Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
BlackSails
Posts: 5315
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 5:48 am UTC

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby BlackSails » Wed Jun 02, 2010 2:16 pm UTC

RockoTDF wrote:
None of these things are weapons. Can anyone point out industrial/construction uses for night vision goggles and gas masks? Bulletproof vests are a bit dodgy. Then again I would probably want one if I was a Palestinian civilian.


There are industrial and construction uses for C4, that doesnt change that the main use is for fighting.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby Diadem » Wed Jun 02, 2010 2:20 pm UTC

Dream wrote:I we were talking about political ends, your astute observation that Palestine isn't Northern Ireland would be interesting. We're not. The accusation was that given terrorism at the level of Hamas rockets, the UK would react just as violently as Israel does. In fact, the UK has endured worse than the Hamas rockets and not responded even remotely similarly. It didn't, for instance, blockade Ireland and forcibly board ships coming from anywhere that might be carrying something that could possibly be used in some kind of terrorist attack. It didn't bulldoze homes, and it didn't restart the Plantations.

You do realize, right, that there's a difference between Ireland and Northern Ireland?

I suggest you read up on the conflict in NI before using it as a basis of your arguments again. People might take you more seriously if you actually know what players were involved. (Ireland was, of course, involved, but only distantly on the sidelines. The conflict in NI was mainly a civil war between the majority and minority in NI. Ireland was hardly involved. Even England was not the main player in the conflict, they mainly tried to keep the peace. (though the fact that they were more on the side of the unionists drew the ire of the nationalist, who occasionally targetted them. But it was still mostly a conflict of unionists vs. nationalists)). Comparing it with the conflict in the middle east just shows that you've understood neither conflict).
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
RockoTDF
Posts: 582
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:08 am UTC
Location: Tucson, AZ, US
Contact:

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby RockoTDF » Wed Jun 02, 2010 3:22 pm UTC

BlackSails wrote:
RockoTDF wrote:
None of these things are weapons. Can anyone point out industrial/construction uses for night vision goggles and gas masks? Bulletproof vests are a bit dodgy. Then again I would probably want one if I was a Palestinian civilian.


There are industrial and construction uses for C4, that doesnt change that the main use is for fighting.


C4 blows stuff up, none of these items do that.
Just because it is not physics doesn't mean it is not science.
http://www.iomalfunction.blogspot.com <---- A collection of humorous one liners and science jokes.

Chen
Posts: 5570
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby Chen » Wed Jun 02, 2010 3:59 pm UTC

RockoTDF wrote:
BlackSails wrote:
RockoTDF wrote:
None of these things are weapons. Can anyone point out industrial/construction uses for night vision goggles and gas masks? Bulletproof vests are a bit dodgy. Then again I would probably want one if I was a Palestinian civilian.


There are industrial and construction uses for C4, that doesnt change that the main use is for fighting.


C4 blows stuff up, none of these items do that.


Point was just because they have industrial/construction uses doesn't mean they can't and won't be used in a more nefarious way.

User avatar
Red Hal
Magically Delicious
Posts: 1445
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 2:42 pm UTC

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby Red Hal » Wed Jun 02, 2010 4:20 pm UTC

Diadem wrote: The conflict in NI was mainly a civil war between the majority and minority in NI. Ireland was hardly involved. Even England was not the main player in the conflict, they mainly tried to keep the peace. (though the fact that they were more on the side of the unionists drew the ire of the nationalist, who occasionally targetted them. But it was still mostly a conflict of unionists vs. nationalists)).

Actually it was between a bunch of violent arseholes who called themselves unionists (or loyalists to be more precise) and a bunch of violent arseholes who called themselves nationalists (again, it would be more precise to use the term republicans), neither of whom ever really enjoyed the support of the majority of their chosen side, and neither of whom were really fighting for the cause they so violently espoused; they were more interested in personal gain and prestige within their murderous groups, oh and organised crime.

Most of us just wanted the violence to stop, get on with our lives and treat everyone equally like we had been trying to do. Well, everyone that is apart from those in the then government who were gerrymandering the Catholic population into a minority of wards to ensure a Protestant majority at Stormont.

Truth be told, there were no innocent sides in the Troubles, but more civilians died than anyone else. In that respect the current situation in Gaza is no different.
Lost Greatest Silent Baby X Y Z. "There is no one who loves pain itself, who seeks after it and wants to have it, simply because it is pain..."

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby Dream » Wed Jun 02, 2010 4:28 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:You do realize, right, that there's a difference between Ireland and Northern Ireland?

I had no idea. Seriously? Is there?

I'll just say that A: I grew up in Ireland in the 1980s and stayed until 2005, and have seen the war and the peace. B: Your assessment of the NI conflict is, as a wise man once said, not even wrong. I mean, it really bears no relation whatsoever to the conflict, at all. C: (and for the second time) I never once equated the two conflicts to one another, nor even explicitly compared them. First I said the UK had actually demonstrated that restraint in the face of terrorism is possible, after someone else claimed it would react as Israel has. Secondly I said that there are lessons to be learned about the depth of the scarring that Israeli policies are inflicting on the Palestinians, they can be learned from the times England has attempted to de facto annex a neighbour by land appropriation. Centuries later it is still a huge problem.

"There are lessons to be learned" is far from the same thing as "these conflicts are pretty much the same".
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby Diadem » Wed Jun 02, 2010 4:32 pm UTC

Red Hal wrote:
Diadem wrote: The conflict in NI was mainly a civil war between the majority and minority in NI. Ireland was hardly involved. Even England was not the main player in the conflict, they mainly tried to keep the peace. (though the fact that they were more on the side of the unionists drew the ire of the nationalist, who occasionally targetted them. But it was still mostly a conflict of unionists vs. nationalists)).

Actually it was between a bunch of violent arseholes who called themselves unionists (or loyalists to be more precise) and a bunch of violent arseholes who called themselves nationalists (again, it would be more precise to use the term republicans), neither of whom ever really enjoyed the support of the majority of their chosen side, and neither of whom were really fighting for the cause they so violently espoused; they were more interested in personal gain and prestige within their murderous groups, oh and organised crime.

I didn't want to imply that both groups in the NI weren't tiny majorities. If I did, my apologies.

I think in fact that this is one of the major differences. In NI the violent groups on both sides were tiny minorities, who never had much support. In the Israel-Palestinian conflict, on both sides the minorities that advocate violence are much bigger. Still minorities, but very significant ones. With much more power.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
aleflamedyud
wants your cookies
Posts: 3307
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 7:50 pm UTC
Location: The Central Bureaucracy

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby aleflamedyud » Wed Jun 02, 2010 4:33 pm UTC

Iv wrote:
yedidyak wrote:The only claim that Briatin had to the Plantations was that they had taken them, in those days that was enough, force ruled. In Israel the situatiuon is totally different. In Gush Etzion, Shchem (Nablus), Hebron, Gaza, Shilo, and all parts of Jerusalem there were Jewish comunities from well before Islam. There were at least two previous Jewish states. There was never an Arab 'state of Palestine' nor was Jerusalem ever anything more than a minor regional city under any Muslim rule - Ottoman or Arab.
So your territorial claims are either based on religion appurtenance or genealogical descent. Do you realize that these arguments makes you really unpopular in an international discussion ? Also, if I were to use the argument that a country that never was should not be allowed to be, without providing the context, I might be called an enemy of Israel (I don't think there ever was a 'state of Israel' if you dismiss religious references). And more importantly, I don't understand why people on both side in this region, justify their actions by historical references that predate Renaissance instead of just claiming their rights as human beings.

Actually, many of these claims are based on 20th-century history. The Jewish communities of Hebron and Old Jerusalem were alive and well until they were massacred by "anti-Zionist" Arabs. Seriously, I despise the settlements, but at least I admit that they have a basis in recent history. If I could steal a line from Doctor Who, we didn't come to Israel, we come from Israel.

As to "dismissing religious references", read Josephus and other historians of the Greco-Roman Antiquity. Hell, there are records in Ancient Egypt that mention "Israel" by name (usually in context of having won a war against Israel).

This is the entire core issue of the conflict between Zionism and Arabism/Islamism. We Zionists know, by living memory and historical record, that we are an authentic, indigenous people of this scrap of land, and we demand self-determination there. The Arabists and Islamists consider our claims to have been overridden not only by the conquests of the Early Islamic Period but by any conquests they might make.

