Report: Israel attacks flotilla, 10 die

[eskachig]

Originally Posted by Zachstar

They said the raid was botched.

Clearly.

That military has a habit of doing that for starters.

The IDF is among the most professional military forces on the planet. They don't have a habit of botching raids. They do, however, conduct a lot of them which raises chances of occasional failure. Which this technically wasn't as the mission was successful - but the IDF did take unnecessary casualties.

I choose to believe the victims over the military who has already lied about this incident. Of course it has nothing to do with me. but other countries views are very important in this case.

I still haven't seen any good evidence of any lies.

If they opened fire it explains the insane behavior. For all they knew the commandos were there to kill (which they of course eventually did) Multiple witnesses say they opened from the helo first. White flags were raised in the chaos got ignored and people died. Israel ends up being the bully yet again. And now the Gaza operation is a failure. Defend Israel all you want. Wont close the egypt border again.

IDF opening fire from helicopters doesn't explain anything at all. Look, civilians, even an enraged mob, have a hard time dealing with gunfire and taking casualties. You can even see this on the videos - within seconds of opening fire the military has full control of the situation. If the ship was under fire before the boarding started we never would have seen a brawl - the deck would be as empty as possible, with anyone who didn't make it off taking cover. People don't mill about in huge groups when bullets are flying.

As for white flags, what are they supposed to represent or signal? I keep hearing about them here, but I don't understand what everyone means. White flag usually means "come talk to me without fear", or "I surrender". Neither of them seemed to be the intention of those on that ship.

[Castout]

Originally Posted by Dimitrius07

Maximum criticism minimum arguments......boring . Not so effective method, i think its put my head up and not down in fact.

Try saying that if you were born a Palestinian. Nobody chooses to what country they belong to.

If your country just wants to add Gaza to its territory then say so explicitly. I'll like your country even more because it's honest on its intentions.

But punishing civilians is an act of cowardice and gets Israel no points.
And not all Palestinians are participating actively or passively to destroy Israel or wants to harm its people. Most civilians are helpless people just wanting to get by and have a peaceful life. They don't choose where they are born into and they don't have access to be granted other nationalities either. And despite the way Israeli govt may treat them they are as humane as any other Israelis.

The Nazis thought Jews were despicable too and did their best to get rid of them. I despise Nazis because they failed to see Jewish people or any other group of people as being as humane as them.

Sure the Israeli commandos were attacked abroad the ships they landed on but they had the rights to do that as it was done IN international waters and translated to piracy. That was not exercising the state sovereignty. Did Israel first declare that 65 km off the coast of Gaza as a no shipping zone?

Originally Posted by eskachig

First of all, being a democracy alone shouldn't guarantee support, second - Israel isn't exactly a model democracy, and the Apartheid parallels aren't completely off-base. The occupation is a problem, and people are pissed off for real reasons. Neither side seems to be interested in searching for a lasting solution. I'm for supporting Israel for geo-political reasons - because of its situation it is far and away the most reliable ally in the region. But I don't think anyone should hold any illusions that Israelis are angels or anything - though they are probably the least nasty regime in the region.

It's not a question of whether Israel is an apartheid state, which it is btw, but that people have been murdered and so far nobody has been prosecuted for it. Pretty simple, eh?

Agreed - engaging military in action makes you fair game as far as I'm concerned. Civilians have certain protections, but extending them to people actively participating in combat is just dumb.

Just remember that when the North Korean commandos storm the US.

Strange viewpoint. Yeah, riot cops will not usually fire on protestors who only have hand weapons. Provided they have their footing, and are lined up in formation with shields and gear. They are in a dominant position and are in no extreme danger in that situation. If they are isolated and overwhelmed, then individual policemen are suddenly in extreme danger, and you bet your ass that service weapons would come out. There is no rule that says that policemen have to allow themselves to be killed, and as soon as there is a real danger to their lives, they are not just mandated, but required to respond with deadly force.

Did the people who fast roped into the boat identify themselves as policemen? ARE they policemen? Let me answer that, no and no.

How many cops do you personally know? Have you talked about the situation with them, and asked what their department guidelines say about this situation? The cops I talked to said that the soldiers waited too long to shoot and are lucky none of them died.

The commandos aren't cops.

What lies? What do white flags have to do with anything? If anything, white flags are usually a signal for "we're ready to talk peacefully". In warfare, using white flags to create an ambush usually means summary execution. For reasons previously stated, I find the "firing from helicopters" story highly suspect.

