• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged Israel Attacks Palestinian Aid Flotilla, According To Reports

Status
Not open for further replies.
bigjelmapro said:
Yes, because its a legal term with legal implications. Saying it here on top of the other threads does not make it true.
Click to expand...

Wrong. They are collective punishments according to the dictionary definition. You have to bring in other nonsense to try and deflect criticism of it.
 
funk de fino said:
Wrong. They are collective punishments according to the dictionary definition. You have to bring in other nonsense to try and deflect criticism of it.
Click to expand...
Nah retorsion applies better. And a vague vanilla dictionary definition doesn't quite cut it.

And this has been discussed in other threads as well which you were involved in. Crickets as usual in those threads too. I wonder why.

Nice article covering this pillaging of international law

A Critique of the Goldstone Report and its Treatment of International Humanitarian Law

And yeah, covers collective punishment...
 
bigjelmapro said:
Nah retorsion applies better. And a vague vanilla dictionary definition doesn't quite cut it.

And this has been discussed in other threads as well which you were involved in. Crickets as usual in those threads too. I wonder why.

Nice article covering this pillaging of international law

A Critique of the Goldstone Report and its Treatment of International Humanitarian Law

And yeah, covers collective punishment...
Click to expand...

A collective punishment is one where innocents people suffer for the actions of others. The blockade of Gaza is exactly that. Forget your international law and GC handwaving. Be a man and admit it.

My mother used to use collective punishment against me and my brother. She wouldnt have used weasel words to try and deny it.
 
bigjelmapro said:
Nah, I think your statement regarding collective punishment suits this comedy circus better.

Click your heels three times Funk....
Click to expand...

That site is almost a parody site. He he. Remember your boots in Iraq crap as well? You are good at the made up stuff eh?
 
Here we go in simple terms

Militants fire rockets -------->Civilians are deprived of basic goods
 
bigjelmapro said:
Israel and Hamas, the ruling party of Gaza, are in a state of armed and under international maritime law under this state of armed conflict Israel can impose a blockade of all maritime traffic, including both civilian and non-civilian traffic.

Official Israeli foreign affairs position: The Gaza flotilla and the maritime blockade of Gaza - Legal background

This flotilla had stated its intentions to break this blockade so there's nothing 'random' about it.

Comparing the ability to stop most traffic on the scale of Britain against Germany was not feasible based on the manpower and the resources required to fully block all traffic coming in and out of the country/territory in question. With the limited amount of coastline Gaza has, this is completely feasible in addition to advances in technology.

Not using the term effective in terms of finding anything. Its to minimize the ability to Hamas to wage war against Israel and to severely limit their supplies and financial lifelines regarding this ability.
Click to expand...

I know that the blockade meets the old effective requirement. The problem is that that standard is generaly considered to have become defunct prior to the founding of israel.

Its not a tactic of war if one is already in a state of war. Both you and I know the difficulties in applying international rules of engagement and war in general when dealing with asymmetrical warfare, so I would appreciate that we stop drawing parallels between warring countries like WWII era Britain and Germany and that of Hamas/PLO and Israel.
Click to expand...

WW2 isn't relivant. We know the both sides broke the relivant laws there. Thats why Dönitz got off fairly lightly.


How does it miss the point? The UN itself states that ch VII art 41 is their call based on a vote. Judging by their past abilities to enforce the brunt of their initiatives worldwide, the lateness, and once they receive a charter to act on any conflict, I completely think its relevant since its the international body in the world that is looked upon for clearance and its ability to act in areas of armed conflict and humanitarian functions.

Point out where this is not de jure according to international maritime law regarding a state of armed conflict between two (or more) parties.
Click to expand...

Where the UN hasn't oked it. You are argueing that it is that it is de facto legal.
 
Captain.Sassy said:
That's the question. While I'm no fan of reported IDF conduct in the past, you could make the case that firing live ammunition if you were being beaten with sticks and bars could be a legitimate use of force. What might be important here is whether they continued shooting after the protesters had stopped the attack or not, and if they did anything to precipitate the mob attack (other than landing on the boat).

