Question State Terrorism?

[xane]

I suspect it'll be brushed under the carpet like most things Isreal has done in the past

I'll let the usual propaganda piece detail what the Israelis are doing, seeing as it wont be reported anywhere else.

 

[Ch3tan]

I


If that was a genuine charitable voyage full of good intentions and baby food, then why didn't they simply allow the Israelis on board? They would check what they wanted to check and then allow the ship to continue. In the same way that most ships are allowed to. Instead they decided to make a massive publicity event of it, and try to take on a heavily armed boarding party with sticks and marbles. Then moan about the result.

They're as bad as each other.

Actually, due to an embargo in place, they would not have got in. It was not a case of inspecting the ships, but stopping them getting to Gaza.

 

[Wij]

The helicopter drop came after the initial inspection team.

Facts we do know so far:

1.) The convoy had been told they would be inspected as Isreal has a right to do even in international waters (assuming the blockade is legal, which hasn't been ruled on as far as I know.)
2.) The convoy organisers had been told before that they could take the aid through the land border (subject to inspection as is normal.)
3.) There were press on board as they knew they were heading for conflict.
4.) The initial inspection ran into problems and violence ensued.
5.) Then the helicopter dropped troops in and shot at those resisting the inspection.

Therefore, we are left with the questions of the legality of the blockade and the proportionality of the response.

First off, this is not piracy sorry. Check your maritime law.

Second off. The 'aid convoy' was deliberate provocation.

Third off. Until the legal status of the blockade is resolved Isreal will carry on doing this.

Fourth off. We simply don't have enough facts to know whether the self-defense was proportionate.

Therefore, noone on here knows yet whether this was legal or illegal. Don't pretend otherwise.

As to the wider background, as always there's fault on both sides. Ideally, Isreal shouldn't be having a blockade of Gaza or possibly even be there in the first place, but also Hamas shouldn't be firing rockets into Isreal.

 

[xane]

Actually we have no idea if they received prior warning or not.

More Israeli Propaganda

 

[dysfunction]

I think there's no way we can say that without all the facts at hand. One thing I would say is that surely the Israeli navy are the ones trained to board ships.

I'll give you that Mr pedantic!

 

[Zenith.UK]

Not commenting on the boat thing directly, people have been saying about Turkey's relationship with Israel getting worse.
It's not just Turkey. Israel's relations with the US are getting more strained. If there's one thing you don't do, it's antagonise the big guy watching your back.

A little quote from a Reuters article.
Nine dead as Israel storms aid ship | Reuters

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu voiced regret as he cut short a visit to Canada and rang Obama to call off a White House meeting that had been planned for Tuesday.

Part of the reason he was visiting the US was to bolster relations between Israel and the US. Instead he's going back home to sort out the clusterfuck done while he was out of the country.

 

[Scouse]

I think they wanted to visit Gaza's Roots Club, or the Swimming Pool, all run by those poor brutally oppressed people.

Hey Xane. It looks ace there! A hotel and a swimming pool! That more than makes up for the 7000-odd palestinians that've been killed in the last 10 years eh?

I'd go visit that hotel and swim in their pool but there's a fucking big inconvenient Berlin-style wall I'd have to get past.


Maybe Israel'd be a better holiday destination. I'm sure I'm wrong about them. I mean, the Lebanese are just wankers and deserved repeatedly invading, and the recent attack on Syria which killed a stack was probably an "accident" eh?

I mean, it's not as if more UN security council resolutions have been passed against Israel than any other country on the planet, is it?

Go go Israel. You're well known for abiding by the Geneva Conventions!

 

[throdgrain]

The helicopter drop came after the initial inspection team.

Facts we do know so far:

1.) The convoy had been told they would be inspected as Isreal has a right to do even in international waters (assuming the blockade is legal, which hasn't been ruled on as far as I know.)
2.) The convoy organisers had been told before that they could take the aid through the land border (subject to inspection as is normal.)
3.) There were press on board as they knew they were heading for conflict.
4.) The initial inspection ran into problems and violence ensued.
5.) Then the helicopter dropped troops in and shot at those resisting the inspection.

Therefore, we are left with the questions of the legality of the blockade and the proportionality of the response.

First off, this is not piracy sorry. Check your maritime law.

Second off. The 'aid convoy' was deliberate provocation.

Third off. Until the legal status of the blockade is resolved Isreal will carry on doing this.

Fourth off. We simply don't have enough facts to know whether the self-defense was proportionate.

Therefore, noone on here knows yet whether this was legal or illegal. Don't pretend otherwise.

As to the wider background, as always there's fault on both sides. Ideally, Isreal shouldn't be having a blockade of Gaza or possibly even be there in the first place, but also Hamas shouldn't be firing rockets into Isreal.

Christ don't bother with all those facts Wij, just let these old women carry on bleating about stuff instead

 

[dysfunction]

Exactly! Who needs facts when knee jerk reactions are so much better!