Yes I understand, you only want to murder all non-Jewish Israelis and take no blame for any of it. Well congratulations you managed to murder 10 + of them, must be your lucky day.

I see them protesting Turkish government statements, not celebrating deaths of the activists.

Have you read the Internet lately? Plenty of anti-Palestine vitriol there. Not that you'd notice that since you've already chosen your side.

Yeah, that's a hell of a miscalculation right there, and you'd earn that bullet. What's your point exactly?

My point is if you fight some invaders but not all then how are you supposed to tell the difference between the ones you are supposed to fight and the ones you are not supposed to fight?

In general, as a civilian interacting with military personnel, one should probably assume that a whole lot of pain can and will be brought on you if you misbehave. Also, soldiers usually have backup.

Remember that when police/military of country x mistreat you in some part of the world.

You don't have freedom to ignore authorities, so there is no freedom to take away. You have all kinds of rights and options, but when a cop tells you to do something cooperation is probably in your best interest. And if you come at a cop with a club you will probably eat a bullet for your trouble.

What cop?

You do have the right to defend yourself against police if they are breaking the law, but not unless you are in danger of physical harm - if a cop is illegally searching your car you can sue him for it, but you don't get to throw a punch.

What cop?

Pipes and knives are lethal force, I can't believe you keep bringing it up. Being boarded could be an act of war (though blockade runners are explicitly allowed to be captured, or in case of resistance, sunk), but armed resistance means that one loses protection of civilian status. As for international waters - every blockade is international waters, and maritime laws explicitly allow for it.

So if I break into your home and you defend yourself with non-lethal force it's ok for me to use lethal force against you? Ok I get it now.

What does it matter? 69 miles, 200 miles, it's all the same really.

Yea it's pretty clear that you're willing to bend things to allow Israel murder people.

There are specific conditions that make a blockade illegal, and that's not part of it.

Making murdering civilians ok?

International laws are fairly vague on what happens in neutral waters, as this debate should show. But Israeli military forces have their own laws which they are obliged to follow, just as US military has the UCMJ. Among other things, they spell out requirements that soldiers have to follow in treatment of civilians, and they ostensibly reflect any international agreements that a nation may be part of.

Good thing they have their own set of laws, it's very handy when murdering civilians in international waters.

Well, not really. You can be detained in international waters for a lot of reasons, some of which have been rehashed in this very thread. UN doesn't have a law enforcement arm - it's a forum for sovereign nations, not a super-government.

What exactly are these reasons? Good to know them, I wouldn't want to be murdered by vague Israeli military forces when going fishing in Finnish coastal waters.

It really doesn't matter what you know, or whether you meant to kill someone or merely wound. Attacking someone with a knife is assault with a deadly weapon (btw, merely threatening someone with a knife is assault), and in general not just cops, but civilians, would usually have a legal right to apply lethal force in self defense.

It really doesn't matter what you know, or whether you meant to kill someone or merely wound. Invading someone's home and shooting them with live ammunition is assault with a deadly weapon (btw, merely threatening someone with a gun is assault), and in general not just cops, but civilians, would usually have a legal right to apply lethal force in self defense.

Indeed. This is silly to even talk about. When someone is beating you with a baseball bat, you should assume they are trying to kill you and act accordingly, it's just common sense.

Indeed. This is silly to even talk about. When someone is invading your home and shooting at you with live ammunition, you should assume they are trying to kill you and act accordingly, it's just common sense.

Huh? What would asking Turkey to inspect ships accomplish? And besides, whether ships were inspected or not, Isreal would still be enforcing the blockade. Because otherwise it's not a blockade!

Duuuh! To find out what is being transported!

What is your point? Clubs are deadly weapons you know. In the course of human history, millions have been clubbed to death. A human skull is sort of a fragile thing.

So when your home is invaded you will not use blunt instruments to defend it, I get it now.

[GoldenRivet]

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

It's not a question of whether Israel is an apartheid state, which it is btw, but that people have been murdered and so far nobody has been prosecuted for it. Pretty simple, eh?

We are a long way from clearing this who was right and who was wrong mess up, for the time being i think we all should try to refrain from playing Monday morning quarterback and let the officials within the international community handle this.

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

Just remember that when the North Korean commandos storm the US.