Of course whatever the case the optics of this whole thing are piss-poor. For both sides, mind you.
Click to expand...

Cell phones on one side, typical night vision at at a distance on the other - much like the footage from Iran where the news guys got plastered. Friendly advice, if you are in territory where terrorists might be, do not carry anything that can be interpreted on limited optical systems as any known kind of weapon. To do otherwise is either very stupid, suicidal or looking for trouble.

Also, remember what you see as stopped attack does not meaN - UNLESS YOU HAVE A VERY CLEAR VIEW OF ALL THE AREA THAT COULD BE INVOLVED - the attack is actually stopped. (Sorry about the all caps. but my little finge, left hand is numb and I can't always spot when I have hit caps instead of Aa).
 
bigjelmapro said:
Only shaky, chopped up Turkish footage and 1 camera angle of soldiers on the back deck is used. Oh, and I love the reporting of the x amount of activist camera crew used. Take into account the IDF footage, its pretty straightforward.
Click to expand...
If an attack is broadcast live over the internet by your enemies, that does not really sound like you are in very good control of the battlespace.
Point out where this crying and moaning is happening. Perhaps you can try another angle here.
Click to expand...
My other 'angle' would be that I expect Israel to be more cool and professional.

Commandos getting overpowered, having their weapons taken, thrown overboard sounds like Israel did not really understand their enemy, underestimated them, made critical mistakes, are embarrassed before the world, and further inflamed a region that really does not need any more.

Despite that... Israel never wrong. Ever. Anything at all. Period.

Got that.

Defend themselves against what? Is this a failed attempt comparing the IDF that boarded to Somali pirates?
Click to expand...

Touch a nerve there did I? By tomorrow morning I'll be surprised if there are not political cartoons morphing the Israel flag into a pirate flag. But so what? Clearly Israel as a national entity does not care what anyone thinks.
Paintball guns were used initially, when firearms were used by these activists, as there were a number of firearms confiscated, the gloves are off.
Click to expand...
I completely understand the soldier's right to defend themselves. I am actually sympathetic. They brought paintball guns to a knife fight.
Boarding a ship does not justify such brutality on part of these so called activists. And there is a blockade.
Click to expand...
Sorry what? They hate you. THEY HATE YOU. Yes even extending to the peace activists. Sheesh doesn't Israel get it? and this will make more hate.
The first flotilla did not have these savages on them. So a failed comparison?
Click to expand...
Violence escalates? Should be an old lesson by now for both Israel and Palestinians.
Any other half-baked statements/assertions to shovel through?
Click to expand...

Israel is better than this.
Her people are capable of greater deeds.
Her military is more competent.
 
Wait, so they used too much force AND are embarrassed because they didn't use enough force?
 
Bill Thompson said:
I agree.

I do not buy the idea that they are innocent civilians on this boat. Hammas wants to kill Israel for religious reasons. Anyone who aides Palestine can expect war.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you mean by "kill Israel" but the grievances of which Hamas is an expression are certainly not religious ones.
 
Last edited:
JihadJane said:
I'm not sure what you mean by "kill Israel" but the grievances of which Hamas is an expression are certainly not religious ones.
Click to expand...

As a child, my grandfather came to the US and worked alongside his brother for a few years. His brother returned to Europe after he made some money. My grandfather stayed in the USA because he knew he could provide a better life for his kids. This was sensible. This was logical. This made more sense than returning to a sacred land. What is more, he made this decision before he had kids, before he was married, and before he even found a woman to marry.

Islam teaches to love the land more than the welfare of your kids. Palestinians teach their kids this. They fight Israel for religious reasons. If there was no Islam, there would be no "Palestine".

If there somehow had been a kind of Islamic teachings among Native Americans, the Cherokee would be terrorising the US government and demanding to return to Georgia and reclaim the land that the US government had taken from them. But there is no such a relgion and so this does not happen.