 

[Wij]

A little more clarity on what actually happened:

BBC News - Israeli convoy raid: What went wrong?

So the convoy had been told to stop (not that they would be inspected as I'd heard) and one ship didn't. Then the initial troops sent in to capture the ship were overwhelmed, leading the second lot coming in.

 

[Scouse]

Therefore, noone on here knows yet whether this was legal or illegal. Don't pretend otherwise.

Just checking - do we care whether it was legal or illegal? Is shooting civilians on board ships stacked to the brim with humanitarian aid OK now?

There are ways of stopping a convoy which avoid loss of life and there are ways of stopping convoys that invite danger. Dropping armed commandos onto a deck, one at a time, into a crowd of angry protestors falls into the latter, IMHO. And it's produced a nice set of telly pictures.

Of course the convoy was "deliberate provocation" - part of its aim was to highlight that Israel are blockading Gaza. Not just building big fuck-off Berlin walls around it. And it's well known that the Israeli's aren't letting the humanitarian aid through their land-based crossing points the way they should.

Of course there were press going along - there are on most convoys into Gaza, just in case something does kick off. Reporters need to make a living y'know. It doesn't mean they were expecting such a stupidly rash action. (Although I don't really think the action was either stupid or rash).

As for them being a bunch of dirty "activists" - one of them was a former US Ambassador.

But, as is the preconception every time something like this happens, yep, they're all just activist scum

 

[Wij]

Just checking - do we care whether it was legal or illegal? Is shooting civilians on board ships stacked to the brim with humanitarian aid OK now?

Of course we care. The internet is ablaze with stories about Isreal being pirates and breaking international law. You can't say it's alright to spread misinformation about this because you don't like what Isreal did.

 

[Scouse]

Interesting article Wij. Taking a couple of quotes from it:

However, as the first troops rappelled down, one by one, "the unexpected occurred. The passengers... pulled out bats, clubs and slingshots with glass marbles, assaulting each soldier as he disembarked".

The unexpected? Seriously?!



However, I'm glad the beeb acknowledges the following (in passing):

Warnings having predictably failed, the Israelis decided to use force.

and, less important (because "video evidence" is quite often an oxymoron):

The soldiers, who had started to use stun grenades, then asked for permission to use their firearms. They were given the go-ahead.

However, this is not seen on the video. Indeed, it stops just as one soldier can be seen levelling his pistol at the protesters. One wonders what happened next. Why did the video stop there?

IMHO, only a retard would have expected it to go any other way - and the Israeli military isn't well known for a low-IQ. In fact, quite the opposite, eh?

 

[DaGaffer]

Just checking - do we care whether it was legal or illegal? Is shooting civilians on board ships stacked to the brim with humanitarian aid OK now?

Of course we care; and if there were weapons in with the humanitarian aid, then they had justification to stop the ship (if the blockade is legal then they had justification anyway). Shooting "civilians" is justified if your own life is threatened. Any or none of these things could be true, and casting the whole thing in starkly black and white terms doesn't reflect the truth, just your political standpoint.

There are ways of stopping a convoy which avoid loss of life and there are ways of stopping convoys that invite danger. Dropping armed commandos onto a deck, one at a time, into a crowd of angry protestors falls into the latter, IMHO. And it's produced a nice set of telly pictures.

Once again, neither you or I are experts in crowd control, and frankly the number of people who are experts in crowd control on a ship is probably a very small group of people indeed. Reading the BBC report, "ham-fisted" doesn't begin to describe the level of fuckup on the part of the Israeli commanders, but I'd really doubt they dropped troops individually to create some good TV; that completely misunderstands the relationship of Israeli commanders with their troops; in a country of "citizen soldiers" you're own people would crucify you if you did that deliberately. And I'll say again; passive resistance would have saved lives, resistance creates martyrs (now let me think, which ethnic/religious group is really big on martydom again?)

Of course the convoy was "deliberate provocation" - part of its aim was to highlight that Israel are blockading Gaza. Not just building big fuck-off Berlin walls around it. And it's well known that the Israeli's aren't letting the humanitarian aid through their land-based crossing points the way they should.

I don't know what point you're trying to make here. The ship itself was provocation enough to get the point across; the armed resistance was unnecessary.

Of course there were press going along - there are on most convoys into Gaza, just in case something does kick off. Reporters need to make a living y'know. It doesn't mean they were expecting such a stupidly rash action. (Although I don't really think the action was either stupid or rash).

On who's side? I think "stupid and rash" definitely applies to both parties here.

As for them being a bunch of dirty "activists" - one of them was a former US Ambassador.

But, as is the preconception every time something like this happens, yep, they're all just activist scum

Clearly not, but its never all of them is it?

Look, I'm not trying to condone Israel's actions here; they clearly have a great deal to answer for, and even if it was just a total fuckup rather than deliberate killings, action is needed by the UN because people did die, but, its also not a black and white situation, and having a few nobel prize winners on your manifest isn't a free pass to aggravated assault either.