This is the issue of the "settlements" and evictions in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of East Jerusalem. Jews had title deeds from the Ottoman period (before there was a State of Israel or a single dunam of land was taken for Zionists by military force) of the 20th century to houses in which Arab families had been living since the Arab armies took East Jerusalem in the War of Independence. An Israeli court came to the fair conclusion that the Arabs could keep living in those houses as long as they paid a set monthly rent to the Jewish property owners. Then the Arab families, on the urgings of the Islamists and Palestinian nationalists in their community, asserted that they owned the houses and would stop paying rent, on the justification that any and all pre-1967 Jewish presence in Jerusalem is a Zionist lie -- a delusion espoused by such Palestinian higher-ups as not only Ismail Haniyeh and Khaled Meshaal but "moderates" like Saeb Erekat as well.

So yes, Israel and Zionism are very unpopular in the international realm because the Arabs are very poor and wretched, and many Western liberals are so overwhelmed with pity that, coming from the poor and wretched, they will believe outright, disprovable fantasies.

So here we stand, the vast majority of Israelis and Zionists simply wishing for the conflict to end, the Zionist right exacerbating the problems by pillaging the Israeli taxpayer to build more goddamn settlements, the Zionist left bitter and directionless because its program of conceding more and more to the Arabs until they like us hasn't worked, and the Arabs dreaming of return to a Judenrein Palestine that never existed.

yoni45 wrote:
RockoTDF wrote:About the US:
I live in a part of the US near the Mexican border that has a serious drug and immigrant trafficking problem (Arizona - there are threads elsewhere about controversial laws designed to combat these issues if you want to look). Every so often Border Patrol cops or citizens on border towns are killed by Mexican criminals. If the US handled this like Israel, it would be like the 2006 war against Lebanon. A few guards go missing: WAR. Does the Mexican army have anything to do with it? No, but let's bomb them anyway. And while we are at it, let's take out parts their small economy as well, and flatten downtown of major cities. Other countries would flip out if America did this!


Um, minus the fact that Mexico actually cooperates with the US. And the whole thing about the fact that said Mexicans aren't, you know, firing missiles into American population centers.

I wonder what would happen if a state harbored entities that committed serious acts of terrorism against the US and didn't cooperate.

Oh wait, that's right -- all it took was one terrorist attack for the US (alongside the UK, among others) to completely obliterate two states. We're talking civilian casualties well past the 100 000 mark (and that's by the most conservative of estimates). Off of one terrorist attack, the scale of which, when adjusted to Israel's far smaller population, Israel has dealt with dozens of.

"Israel takes it to a whole new extreme"? What a joke. If Israel was even marginally as belligerent as the US or the UK both Lebanon and Syria wouldn't be on the map at this point, and neither would a sizable portion of their total populace.

But you forget Yoni: Israel doesn't have the world's largest economy, the world's largest overseas empire, the world's strongest currency, or a veto in the United Nations Security Council. Picking on Israel is easy!
"With kindness comes naïveté. Courage becomes foolhardiness. And dedication has no reward. If you can't accept any of that, you are not fit to be a graduate student."

yedidyak
Posts: 954
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 10:24 pm UTC
Location: Israel

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby yedidyak » Wed Jun 02, 2010 4:40 pm UTC

Iv wrote:
yedidyak wrote:The only claim that Briatin had to the Plantations was that they had taken them, in those days that was enough, force ruled. In Israel the situatiuon is totally different. In Gush Etzion, Shchem (Nablus), Hebron, Gaza, Shilo, and all parts of Jerusalem there were Jewish comunities from well before Islam. There were at least two previous Jewish states. There was never an Arab 'state of Palestine' nor was Jerusalem ever anything more than a minor regional city under any Muslim rule - Ottoman or Arab.
So your territorial claims are either based on religion appurtenance or genealogical descent. Do you realize that these arguments makes you really unpopular in an international discussion ? Also, if I were to use the argument that a country that never was should not be allowed to be, without providing the context, I might be called an enemy of Israel (I don't think there ever was a 'state of Israel' if you dismiss religious references). And more importantly, I don't understand why people on both side in this region, justify their actions by historical references that predate Renaissance instead of just claiming their rights as human beings.


No. My territorial claims are that we were always there. The references I made to previous Jewish states, whilst they are mentioned in the Tanakh are also well established historically and archeologically.

The legal basis for Israel today, even without those facts, is also pretty clear. Check out your history from 1917 onwards, and see what happened to all the lands of the former Ottoman Empire. Legally, Israel has as much right to be there as Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and all the other countries in the MI. All were set up by the British in the same way, at the same time.

Separately, it has now come out that at least 3 of the 4 Turkish dead on the Mavi Marmara told their families before they left that they dreamed of becoming matyrs. It seems now obvious that these people went with the express aim of attacking Israeli soldiers and then to fight to the death.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340 ... 09,00.html
http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNew ... 34486.html
http://www.onejerusalem.org/2010/05/fre ... ce-say.php

EDIT - Would like to point out that the aid from the flotilla is now waiting at the Erez crossing because Hamas wont let it into Gaza, whilst the IDF is trying to deliver it. Come to your own conclusions about what that says. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340 ... 81,00.html

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby Dream » Wed Jun 02, 2010 4:51 pm UTC

yedidyak wrote:The legal basis for Israel today, even without those facts, is also pretty clear. Check out your history from 1917 onwards, and see what happened to all the lands of the former Ottoman Empire. Legally, Israel has as much right to be there as Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and all the other countries in the MI. All were set up by the British in the same way, at the same time.

Syria and Lebanon were French controlled, not British. Syria, Lebanon etc. are all within the borders established at their inceptions, and any time they exceeded them, they withdrew after peace was established. The same is not true of Israel. If the legal basis for the existence of the state of Israel comes of the post-mandate carving up of the Middle East, then Israel has no right to an inch beyond the '48 borders. Something tells me you wouldn't agree with that, though.

yedidyak wrote:My territorial claims are that we were always there. The references I made to previous Jewish states, whilst they are mentioned in the Tanakh are also well established historically and archeologically.

So, can the Zoroastrians have Iran back then? They've always been there, though not quite in the numbers they were in biblical times. The Muslims essentially kicked them out of there, even though it could well be argued that it was natural demographic shifts over centuries that really did it. They used to have a state there, but now they don't have a homeland of their own...

No, on reflection, basing territorial claims on millennia old history it really stupid.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

yedidyak
Posts: 954
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 10:24 pm UTC
Location: Israel

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby yedidyak » Wed Jun 02, 2010 4:57 pm UTC

Dream wrote:
yedidyak wrote:The legal basis for Israel today, even without those facts, is also pretty clear. Check out your history from 1917 onwards, and see what happened to all the lands of the former Ottoman Empire. Legally, Israel has as much right to be there as Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and all the other countries in the MI. All were set up by the British in the same way, at the same time.

Syria and Lebanon were French controlled, not British. Syria, Lebanon etc. are all within the borders established at their inceptions, and any time they exceeded them, they withdrew after peace was established. The same is not true of Israel. If the legal basis for the existence of the state of Israel comes of the post-mandate carving up of the Middle East, then Israel has no right to an inch beyond the '48 borders. Something tells me you wouldn't agree with that, though.



Yes, Lebanon and Syria were part of the French Mandate, except for the Golan which was British then given to the French. However, my point was that all those countries were created by the powers who took aver from the Ottomans after WW1 splitting up the land.

Israel is indeed not within its original borders. 76% of the original League Of Nations Mandate for Palestine which was decided to be a Jewish State was given to become the Kingdom of Jordan. Israel now, with the areas of Judea and Samaria, comprise only 24% of the original.


Dream wrote:So, can the Zoroastrians have Iran back then? They've always been there, though not quite in the numbers they were in biblical times. The Muslims essentially kicked them out of there, even though it could well be argued that it was natural demographic shifts over centuries that really did it. They used to have a state there, but now they don't have a homeland of their own...

No, on reflection, basing territorial claims on millennia old history it really stupid.


So ethnic cleansing and conquest are grounds for territorial claims?

