Gaza aid flotilla raid: Turkey criticises Israel report

What ever.

Lame

Im just not for running in circles.

It is what you are doing and what you are supporting, which suggests that you do like it and your country likes it which is why you are still stuck with decades old issues with no progress at all

What exactly fell apart.

Nearly every point you made.

I did not claim anything did not try to explain anything to you.

You made several claims, the majority of them fell apart.

I've read parts of the report, I can't find many inconsistencies.

The main problem with the report is over the nature of the conflict and the status of the territory, which of course leads to the problem of which laws apply.
The secondary problem is the legality of the blockade in the first place, that has been partially recognised by Israel in several of their amendements to the blockade which were violating international law by blocking humanitarian aid.
The report skims over those which is why it is questionable, after all it would legitimise Hamas and their claims wouldn't it.

On a side note it is also interesting is also that a WW2 style total blockade would not be allowed today under international law

Gimpy made that mistake at the beginning of the topic, laws change and after the scale of war crimes during WWII lots of laws changed or were introduced.

There were 2 mistakes Israel did:

I disagree on the second point, special forces were best for what was being attempted.
Plus add a third which came out at the time, in that the raid didn't get the political approval it was supposed to recieve before it was launched.

Especially I am looking for the answer to one question: Why the f. did the boats refuse to enter the port of Ashgod if their intention was bringing goods to the people of Gaza and not only to make propaganda?

Because it was a propoganda exercise, and it worked far better than they could have hoped.
Israel came out with their own propoganda much of which was laughable, they should be much better at it by now.

Anyway: welcome back from the brig Tribesman - though our opinions seem to differ much in this topic

Do they?

[MH]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

It is what you are doing and what you are supporting, which suggests that you do like it and your country likes it which is why you are still stuck with decades old issues with no progress at all

So tell me what you have in mind.
How you propose to solve the issues?

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Nearly every point you made.

You made several claims, the majority of them fell apart.

I did not claim anything or tried too lol.

Originally Posted by Tribesman

The report skims over those which is why it is questionable, after all it would legitimise Hamas and their claims wouldn't it.

So is it good thing or bad?

Originally Posted by Tribesman

I disagree on the second point, special forces were best for what was being attempted.
Plus add a third which came out at the time, in that the raid didn't get the political approval it was supposed to recieve before it was launched.

My god....really...

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Because it was a propoganda exercise, and it worked far better than they could have hoped.
Israel came out with their own propoganda much of which was laughable, they should be much better at it by now.

You contradict your self here......


Israel never was good at the propaganda thingy.
Lying to every one is not our cup of tea it seems.

Originally Posted by Tribesman

The main problem with the report is over the nature of the conflict and the status of the territory, which of course leads to the problem of which laws apply.
The secondary problem is the legality of the blockade in the first place, that has been partially recognised by Israel in several of their amendements to the blockade which were violating international law by blocking humanitarian aid.
The report skims over those which is why it is questionable, after all it would legitimise Hamas and their claims wouldn't it.

The issue is that Gaza is run by partly elected by Palestinians partly won by force government.
The government in fact is a extremist Islamic terror organization.
They oppose any compromise with Israel they oppose PA and work to undermine Palestinian Authority in west bank.
They bombed Israel for 8 years and UN did nothing=where the hell was international low then?
When Israel decided to put end to those bombing we been accused of killing civilians.
It was expected thats one of the reason for the long wait.
Israel must always prove to the world that it has restrains while terrorist because they are terrorist is expected of them nothing.
While we try to blockade them so that would be no need to kill civilians or got forbit terrorist we break international laws.
So who cares what international low says when EU twist it so suit its needs.
The twisted reality is too hard to grasp for average EU citizen anyway.
Is it maybe that EU is afraid of Islamic demonstrations on its streets?

I did not claim anything or tried too lol

wow the 3rd page and you havn't made any claims?
that is as laughable as the megaphone project.

So is it good thing or bad?

It weakens the validity of the report and its claims, if the report is weak and of questionable validity then it is bad.