It is all about religion. If believe it is not. I think you have been duped.

Israel had warned this "aid" ship. And yet they walked right into the conflect. Why do you think they did?

Things in this world are not as they appear on the surface. I think the Muslim Aid Group had expected and orchestrated this theatre to generate sympathy. It is how they roll. They have done this countless times in the past. To me this is just like when they would fire rockets into Israel from a school or hospital whilst counting on return fire to kill children and the elderly.

If they generate sympathy within us, they have used their immorality and our short-sightedness to claim a victory.
 
Bill Thompson said:
As a child, my grandfather came to the US and worked alongside his brother for a few years. His brother returned to Europe after he made some money. My grandfather stayed in the USA because he knew he could provide a better life for his kids. This was sensible. This was logical. This made more sense than returning to a sacred land. What is more, he made this decision before he had kids, before he was married, and before he even found a woman to marry.

Islam teaches to love the land more than the welfare of your kids. Palestinians teach their kids this. They fight Israel for religious reasons. If there was no Islam, there would be no "Palestine".

If there somehow had been a kind of Islamic teachings among Native Americans, the Cherokee would be terrorising the US government and demanding to return to Georgia and reclaim the land that the US government had taken from them. But there is no such a relgion and so this does not happen.

It is all about religion. If believe it is not. I think you have been duped.

Israel had warned this "aid" ship. And yet they walked right into the conflect. Why do you think they did?

Things in this world are not as they appear on the surface. I think the Muslim Aid Group had expected and orchestrated this theatre to generate sympathy. It is how they roll. They have done this countless times in the past. To me this is just like when they would fire rockets into Israel from a school or hospital whilst counting on return fire to kill children and the elderly.

If they generate sympathy within us, they have used their immorality and our short-sightedness to claim a victory.
Click to expand...

Where is your argument that it is "all about religion"?

Your posts consists entirely of unsupported assertions juxtaposed with red herrings and non-sequiturs.
 
I'm still waiting for this video freegaza claims to have that shows IDF soldiers shooting at sleeping people.

(Cyprus, June 1, 2010, 6:30 am) Under darkness of night, Israeli commandoes dropped from a helicopter onto the Turkish passenger ship, Mavi Marmara, and began to shoot the moment their feet hit the deck. They fired directly into the crowd of civilians asleep. According to the live video from the ship, two have been killed, and 31 injured. Al Jazeera has just confirmed the numbers
Click to expand...

Link here...

Also

What's up with this fluctuating body count ? Is this just a miscommunication issue ? This morning it was more than 20, now we seem to be down to nine.
 
Skeptic said:
I just want to point out that trying to violate a naval blockade is an act of war against the country imposing the blockade, and calling it "humanitarian" (well, apart from the "kill the Jews" chants, etc., etc., etc.) doesn't get one off the hook.
Click to expand...

Walling up and blockading a bunch of innocent civillians; preventing them from having any real liberty could be considered an act of war too. Please don't act like you are so well versed in the centuries of cultural affairs between these two groups of people that you can even begin to make some proclamation about who is guilty and who isn't here.

Things in this world are not as they appear on the surface. I think the Muslim Aid Group had expected and orchestrated this theatre to generate sympathy. It is how they roll. They have done this countless times in the past. To me this is just like when they would fire rockets into Israel from a school or hospital whilst counting on return fire to kill children and the elderly.
Click to expand...

Right. It had nothing to do with the egregious human rights violations that are being commited in the west bank. Nothing at all.
 
funk de fino said:
I am not using the GC, you seem to have brought thi into it. Is it collective punishment or not? It was definitions you wanted to talk about.
Click to expand...
No, it's not collective punishment.

The wall and the blockades are collective punishment. Am I dishonest for saying that?
Click to expand...
Quite.

Well it is you that seems to use it more than anyone else here. Your definition seems to be different to mine.
Click to expand...
Feel free to quote any precedence for your meaning in the context of human rights.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom