palestinians support Hamas, they are guilty of perpetrating the suffering on the Israelis. Israelis have the inherent right to defend themselves and to end their suffering. The Palestinians (Hamas) are the attackers. The Israelis are the defenders. No question about that. The Israelis actions have always come in defence to the Palestinians offence.

I don't have any problem accepting that Hamas need to change their policies by a) recognising Israel's right to exist and b) denouncing indiscriminate violence against Israeli civilians - and I reckon we'd be hard pushed to find much disagreement on either of those issues. But, the picture you paint here is profoundly misleading, especially when you consider the historical picture. As far as the Palestinians (and other Arabs in the region) are concerned, the Israelis are pretty far from a peaceful 'defensive' regime, and their current treatment of the Palestinians paints a very different picture about how interested they are in a peaceful two-state solution. The Israeli government would no doubt like nothing better than the Palestinians to just go away - which is never going to happen.

There is also the question of how a group like Hamas can take power (such as it is) in a situation like Gaza at all. How did the conditions arise in Palestine to empower a group like Hamas, and who is responsible for that? Are the Palestinian people inherently more violent than their Israeli neighbours? I seriously doubt it. While Israel enjoys international relations and trade with the outside world, and generally high standards of living, the Palestinians have been crapped on from a great height for decades and now live in desperately difficult conditions, dependent on a trickle of aid that a hostile regime allows through. While I accept that the Palestinians share the responsibility for giving a terrorist group a mandate in their territory, much of the blame lies with the Israelis for making it possible and for consistently failing to support efforts to establish a viable and peaceful Palestinian state.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

The Science Bit

The relevant bit
Article has accurate sources, so wiki for once is actually grand

You could have warned me there were icky pictures. Fortunately, it's 1am here, and so it's hardly meal time.

White phosphorus is quite unpleasant. It spontaneously burns in contact with air and can be aerosolised. Net result is that anyone near the explosion can breathe in fire. It's also toxic, so if it's in contact with your skin, it'll melt it until it runs out of oxygen and then you absorb the phosphorus through the exposed areas and can lead to severe organ damage.

Charming. It seems that with each passing day, mankind finds increasingly-inventive ways to kill one another.

Yet the weapons found weren't particularly useful for waging war. Hand-to-hand, yes. Nuisance, yes. Rocket attacks on Israeli territory from Hamas positions... no.

I daresay they'd come in handy for defending batteries of rockets from ground assaults. Gaza might not be big, but it's crowded and air strikes aren't really going to be feasible given that a) there's a good chance they'd miss and b) guerilla tactics mean the attack platforms coul be disbanded before air support arrives. Any rocket attack on Israel from Gaza would be me with a ground force, and given the Israelis' proclivity for urban warfare and their superior numbers and weapons, molotovs and bullets would come in useful.

 

[FoolKiller]

No, most people here think this attack was stupid, they could have stopped the ship in another way and victimless.

I think you are taking a very one-sided view here. You make it sound like the Navy fired on the ship or the soldiers opened fire as soon as they landed, but considering that other ships involved were boarded and taken to Tel Aviv without incident tells me that the actions of the passengers on this ship were designed to create a provocation.

Reading this article, it sounds as if the IDF troops went in with non-lethal weapons but had to resort to lethal weapons.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3896796,00.html
Chances are this is a one-sided story, but so is everything in all the "OMG I can't believe Israel is such an arse," stories.

Should it have been handled differently by the IDF? Probably. Even the IDF says so in that article. But to act as if the passengers on this ship are innocent of any form of provocation, and were fired upon without any reason whatsoever seems a touch unbelievable in my book. If a similar situation had occurred on all the aid ships I might find it a bit more believable that the IDF immediately acted as if they were attacking an enemy ship, but I would still have questions.


Honestly, considering that Israel had Naval vessels sitting right there that could have just sank these ships at the push of a button I cannot buy into the idea that this was some sort of intentional massacre where the IDF acted without provocation.

 

[NLxAROSA]

That Hamas "gang" is now a government. And unlike the PLO, they haven't changed and started making concessions to Israel... Hamas, instead, remains a radical group... whose party line is death to all Jews, or the like.

It was a rhetorical question, but thanks for explaining it, it was exactly the point I was trying to make.

Unfortunately it seems Israeli–Palestinian conflict will continue until doomsday because both are too stubborn to reach a peaceful settlement.

Well, it's fairly obvious that the enemies of Israel don't give a rats ass about the Palestinians and just use them as an excuse to attack Israel. So even if the Palestinian conflict were solved, there will still be forces bent on Israels destruction.

To say Israel has gone too far in its own defense, or not supporting Israel in everything it does it's not anti-semitism as I read in other forums.

It does not make you antisemetic, but questioning the motives of the so-called 'humanitarians' doesn't make you a Zionist either.

Yet the weapons found weren't particularly useful for waging war. Hand-to-hand, yes. Nuisance, yes. Rocket attacks on Israeli territory from Hamas positions... no.

All I have seen so far is a bunch of makeshift weapons (mostly metal pipes/rods), a couple of bags of marbles and some catapults. Hardly justifying the death of nine people IMO. From the looks of it, the IDF came in ill-prepared/informed and then freaked out with an over-the-top response.

