The Uncola
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2010
- Messages
- 718
- Reaction score
- 255
- Location
- Minnesota
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Liberal
It's not about "personal prejudice," it's about facts and truth. The facts and truth are that the vast majority of the problem lies with the Arab world, they have committed the most faults and thus one cannot say that the blame is equally distributed between both sides. How many wars did Israel start? How many treaties and peace agreements did they go along with? Heck, they gave Gaza away in the hopes of peace and it turned into a hell hole run by terrorists because they people chose that. The problem lies majority with the Arab world and the Palestinians, Israel gets screwed in the process and is guilty until proven guilty just as Netenyahu said.
Other's opinions are wrong and not based on facts. The fact is what I have stated, Israel gets screwed by treaties and is guilty until proven guilty in the eyes of the Arab nations and the UN. There is a different between feelings and facts. Looking objectively at what is presented would vindicate Israel and expose the UN and Arab nations for the hypocrisy that they are.Opinions are neither "facts" or "truths" simply by you saying so. (or anyone else for that matter) They are merely opinions. People's prejudices cloud that reality.
Other's opinions are wrong and not based on facts. The fact is what I have stated, Israel gets screwed by treaties and is guilty until proven guilty in the eyes of the Arab nations and the UN. There is a different between feelings and facts. Looking objectively at what is presented would vindicate Israel and expose the UN and Arab nations for the hypocrisy that they are.
So you have been fine with the boarding if it happened within some 12 mile limit. Seems like you then generally agree with what Israel did.
I wouldn't have agreed either way, but at least if it happeend in Israeli watesr then it wouldn't have violated international law. Israel screwed themselves.
Q&A: Is Israel's naval blockade of Gaza legal? | ReutersQ&A: Is Israel's naval blockade of Gaza legal?
LONDON (Reuters) - Israel has said it will continue a naval blockade of the Gaza Strip despite growing global pressure to lift the siege after a navy raid on a Turkish ferry carrying aid killed nine activists this week.
World
What is the legality of the blockade and did Israel's intervention breach international law? Below are some questions and answers on the issue:
CAN ISRAEL IMPOSE A NAVAL BLOCKADE ON GAZA?
Yes it can, according to the law of blockade which was derived from customary international law and codified in the 1909 Declaration of London. It was updated in 1994 in a legally recognized document called the "San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea."
Under some of the key rules, a blockade must be declared and notified to all belligerents and neutral states, access to neutral ports cannot be blocked, and an area can only be blockaded which is under enemy control.
"On the basis that Hamas is the ruling entity of Gaza and Israel is in the midst of an armed struggle against that ruling entity, the blockade is legal," said Philip Roche, partner in the shipping disputes and risk management team with law firm Norton Rose.
WHAT ARE INTERNATIONAL WATERS?
Under the U.N. Convention of the Law of the Sea a coastal state has a "territorial sea" of 12 nautical miles from the coast over which it is sovereign. Ships of other states are allowed "innocent passage" through such waters.
There is a further 12 nautical mile zone called the "contiguous zone" over which a state may take action to protect itself or its laws.
"However, strictly beyond the 12 nautical miles limit the seas are the "high seas" or international waters," Roche said.
The Israeli navy said on Monday the Gaza bound flotilla was intercepted 120 km (75 miles) west of Israel. The Turkish captain of one of the vessels told an Istanbul news conference after returning home from Israeli detention they were 68 miles outside Israeli territorial waters.
Under the law of a blockade, intercepting a vessel could apply globally so long as a ship is bound for a "belligerent" territory, legal experts say.
CAN ISRAEL USE FORCE WHEN INTERCEPTING SHIPS?
Under international law it can use force when boarding a ship.
"If force is disproportionate it would be a violation of the key tenets of the use of force," said Commander James Kraska, professor of international law at the U.S. Naval War College.
Israeli authorities said marines who boarded the Turkish vessel Mavi Marmara opened fire in self-defense after activists clubbed and stabbed them and snatched some of their weapons.
Legal experts say proportional force does not mean that guns cannot be used by forces when being attacked with knives.
"But there has got to be a relationship between the threat and response," Kraska said.
The use of force may also have other repercussions.
"While the full facts need to emerge from a credible and transparent investigation, from what is known now, it appears that Israel acted within its legal rights," said J. Peter Pham, a strategic adviser to U.S. and European governments.