My god....really...

So you have nothing to say.
Well done.

You contradict your self here......

There is no contradiction.

Israel never was good at the propaganda thingy.

Thats strange, they have had some great results over the years.

Lying to every one is not our cup of tea it seems.

The rush jobs are always so ridiculous they fall apart quickly, when it puts the work in to it its as good at lying as any other govt.

[MH]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

wow the 3rd page and you havn't made any claims?
.

No ...i have a flew and just passing time at home on internet.
That why i even bother to answer you.

No ...

As that simpy isn't true that makes you a liar doesn't it.
Well done

BTW I like your edit, are those more claims you are not making?
Damn, several of those claims you clearly didn't make also fall apart instantly.

[MH]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

As that simpy isn't true that makes you a liar doesn't it.
Well done

Good point.

[Penguin]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

The main problem with the report is over the nature of the conflict and the status of the territory, which of course leads to the problem of which laws apply.
The secondary problem is the legality of the blockade in the first place, that has been partially recognised by Israel in several of their amendements to the blockade which were violating international law by blocking humanitarian aid.
The report skims over those which is why it is questionable, after all it would legitimise Hamas and their claims wouldn't it.

please quote with the names included, otherwise it becomes terrible confusing

That's why I mentioned especially the pages 45-90. I usually struggle with juristic texts in a foreign language, but this is relative easy to read. A brief summary: Israel does not deny that they have an armed conflict with Hamas. The status is that Gaza is not an occupied territoy anymore, since Israel drew his troops out in 2005. So they have no more de-facto control over Gaza, regardless they accept that the 4th geneva convention is valid (page 47)
They also claim that the nature of the conflict is a complex one, and that there are many different positions, but also accept the fact that they are"bound by international humanitarian law" (p. 49) The humanitarian situation is being handled on the pages 64-90.
We are not talking about a siege here, but about a naval blockade, this is a big difference.
So this report makes sense and is conclusive, many positions and also many jurisdictional decisions are being presented. It is not that Israel is a banana republic, their courts are independent.

Originally Posted by Tribesman

I disagree on the second point, special forces were best for what was being attempted.
Plus add a third which came out at the time, in that the raid didn't get the political approval it was supposed to recieve before it was launched.

I still think it was a failure of Israel's intelligence agencies, that they didn't get the fact that the ships had their share of fanatics onboard, who would not give in when hey see military, but rather fight back as a mob. They just didn't calculated in so much resistance. And a situation like this is imo better handled by forces who are experienced in riot control.

About the political approval, I am uncertain what you mean. I can't tell you much about Israel's internal situation and the approval of the people about a situation like this prior to the event.
If you mean the approval of the international community: well, it is often that Israel is painted as the bully, regardless how many measures they do to try to avoid unnecessary (civilian) casualties. Remember the situation in 2008 about the operation Cast Lead. How much you could read in the press about leaflets that the IDF dropped prior to attacks and much you could hear about the phosphorous grenades? Of course you can't avoid civilian casualties, especially in an area like Gaza. However one should recognize IDF's efforts in minimizing these, they do a much better job than many other armies in doing so.

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Because it was a propoganda exercise, and it worked far better than they could have hoped.

My question was more of a rhetorical nature: of course was the flotilla a propaganda coup. If they would really want to help, there were many ways that are more effective. I agree, the propaganda effect they got was more than they had dreamt of.

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Do they?

Well, you didn't state too much of your own opinion yet. I know you want people to think of their own - me either- but it helps a lot to know where your opinion comes from. So what is your take on the whole thing?

[MH]

Originally Posted by Penguin

My question was more of a rhetorical nature: of course was the flotilla a propaganda coup. If they would really want to help, there were many ways that are more effective. I agree, the propaganda effect they got was more than they had dreamt of.

They got their 5 minuets of fame initially.
There are also those that will cling to anything that supports their antagonist views or say that the inquiry was fabricated.