You are delusional beyond clinical measure.

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

Did the people who fast roped into the boat identify themselves as policemen? ARE they policemen? Let me answer that, no and no.

they identified themselves and gave orders to divert from a dangerous blockade area

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

The commandos aren't cops.

no, they are however authority figures.

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

Yes I understand, you only want to murder all non-Jewish Israelis and take no blame for any of it. Well congratulations you managed to murder 10 + of them, must be your lucky day.

I dont think anyone except for you in this entire thread has called for anyone to be murdered

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

Have you read the Internet lately? Plenty of anti-Palestine vitriol there. Not that you'd notice that since you've already chosen your side.

Have you? the internet is filled with anti-_______ vitriol everywhere (fill in the blank with any racial, ethnic, religious, political etc group you want).

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

My point is if you fight some invaders but not all then how are you supposed to tell the difference between the ones you are supposed to fight and the ones you are not supposed to fight?

Lets illustrate it for you to make it easier

A Legitimate authority figure >>> CLICK <<<

NOT a legitimate authority figure >>> CLICK <<<

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

Remember that when police/military of country x mistreat you in some part of the world.

We usually have the intelligence capacity to avoid those parts of the world, unlike the individuals attempting to run the blockade.

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

What cop?

the cop thing is an analogy. see here and here its a frequently used form of communication which generally simplifies an idea or concept so that it is more easily understood by others who may be detached from the original idea or concept.

keep in mind, analogy use rarely works with people like yourself.

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

So if I break into your home and you defend yourself with non-lethal force it's ok for me to use lethal force against you? Ok I get it now.

if you are just plane old OTH... no

If you are an authority figure attempting to ascertain whether or not a law has been violated.. yes

rule number one when you are attacked by another human being is to assume that this person's intention is to cause death or serious - possibly fatal- injury

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

Yea it's pretty clear that you're willing to bend things to allow Israel murder people.

as it has become abundantly clear that you are willing to do the same to allow everyone else to murder those who dont agree with you (namely, Americans)

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

Making murdering civilians ok?

the term civilian indicates civility, these individuals displayed no civility that i could recognize. If they had played it smart and spent a whole 15 minutes playing nice im sure this entire situation would be completely different.

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

Good thing they have their own set of laws, it's very handy when murdering civilians in international waters.

The laws of international waters are gray and fuzzy at best... they need revamping IMHO

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

I wouldn't want to be murdered by vague Israeli military forces when going fishing in Finnish coastal waters.

in the highly - and i do mean highly improbable event that such a thing does occur... we promise we will hold a brief moment of silence for you.

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

Invading someone's home and shooting them with live ammunition is assault with a deadly weapon

Who's home was invaded? i must have missed that in the articles.

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

So when your home is invaded you will not use blunt instruments to defend it, I get it now.

No, i will use an M1911 Colt .45

Unless of course it is a uniformed authority figure who has no less than half a dozen times identified himself as such and requested my cooperation.

If one has an ounce of civility in them... it should never even get to the point that an authority figure barges into your home by force.

GR, let eskachig answer, you're just being way too silly for me to answer.

[Skybird]

All those wellmeaning, better-knowing philantropic Hamas-sympathesizers I would like to see answreing one question, after all this talking of how illegal it is that Israel tries to contain an enemy who has sworn to kill it.

If they are expected not launch wars and devastate Gaza in an (probably fruitless) attempt to kill Hamas at least dig them out and chase them away, and if Israel also shall not be allowed to isolate Hamas and to reduce or prevent Hamas being resupplied with goods it could make military or propagandistic use of, and if Israel shall not run a blockade, and shall not return fire when being attacked with rockets aimed at it's people -

what the hell are they allowed to do then to defend themselves from Hamas...??? Disappearing from the face of the planet? Die in silence when Palestine terror rockets hit them?

Many Westerners are so outraged over Israeli media manipulation. But Palestinian propaganda for some strange reason almost never gets critically questioned.

I think, in the end many Europeans hate Israel as much as many Arabs, for being Jewish, and for being there, just that the first hate it passively, and the latter actively. Arabs and Persians want to overthrow Israel by their own deed. Europeans are willing to let it happen. Both are partners in crime founded on antisemitism.