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby Dream » Wed Jun 02, 2010 5:13 pm UTC

yedidyak wrote:76% of the original League Of Nations Mandate for Palestine which was decided to be a Jewish State was given to become the Kingdom of Jordan. Israel now, with the areas of Judea and Samaria, comprise only 24% of the original.

I'm sorry, what are you talking about? I have never heard about any decision that all of Palestine was to be a Jewish state. There was a brief dalliance with the idea of a joint Arab-Jewish state after Russia pulled out of Sykes-Picot, but that's the only whole-Palestine state plan I'm aware of. That happened during the League of Nations, so it might be what you're thinking of. The idea that the Kingdom of Jordan, on the East bank of the river Jordan, was ever intended to be part of Israel is laughable. Perhaps you mean that the West Bank was part of Trans-Jordan (not the Kingdom) before the Kingdom's establishment?

yedidyak wrote:So ethnic cleansing and conquest are grounds for territorial claims?

Did you miss the part where I said basing territorial claims on biblical history is stupid?
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

yedidyak
Posts: 954
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 10:24 pm UTC
Location: Israel

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby yedidyak » Wed Jun 02, 2010 5:26 pm UTC

Dream wrote:
yedidyak wrote:76% of the original League Of Nations Mandate for Palestine which was decided to be a Jewish State was given to become the Kingdom of Jordan. Israel now, with the areas of Judea and Samaria, comprise only 24% of the original.

I'm sorry, what are you talking about? I have never heard about any decision that all of Palestine was to be a Jewish state. There was a brief dalliance with the idea of a joint Arab-Jewish state after Russia pulled out of Sykes-Picot, but that's the only whole-Palestine state plan I'm aware of. That happened during the League of Nations, so it might be what you're thinking of. The idea that the Kingdom of Jordan, on the East bank of the river Jordan, was ever intended to be part of Israel is laughable. Perhaps you mean that the West Bank was part of Trans-Jordan (not the Kingdom) before the Kingdom's establishment?

yedidyak wrote:So ethnic cleansing and conquest are grounds for territorial claims?

Did you miss the part where I said basing territorial claims on biblical history is stupid?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Ma ... _Palestine - See the map??
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Ma ... of_borders

Yes, there was to be an Arab state on part of the East Bank under the Sykes-Picot agrement, but the earlier Balfour Declaration called for a Jewsih National Home in 'Palestine', which was then understood to mean all of the Mandate.

Even under the Faisal-Weizman Agreemnet the borders included more than are currently controlled by Israel.

And by saying that since the Jews didnt have a state there any more they shouldnt have another one now is saying that ethnic cleansing and conquest make a difference.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby Dream » Wed Jun 02, 2010 5:31 pm UTC

I know the maps. You claimed that Mandate Palestine was "decided" (your word) to be a Jewish state. Please cite for the decision, or just drop it. It's ridiculous in the extreme.

Ah, I see. It's merely your fantasy that "in Palestine" and "all of Palestine" are the same thing. As I said, ridiculous.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

yedidyak
Posts: 954
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 10:24 pm UTC
Location: Israel

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby yedidyak » Wed Jun 02, 2010 5:39 pm UTC

The greatest source of conflict was the Balfour Declaration, 1917. Lord Balfour wrote a memorandum from the Paris Peace Conference which stated that the other allies had implicitly rejected the Sykes-Picot agreement by adopting the system of mandates. It allowed for no annexations, trade preferences, or other advantages. He also stated that the Allies were committed to Zionism and had no intention of honoring their promises to the Arabs.[11]

Eighty-five years later, in a 2002 interview with The New Statesman, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw observed "A lot of the problems we are having to deal with now, I have to deal with now, are a consequence of our colonial past. .. ..The Balfour Declaration and the contradictory assurances which were being given to Palestinians in private at the same time as they were being given to the Israelis - again, an interesting history for us but not an entirely honourable one."[12]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sykes%E2%8 ... _Agreement

If the plan was always two states in Mandate Palestine, what were the broken promises to both sides?
The fact is, the British led both sides to understand that they were favoured by the British. Then they went back on both, leaving both sides insulted.
You wont accept this as proof, but the Lehi had all of Mandate Palestine on their logo.

Whatever, the understandings at the time, which we may never know - the agreement betwen Weizman, first President of Israel, and Emir Faisal would have had Israel larger than currently, with both sides of the Jordan Valley in the Jewish state.
Last edited by yedidyak on Wed Jun 02, 2010 5:42 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby Dream » Wed Jun 02, 2010 5:41 pm UTC

But no decision was ever made to give all of Mandate Palestine to a new state of Israel. That simple is not true, at all.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
BlackSails
Posts: 5315
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 5:48 am UTC

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby BlackSails » Wed Jun 02, 2010 5:44 pm UTC

RockoTDF wrote:
BlackSails wrote:
RockoTDF wrote:
None of these things are weapons. Can anyone point out industrial/construction uses for night vision goggles and gas masks? Bulletproof vests are a bit dodgy. Then again I would probably want one if I was a Palestinian civilian.


There are industrial and construction uses for C4, that doesnt change that the main use is for fighting.


C4 blows stuff up, none of these items do that.


Yes, and? Blowing stuff up is a legitimate need for construction.

Large containers of sulfur dichloride and ethylene also have legitimate uses, but the IDF would be completely justified in flipping the fuck out if they found them on a boat. (sulfur dichloride and ethene are the precursors to mustard gas)

yedidyak
Posts: 954
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 10:24 pm UTC
Location: Israel

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby yedidyak » Wed Jun 02, 2010 5:46 pm UTC

The three principles of the British Balfour Declaration regarding Palestine were adopted in the Treaty of Sèvres:

ARTICLE 95.

The High Contracting Parties agree to entrust, by application of the provisions of Article 22, the administration of Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, to a Mandatory to be selected by the said Powers. The Mandatory will be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2, 1917, by the British Government, and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

Palestine officially fell under the British Mandate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_ ... _Palestine

Here, the treaty of Sevres, signed by the British, mentions ther Balfour Declaration, says that the intention is to set up a Jewsih national home in Mandate Palestine, with no mention of any Arab state, just that Arabs do not lose their civil rights.

User avatar
aleflamedyud
wants your cookies
Posts: 3307
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 7:50 pm UTC
Location: The Central Bureaucracy

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby aleflamedyud » Wed Jun 02, 2010 5:57 pm UTC

Dream wrote:So, can the Zoroastrians have Iran back then? They've always been there, though not quite in the numbers they were in biblical times. The Muslims essentially kicked them out of there, even though it could well be argued that it was natural demographic shifts over centuries that really did it. They used to have a state there, but now they don't have a homeland of their own...

If by this you mean that the Islamist government of Iran should be replaced with a liberal democracy that will treat all religions and all Iranians equally, including and especially Zoroastrianism and the few remaining Zoroastrians, rather than enforcing Muslim hegemony through the use of secret police, YES!

yedidyak wrote:Whatever, the understandings at the time, which we may never know - the agreement betwen Weizman, first President of Israel, and Emir Faisal would have had Israel larger than currently, with both sides of the Jordan Valley in the Jewish state.

And everyone please go look up Emir Faisal. He was living, historical proof that there is nothing inherent in Arab or Muslim culture that makes them anti-Semitic or anti-Zionist. The notion that Arab rights can only be satisfied by the removal of the Jewish state is, essentially, war propaganda by the pan-Arab fascists and the Islamists.

The point, to get back on topic, is that the blockade of Gaza simply cannot be lifted for humanitarian reasons without enabling the Hamas war machine and possibly triggering a repeat of Operation Cast Lead or even a need to reoccupy Gaza. It's not a happy condition or one we should particularly favor over the more humane alternatives, but rather than demanding that the international community force Israel to unilaterally lift the blockade we should demand that the international community disable the Hamas war machine, which would make the lifting of the blockade possible without a second Cast Lead or a second Israeli occupation of Gaza.
"With kindness comes naïveté. Courage becomes foolhardiness. And dedication has no reward. If you can't accept any of that, you are not fit to be a graduate student."