Overall i think the incident showed a true nature of some organizations that try to portrait themselves as innocent peace organization whose sole propose is to fight propaganda war against Israel by manipulating mainly EU public.
It uncovered the hypocrisy of those organization and to some extent the whole Gaza issue.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by MH

Overall i think the incident showed a true nature of some organizations that try to portrait themselves as innocent peace organization whose sole propose is to fight propaganda war against Israel by manipulating mainly EU public.

The Turks - government and Turkish organisations - had a big hand in organising the flotilla from beginning. While propaganda for the EU audience came as a nice side-effect, the main direction they were aiming at from Erdoghan'S and the government's side where the Arab people. By profiling itself as the broker of Palestinian interest and challenging the Israelis, hopefully embarassing them, Erdoghan tried (and tries) to collect support and sympathy from the population in Arab countries, and strenghen Turkey'S influence and the general acceptance for Turkey amongst Arabs (the relations between Turks and Arabs are stressful due to the Ottoman past where the Turkish empire looked down on the Arabs and let them know that it considered Turks to be superior to Arabs)

The flotilla calculation worked well for Erdoghan - both with the Arabs and the Europeans.

His support for Hamas and Hezbollah, his lining up with Iran and calling it a friend, his merely hidden opposition to and suspected sabotaging of Western attempts to contain the Iranian nuclear program, his proliferation of UN- or Western-banned deals with Hezbollah and Iran, and the massive shift in Turkey towards orthodox fundamentalism that the AKP is maintaining, must be seen in this light. Erdoghan sees modern Turkey and himself as the successor to the Ottomans' attempt of becoming dominant not only in Europe, but the oriental region as well, and for that he paves the way by sowing a seed that he hopes will rise acceptance and sympathy for Turkey amongst Arabs. Love for the Palestinian'S fate, has nothign to do with Erdoghan'S mission, but his hate for Israel. When the Palestinians have served their functional purpose, Turkey most likely would let them down like almost all other Arabs did, too, for there is nothing with the Palestinians that is of worth or any kind of potential for anybody, just the promise of future troubles with them. And for Iran, the Palestinians are just a proxy.

The Palestinian government in the West-Jordan-Land, is cursing Erdoghan. They would prefer him being gone better yesterday than tomorrow, for the Hamas in Gaza that Erdoghan supports is hostile to the government in WJL.

However, MH, I see that it is just you and the other. Don't forget to switch off the light once you are done here.

please quote with the names included, otherwise it becomes terrible confusing

The following are all yours Penguin, though I must say its rather funny that skybird seem to have an issue with you, did you upset him by calling his racial/religious bigotry akin to the writings in mein kampf?

A brief summary: Israel does not deny that they have an armed conflict with Hamas.

What is the nature of that conflict? Is it an international one between states?

The status is that Gaza is not an occupied territoy anymore, since Israel drew his troops out in 2005.

That status is very questionable, after all what is the actual status of the territory?
Territory of a piece of land in this context includes airspace and where applicable the sea, what is the position on that?

They also claim that the nature of the conflict is a complex one,

It certainly is.

and that there are many different positions

Which is why they need to get definitive anwsers established on the status and nature of the issues before they can even attempt to claim legitimacy under law as they need to apply the correct laws.
In nearly every case there they are basing their "legality" on a dubious premise.

but also accept the fact that they are"bound by international humanitarian law"

And since the time of the incident they have changed their blockade policies because it was breaking that humanitarian law they were bound by.
If it was breaking those laws at the time of the incident then it cannot have been a legal blockade then.

We are not talking about a siege here, but about a naval blockade, this is a big difference.

It is a land, sea and air blockade, this incident just happened to be a maritime one which was a dispute about the land one

About the political approval, I am uncertain what you mean.

There was a big stink in Israel as events went pear shaped, the operation was set up and ready to go but was supposed to get a final go ahead at ministerial level. It went ahead without getting the final approval.

So what is your take on the whole thing?

On the Gaza issue or the whole mess in the formerly mandated territories?

[MH]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

There was a big stink in Israel as events went pear shaped, the operation was set up and ready to go but was supposed to get a final go ahead at ministerial level. It went ahead without getting the final approval.


