Report: Israel attacks flotilla, 10 die

Having been in somewhat of the same situation years ago?
There would be a way higer body count had I been there!

I have no sorrow for so called pieceful missions
that are nothing more then missions to use the Media to ends
that we are seeing.

The guilty ones are the Media in all ways!
They want news, and the dumb arses provide it.

[GoldenRivet]

Originally Posted by Dowly

You did see the video tater posted, right? The one where the people onboard the ships grab the descending IDF soldiers and start beating them with metal rods? If they were innocent they prolly wouldn't have done that, now would they?

Grab a coast guardsman and start whipping his ass during a safety inspection or some other interdiction.

see how well that ends.

[AngusJS]

Originally Posted by Dowly

You did see the video tater posted, right? The one where the people onboard the ships grab the descending IDF soldiers and start beating them with metal rods? If they were innocent they prolly wouldn't have done that, now would they?

And like stated and again, by watching the video comes clear, they (IDF) were armed with non-lethal weapons, only after they are starting to get beat they draw out their secondary weapons (pistols) and start shooting.

I did. The commandos shouldn't have been on the ship in the first place. That's the point.

Do you have a right to defend your ship which is being boarded illegally? If a US or Finnish ship was boarded, would they not have that right?

If you do not fall to your knees and do not resist?
Your guilty!

You can cry all you want later.
As is going on now.
10 dead?
You are lucky people!

As for the legality of the boarding - there is no question - it was legal.

It would be legal if it was legal, but as it wasn't it isn't. Its outside their jurisdiction and absent of the neccesary international agreement.

But I see the problem you have....

His refusal to divert - knowing that the UN Security Council has not deemed the blockade illegal (and thus it IS legal at the moment)

....you are getting the order of things backwards. Since they have not deemed it legal it remains illegal.
In fact a selection of the the words the UN use about the blockade is unacceptable, unjustifiable, counterproductive and errrr....illegal.

"an act of war by which a belligerent prevents access to or departure from a defined part of the enemy’s coasts.

enemy's coast???
what is the legal status of the Palestinian territories

Doubt it? Look at history. US merchants and at least one warship were sunk prior to the US entry into WW2 -

Totally irrelevant, maritime law has been changed massively since 1941.

Legally speaking, the turkish flagged ships were in violation of international maritime law by their notification of intent to bypass a legal blockade.

On the legal issues it appears you havn't the faintest idea what you are talking about.

If you do not fall to your knees and do not resist?
Your guilty!

Wow police, judge and jury all in one..... Or just sensationalist crap.

[TLAM Strike]

Has anyone read the San Remo Manual on International Law of Armed Conflict at Sea? No? I don't blame you its 30 pages of boring, but it is suposta be an important legal paper.

Well here is the good stuff:

SECTION V : NEUTRAL MERCHANT VESSELS AND CIVIL AIRCRAFT

Neutral merchant vessels

67. Merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral States may not be attacked unless they:

(a) are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture;
(b) engage in belligerent acts on behalf of the enemy;
(c) act as auxiliaries to the enemy s armed forces;
(d) are incorporated into or assist the enemy s intelligence system;
(e) sail under convoy of enemy warships or military aircraft; or
(f) otherwise make an effective contribution to the enemy s military action, e.g., by carrying military materials, and it is not feasible for the attacking forces to first place passengers and crew in a place of safety. Unless circumstances do not permit, they are to be given a warning, so that they can re-route, off-load, or take other precautions.

[GoldenRivet]

TLAM Strike FTW!

[CaptainHaplo]

Excellent post TLAM!

[Stealth Hunter]

[VonHesse]

Originally Posted by Stealth Hunter

Hilarious!!!

[AngusJS]

What if the blockade itself is illegal?

[Stealth Hunter]

Originally Posted by AngusJS

What if the blockade itself is illegal?

Then it all was pointless for Israel to begin with. And they're in a heap of trouble. From what I've heard and been reading, the Israelis opened fire with the paintball guns they had on the humanitarian aid workers and injured a few of them, then were stormed by the rest. The Turks on board were screaming at them not to shoot because they were "raising the white flag!"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/10199480.stm

Well that must excuse it. After all, if I break into your house and shoot you with a beanbag gun before racking up the buckshot after you hit me with a chair, it's you that's in the wrong...

Humanitarian aid ships used to be considered under the old articles of naval warfare as sacred as hospital ships, particularly when they belonged to a private organization or sponsored organization (like the Red Cross). Don't think they've changed that part since the Great War, except maybe for ones carrying ammunition and firearms (which, aside from a bunch of kitchen cutlery and a "Prince of Persia"-looking dagger, they never found any pistols or rifles or anything).

[GoldenRivet]

Originally Posted by AngusJS

What if the blockade itself is illegal?

So far, based on this threads posts, it would appear that the UN has ruled the blockade legal

[Stealth Hunter]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

So far, based on this threads posts, it would appear that the UN has ruled the blockade legal

As far as the actual blockade goes, the UN is debating on whether or not they should be allowed to continue it or not. There's nothing currently going on that's just about this incident, however.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/01/wo...01nations.html