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby Dream » Wed Jun 02, 2010 6:25 pm UTC

yedidyak wrote:the intention is to set up a Jewsih national home in Mandate Palestine

Which is self evidently not all of the Mandate, it is a state in the Mandate. You claimed a decision was made to the effect that all of Mandate Palestine would be given over to the creation of Israel. That is not true.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

yedidyak
Posts: 954
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 10:24 pm UTC
Location: Israel

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby yedidyak » Wed Jun 02, 2010 6:31 pm UTC

Dream wrote:
yedidyak wrote:the intention is to set up a Jewsih national home in Mandate Palestine

Which is self evidently not all of the Mandate, it is a state in the Mandate. You claimed a decision was made to the effect that all of Mandate Palestine would be given over to the creation of Israel. That is not true.


I think it was understood that the intention 'in Palestine' was that Palestine would be one Jewish State. I think that this assumption can be drawn from the fact that Balfour was at the same time arguing that the old one state idea was not feasible, implying that there was a one state idea at the time. Also maybe he fact that the Lehi certainly beleived that all of the Mandate was theirs.

You may disagree, fine. We arent going to agre on this, and that is irrelevant. The fact remains that the early agreements include all of present day Israel, the Golan, Judea and Samaria, and Gaza.

All of course irrelevant to the OP.

yoni45
Posts: 2123
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 9:16 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby yoni45 » Wed Jun 02, 2010 6:42 pm UTC

RockoTDF wrote:Mexicans are in charge of drug cartels and gangs that commit all kinds of crimes across the southwest. I don't have any stats, but a huge amount of crime is tied to south of the border.


That's nice.

You're under the assumption that this is anywhere close to being the equivalent of the Mexican government cooperating with groups firing missiles into American population centres... Why?

Most countries have smuggling and illegal immigrant problems. Israel has one with Egypt. That's nice, and completely irrelevant.

RockoTDF wrote:Were the Lebanese supporting rocked assaults?


Only by providing entirely free reign across Lebanese territory to act against Israel, harboring enemies of Israel...

RockoTDF wrote:I won't even attempt to defend the decision to start the Iraq war. The vast majority of civilian casualties were not caused directly by coalition military operations.


Right -- we'll just ignore the fact that coalition military operations were responsible for more deaths in two months in Iraq that Israel's killed across the last decade.

(given the likely vastly underinflated numbers, because apparently, the US "doesn't do body counts").

RockoTDF wrote:The Taliban government sponsored and supported those involved in 9/11. When your country is attacked on that scale, you can attack those responsible. Short of a land invasion I can't think of another just reason to go to war. The difference between the US and Israel is that...


THE US COMPLETELY OBLITERATES ENTIRE COUNTRIES WHEN FACED WITH FAR (relatively) LESSER THREATS THAN ISRAEL.

It's actually somewhat hilarious to see you try to justify the US while condemning Israel.

Yeah, the US "doesn't cut off humanitarian aid" -- it only kills thousands of people while completely tearing apart entire states. We won't go into the fact that compared to Afghanistan prior to the US invasion, the life expectancy in Afghanistan actually dropped by two years, that the literacy rates dropped by almost 10%, and that by comparison, Gaza may as well be paradise.

The US kicks down doors at 4am instead of bulldozing their houses? Drop a bomb in Afghanistan and take down a house while in Gaza you take down 10 houses? Perhaps then, you'd like to explain why American bombs manage to take out about 100 civilians at a time?

RockoTDF wrote:Pretty much every news source seems to be flipping out about this, along with heads of state. I'm no maritime lawyer but I would like to think that these people know more about maritime law than xkcd posters...


Well then, feel free to go ahead and ask them and let us know. Until then, I see no reason to assume otherwise.
I sell LSAT courses and LSAT course accessories. Admittedly, we're still working on the accessories.

User avatar
RockoTDF
Posts: 582
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:08 am UTC
Location: Tucson, AZ, US
Contact:

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby RockoTDF » Wed Jun 02, 2010 8:49 pm UTC

yoni45 wrote:
RockoTDF wrote:Mexicans are in charge of drug cartels and gangs that commit all kinds of crimes across the southwest. I don't have any stats, but a huge amount of crime is tied to south of the border.


That's nice.



If you are going to be sarcastic, fuck off.

You're under the assumption that this is anywhere close to being the equivalent of the Mexican government cooperating with groups firing missiles into American population centres... Why?

Most countries have smuggling and illegal immigrant problems. Israel has one with Egypt. That's nice, and completely irrelevant.

RockoTDF wrote:Were the Lebanese supporting rocked assaults?


Only by providing entirely free reign across Lebanese territory to act against Israel, harboring enemies of Israel...


It is relevant because the immigration problem is tied to a lot of organized crime. 44 Israeli civilians were killed in the 2006 Lebanon War compared to 1200 Lebanese civilians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Israe ... n_Conflict

I would be willing to bet that far far more than 44 Americans die every year to drug related violence tied to Mexico. Given how corrupt the Mexican government, military, and police are, one could argue that they are complicit in such activities. Did the US kill 1200 Mexican civilians? Or 1200 civilians from any country in "the war on drugs?"

RockoTDF wrote:I won't even attempt to defend the decision to start the Iraq war. The vast majority of civilian casualties were not caused directly by coalition military operations.


Right -- we'll just ignore the fact that coalition military operations were responsible for more deaths in two months in Iraq that Israel's killed across the last decade.

(given the likely vastly underinflated numbers, because apparently, the US "doesn't do body counts").


Are you referring to a specific two months or just two months in general?

RockoTDF wrote:The Taliban government sponsored and supported those involved in 9/11. When your country is attacked on that scale, you can attack those responsible. Short of a land invasion I can't think of another just reason to go to war. The difference between the US and Israel is that...


THE US COMPLETELY OBLITERATES ENTIRE COUNTRIES WHEN FACED WITH FAR (relatively) LESSER THREATS THAN ISRAEL.


Stop yelling like a child. Even if the US does obliterate entire countries (which it doesn't) it at least helps in reconstruction.

It's actually somewhat hilarious to see you try to justify the US while condemning Israel.


It's actually somewhat hilarious to see you try to justify Israeli actions regardless of my stance on the US or Israel.

Yeah, the US "doesn't cut off humanitarian aid" -- it only kills thousands of people while completely tearing apart entire states. We won't go into the fact that compared to Afghanistan prior to the US invasion, the life expectancy in Afghanistan actually dropped by two years, that the literacy rates dropped by almost 10%, and that by comparison, Gaza may as well be paradise.


How much of that is the fault of the US dropping bombs or people bombing their neighbors? I would rather live in Iraq than Gaza. What does literacy rate have to do with the US? Correlation, not causation there. When warlords close schools and do other such things I don't see how you can directly blame the US.

The US kicks down doors at 4am instead of bulldozing their houses? Drop a bomb in Afghanistan and take down a house while in Gaza you take down 10 houses? Perhaps then, you'd like to explain why American bombs manage to take out about 100 civilians at a time?


Depends on the bomb. There is a difference between bombing what you think is a military target in a rural area and bombing a military target in one of the most dense urban areas in the world.

On the upside, this conversation has made me think a bit more critically about the situation in Afghanistan (I've never thought Iraq was justified) and how others could see American criticism of Israel as hypocritical. However, the fact remains that Israel supports ethnic cleansing via settlements, has an inhumane blockade of Gaza, and isn't willing to take steps necessary for long term peace. Even if Hamas doesn't want to take those steps, Israel should do so and claim the moral high ground against terrorism.
Just because it is not physics doesn't mean it is not science.
http://www.iomalfunction.blogspot.com <---- A collection of humorous one liners and science jokes.

User avatar
BlackSails
Posts: 5315
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 5:48 am UTC

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby BlackSails » Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:02 pm UTC

RockoTDF wrote:Depends on the bomb. There is a difference between bombing what you think is a military target in a rural area and bombing a military target in one of the most dense urban areas in the world.


I didnt realize Israel was bombing Delhi.

User avatar
Kulantan
Posts: 999
Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 9:24 pm UTC
Location: Somewhere witty

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby Kulantan » Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:21 pm UTC

Gaza population density = 4167 personkm-2
See how it stacks up.
TEAM SHIVAHN
Pretty much the best team ever

phlip wrote:(Scholars believe it is lost to time exactly which search engine Columbus preferred... though they are reasonably sure that he was an avid user of Apple Maps.)

Blog.

