Israel

have they gone too far yet? Im wondering what exactly they will need to do before the international community will take a stand against them.

The IDF stormed a ship bound for Gaza which contained aid and supplies for the blockaded Gaza Strip, killing 9 and injuring dozens.

Their defence? If they let one ship in they will have to let them all in.

Does this excuse justify their actions? The ship had been searched and cleared by the Turkish government.

The latest sickening action in a long, long line of sickening actions from Israel. I just hope the necessary world powers will do te right thing this time.

CONTENT REMOVED: http://foot.ie/faq.php?faq=rules#faq_attribution

Watching coverage on BBC World and Al Jazeera throughout the day and the difference is startling; Al Jazeera far more willing to ask the tough questions of the Israeli representatives they had on and using far stronger language to describe the events. The fairly limp wristed comments from the White House were disappointing if not unexpected.

It would be nice to see this as the tipping point but unfortunately it'll be old news in a few days, and the Israelis know it, which only makes the whole thing more frustrating, depressing and infuriating. That said, the fact there's so many nationalities involved on board the boats makes it a unique situation and means there might be a chance for real action.

It must be hell for those who know that a family member of friend was on board one of the ships and be faced with the news blackout Israel have engineered regarding the dead and the injured.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/mid...t/10195838.stm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010...-flotilla-gaza

here are the links to the articles i posted earlier.

I agree TCM - was very disappointed in Washingtons response - something along the lines of "regret the loss of life". The bare minimum in other words. Huge implications here for Israel though. Turkey was their one ally in that region and they have stormed a Turkish boat and killed 9 people who were there. It will be interesting to see how there policy of deliberate ambiguity will work over the next few days muddling the facts to such an extent that, as you say, it will be forgotten far more quickly than it should.

What will it take for America and Britain to take a stand against their actions? They've gotten away with everything to date. As you say, frustrating, depressing and infuriating.

pretty interesting website regarding military strength and firepower.

http://www.globalfirepower.com/

Sadly can't see the US doing too much unless the Turkish state (who hardly have an unblemished record) decide to take or threaten direct action v.Israel.
Whilst not having much time for either regime, one can only hope it doesn't as the potential escalation in the Middle East tinderbox doesn't bear thinking about.
On a more parochial note, given there was substantial Irish input into one of the boats in that flotilla, one can only hope the likes of Martin propose immediate sanctions v.Israel, both economic and cultural. It's harsh on the average Israeli but they do keep voting for various showers of paranoid c*nts.

And to think people on here were whinging about anti-Israeli publicity when we played them in those qualifiers. They have got off very lightly in the meantime....
And yes, am well aware of various Muslim fundamentalists! But don't feel that's an issue here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

...It's harsh on the average Israeli but they do keep voting for various showers of paranoid c*nts...

---

Not to condone anything they´ve done, but it´s not paranoia if everyone´s really out to get you.

I was interested to hear the Israelis claim that they were acting within their rights to board vessels in international waters. I always thought that the right of free passage was guaranteed by states, but when I had a look at the UN website (http://www.un.org/Depts/los/conventi...clos/part2.htm) it appears there are legitimate grounds for withdrawing the right.

Article 19 [abridged]
Meaning of innocent passage
1. Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State…. [Israel can take its pick of problems here]

2. Passage of a foreign ship shall be considered to be prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State if in the territorial sea [my emphasis] it engages in any of the following activities:
(a) any threat or use of force against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of the coastal State…. [Israel can make a case for sovereignty and territorial integrity being threatened]

(b) any exercise or practice with weapons of any kind; [the IDF claimed its troops opened fire only when threatened by knives and sticks and when crew attempted to seize troops’ weapons]

(d) any act of propaganda aimed at affecting the defence or security of the coastal State; [aside from delivering humanitarian aid, the flotilla was intended to publicise conditions in Gaza; by inference this could result in pro-Hamas sentiment, thereby damaging Israeli security]

(f) the launching, landing or taking on board of any military device; [I imagine it’s quite easy to attribute a military purpose even to humanitarian aid]

A little further on, another article allows a country to take action outside its territorial waters:

Article25 [abridged]
Rights of protection of the coastal State
2. In the case of ships proceeding to internal waters or a call at a port facility outside internal waters, the coastal State also has the right to take the necessary steps to prevent any breach of the conditions to which admission of those ships to internal waters or such a call is subject.


So, if my reading of this is right (and it’s just a layman’s glance over part of the convention, done late at night) Israel has done its homework, and has acted in a legally justifiable way to prevent a threat to its sovereignty.

However…

Moral justification for armed troops to rappel from military helicopters, open fire on civilians, prevent badly-needed humanitarian aid from reaching a subjugated people, engage in propaganda and censorship, and show flagrant disregard for international comity is another matter entirely.

Coming so soon after the Mossad use of forged Irish and Australian passports, and the ongoing disproportionate use of military power against Hamas (whose terrorist activities are also to be condemned ) and Palestinians in general, it is disappointing to see the international community so meek in its response, Turkey and Arab/Muslim states excepted. The US response was typically mealy-mouthed; Cowen stumbled and mumbled his way to asking for an independent international enquiry (repeating the EU line – a safe call); alright, Michéal Martin summoned the Israeli ambassador to account for the incident, but he did the same when the passport scandal broke.

As long as international condemnation of heavy-handed and illegal actions remains lily-livered and ineffectual, why would Israel even consider changing how it conducts itself? No matter that it is becoming an international pariah with a disregard for international law that makes North Korea look like a paragon of virtue, Israel will continue to do just what it has always done.

Except they're not. Or they probably wouldn't be if they'd shown a bit more humility, amongst other traits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John83

Not to condone anything they´ve done, but it´s not paranoia if everyone´s really out to get you.

