Israeli Navy Raids Gaza Aid Flotilla, 10 Confirmed Dead

[bush_cheney2004]

...if Turkey follows up it's threat to escort another aid convoy to Gaza with it's Navy what does Israel do? what does NATO do? what does the USA do?...

Same as with the other five ships...peaceful blockade inspection or port call for inspection. Turkey does not have air or naval superiority for the region. USA watches the fun and chooses favorites just as in the Falklands War.

[lictor616]

My comments in regards to Israel's violations of international law are not my opinion. These alleged violations have been investigated and confirmed by these organizations. So take those organization's words for it. Then there are the ongoing international law violations, like the settlements and land annexations.

So why are you so eager for everyone to pay attention to and follow international water laws, but when it comes to human rights laws and the laws of war, you try to justify the violations?

wow touché,

can't wait to see what dancer cooks up in defense, oh wait I don't

[Peter F]

Bonam:

Turkey would gain what exactly? Nothing whatsoever

True. But as I said injured pride is actionable.

Turkey is a democracy. Politically they will have to act. They won't be retaliating, but they will be escorting...assuming another Turkish ship challenges the Israeli blockade.

Just like Canada chases down Spanish Trawlers and just like Isreal had to board the Turkish vessel - even when knowing it wasnt loaded with weaponry for Hamas. It was loaded in Turkey after all. Domestic politics demanded it. and domestic politics will demand Turkish naval escort.

..I suspect the Israeli's will get a brain and let it through - since after all it was loaded in Turkey.

Edited June 1, 2010 by Peter F

[bush_cheney2004]

Bonam:

True. But as I said injured pride is actionable.

Survival is more actionable....50,000 credits are wagered for the nation of Israel.

[Bonam]

True. But as I said injured pride is actionable.

Go act on your pride then. Turkey, however, in my estimation, is smart enough to act in its own best interests rather than out of an emotional response.

[Borg]

Tarek Fatah was exactly right in asking that question...

Not only Egypt,but where are the other Arab nations coming to the aid(I mean aid,not to make war) of the Palestinians?

Arab nations over here do not want Palestinians anywhere near their country - they detest the Palestinians in a big way - which is why Jordan refuses to let them in and Lebanon has them penned up in the camps along the beaches.

The only time the Palestinians are considered "ok" is when it is politically expedient to use them for other purposes. Ie - hate the Jews.

Most racist folks over here are the arabs

Once again the Canuckleheaded and entitled lefties will whine about this and the media will lead the way - however it is a fact.

Borg

[sharkman]

It seems like every year Israel's enemies hatch a new scheme to use 'citizens' as a human shield to attack Israel in some way.

Eventually it will lead to war.

[Black Dog]

I have waited to make a comment on this until I could have some reasonable degree of confidence in what happened.

Why? It's not like your conclusion would have been in doubt regardless of the evidence.

No sympathy for the ones who died from what I've seen thus far. It looks very much like the IDF was entirely justified in defending themselves.

They were not justified boarding a civilian vessel in international waters. End of story.

Edited June 1, 2010 by Black Dog

[Bonam]

They were not justified boarding a civilian vessel in international waters. End of story.

They were justified boarding a vessel carrying unknown goods to a territory ruled by a terrorist group sworn to Israel's destruction. End of story.

[BCMan]

This isn't the end of the story. Israel has to explain themselves to the UN and the EU and the US and Turkey and the rest of the world. Right now, they totally screwed this one.

They were justified boarding a vessel carrying unknown goods to a territory ruled by a terrorist group sworn to Israel's destruction. End of story.

[Bonam]

Israel has to explain themselves to the UN and the EU and the US and Turkey and the rest of the world.

Yeah what else is new. The world always wants Israel to explain something, or to surrender something, or to give something. Same tired old story... Israel takes steps to ensure its security, world is outraged. Repeat ad nauseam.

[BCMan]

They violated international laws. As of now, Israel is supposedly in war with turkey by attacking a vessel that had Turkey’s flag on it. Since Turkey is a NATO member, that involves a lot of other nations, including the US.