As far as Israel is concerned, some years ago I wrote in an essay that the historic circumstances of it'S foundation were choosen stupid, and that the position of Israel is so very exposed and hard to defend that in the long run it's strategic chnaces for survival tend to point towards nill. I was laughed about. Some time later I pointed out that military historian van Crefeld thinks similiar (no wonder he is so much hated in Israel), and again I came under fire. But you see, until Israel falls, I see no alternative to Israel trying to survive - what else could be expected of it? That it just raises its hands and says "shoot me"?

Also, people thinking that if the Palestinians would get their own state or if Israel would simply disappear, the great love epidemic wouold break out in the ME and there would be peace all of a sudden, only illustrate that they do not know that in that region a militant conflict is burning since centuries that goes far beyond the Israeli state, that is a thing between Sunni and Shia, and in which Israel and the Palestinians' fate play a remarkably small role only. Currently, Iran and Saudi Arabia fight a proxy war over Palestine. with Israel and the Palestinians gone, that easily could become a hot war again.

There is a reason why several arab states have arranged themselves with the existence of Israel. they have learned that they could live with it without being put into danger by it.

With Iran, that is something completely different.

Skybird,

how come you never discuss matters with others? You just spew your page-long texts as if expecting people to go "Yea this dude rocks, I agree with him!". Are you afraid that by debating you would have to find factual base for your racist views and you know how that is impossible so you just debate with yourself?

How??? I suppose maybe you mean emotionally affected.

How on earth could industry be emotionally affected?
Note that I was talking about events in the middle east over the years and the way they have impacted globally. These events in the middle east impact globally because they hit people and business all round the world right where they notice it hurts.

This... is not really true. There are indeed a lot of strange procedural weirdnesses with Gaza supplies, but for the most part the important stuff gets through.

"for the most part" isn't good enough, the legal obligations are very clear which is why I asked Golden Rivet earlier about the legal status of the territory in question.

From the BBC:

Look at the words, " largely been able to continue to transport basic supplies such as flour and cooking oil", "Israel generally allows medicines into Gaza.", " 15-30% of essential drugs out of stock over 2009"
Any single one of those shows that Israel is failing in its legal obligations, though you could go further and do the UN complaining that their essential humanitarian goods are being stopped, you can go to the ICRC where they complain about essential medicines and spare parts for hospital equipment being blocked, you can go to the WHO and see them complain about malnutrition and vitamin deficiency caused by the blocking of essential humanitarian aid, youcan go to the Israeli courts and see the repeated complaint that despite a ruling that Israel is obliged to supply 60% of the required fuel for electricity generation it consistantly fails to deliver even that.

but in general Israel lets all food and medicine through.

Which is it? in general or all.
If you look around on the link you provided you will see that "in general" doesn't make the grade and "all" isn't even on the bill.

Oh, and here is the offer Israel's navy made to the activists before boarding:

So what? Firstly they were still in international waters, secondly the whole rationale behind the protest(apart from the crazy nuts) is that Israels standing offer to ship goods falls very short of what is required.

I'm actually with you on this, I don't think this blockade will accomplish Israel's goals.

Oh dear, you have just weakened Israels case if it by some chance had waited until the ships were within its jurisdiction.

Embargo and blockade are not the same thing,

I know, but many have been playing mix and match to try and justify the actions.
Bibi did it just yesterday with an entirely different embargo, blockade, two resolutions and three bi-laterals which he portrayed as not only one single thing but also portrayed as the same as this current episode.

and the mechanism you outline makes the tactic of a naval blockade completely pointless.

It all depends on the legal status of any actions, which comes back again and again to the limits of jurisdiction which may possibly be applied in this case which are the territorial waters and contiguous zone, plus of course the legal status of the both Israel and the territory in question, not forgetting the legal obligations Israel carries which affect the legality of its customs actions(which in effect is what this "blockade" really is).
To which you must add the practicalities and effeciveness(which also affect the legal issues).

As I have said, the middle east is a very complex mess, this incident alone is chock full of little pitfalls which completely change the game, anyone taking the ridiculous interchangable Israel/arab good/bad approach is in effect just showing their blind hatred for one side or the other and lack of rational thought.

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

no, they are however authority figures.

Define authority figure. Does that cover like for example in your case, catholic priests, and stuff? WTH exactly is an authority figure?

I dont think anyone except for you in this entire thread has called for anyone to be murdered

Besides you, Skybird, eskachig, etc.

Have you? the internet is filled with anti-_______ vitriol everywhere (fill in the blank with any racial, ethnic, religious, political etc group you want).