On the Gaza issue or the whole mess in the formerly mandated territosries?

You are one of those nazi ufo conspiracy theory suporters i guess.
You dig so hard to find any flaws so you may have reason for your antagonist ideas.
I wonder what really hides there.

[Penguin]

Originally Posted by MH

There are also those that will cling to anything that supports their antagonist views or say that the inquiry was fabricated.

Only people who want to think on their own can be change thier minds. There will always be people who will deny that there is a moon if Israel's astronoms say there is one . But even if Erdogan would be convinced that the report makes sense, it would be a political suicide for him if he says so in public.

Originally Posted by MH

Overall i think the incident showed a true nature of some organizations that try to portrait themselves as innocent peace organization whose sole propose is to fight propaganda war against Israel by manipulating mainly EU public.
It uncovered the hypocrisy of those organization and to some extent the whole Gaza issue.

I believe that there also were activists with honest intentions on the boats. They must ask themselves however why they jumped into bed with an organization like this. Even before the incident it was known that the ship to gaza organization is not neutral, to understate a little... The people who participated just could have informed themselves beofre.
These people became the usefull idiots to show the credibility of the flotilla.

Originally Posted by Tribesman

The following are all yours Penguin, though I must say its rather funny that skybird seem to have an issue with you, did you upset him by calling his racial/religious bigotry akin to the writings in mein kampf?

q??? did I make it on Skybird's ignore list? Don't know. lol if that is true. On some issued I agree with him on others I just smack my head against the wall I don't care what anybody thinks of me, but I leave the name-calling to others

Originally Posted by Tribesman

What is the nature of that conflict? Is it an international one between states?
That status is very questionable, after all what is the actual status of the territory?
...
Territory of a piece of land in this context includes airspace and where applicable the sea, what is the position on that?
...
Which is why they need to get definitive anwsers established on the status and nature of the issues before they can even attempt to claim legitimacy under law as they need to apply the correct laws.
In nearly every case there they are basing their "legality" on a dubious premise.

just read the report, I am not Israel's lawyer, nor do I live there. I just build my opinion about the whole incident.
If you ask 2 experts for international law, you'll get 3 answers, if you ask 2 israeli judges, you'll get 4 . The different point-of-views are all documented in the report
Hamas has the political control over the territory, this is what matters for the Israelis. They are not at war with Gaza, or the palestine territories, but with a terrorist organization that is in political charge and de-facto control over the territory.
But the nature doen't matter in this case. Israek lets goods into gaza. We can discuss if that's enough, or if the wrong good are regarded as contraband. However speaking of starvation of the palestinians or talking about a holocaust in Gaza, seen on demonstrations or heard from arab statements, is not only tasteless but more than wrong .

Originally Posted by Tribesman

And since the time of the incident they have changed their blockade policies because it was breaking that humanitarian law they were bound by.
If it was breaking those laws at the time of the incident then it cannot have been a legal blockade then.

The big problem with the good they let into,is that much stuff can be used for more than one purpose. The example of concrete may be the most obvious, as it can be used for construction of houses and infrastucture as well as for building shelters. Even shelters are dual: they can be used to protect civilians, or to protect fighters or mortar/rocket launchers.
Some stuff may sound crazy on the first look, for example that Israel (had?) allowed no canned food to be shipped into Gaza. But the metal from the cans can also be used for military purposes.
All the reports from international sources that I've seen/read about the situation in Gaza they point to one fact: Hamas gets their hands on the goods first & they organize their distribution. Of course do their supporters get the most, their opponents nothing.

Originally Posted by Tribesman

It is a land, sea and air blockade, this incident just happened to be a maritime one which was a dispute about the land one

Point for you, I meant a blockade is not a siege, regardless if it's on land/underwater/in space

Originally Posted by Tribesman

On the Gaza issue or the whole mess in the formerly mandated territories?

on both, I wrote a little bit about where I come from on this issue, so did MH, now it's your turn