Honestly, considering that Israel had Naval vessels sitting right there that could have just sank these ships at the push of a button I cannot buy into the idea that this was some sort of intentional massacre where the IDF acted without provocation.

Exactly, if the IDFs intention was to kill, they would have done so, and without any injury on their own side.

 

[Famine]

All I have seen so far is a bunch of makeshift weapons (mostly metal pipes/rods), a couple of bags of marbles and some catapults. Hardly justifying the death of nine people IMO. From the looks of it, the IDF came in ill-prepared/informed and then freaked out with an over-the-top response.

They only boarded one of the six ships - the only one that didn't comply with the instruction to be towed to Ashdod, saying that they'd need force to make them comply. When they boarded with force, the soldiers were attacked with knives and bars, some thrown overboard and some having their weapons taken from them and used against them.

That justifies defending themselves. What was on board is, at that point, irrelevant - however the ship that refused to comply, said they'd need forcing to port and attacked the IDF also contained materials banned by the blockade. They weren't materials that could be used to effectively attack Israel, but they were banned.

Five of the six ships complied, were towed, searched and left without incident. The ship that went looking for a fight with Israel got one (as does anyone else).

 

[BlacqueJacques]

Just like the conflict, I think this thread will go on and on and on and on and on .......

 

[NLxAROSA]

EDIT: Response to Famine, not BJ.

I'm not sure what your point is, I think it was quite clear from my previous posts that I feel these 'activists' had a different agenda from the rest and got what they asked for. You play with a snake, you get bitten. So I guess we totally agree on that point.

I was merely pointing out that the Israelis, despite their superior training, equipment and intelligence, moved themselves into a position where deadly force was the only way out. And in my opinion, that is poor judgement from their side. Which, again totally IMO, is their only fault in this whole incident. Once they made the call, there was no other way out.

Also I found it quite hilarious that an Israeli article about 'confiscated weapons' shows pictures of a bunch of marbles and sticks.

BTW, for those that haven't done so already, browse back a few pages and view the videos that I posted of the people on board the Mavi Marmara. They show clearly that these people were not real peace activists. Also, in todays news, it became clear that one of the Dutchmen present on board of the Mavi Marmara was the head of the Dutch Hamas department. Real 'humanitarian' material, huh?

 

[Eric.]

Let's liken this to a traffic stop by a police officer.

Say I'm driving home, friday night, like 2am. I go through an intersection where a police officer is, he decides to follow me and eventually pull me over. I wasn't doing anything illegal, nothing illegal done to the car, and nothing illegal inside the car. Given the time and day, cops tend to pull people over on "suspicion" of drunk driving.

That much is analogous to knowing of the blockade. So the cop flips his lights on, and I decide to run, or at least keep driving in a legal manner. That's the humanitarian ship refusing to stop for the blockade. At some point they are going to forcibly stop my car, and either open my door and pull me out and onto the ground to be cuffed, or approach with guns drawn expecting me to be armed and a threat.

Would you say the police have done anything wrong yet? Did I?

Now when the cop approaches me to put handcuffs on I reach for a knife and successfully stab him in the body. You think he's going to use as much force as he legally can to disarm or disable me? Sure bet. Probably no lethal force in this case, but I'm one person against several cops, rather than a boatload of possibly aggressive "humanitarians".

 

[Omnis]

Not really, Eric. The aid flotilla's primary purpose was to bring attention to the brutality of the blockade of Gaza. They probably didn't expect to successfully deliver aid to the people. They effectively martyred themselves and proved their point.

 

[Eric.]

So if the blockade isn't legal, let's say the traffic stop isn't legal either. Is it still okay that I retaliate on the cop and attack?

 

[Danoff]

The blockade is legitimate, and the people who attempted to defy it proved only that Israel is serious when they claim they're going to do something.

 

[Omnis]

I think these folks are more concerned with morality than with law. For the purposes of their cause, the law or the legality of the blockade is not important. Like I said, they've made martyrs of themselves.

 

[Stevisiov]

Not really, Eric. The aid flotilla's primary purpose was to bring attention to the brutality of the blockade of Gaza. They probably didn't expect to successfully deliver aid to the people. They effectively martyred themselves and proved their point.

I think it's important that note that the different boats on the flotilla had different intentions and as such shouldn't be lumped into the same category. It's fairly clear to me that the boat that was stormed had slightly different intentions to that of the others, hence not stopping.

 

[sumbrownkid]

And the cycle continues after this debacle.

In all honesty, this conflict ain't gonna end without a really big bang.

Hopefully it doesn't happen anytime soon.

 

[NissanSkylineN1]

So I'm still wondering:
"Ok, if they place sanctions and Israel gets wiped off the map.... whats the bad part about it?" No one really wants Israel on the map anyways due to their poor relations with other countries and their dick move to build settlements on Palestinian neighborhoods in Jerusalem.
I know that I may sound not sympathetic at all and quite screwed in the head but seriously, wouldn't it be better if Israel just go sanctions and get the consequences that come with it?