How about right here in Subsim? Check out the "a story about patriotism". Btw, how about I start supporting Stormfront nazis in Texas? You ok with that?

Lets illustrate it for you to make it easier

A Legitimate authority figure >>> CLICK <<<

NOT a legitimate authority figure >>> CLICK <<<

Oh that's just too funny. How about this guy?

We usually have the intelligence capacity to avoid those parts of the world, unlike the individuals attempting to run the blockade.

How about the English that the Americans fought to gain their independence? And the indians? Eh, how about the whole cowboy vs. indian - thing? I mean, they were ruthless savages and they just had to be exterminated for freedom to flourish, right?

keep in mind, analogy use rarely works with people like yourself.

Dude, I know what analogy is. You were saying that these commandos have the same rights as say cops in US. They don't. End of story.

if you are just plane old OTH... no

If you are an authority figure attempting to ascertain whether or not a law has been violated.. yes

rule number one when you are attacked by another human being is to assume that this person's intention is to cause death or serious - possibly fatal- injury

What the hell is an "authority figure"?! Do North Korean commissars qualify as "authority figures" who can bust into your house on a hunch and shoot you to death?

as it has become abundantly clear that you are willing to do the same to allow everyone else to murder those who dont agree with you (namely, Americans)

Where are Americans being murdered? Or Israelis for that matter? All I see are aggressive wars and murderous acts committed by these two nations.

the term civilian indicates civility, these individuals displayed no civility that i could recognize. If they had played it smart and spent a whole 15 minutes playing nice im sure this entire situation would be completely different.

They were in INTERNATIONAL WATERS.

The laws of international waters are gray and fuzzy at best... they need revamping IMHO

It's clear enough for people who are against murdering civilians.

in the highly - and i do mean highly improbable event that such a thing does occur... we promise we will hold a brief moment of silence for you.

You and the rest of your split personality?

Unless of course it is a uniformed authority figure

Ok I get it, you're into big dudes in leather, you've made it very clear.

[eskachig]

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

It's not a question of whether Israel is an apartheid state, which it is btw, but that people have been murdered and so far nobody has been prosecuted for it. Pretty simple, eh?

I was talking about generalities, not this particular situation.

Just remember that when the North Korean commandos storm the US.

In case of a Red Dawn style invasion of mainland US, should I choose to participate in partisan activities, my death at the hands of North Korean troops will not be illegal, yes - provided I'm not surrendering or a prisoner that is. Partisans aren't civilians.

Did the people who fast roped into the boat identify themselves as policemen? ARE they policemen? Let me answer that, no and no.

They identified themselves as Israeli Navy, were in radio contact with the captain of the vessel, who gave clear intent of running the blockade. Nobody should have been surprised by anything.

The commandos aren't cops.

No kidding, they showed amazing restrained. Cops aren't this disciplined or well trained.

Yes I understand, you only want to murder all non-Jewish Israelis and take no blame for any of it. Well congratulations you managed to murder 10 + of them, must be your lucky day.

How the hell did you get that from anything I said? Your leaps of logic are beyond me. There are 9 dead and not all of them are Israelis?

Have you read the Internet lately? Plenty of anti-Palestine vitriol there. Not that you'd notice that since you've already chosen your side.

What's funny is that I'm pretty much in the middle, and only look conservative next to people like you. From where I am I can see very clearly that there is tons of vitriol on both sides.

My point is if you fight some invaders but not all then how are you supposed to tell the difference between the ones you are supposed to fight and the ones you are not supposed to fight?

I don't think you're supposed to fight anyone unless you are prepared for the consequences. Cops and Soldiers are supposed to be cognizant that death is a real possibility. Anyone that wishes to open hostilities on a national military force should be as well. It's also the military's job to retain absolute monopoly on force, to make resistance simply retarded. Israel failed to present this equation adequately in this scenario.

And yes, some times one is simply forced to fight and that's all there is to it, it's either fight or die. This was not one of those times, and if the activists thought it was - well that was a miscalculation.

Remember that when police/military of country x mistreat you in some part of the world.

I don't understand what you are trying to say. If I'm mistreated by police/military in some part of the world I hope I escape with my life, and I don't have many illusions about fighting my way through the authorities of some foreign nation. Yes, I do have every expectation that trying to attack a policeman or soldier in any nation is quite likely to get me killed. In some situations I may have to regardless.