For more information go here: http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/385ec082b509e76c41256739003e636d/7694fe2016f347e1c125641f002d49ce

Furthermore; they were not allowed to attack a humanitarian ship on international waters, the attack took place outside the blockade area which is a violation.

"SECTION III : ENEMY VESSELS AND AIRCRAFT EXEMPT FROM ATTACK

Classes of vessels exempt from attack

47. The following classes of enemy vessels are exempt from attack:

(a) hospital ships;

( small craft used for coastal rescue operations and other medical transports;

© vessels granted safe conduct by agreement between the belligerent parties including:

(i) cartel vessels, e.g., vessels designated for and engaged in the transport of prisoners of war;

(ii) vessels engaged in humanitarian missions, including vessels carrying supplies indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, and vessels engaged in relief actions and rescue operations;

(d) vessels engaged in transporting cultural property under special protection;

(e) passenger vessels when engaged only in carrying civilian passengers;

(f) vessels charged with religious, non-military scientifc or philanthropic missions, vessels collecting scientific data of likely military applications are not protected;

(g) small coastal fishing vessels and small boats engaged in local coastal trade, but they are subject to the regulations of a belligerent naval commander operating in the area and to inspection;

(h) vessels designated or adapted exclusively for responding to pollution incidents in the marine environment;

(i) vessels which have surrendered;

(j) life rafts and life boats."

Yeah what else is new. The world always wants Israel to explain something, or to surrender something, or to give something. Same tired old story... Israel takes steps to ensure its security, world is outraged. Repeat ad nauseam.

[Bonam]

They violated international laws. As of now, Israel is supposedly in war with turkey by attacking a vessel that had Turkey’s flag on it.

You can "suppose" all you like but there is no war between Israel and Turkey.

[BCMan]

That wasn’t my main point...I don’t want to see more wars, it’s time to end violence and bring peace NOT war. I assume you agree with the rest of my post now, so, please stop saying the raid was justified.

You can "suppose" all you like but there is no war between Israel and Turkey.

[bloodyminded]

Thanks for being on watch when and where it really counts.

The fog sure gets thick in these parts.

And thank you for your support, without insisting that I "love terrorists," the usual sober response from the moral relativists here....

.....the ones who justify terrorism, so long as the "proper" countries are not the targets.

Edited June 1, 2010 by bloodyminded

[Guest American Woman]

And thank you for your support, without insisting that I "love terrorists," the usual sober response from the moral relativists here....

Sort of like the usual sober responses insisting I'm "an apologist" or "a bigot" or that I "support no food, shelter, or medicine for those living in the Gaza" from the other side when someone dares question something/bring up a point concerning 'the other side' of the incident/issue? Or is that type of response ok when it's directed at the opposing side?

Just curious.

[Argus]

A more interesting question is whether we support our government's way of overthrowing democracies and supporting terrorists worse than Hamas.

Our government has overthrown democracies? Supported terrorists worse than Hamas?

Could you please cite these instances?

Why should we hold the Palestinians to a higher standard? I'm having difficulty understanding the reasoning.

Evidently, the standards most of us hold to are immensely higher than yours.

[Argus]

The powerful Western nations--who have objectively behaved far worse than Hamas, including in its oft-repeated material support for terrorists (some of whom were also objectively worse than Hamas)--recruited Nazis after the Second World War.

I question just how "objective" you are.

Our collective governments have done a lot of things in the midst of war in order to protect their populations. Not all of them were pretty, not all were smart. However, overall our collective western governments have behaved in an admirably lawful way with the overall best interests of their people in mind. Running the world is a complex undertaking and sometimes isn't as pretty as we'd l ike it to be, especially when dealing with evil, violent people.

But our Nazi coalitions were...different...somehow....oh yeah! that magical, talismanic phrase: "The Cold War"!

As stated, running the world is complex. Governments can rarely afford to be as noble as the idealistic simpletons who berate them for doing what was necessary. Some seem to think our government should only have aided "nice" governments which respected human rights. In the cold war era, that pretty much consisted of NATO and damn all else. So the puritans would have had us wash our hands of the rest of the planet and let the Soviets expand their influence undeterred while we stand aloof, wrapped in our own purity. What utter mindless stupidity that would have been.