 

[Scouse]

Of course we care. The internet is ablaze with stories about Isreal being pirates and breaking international law. You can't say it's alright to spread misinformation about this because you don't like what Isreal did.

Fair enough.

However, I've not called them pirates and don't know (or care) if they've broken international law.

It doesn't matter to me - they shot and killed civilians in an action that could clearly have been avoided.

 

[Mabs]

illegal sanctions eh

so when the UN do sanctions on iraq, anyone else its legal cos... they say so ?

im sure the iraqis didnt consider it legal.

if you have the loudest voice, and in this case a bigger navy, you can do it


both sides are at fault to a massive degree frankly, but as with all religious/ethnic problems its not going to end peacefully

 

[Wij]

Fair enough.

However, I've not called them pirates and don't know (or care) if they've broken international law.

It doesn't matter to me - they shot and killed civilians in an action that could clearly have been avoided.

By what ? Sinking the boat ? Easy to say it was a fuck-up in hindsight. Yes, the Isreali response lead to loss of life but I doubt that was the intent. They misread the situation as far as I can see.

 

[rynnor]

I dont know about the legality of their actions but Israel has certainly produced another PR disaster by killing a load of people onboard Aid ships.

When the US empire wanes they are f00ked in my opinion.

 

[Scouse]

On who's side? I think "stupid and rash" definitely applies to both parties here.

I'd agree that stupid and rash definately applies to the protesters, with the caveat of - if you're trying to stop a well-armed military force taking control of your ship, how do you do it without the use of some force?

Clearly not, but its never all of them is it?

It's always enough of them to create bias in news reporting tho eh?

 

[Scouse]

I dont know about the legality of their actions but Israel has certainly produced another PR disaster by killing a load of people onboard Aid ships.

When the US empire wanes they are f00ked in my opinion.

I'm not sure it's a PR disaster. I think the Israeli authorities will see this as a PR coup, as people will watch the videos, feel sympathy for the troops getting battered and think "fucking activists".

Coupled with the way it's going to get reported in the United States I think it's only going to bolster US support for Israel.


Of course, if they do release the full video and show the troops opening up on the civilians it may go the other way...

 

[Wij]

I'd agree that stupid and rash definately applies to the protesters, with the caveat of - if you're trying to stop a well-armed military force taking control of your ship, how do you do it without the use of some force?

That's kinda the point though. They shouldn't have attempted to stop the soldiers. They had stated that their destination was a blockaded port so the military CAN use force to seize the vessel. Therefore, they had no legitimate reason to attempt to stop them.

 

[ECA]

Coupled with the way it's going to get reported in the United States I think it's only going to bolster US support for Israel.

Uh how do you perceive it's being reported there?

CNN/msnbc/etc seem pretty balanced.. ie Israel boards convoy, civilians dead, Netanyahu cancels visit, UN investigation called for, convoy clashed with troops etc etc.


Hell even foxnews seems to be doing the same.
Fox even covered Egypt opening it's border w/ Gaza to allow aid in.

 

[dysfunction]

This is all assuming that it's right for Israel to stop aid going into Gaza.
All Israel want is for Gaza to remain a bombed barren waste land because it suits them...so they can continue to steal land away from Palestine.

This is wrong and therefore any attempts to keep Gaza in this fashion is wrong.

 

[Wij]

This is all assuming that it's right for Israel to stop aid going into Gaza.
All Israel want is for Gaza to remain a bombed barren waste land because it suits them...so they can continue to steal land away from Palestine.

This is wrong and therefore any attempts to keep Gaza in this fashion is wrong.

Seperate argument though.

 

[Ctuchik]

Hell even foxnews seems to be doing the same.
Fox even covered Egypt opening it's border w/ Gaza to allow aid in.

that's probably more shocking then anything tbh.

did hell freeze over while i wasn't looking?

 

[Turamber]

Actually, I saw your name in the thread and correctly thought "here comes a standard Christian defence of Israel that won't actually comment on the actions of Israel or any of the issues I've brought up in the thread at all" - a preconception that was fully borne out by your post.

What a lot of hot air you talk. I didn't take "sides" as there is insufficient information available yet to know exactly what happened. To my mind both sides are the losers here.

 

[rynnor]

Still - its alright because Mr Obama is going to sort it all out right?

I mean thats why they gave him the Nobel prize for peace right?

 

[Wij]

Nah - that was cos e iz black.

(and democrat)

 

[Calaen]

Both sides are at fault if it was human aid only, there should not have been any press or activists on the boats. The sooner those tools learn that they cause more shit than good the better.

 

[rynnor]

Both sides are at fault if it was human aid only, there should not have been any press or activists on the boats. The sooner those tools learn that they cause more shit than good the better.

I think theres a lot more to come out on this story so I'm not going to pre-judge it - much depends on who was on board and what their motivations were.

However I wouldnt fault them for having journalists on board - this is often done in the hope that it will ensure safety (vainly as it turned out).