User avatar
scikidus
Posts: 792
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 9:34 pm UTC
Location: New York, NY
Contact:

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby scikidus » Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:25 pm UTC

Only yesterday, scikidus wrote:I'm surprised/glad neither Turkey nor Israel has played the "allies with the US" card (yet). It basically becomes this schoolyard peer pressure thing.

I spoke one day too soon! http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/02/world ... olicy.html Excepts:
Struggling to navigate a bitter split between two important allies, the Obama administration on Tuesday tried to placate an outraged Turkish government while refusing to condemn Israel for its deadly raid on a flotilla of aid ships bound for Gaza.
...
The deep rift between Israel and Turkey, which had cultivated close ties, puts the Obama administration in a tough spot on two of its most pressing foreign-policy issues: the Middle East and Iran.

The United States does not want to abandon Israel, which has been subjected to international opprobrium since the raid. The administration is desperate to keep alive indirect peace negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians brokered by its special envoy, George J. Mitchell.

But it also does not want to alienate Turkey, which is playing an increasingly vocal role on the world stage. Relations were already tender after the United States threw cold water on a Turkish and Brazilian effort to resolve the impasse over Iran’s nuclear program. Turkish officials complain that they negotiated the deal with the encouragement and agreement of the administration.
...
“Turkey and Israel are both good friends of the United States, and we are working with both to deal with the aftermath of the tragic incident,” Mrs. Clinton told reporters at the State Department after meeting with Turkey’s foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu.
...
Earlier in the day, Mr. Davutoglu harshly criticized the cautious American response to the raid, saying: “We expect full solidarity with us. It should not seem like a choice between Turkey and Israel. It should be a choice between right and wrong, between legal and illegal.”

He complained that the United States had delayed and watered down the United Nations Security Council statement on Israel, which condemned the actions on the ship rather than Israel itself.

Mr. Davutoglu demanded that Israel apologize for the attack, release the detained passengers, return the bodies of the dead, agree to an independent investigation and lift its blockade of Gaza. He said Turkey was prepared to go back to the United Nations for further action against Israel.
...
“We’re going to do our best to heal the wounds with the Turks,” said Michael B. Oren, Israel’s ambassador to the United States, who also met with General Jones and other White House officials.

So yeah. Schoolyard fighting. Great.
Happy hollandaise!

"The universe is a figment of its own imagination" -Douglas Adams

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby Dream » Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:41 pm UTC

The US response is spineless. After the East Jerusalem/Joe Biden fiasco I think they should show some more resolve. Israel isn't going to make an enemy of the US just because the US condemns such a blatant fuckup/crime (take your pick, the difference isn't important here). The US should be showing that it is willing to throw some weight around in the region. Otherwise, why would anyone care about its policies? It certainly shouldn't stand by while other Western nations line up to condemn Israel over this.

Even were the US to back Israel, it should do it, and not vacillate about waiting until all the facts are in. Personally I think it is in the US's interest to pull Israel up short on this one to reestablish some credibility in the region. There won't be many opportunities to do so that would be as easy to sell to Israel itself and Israel supporters in the US government. Couldn't hurt to make better friends with Turkey at the moment either, as the whole Iran/uranium deal is something America will likely only have leverage over from the Turkish end.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
defaultusername
Posts: 329
Joined: Sun Jun 22, 2008 9:15 pm UTC
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby defaultusername » Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:42 pm UTC

BlackSails wrote:
RockoTDF wrote:Depends on the bomb. There is a difference between bombing what you think is a military target in a rural area and bombing a military target in one of the most dense urban areas in the world.


I didnt realize Israel was bombing Delhi.

Wikipedia wrote:Population density: 4,118/km^2, 6th highest worldwide

I think that qualifies as "one of the most dense urban areas in the world".
Because phlogiston.

yoni45
Posts: 2123
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 9:16 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby yoni45 » Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:43 pm UTC

RockoTDF wrote:It is relevant because the immigration problem is tied to a lot of organized crime...


Again -- that's nice. You still seem to be under the assumption that this is anywhere close to being the equivalent of the Mexican government cooperating with groups firing missiles into American population centres...

...and it's still just as silly of an assumption.

(I mean, I could elaborate further, but I'd imagine it should be pretty obvious as to why a border control issue is somehow not even close to equivalent to a state sanctioning missile attacks against a neighboring state...)

RockoTDF wrote:Are you referring to a specific two months or just two months in general?


A specific two months.

RockoTDF wrote:Stop yelling like a child. Even if the US does obliterate entire countries (which it doesn't) it at least helps in reconstruction.


Right -- except for some odd reason, since the US occupation of Afghanistan, their life expectancy dropped (as likely did any other metrics of human development). Even more oddly, the Palestinians under Israeli occupation have actually prospered far past many of their Arab neighbors by practically every notable metric.

RockoTDF wrote:
It's actually somewhat hilarious to see you try to justify the US while condemning Israel.

It's actually somewhat hilarious to see you try to justify Israeli actions regardless of my stance on the US or Israel.


Except I haven't actually justified any Israeli actions. Smooth.

RockoTDF wrote:How much of that is the fault of the US dropping bombs or people bombing their neighbors?


As a result of the bombs themselves? Not sure. But given that under US occupation the US is responsible for the human development of Afghanistan, the US would be responsible for the drops in those development indicators.

RockoTDF wrote:Depends on the bomb. There is a difference between bombing what you think is a military target in a rural area and bombing a military target in one of the most dense urban areas in the world.


Right, the difference being that the US is careless enough when it comes to civilian casualties to manage to kill way more civilians than Israel in single events (and overall), even though they're operating in environments that are far less dense.
I sell LSAT courses and LSAT course accessories. Admittedly, we're still working on the accessories.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby Dream » Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:52 pm UTC

Dream wrote:...Personally I think it is in the US's interest to pull Israel up short on this one to reestablish some credibility in the region.

Just quoting myself to point out that I may have come across as advocating US interference in the Middle East, which I do not. I was addressing the situation from the US point of view, not my own.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

Whitebeard
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 4:55 pm UTC

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby Whitebeard » Wed Jun 02, 2010 10:14 pm UTC

I must say that I am absolutely disgusted at some of the misinformed comments I've seen on this thread. I can't say I'm surprised though. Someone mentioned on this thread that the argument of media bias is getting old, but that doesn't make it any less true. But how would I know which media is really biased, right?

I served in the Israeli navy a few years ago and I participated in quite a few missions, so I know exactly how the navy and the IDF in general work. I personally participated in the seizure of another vessel or two in the past that attempted to violate the blockade, and while none of those incidents ended up like this one, they still stirred a lot of anti Israeli sentiments in the world. On one such occasion there was actually a CNN reporter aboard their boat, so out of sheer curiosity I read the article on CNN.com about the incident - I was absolutely outraged. It was as if the article was discussing another boat that was contesting another navy. The writer of the article didn't seem to let the facts affect his prose too much. Instead, he was too busy demonizing Israel as much as he possibly could. I recall the article talking about how the navy ship attacked the boat with no warning, while in reality we hailed them on the radio for an hour and we certainly didn't "attack" them. If you can't count on objective journalism from a huge network like CNN with a reporter on the freaking ship, then there's no reason to believe anything you see on the news. That's certainly the conclusion I came to after that incident.

I've seen too much bullshit on this thread to comment on everything but I will say this: the IDF really is the most moral army in the world. Not only that, but due to the unreasonable and unproportional criticism it has been getting in recent years, its methods are constantly growing more efficient and less costly in terms of human life - usually at the cost of increased risk to Israeli soldiers. For example, in an urban setting, terrorists will often hole up in a building, booby trap the entrances and fire on passing soldiers. The easy solution is to blow up the whole building. This way you don't risk anything, but you demolish the house and possibly kill civilians inside(as someone mentioned, Hamas gunmen often operated in heavily populated areas to make it harder on the IDF to take the easy way out). The harder and riskier option would be to send soldiers inside to clear the building - and this is the sort of tactic we are seeing more and more. Do you know many countries who would constantly put their own soldiers in this sort of jeopardy for the sake of uninvolved people on the other side? It's true that sometimes mistakes happen, but they are exceptions rather than the rule. Also, it's really easy to talk about what Israel *should* have done in retrospect while sitting around drinking beer on the other side of the world, but making those decisions in real time with real concerns and real interests is a little harder. So please, give Israel some credit and don't speak with conviction of which you don't know.