---

and if everyone is really out to get you then there is usually a pretty compelling reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SkStu

It will be interesting to see how there policy of deliberate ambiguity will work over the next few days muddling the facts to such an extent that, as you say, it will be forgotten far more quickly than it should.

---

The Assistant/ deputy Ambassador was on the Last Word last night and said there were hand grenades thrown and they had pistols - fair play to Savage, who got her to withdraw it, but I'm sure that stuck in someones head (which was the intention). Hook/ Newstalk opened with basically a propaganda piece for the Israeli's, down to the "only democracy in the middle east" crap - the whole reason for the blockade is because they won't accept the democratic decision of the people of Gaza. I think Crowley is back out there for RTE judging from Morning Ireland, so they'll be back "on message"...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John83

Not to condone anything they´ve done, but it´s not paranoia if everyone´s really out to get you.

---

Israel are out to get everyone first though. That's the problem, and now it's the circle. Israel justify their actions because people get píssed off at them for land grabs and what have you, but they conveniently ignore that last part.

It's hard to work out what the hell either side were thinking.

Surely the Israelis should have known that there might be resistance and should have acted much more carefully to account for that.

And surely anyone on those ships would have known that attempting to lynch Israeli commandos was only going to end one way. But then maybe that was the point?

The result is a disaster for everyone except Hamas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr A

And surely anyone on those ships would have known that attempting to lynch Israeli commandos was only going to end one way. But then maybe that was the point?

---

Do you really believe that IDF commandos coughed up a couple of pistols to people armed with, albeit sophisticated :rolleyes: , knives and metal bars? I just don't buy it! Not the brightest to put up resistance, but I don't see how they put up enough that would end in that slaughter.

I was given a hint of this early this morning from a friend who'd told me that going back to the ME would be dangerous as Israel had gone mental again. Only listening to Morning Ireland did I grasp it, and then on PK he had the Deputy Ambassador woman and her counterpart from the Turkish Embassy. If I were a swing voter I'd have gone to the Turkish side as he was a true diplomat. The Israelis have violated maritime law, and the lies that are circulating now will grow legs as the republican and conservative media in the UK and US will spin it mercilessly. Own goal for Israel and what sympathy they had in moderate circles is evaporating quickly. On the OK show she came across as a total creamer and she tried to say they had guns, before quickly saying - taken from the commandos. It will be interesting to see the autopsies on the bodies - and how many suffered single bullet wounds!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr A

And surely anyone on those ships would have known that attempting to lynch Israeli commandos was only going to end one way.

---

I know in the interests of fairness we should mention the official Israeli line but in my view they've forfeited their right to be taken at face value with their numerous lies in the past. If the evidence proves otherwise, fair enough, but until them I'm going to go right ahead and presume the innocence of everyone on the flotilla. Even if that were the truth, it's still a pretty disproportionate response.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SkStu

muddling the facts to such an extent that, as you say, it will be forgotten far more quickly than it should.

What will it take for America and Britain to take a stand against their actions? They've gotten away with everything to date. As you say, frustrating, depressing and infuriating.

---

That's just it- the standard Israeli tactic- muddy the waters sufficently so that by the time the truth comes out it doesn't much matter because some of the mud has stuck. See, for example, Sabra and Shatila, Lebanon. It would be great if some world leader would take a stance. Robert Fisk writes in his column today:

Quote:

---

You only have to read the gutless White House statement – that the Obama administration was "working to understand the circumstances surrounding the tragedy". Not a single word of condemnation. And that's it. Nine dead. Just another statistic to add to the Middle East's toll.

But it's not.

In 1948, our politicians – the Americans and the British – staged an airlift into Berlin. A starving population (our enemies only three years before) were surrounded by a brutal army, the Russians, who had erected a fence around the city. The Berlin airlift was one of the great moments in the Cold War. Our soldiers and our airmen risked and gave their lives for these starving Germans.

Incredible, isn't it? In those days, our politicians took decisions; our leaders took decisions to save lives. Messrs Attlee and Truman knew that Berlin was important in moral and human as well as political terms.

---

Depressing stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

Israel are out to get everyone first though. That's the problem, and now it's the circle. Israel justify their actions because people get píssed off at them for land grabs and what have you, but they conveniently ignore that last part.

---

The creation of their state was greeted with a declaration of war from five neighbouring countries. That´s a curious definition of "first" you have there.

Again, and I shouldn´t have to point this out only this is so polarised a debate, this doesn´t mean I think Israel is justified in much of anything they do. I´m just pedantically objecting to the notion that Israel are the big evil and everyone else is blameless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John83

The creation of their state was greeted with a declaration of war from five neighbouring countries. That´s a curious definition of "first" you have there.

---

I thought it was them jumping the gun and declaring independance that sparked the war? But isn't that the root of the problem anyway - it was "created".

So was Pakistan, so was Northern Ireland. Hmmm, I think I'm detecting a pattern...

Yeah, The word 'Brits' springs to mind!!!
;)

Stupid religious nutjobs comes to my mind (all of them on all sides).

Like John, I'd be wary of passing comment on this due to the emotions on both sides, but in '48 the UN had a partition plan just like the arrangement that will be enforced when the Palestinians get independence, the Jews agreed, the Arabs wouldn't, with the result that the neighbouring countries invaded, so for once the British aren't to blame, even though they carved out Palestine first day. Israel can blamed for this incident, building the "security wall" that annexes half the West Bank and the settlement, but they do have some fair grievances, like that Hamas want to wipe their country off the map and that most of the neighbouring states and Iran continue to refuse to recognise them, so there's fault on both sides that only a two-state situation can solve.