• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Israel intercepts Gaza flotilla, says Hamas

Seems to me Israel has pretty much scored an own goal with this fiasco.
I almost feel sorry for Israel, it just cannot get a break.

Killing civilians on ships under the flag of a NATO member and done in IW? I don't recall the last time I've seen a country so utterly devoted to ensuring its isolation from the world.
 
Andalublue said:
If the UN cannot be regarded as impartial, then who can? --snip-- Perhaps you believe that no investigation of the raids and the deaths is necessary.
Click to expand...

I think you're misreading jujuman13 in this case.


Pretty conclusive "own goal" by Israel so far. Relations with Turkey has soured ever since the collective punishment of the citizens of Gaza started 3 years ago and this has just put the nail into that coffin, most of Europe condemns the actions and the rest of the world seems to agree.

It's left to the US to back Israel once again, my only surprise was that the US actually didn't use its veto and whitewash the whole incident.
 
I think the Israeli government has gone too far. There were many other incidents which shook me considerably, but this one is very troubling. Attacking humanitarian aid people and calling them people trying to "delegitimate" Israel. Calling an aid ship an "enemy ship, intruding into Israeli waters"....My, my, what arrogance.
Also, the US just watched the incident without batting an eye, while it roared in anger when NK tested nukes which killed nobody (I'm not pro-North Korean)......
 
:applaud:applaud
 
Hatuey said:
There comes a time in every country's life where they stop being the oppressed and become the oppressor.
Click to expand...

Whenever you show up, I just know the hackery will be escalated. I wasn't disappointed. Did you listen to the Israeli side of the story before you started hating? No you didn't. The Israeli soldiers went onboard unarmed initially to ask the ship to be inspected.
 
RightinNYC said:
How does that make it okay? See my avatar for more info.
Click to expand...
Well we clearly have a different view on this. I do not know your age but many changes happened because people were willing to put in a stand against what was. You will find this in the suffragette movement, civil rights movement, CND and so on. Civil disobedience is where people are willing to make a stand despite risk because they believe that what they are working for is worth that. A green peace boat got shot at and possibly destroyed by France when involved in such action. What is, is not always, what is right. Civil disobedience has gone out of fashion but it is a powerful force for change. Note how everyone is talking about how the situation in Gaza must change now and that includes in Israel, certainly by the news reports I have heard.


For everything apart from the violence including as I hear people choosing detention rather than deportation, it is appropriate for their objective.

For the violence, I need to find out more. The best strategy is always complete pacifism in such situations. We know one Brit is among the injured. Like all the killed and injured, this is not good.
 
For those who are interested, the text of the UN Security Council's Presidential can be found at: BBC News - UN statement on Israel's Gaza aid ships raid

IMO, the Statement is badly unbalanced and is symptomatic that the excessive bias that has long pervaded the UN General Assembly and various UN bodies has begun to spread into the Security Council. On one hand, it calls for "a prompt, impartial, credible and transparent investigation conforming to international standards" (something I agree with and believe is very much in Israel's interests; if the statement only included that call and expressed regret over the loss of life, it would have been appropriate, but it didn't). On the other, it rushes to judgment before such an investigation has even been undertaken and "condemns those acts which resulted in the loss of at least ten civilians and many wounded" without acknowledging any of the violence by the crew that instigated the whole incident. It also calls for "the immediate release of the ships as well as the civilians held by Israel." That, too, is an unacceptable act of interference with Israel's sovereignty. The small number of individuals who started the violence should be prosecuted accordingly. If, in fact, weapons were present on the ship, those on the particular ship should also be prosecuted for transporting illicit weapons.
 


I think the weapons were sticks and iron rods which were on the boat. Some people apparently also had knifes. Apart from that I have seen some marbles and a few catapults.

I watched a CNN video where they had an expert who talked through the Israel movie. He pointed out that when the first man was getting near the ship from a helicopter the Israelis set off some harmless explosion, can't remember the name, to divert the passengers attention. One of the things I am interested in, is whether the people believed they were under attack. The explosion may well have led them to believe this.
 

The UN is absolutely not impartial. The video says it all. The Israelis were attacked. No investigation is necessary.
 
I don't want to read this whole thread, but where is the evidence that they were armed?

Moreover, if they were in international waters then how isn't defending their flotilla against unauthorized boarding justified?
 
Last edited:

Yes, this same august body made up of representatitives of so many totalitarian states and tin pot dictatorships, having once passed a resolution calling the right of self determination for Jewish people "racism" is now "impartial"?

I can't imagine how anybody could be so incredibly naive as to believe that.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
I don't want to read this whole thread, but where is the evidence that they were armed?

Moreover, if they were in international waters then how isn't defending their flotilla against unauthorized boarding justified?
Click to expand...

The videos show that the people on-board were attacking the Israelis with pipes and bats. They took weapons from the Israelis.

The boarding was not unauthorized, it was legitimate.
 
alexa said:
What will happen if Turkey decides to send another ship but next time with a military escort. Interesting question.
Click to expand...

What will happen if Turkey engages in an act of war?

I imagine it will be recognized by Israel as an act of war.
 



Then I for one would expect Israel to defend its blockade. I think the questions that should be being asked here is 1. What was really on those ships? 2. Why was the stated intent of the so called flotilla to break the blockade? 3. Was this intrusion into the ongoing situation there sanctioned, and approved by the Turkish government?

To answer your question, if Turkey decided to send a ship with military escort, then I think that they would be injecting themselves into the ongoing struggle, and at fault. They would deserve what they get.


j-mac
 
The videos show that the people on-board were attacking the Israelis with pipes and bats. They took weapons from the Israelis.
Click to expand...

So the only weapons they had were pipes and bats?

The boarding was not unauthorized, it was legitimate.
Click to expand...

How so?
 
Khayembii Communique said:
So the only weapons they had were pipes and bats?
Click to expand...


We don't know that conclusively yet. I think it is not only premature to forward that conclusion, but irresponsible in a partisan way to do so.

From the information we do know, the other ships had no resistance, only this one, why?


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Then I for one would expect Israel to defend its blockade. I think the questions that should be being asked here is 1. What was really on those ships?
Click to expand...

I don't think there is any evidence that there is anything but aid. All ships were inspected in Turkey prior to departure.

Turkey is furious. Whether the Government was involved I do not now and doubt but it is angry. It was a Turkish ship. If it had been a British ship our government would have had a responsibility to protect us, particularly if we are attacked on the high seas.

So Israel would think it was worth WW3 you think.

You are American are you not. You should be aware that Turkey is also an important ally of the US.

Israel seems also furious with Turkey. I heard one of their spokespeople this morning comparing the Turkish Government to Hamas. It looks like the friendship between Turkey and Israel may be at an end.
 
reefedjib said:
Until they forcibly took weapons from the Israelis and opened fire on the Israelis.



There have been several posts about it. Here is one: http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...aza-flotilla-says-hamas-6.html#post1058778784
Click to expand...

That cite of international law is incorrect in this case. The ships in question were not merchant vessels or commerial boats, they were humanitarian ships on a relief effort.



donsutherland1 posted that they were required to submit to identification and inspection and refused to do so. They identified themselves but do not, under any circumstance, have to submit to an inspection while in international waters. Israel has no authority to require a neutral vessel to submit to an inspection in international waters. Had they been in Israeli territorial waters, they would have all the authority to make them submit to an inspection. But it happened in international waters.
 
Last edited:

They are not enemy vessels, so paragraph 47 does not apply.
 
Degreez said:
donsutherland1 posted that they were required to submit to identification and inspection and refused to do so. They identified themselves but do not, under any circumstance, have to submit to an inspection while in international waters.
Click to expand...

There is nothing in the San Remo Manual that bars such inspections in international waters. The manual is very specific about exemptions, including those in neutral waters (neutral waters are waters under the jurisdiction of sovereign states neutral to a conflict; they are not the same thing as international waters).
 
Incorrect.

There is nothing that grants power to a State to exercise authority outside its territorial jurisdiction.
http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/closindx.htm
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…