What cop?
What cop?

If you read my original message - you can see that I'm responding to your comment about Americans, cops, and rights.

So if I break into your home and you defend yourself with non-lethal force it's ok for me to use lethal force against you? Ok I get it now.

False analogy. First, the situation you are describing isn't actually defense, it's preemptive attack. In some situations, preemptive attack is justified, in others it is not. Usually the most important factor is reasonable suspicion of intent to harm. If you attack a drunk person who wandered into your house - you are committing a crime, and he does have a right to self defense.

Yea it's pretty clear that you're willing to bend things to allow Israel murder people.

Bend what? Blockades have been standard military operations for hundreds of years and there is plenty of legal precedent floating around. It's you who is suddenly inventing this idea that blockades can only be carried out within sight of the coastline.

Making murdering civilians ok?

Making blockade runners not civilians.

Good thing they have their own set of laws, it's very handy when murdering civilians in international waters.

Murder implies that they went to that ship to kill civilians all along, which is a simplistic and cynical assertion. The IDF laws are publicly available, and do not allow for murdering civilians.

For the sake of the argument, try to separate the decision to board the ship, from the way that mission went down. The soldiers acted completely lawfully - it is not their job to decide whether boarding a ship is legal or not, they were attacked, suffered casualties, requested permission to open fire, and were granted permission. Their superiors who gave permission to open fire, saw their men in mortal danger and did their duty as well. It's not their duty to decide whether the blockade is legal or not either. Their superiors in turn, who set guidelines for interdiction, also clearly didn't intend any deaths as part of the process, so no murder.

Someone along the line may be guilty of negligence and bad planning, but certainly not murder.

What exactly are these reasons? Good to know them, I wouldn't want to be murdered by vague Israeli military forces when going fishing in Finnish coastal waters.

They were posted in this thread several times. But one of those is running a blockade.

It really doesn't matter what you know, or whether you meant to kill someone or merely wound. Invading someone's home and shooting them with live ammunition is assault with a deadly weapon (btw, merely threatening someone with a gun is assault), and in general not just cops, but civilians, would usually have a legal right to apply lethal force in self defense.

Actually yes. That scenario did not apply here.

Indeed. This is silly to even talk about. When someone is invading your home and shooting at you with live ammunition, you should assume they are trying to kill you and act accordingly, it's just common sense.

Also yes. That scenario also did not occur.

Duuuh! To find out what is being transported!

This would be practical if a) Israel trusted the Turks, and b) the vessel could be continuously monitored through the entire passage. As it happens most of the time it's just easier to check ships at the destination.

So when your home is invaded you will not use blunt instruments to defend it, I get it now.

I don't understand what you're getting at. If I feel that deadly force is warranted, and the best weapon around is a club, of course I'll use it.

According to Finnish media a new aid ship is approaching Gaza.

eskachig,

the US police and these commandos do not have the same set of legal rights and restrictions that govern them. US cops aren't allowed to take over ships and blast away at civlians in international waters, why should Israeli military?

Cops aren't this disciplined or well trained.

Riiight, well maybe in US they aren't.

How the hell did you get that from anything I said? Your leaps of logic are beyond me. There are 9 dead and not all of them are Israelis?

Palestinians, I meant Palestinians, or whatever nationality the killed people were.

What's funny is that I'm pretty much in the middle, and only look conservative next to people like you. From where I am I can see very clearly that there is tons of vitriol on both sides.

I'm actually a fervent zionist and Jewish myself but this time I'm making an exception due to the facts of this case.

I don't think you're supposed to fight anyone unless you are prepared for the consequences. Cops and Soldiers are supposed to be cognizant that death is a real possibility. Anyone that wishes to open hostilities on a national military force should be as well. It's also the military's job to retain absolute monopoly on force, to make resistance simply retarded. Israel failed to present this equation adequately in this scenario.

And yes, some times one is simply forced to fight and that's all there is to it, it's either fight or die. This was not one of those times, and if the activists thought it was - well that was a miscalculation.

Well they did die, because they were murdered by the Israeli commandos.

Hey I'm part of the Finnish military force, don't you go opening hostilities against me!

I don't understand what you are trying to say. If I'm mistreated by police/military in some part of the world I hope I escape with my life, and I don't have many illusions about fighting my way through the authorities of some foreign nation. Yes, I do have every expectation that trying to attack a policeman or soldier in any nation is quite likely to get me killed.