"However, not every operation that the law permits is necessarily prudent from the strategic point of view."
OPPONENTS HAVE CALLED ISRAEL'S RAID "PIRACY." WAS IT?
No, as under international law it was considered a state action.
"Whether what Israel did is right or wrong, it is not an act of piracy. Piracy deals with private conduct particularly with a pecuniary or financial interest," Kraska said.
HAVE THERE BEEN ANY SHIPPING DISRUPTIONS AFTER THE RAID?
None so far but the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), an association which represents 75 percent of the world's merchant fleet, has expressed "deep concern" over the boarding by Israeli forces, arguing that merchant ships have a right to safe passage and freedom of navigation in international waters.
"These fundamental principles of international law must always be upheld by all of the world's nations," the ICS said.
It didn't violate international law, it's just people like you who would have been against it even if it was done in Israel's territorial waters(as you're admitting here) that deny it.
I believe Israel has already recognized the right of the Palestinians to a state of their own in the West Bank and Gaza. (The two states solution)Palestinians need to acknowledge Israel's right to exist and denounce terrorism. Israel, on the other side, has to accept the prospect of a two state solution and a Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza.
It's funny that you should say that Israel has the right to defend itself because so did those people on the boat. I will remind this entire thread that this attack happened on international waters.
Why do people automatically assume that boarding a ship in international waters is against the law?I support Isreal's right to exsist and defend herself as a soverign nation, but if it turns out to be true that they did attack this ship in international waters, it wouldn't matter if they used paintball guns or toy laser tag rays guns. They would be in the wrong here.
Why do people automatically assume that boarding a ship in international waters is against the law?
The US does it all the time when it stops drugs-smuggling ships, and it sure as hell is allowed to do so according to the law.
Same goes for Israel boarding a ship that's intending to run its blockade.
I believe Israel has already recognized the right of the Palestinians to a state of their own in the West Bank and Gaza. (The two states solution)
Besides that and a few other points I have found myself in disagreement with, great post.
Don't declare state, Lieberman warns PalestiniansIsraeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman says Tel Aviv would annul previous peace accords with Palestinians if they decide to go ahead with plans to unilaterally declare an independent state.
Why do people automatically assume that boarding a ship in international waters is against the law?
The US does it all the time when it stops drugs-smuggling ships, and it sure as hell is allowed to do so according to the law.
Same goes for Israel boarding a ship that's intending to run its blockade.
I don't have a problem with a nation defending it's ports in their own territorial waters. After all, that's what a blockade is all about.
seems some of the senior players within your government disagree with you:
Don't declare state, Lieberman warns Palestinians
or is it only that israel believes it is empowered to declare Palestine a soverign state
I don't have a problem with a nation defending it's ports in their own territorial waters. After all, that's what a blockade is all about. I do, however, have a problem with any country including my own going "pirate" against a vessel they suspect may be invading their waters or running their blockade but hasn't yet. This is the only sticking point I'd have concerning this incident. Other than that, I support Isreal's right to defend itself against all aggressors as I would any other soveriegn nation.
If Israel had dropped in, looked around, FOUND NOTHING OF CONCERN, and let them go on to the appropriate port... then everything would have been fine.
But Israel dropped in and the crap hit the fan. Israeli soldiers were attacked and contraband (in the form of people without passports but lots of cash, and other cargo) was found. Now, since the boat was obviously an attempt to break the blockade - not only by stating intentions but also by actually attempting to carry contraband (and internationally illegal cargo, in the case of personel without passports carrying large amounts of cash)... I think the seizure was entirely appropriate, don't you? Do you think that when people state their intention to break the blockade and then actually make all efforts to so so, then react violently when authorities try to enact law and order... Israel should then just say "ok, go ahead"?
You're basically saying "I'm fine with Israel as long as they only inspect ships and let anything pass through no matter what happens". So nice of you to accept Israel's right to search ships. Too bad you don't think Israel has any rights beyond that - like, to do anything about what they find or what happens. Do you also think law enforcement should end once a crime has been discovered? Do you believe in law without justice and order?
Just got ask, is this "special relationship" worth the trillions of dollars we've given to them as welfare?
Now besides all that, the economic aid the US gives to Israel is mainly returned to the US' economy through the Israeli commitment in the agreement between the two nations to buy most of its military equipment and gear from the Untied States.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?