Here are a few more videos from the incident to think about. I haven't seen any of them on this thread:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZlSSaPT_OU&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiWcXwp2Jbo&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFGuwUGaI9o&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9p5QT91QYs&feature=player_embedded

Not that they will matter to people who only see what they want to see. I was particularly amused by the comments people made earlier about how the nightvision goggles, bulletproof vests and gas masks found on the ship didn't necessarily mean that it was carrying more than aid. But I guess people only see what they want to see. Work your self delusive magic on this one: there were also flashbang grenades on the ship. You can see the flasbangs going off next to the commandos in some of the videos.
Another fact that no one seems to have mentioned is that some of the commando's were also injured pretty badly. One of them was thrown off the deck(you can see this in the videos) and he later needed some major back surgery. There were a few broken arms, stab wounds and at least one of them was shot by the so-called peace activists. Whether this was with a gun stolen from the commandos or with a gun they already had on board I don't know.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby Dream » Wed Jun 02, 2010 10:23 pm UTC

Whitebeard wrote:Another fact that no one seems to have mentioned is that some of the commando's were also injured pretty badly.

I see you haven't actually read the thread. You might want to try doing that before you comment on it.
Whitebeard wrote:If you can't count on objective journalism from a huge network like CNN with a reporter on the freaking ship, then there's no reason to believe anything you see on the news. That's certainly the conclusion I came to after that incident.

Quite true. I wouldn't believe anything I read on CNN. Instead I'd read as widely as I could, and allowing for interests, editorial policies and reporter biases, I'd form a rounded picture of whatever I was reading about.

So when Mark Regev tells me that the Israeli assault team were the victims of a premeditated lynch mob, I don't believe it any more than I would CNN.

EDIT: Just checked the videos. You criticise CNN as biased, and expect people to accept as evidence videos uploaded by a user called "idfnadesk"? Do you even understand the concept of a double standard?
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

JonScholar
Posts: 272
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 5:07 am UTC

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby JonScholar » Wed Jun 02, 2010 11:26 pm UTC

Whitebeard wrote:I've seen too much bullshit on this thread to comment on everything but I will say this: the IDF really is the most moral army in the world. Not only that, but due to the unreasonable and unproportional criticism it has been getting in recent years, its methods are constantly growing more efficient and less costly in terms of human life - usually at the cost of increased risk to Israeli soldiers. For example, in an urban setting, terrorists will often hole up in a building, booby trap the entrances and fire on passing soldiers. The easy solution is to blow up the whole building. This way you don't risk anything, but you demolish the house and possibly kill civilians inside(as someone mentioned, Hamas gunmen often operated in heavily populated areas to make it harder on the IDF to take the easy way out). The harder and riskier option would be to send soldiers inside to clear the building - and this is the sort of tactic we are seeing more and more. Do you know many countries who would constantly put their own soldiers in this sort of jeopardy for the sake of uninvolved people on the other side? It's true that sometimes mistakes happen, but they are exceptions rather than the rule. Also, it's really easy to talk about what Israel *should* have done in retrospect while sitting around drinking beer on the other side of the world, but making those decisions in real time with real concerns and real interests is a little harder. So please, give Israel some credit and don't speak with conviction of which you don't know.


Right, wonderful, now if israel lifts the ban and allows foreign journalists to confirm what the IDF is saying then we'll all believe you. Until then, there's no trustworthy source that will verify this claim, and in fact, it would appear every source outside of Israels own net of media has reported the exact opposite.

Edit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/israel-mfa/

Is this legitimate? Israeli ministry of foreign affairs is providing these photos? Because some people are claiming that the EXIF data is revealing the photos of pepper spray, bulletproof vests, and nightvision to be fake (they date back to 2003). Maybe someone a bit more tech savvy then me can run a quick analysis of the photos and figure that out for us?

Iv
Posts: 1207
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 1:08 pm UTC
Location: Lyon, France

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby Iv » Wed Jun 02, 2010 11:47 pm UTC

Whitebeard wrote:I've seen too much bullshit on this thread to comment on everything but I will say this: the IDF really is the most moral army in the world.
Thanks for contributing then !
Ok, so of all the armies you have been participating in, what would be the less moral, would you say, because obviously you could not say such a thing without being able to compare with every army in the world ?
An army that can't handle a bunch of protesters armed with sticks without killing 10 of them is either incompetent or immoral. I agree that most videos here tend to balance toward the incompetence side.
What is your take on the Goldstone report ? Airstrike on a mosque during the evening prayer, use of civilian at the point of a gun to check for booby traps in houses, use of phosphore shells in inhabited areas ?

I don't get the "you pick on Israel because it is easy" argument. It is not easy ! You are a rich country, you are indeed one of the sole democracy in the region, you have the Shoah as a moral high ground, you have US support... It would be easier to pick on the Palestinians : poor and less educated, a lot of fanatics, violent rhetorics, a taste for martyrdom. If we wanted a bully, we would pick the one without assault tanks and patriot missiles ! Most of "us" are neither jewish (in the sense of "of jewish faith") nor muslims. Most of "us" find bearded fanatics to be despicable, whatever book they read from. Most of "us" however would like a world where there is no "us" vs "you" vs "them".

The goal that most diplomats worked toward during the second part of the 20th century was to replace armed conflicts by legal process as a mean of solving international disputes. That is a long idealistic work. It takes time, it takes many pieces to be put together. The picture is really bigger than the minuscule state of Israel and the land of Palestine. These diplomats are only interested by this conflict in order to make it end. And they point at where international law is not obeyed. It is not obeyed when the Hamas launches rockets to Israel. It is not obeyed when Israel starves civilians in a blockade. Hamas as a result as been added on the list of terrorist organizations (don't forget that the next time you say that some country has sympathy for these terrorists) and Israel is being criticized and a bit pressured. Yeah, obviously the world is biased against Israel.

You know, the day you will reach for goodwill outside Israel in order to help you live peacefully, you will find a lot of goodwill. Everyone agrees that one should be able to relax in a garden on a summer afternoon without fearing rocket shots. And criticizing what you seem to do wrong is really something we think is helpful. Don't dismiss criticism as basic racism. Here is an interesting (French, sorry, don't know about other countries) stat : there are less than 15% of people who declare themselves as antisemitic, but there are more that 80% of people who disapprove Israel's foreign policies. And there is in fact more intolerance against muslim people here than there is against jews.

Just give our arguments a chance. Just consider a bit our point of view. We think, honestly, friendly, as a population that has more interest being in your side than in the other, that you are doing wrong. Isn't it a bit harsh to dismiss these without consideration ?

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby Diadem » Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:01 am UTC

Dream wrote:I grew up in Ireland in the 1980s and stayed until 2005, and have seen the war and the peace.

That merely proves that you ought to understand the conflict, not that you do. You were comparing the Israeli blockade of Gaza with the UK blockading Ireland. I'm sorry, but if you think that's valid comparison you've completely failed to understand the conflict. The UK blockading Ireland would be more comparable with, I dunno, the US blockading Egypt, or some such absurd notion.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

Adamah
Posts: 85
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 1:40 am UTC
Location: DC

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby Adamah » Thu Jun 03, 2010 1:21 am UTC

Iv wrote:You know, the day you will reach for goodwill outside Israel in order to help you live peacefully, you will find a lot of goodwill. Everyone agrees that one should be able to relax in a garden on a summer afternoon without fearing rocket shots. And criticizing what you seem to do wrong is really something we think is helpful. Don't dismiss criticism as basic racism. Here is an interesting (French, sorry, don't know about other countries) stat : there are less than 15% of people who declare themselves as antisemitic, but there are more that 80% of people who disapprove Israel's foreign policies. And there is in fact more intolerance against muslim people here than there is against jews.

Just give our arguments a chance. Just consider a bit our point of view. We think, honestly, friendly, as a population that has more interest being in your side than in the other, that you are doing wrong. Isn't it a bit harsh to dismiss these without consideration ?


I'm going to start at the bottom of your post because I'd rather start on a positive note than a negative. I agree that most of the criticism directed at Israel is not anti-semitic, and I even think a lot of it is understandable. I'm also glad to hear that, current policy aside, the critics of Israel would like to see a peaceful, friendly relationship with the country.