What if you didn't have a country to escape to with your life?

False analogy. First, the situation you are describing isn't actually defense, it's preemptive attack. In some situations, preemptive attack is justified, in others it is not. Usually the most important factor is reasonable suspicion of intent to harm. If you attack a drunk person who wandered into your house - you are committing a crime, and he does have a right to self defense.

Honestly, I'm trying to understand this analogy and see how it might be used to defend the idea that the shooting was justified. Are you saying that the Israeli commandos are like the drunk whom I can't attack? But the drunk (Israeli commandos) can attack me with deadly force if I were to fight against the drunk with non-lethal force?

It's still happened in international waters.

Someone along the line may be guilty of negligence and bad planning, but certainly not murder.

Are you saying that just because this is a military operation there is no way there couldn't be murder charges appearing down the line? Why exactly not?

They were posted in this thread several times. But one of those running a blockade.

So I could be killed by IDF in Finnish coastal waters. Ok I get it now.

Actually yes. That scenario did not apply here.
Also yes. That scenario also did not occur.

Actually yes. Both scenarios apply and occured here.

This would be practical if a) Israel trusted the Turks, and b) the vessel could be continuously monitored through the entire passage. As it happens most of the time it's just easier to check ships at the destination.

Well I guess the North Korea is ok in not trusting the South Korea then and is ok in behaving the way it does.

[eskachig]

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

Define authority figure. Does that cover like for example in your case, catholic priests, and stuff? WTH exactly is an authority figure?

Military personnel represent the ultimate authority of a sovereign nation. There is no further expression of temporal authority in the world. They persecute war on behalf of their government, and within their AO they are indeed an authority.

Besides you, Skybird, eskachig, etc.

I'm not calling for anyone to be killed whatsoever.

How about the English that the Americans fought to gain their independence? And the indians? Eh, how about the whole cowboy vs. indian - thing? I mean, they were ruthless savages and they just had to be exterminated for freedom to flourish, right?

How is that related to what he said? What do the revolutionary war and genocide of native americans have to do with anything in this thread?

What the hell is an "authority figure"?! Do North Korean commissars qualify as "authority figures" who can bust into your house on a hunch and shoot you to death?

Military personnel are authority figures of a certain sort, being empowered to represent the interests of their state and persecute violence on its behalf. They are also usually the monopoly on force in their immediate area, which makes them an authority of the timeless sort.

Where are Americans being murdered? Or Israelis for that matter? All I see are aggressive wars and murderous acts committed by these two nations.

Dramatic oversimplification, even if I think American foreign policy in the last two decades has been... shall we say histrionic?

Israel actually suffered quite a lot, especially for its population size. Of course, they also killed more Palestinians than the other way around as well.

They were in INTERNATIONAL WATERS.

They were running a blockade, and even declared so. This isn't even a disputed issue, there are clear laws that allow them to be captured or even sunk, international waters or not.

It's clear enough for people who are against murdering civilians.

Blockade runners are not civilians by definition.

This isn't even a disputed issue, there are clear laws that allow them to be captured or even sunk, international waters or not.

Actually the whole point is that it is not a clear issue and many questions remain on which of the laws Israel claims it used and was allowed to use and which laws it really was allowed to use.
So far most of Israels claims of legitimacy in their action have been full of holes, which when it comes to question of legality doesn't make their claims any good.

Blockade runners are not civilians by definition.

That depends on the legal status of the blockade(which doesn't look good), the nature of the material in question(which also doesn't look good.
So while in essence what you say could be valid, when it comes down to the actual details on which it is conditional it falls apart very rapidly.

Blockades have been standard military operations for hundreds of years and there is plenty of legal precedent floating around.

During those hundreds of years, the laws regarding blockades have changed dozens of times, the only relevant legal precedents are those set in relation to how the law now stands.
Seriously, we have had people citing Napoleonic examples even though those blockade laws went out the window in 1826

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

According to Finnish media a new aid ship is approaching Gaza.

I hope Israel won't back up on this one. They have every right to enforce the blockade, no matter what the UN or the almighty media says. If they intend to run the blockade again against warnings, I say blow the ship clean out of water. That should give the 'peace activists' something to think about. Fricking idiots.

[GoldenRivet]

Torpedo the damned thing and be done with it.