Given our support--both material and ideological--for terrorism far worse than anyhting in the most ambitious dreams of the most fanatical Hamas members

;

Would you like to recite these evil deeds, so much more worse than "the most fanatical HAMAS member" that we "supported"? In your, uhm, "objective" way, of course, or at least, as objective as someone on the far fringes of the Left can be.

No sober, thinking, moral person should. It's embarassing.

Well don't worry. It's clear you need have no guilt. You're far too pure for that. In fact, you'd be a saint except of course, you're too noble to believe in Christianity, which after all, doesn't respect gay rights as it should. The evil, terrorist bastards!

Edited June 1, 2010 by Argus

[Argus]

No they are not...

And although they are secular,they are still an Islamic country at heart.

I'm not so sure this could'nt turn into a much larger regional conflict.

The standard term used to describe both Turkish and Greek militaries is ABNB. They would stand no chance against Israel.

ABNB - All Balls, No Brains. Think crazed, howling idiots wielding clubs as they charge at men wielding automatic weapons. The outcome of such behaviour is inevitable.

[Argus]

military capability Turkey is rated ahead of Israel....

and what many don't here arealize is Turkey is a member of NATO..and part of a NATO treaty that says an attack on one member is considered an attack on all members...TURKEY respected that treaty and went to Afghanistan after the USA was attacked in 911...most of the dead in this piracy raid were Turks on a Turkish ship...if Turkey follows up it's threat to escort another aid convoy to Gaza with it's Navy what does Israel do? what does NATO do? what does the USA do?...

This is silly. The Turkish government, Islamist in its beliefs, might, althought I highly doubt it, consider such a thing, but if they did the Turkish military would overthrow them and that'd be that. The Turkish generals are not about to see their pretty toys shattered by the Israilis to no purpose in the name of some sort of world muslim solidarity.

[Argus]

they'll actually have Greek support on this...

Utter drivel.

[bloodyminded]

Sort of like the usual sober responses insisting I'm "an apologist" or "a bigot" or that I "support no food, shelter, or medicine for those living in the Gaza" from the other side when someone dares question something/bring up a point concerning 'the other side' of the incident/issue? Or is that type of response ok when it's directed at the opposing side?

Just curious.

I don't think I understand what you're getting at. I've never called you a bigot, nor anything like it.

I'm talking about the insults precisely aimed at myself, not which "side" does what.

[Argus]

Why? It's not like your conclusion would have been in doubt regardless of the evidence.

Untrue. Unlike yourself, I retain the ability to judge situations on their own merits.

They were not justified boarding a civilian vessel in international waters. End of story.

I think I've expressed my opinions on numerous occasions with regard to the sanctity of the letter of the law. I'm far more interested in right and wrong. The vessels were headed for Israeli controlled territory. They'd announced that to all and sundry. They were only a little ways outside the Israeli exclusion zone. Those who care more about the technical aspects of law than reality will whine about this but it really doesn't concern me whether they stopped them where they did or waited another ten or twenty kilometers. They probably wanted to go in at night thinking most of them would be below decks asleep. it was a tactical move and quite logical.

[bloodyminded]

Our government has overthrown democracies? Supported terrorists worse than Hamas?

Of course.

Could you please cite these instances?

Canada was intimately invovled in the overthrow of the democratically-elected Aristide of Haiti. We've also approved of the far worse American record of doing so.

As for supporting terrorists: we materially aided the State terrorists in Indonesia--Suharto and the Generals. And no one, i hope, would dare argue that their record doesn't eclipse that of Hamas. Or of Hamas and Hizbelloah combined. In fact, the comparison is a terrible joke.

Evidently, the standards most of us hold to are immensely higher than yours.

"Evidently" directly implies "evidence." So..go! Show me.

[Argus]

And thank you for your support, without insisting that I "love terrorists," the usual sober response from the moral relativists here....

That's really quite amusing coming from a moral relativist.