Iv wrote:I don't get the "you pick on Israel because it is easy" argument. It is not easy ! You are a rich country, you are indeed one of the sole democracy in the region, you have the Shoah as a moral high ground, you have US support... It would be easier to pick on the Palestinians : poor and less educated, a lot of fanatics, violent rhetorics, a taste for martyrdom. If we wanted a bully, we would pick the one without assault tanks and patriot missiles ! Most of "us" are neither jewish (in the sense of "of jewish faith") nor muslims. Most of "us" find bearded fanatics to be despicable, whatever book they read from. Most of "us" however would like a world where there is no "us" vs "you" vs "them".

The goal that most diplomats worked toward during the second part of the 20th century was to replace armed conflicts by legal process as a mean of solving international disputes. That is a long idealistic work. It takes time, it takes many pieces to be put together. The picture is really bigger than the minuscule state of Israel and the land of Palestine. These diplomats are only interested by this conflict in order to make it end. And they point at where international law is not obeyed. It is not obeyed when the Hamas launches rockets to Israel. It is not obeyed when Israel starves civilians in a blockade. Hamas as a result as been added on the list of terrorist organizations (don't forget that the next time you say that some country has sympathy for these terrorists) and Israel is being criticized and a bit pressured. Yeah, obviously the world is biased against Israel.


I'm going to tell you something that I don't think critics of Israel understand. I think it's something that only Israelis understand - Israel is afraid. Yes, Israel is rich, is supported by America, and has patriot missiles while the Palestinians have rocks, but Israel is afraid. Why? Because it isn't a conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. It is a conflict between Israel and those who wish Israel didn't exist, which is a large part of the Arab and Muslim world. And compared to Israel, the Arab world is far richer, has far more diplomatic power, has a larger army, and has more people. You see the conflict and see Big Israel beating up on little palestine, and it is so easy to sympathize with the underdog. Israelis see little israel and Big Arab World, and they are afraid.

And Israel should be afraid, because although you say that the 20th century was a time of replacing armed conflicts with legal process, how often did that actually happen? Where was the League of Nations when Italy invaded Ethiopia, or when Japan conquered East Asia? Where was the UN when China invaded Tibet? When Iraq invaded Iran and used chemical weapons on them, the world threw their support behind Iraq. Why? Politics, power, national interest, indifference. No government wanted to risk war with Italy to save some distant, impoverished African country. Nobody wanted to risk their political ties to the most populous country on Earth (China) to protect the self-determination of a sparse mountainous tribe (Tibet). Nobody wanted to stand up for what was right in the face of what was profitable. The Jews know this best, just look at their history for the past 2,000 years and you can how little justice there is in this world. There is only justice when it is in your interest, and Israel, a country of 7 million people with no oil, just doesn't have enough to make it worth anyone's interest compared to 1 billion people and a whole lot of oil. These aren't distant memories either. Just look at all the atrocities happening across the globe today that the world turns a blind eye to.

So Israel sees this, and it thinks - will we become one of these atrocities that the world turns a blind eye to? If the armies of the Arab world coming marching through our borders 50 years from now, as they've done multiple times already, will the UN condemn us again and watch Tel-Aviv burn? In Israel's view, the only safety it can rely on is the safety it can give itself. That's why it holds onto the territories still - because it is afraid to let go. If you lived in a country 15 kilometers wide, where a sniper across the border could shoot anyone walking around the streets of the capital (and where quite a few Palestinians would happily try to), where your neighbors sing songs about how they will conquer your land, and where they've actually tried to several times in the recent past, you'd be scared too. Many on the far right in Israel see this whole conflict as one long war that started in 1948, and handing over the territories as the equivalent of a retreat.

And there's a lot of evidence to suggest they might be right. What guarantees does Israel have of peace and security? Israel withdrew from Lebanon, certified by the UN, and in 2006 Hezbollah attacked. Israel withdrew from Gaza, and in return the Gazans vote for an Islamist government that states quite clearly there will be no peace until Israel is under Islamist control, and (surprise surprise) they start launching rockets at Israel. Any Muslim leader looking for a boost in popularity need only attack Israel and they'll be cheered. And anyone who thinks this is because of the occupation is naive. It is because of Israel itself, a Jewish state where Muslims once had control.

And when the UN constantly condemns Israel, it just makes Israel feel more isolated, it just proves the point that Europe would sell Israel for a barrel of oil, and it just reinforces the belief that Israel can't trust its security to international law. Look at UN Resolution 3379 passed in 1975 which equates zionism with racism, and wasn't revoked until 1991. Look at the global condemnation of Israel when it fought a defensive war against Hezbollah just to try to stop them from launching rockets at Israeli cities. Look at the calls for boycott and divestment. Who condemned the activists who tried to stab, beat, and shoot Israeli soldiers?

That is the difference between the European view and the Israeli view. Today, the Europeans live in a post-conflict world. There is no threat of an army marching on Paris. You will never be exiled and your family will never be killed. But in Israel these are possibilities. Slim, but quite real.

I don't want to make the situation sound so bleak. I'm merely highlighting the difference in views. The majority of Israelis understand that regardless of the danger, they need to put their faith in peace. The alternative, isolation, would lead to certain doom. But they look across the aisle and see Palestinians who want them dead. These are the people they should lift a blockade on? The ones who just a couple years ago launched thousands of rockets at us, and have said they will do it again? That's an uncomfortable thought, especially when the world gives Israel no support or guarantees. And honestly the Palestinians are more than happy to stall while world anger at Israel grows.

If you want to see progress toward peace, start giving Israel the guarantee of security that it needs in order to make the tough decisions that will lead to peace. Stop the calls for boycott and divestment. Stop threatening to prosecute its leaders as war criminals. Legitimate criticism is reasonable, and I assure you that Israeli leaders get quite a bit of it domestically, but be fair about. But above all, the world needs to make it clear that they will stand by Israel when it is attacked. The world did nothing in 2006 when Hezbollah attacked. That was the perfect time to demonstrate support for the Jewish state, so they know that if they gave up more territory, they could rely on the world for security.

I'm going to close on an anecdote that I think is representative of the right-wing Israeli view. Last time I was on a tour in Israel, our guard was a right-wing religious nationalist war veteran. He was probably the most right-wing guy I'd met in Israel, and he would talk about how the whole peace process is nonsense and there will always be war until eventually one side is driven out or the other is. I then asked him, hypothetically, would he support Israel in leaving all the territories if he knew for a fact that Israel would never be attacked again? "Of course," he said.

User avatar
aleflamedyud
wants your cookies
Posts: 3307
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 7:50 pm UTC
Location: The Central Bureaucracy

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby aleflamedyud » Thu Jun 03, 2010 1:58 am UTC

Dream wrote:The US response is spineless. After the East Jerusalem/Joe Biden fiasco I think they should show some more resolve. Israel isn't going to make an enemy of the US just because the US condemns such a blatant fuckup/crime (take your pick, the difference isn't important here). The US should be showing that it is willing to throw some weight around in the region. Otherwise, why would anyone care about its policies? It certainly shouldn't stand by while other Western nations line up to condemn Israel over this.

Even were the US to back Israel, it should do it, and not vacillate about waiting until all the facts are in. Personally I think it is in the US's interest to pull Israel up short on this one to reestablish some credibility in the region. There won't be many opportunities to do so that would be as easy to sell to Israel itself and Israel supporters in the US government. Couldn't hurt to make better friends with Turkey at the moment either, as the whole Iran/uranium deal is something America will likely only have leverage over from the Turkish end.

Tell me again, O Great Moralist, why the United States should want street-cred in a region whose every nation other than Israel, Jordan, and Lebanon is ruled by some kind of fascist, undemocratic regime -- including the Gaza Strip? Honestly, the US doesn't have to prove it can throw weight around in the Middle East. It already destroyed Afghanistan and Iraq to do that.

Personally, I'm glad that the Obama Administration has maintained its pro-Israel commitments that were given during the presidential campaigns. The United States should not be indulging itself in the kind of Third Worldism that makes some people think Israel alone should be put on a leash while violent Islamofascism/Islamism (use whichever term you prefer, it's the same thing) takes over Turkey. The United States actually has to have an effective and moral foreign policy, so it can't afford that kind of xenophilic indulgence of crying for those who despise our existence.

Iv wrote:I don't get the "you pick on Israel because it is easy" argument. It is not easy ! You are a rich country, you are indeed one of the sole democracy in the region, you have the Shoah as a moral high ground, you have US support...

That makes Israel easier to criticize. A rich country with democracy in a poor region, who have a sympathetic-sounding narrative behind their existence, are easier to resent for existing than poor people with no human rights. That which is pitied will not be criticized but lauded, and that which is resented for its success will be bullied.

By the way, here is another video I found on YouTube. Those are still "improvised" weapons, but they're definitely weapons. These people definitely prepared and intended for a violent confrontation. If you want to disbelieve and disregard the video evidence because it's made and published by IDF, go ahead. Personally, I'm happy that the IDF finally got its act together enough to take video evidence of their claims at all.
Last edited by aleflamedyud on Thu Jun 03, 2010 2:00 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
"With kindness comes naïveté. Courage becomes foolhardiness. And dedication has no reward. If you can't accept any of that, you are not fit to be a graduate student."

User avatar
RockoTDF
Posts: 582
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:08 am UTC
Location: Tucson, AZ, US
Contact:

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby RockoTDF » Thu Jun 03, 2010 1:59 am UTC

yoni45 wrote:
RockoTDF wrote:It is relevant because the immigration problem is tied to a lot of organized crime...


Again -- that's nice. You still seem to be under the assumption that this is anywhere close to being the equivalent of the Mexican government cooperating with groups firing missiles into American population centres...

...and it's still just as silly of an assumption.

(I mean, I could elaborate further, but I'd imagine it should be pretty obvious as to why a border control issue is somehow not even close to equivalent to a state sanctioning missile attacks against a neighboring state...)


It isn't obvious. The local governments do cooperate with criminals that kill Americans. I think a drive by shooting is less sailient than a missile, certainly. Obviously we aren't going to agree on the comparison and no one else seems to be chiming in, so I'm dropping this.

RockoTDF wrote:Stop yelling like a child. Even if the US does obliterate entire countries (which it doesn't) it at least helps in reconstruction.


Right -- except for some odd reason, since the US occupation of Afghanistan, their life expectancy dropped (as likely did any other metrics of human development). Even more oddly, the Palestinians under Israeli occupation have actually prospered far past many of their Arab neighbors by practically every notable metric.


Prospered? Are you serious? Gaza has no economy, their hospitals and schools are falling apart (thanks to this blockade) and they are being kicked out of their homes via ethnic cleansing in the West Bank.

RockoTDF wrote:
It's actually somewhat hilarious to see you try to justify the US while condemning Israel.

It's actually somewhat hilarious to see you try to justify Israeli actions regardless of my stance on the US or Israel.


Except I haven't actually justified any Israeli actions. Smooth.


I'm sorry that I mistook your constant apologizing and lack of criticism for Israel as justification.

RockoTDF wrote:How much of that is the fault of the US dropping bombs or people bombing their neighbors?


As a result of the bombs themselves? Not sure. But given that under US occupation the US is responsible for the human development of Afghanistan, the US would be responsible for the drops in those development indicators.


Yes, the US would be responsible. That isn't the same as disallowing school books or wheelchairs. The US builds hospitals, it doesn't cut them off from the supplies they need to function. The US tries to take responsibility.

RockoTDF wrote:Depends on the bomb. There is a difference between bombing what you think is a military target in a rural area and bombing a military target in one of the most dense urban areas in the world.


Right, the difference being that the US is careless enough when it comes to civilian casualties to manage to kill way more civilians than Israel in single events (and overall), even though they're operating in environments that are far less dense.



Citation needed about the single events thing.
Just because it is not physics doesn't mean it is not science.
http://www.iomalfunction.blogspot.com <---- A collection of humorous one liners and science jokes.

User avatar
scikidus
Posts: 792
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 9:34 pm UTC
Location: New York, NY
Contact:

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby scikidus » Thu Jun 03, 2010 2:04 am UTC

UPDATE: The site is Yahoo! news, but the story is from AP. People are starting to piece together the series of events.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100602/ap_ ... nstruction

From that it sounds like the activists were ignorant of the rules of conduct during a blockade and thought the Israelis were attacking them, while the Israelis entered thinking the commandeering would be routine, and started shooting people once they were attacked and believed their lives were in danger.
Happy hollandaise!

"The universe is a figment of its own imagination" -Douglas Adams

User avatar
RockoTDF
Posts: 582
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:08 am UTC
Location: Tucson, AZ, US
Contact:

Re: Israelian raid on Gaza-bound aid ship kills 10+ people

Postby RockoTDF » Thu Jun 03, 2010 2:13 am UTC

Whitebeard wrote:I must say that I am absolutely disgusted at some of the misinformed comments I've seen on this thread. I can't say I'm surprised though. Someone mentioned on this thread that the argument of media bias is getting old, but that doesn't make it any less true. But how would I know which media is really biased, right?


Fair point, but I think what is different this time is that those of us siding with the flotilla heard the Israeli side of the story first and weren't sold. The way the blockade works (but not a blockade itself) is inhumane. Once people read what was going on they really didn't care what Israel said.

I served in the Israeli navy a few years ago and I participated in quite a few missions, so I know exactly how the navy and the IDF in general work. I personally participated in the seizure of another vessel or two in the past that attempted to violate the blockade, and while none of those incidents ended up like this one, they still stirred a lot of anti Israeli sentiments in the world.


Because the banned items list is ridiculous. It isn't the blockade, it is what is being blocked.

I've seen too much bullshit on this thread to comment on everything but I will say this: the IDF really is the most moral army in the world. Not only that, but due to the unreasonable and unproportional criticism it has been getting in recent years, its methods are constantly growing more efficient and less costly in terms of human life - usually at the cost of increased risk to Israeli soldiers.


Maybe if things were handled better politically there wouldn't be as much of a need for better methods.

For example, in an urban setting, terrorists will often hole up in a building, booby trap the entrances and fire on passing soldiers. The easy solution is to blow up the whole building. This way you don't risk anything, but you demolish the house and possibly kill civilians inside(as someone mentioned, Hamas gunmen often operated in heavily populated areas to make it harder on the IDF to take the easy way out). The harder and riskier option would be to send soldiers inside to clear the building - and this is the sort of tactic we are seeing more and more. Do you know many countries who would constantly put their own soldiers in this sort of jeopardy for the sake of uninvolved people on the other side?


"The other side" - there is a problem. As long as Israel sees the people of Palestine as "the other side" there can be no progress.

It's true that sometimes mistakes happen, but they are exceptions rather than the rule. Also, it's really easy to talk about what Israel *should* have done in retrospect while sitting around drinking beer on the other side of the world, but making those decisions in real time with real concerns and real interests is a little harder. So please, give Israel some credit and don't speak with conviction of which you don't know.


The ships had a long way to steam before they got to Gaza. More could have been done. This was not some sudden situation where they only had moments to think. As I recall they knew the ships were coming for quite some time.

Here are a few more videos from the incident to think about. I haven't seen any of them on this thread:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZlSSaPT_OU&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiWcXwp2Jbo&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFGuwUGaI9o&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9p5QT91QYs&feature=player_embedded

Not that they will matter to people who only see what they want to see. I was particularly amused by the comments people made earlier about how the nightvision goggles, bulletproof vests and gas masks found on the ship didn't necessarily mean that it was carrying more than aid. But I guess people only see what they want to see. Work your self delusive magic on this one: there were also flashbang grenades on the ship. You can see the flasbangs going off next to the commandos in some of the videos.
Another fact that no one seems to have mentioned is that some of the commando's were also injured pretty badly. One of them was thrown off the deck(you can see this in the videos) and he later needed some major back surgery. There were a few broken arms, stab wounds and at least one of them was shot by the so-called peace activists. Whether this was with a gun stolen from the commandos or with a gun they already had on board I don't know.


How do we know who was using flashbangs? I want to see full videos before coming to any conclusions about what was found where, who started getting violent first, etc.
Just because it is not physics doesn't mean it is not science.
http://www.iomalfunction.blogspot.com <---- A collection of humorous one liners and science jokes.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Leovan, pex and 8 guests