• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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!

Questions regarding flotilla from a neophyte

Zyphlin

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
51,312
Reaction score
35,172
Location
NoMoAuchie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Okay, I am about as noob as noob can come with the whole issues surrounding Israel and Palestine so as I look into the flotilla thing a few things crossed my mind that I'm curious and was wondering if people could give me some answers...

First, is Gaza technically part of Israel that they simply are allowing others to live on, or is that land completely seperate to Israel and technically free in and of itself.

Second, if Gaza is independent from Israel what right or on what grounds does Israel have in forming a military blockaide around it? Is it part of an agreement for giving the land, is it something under international law, is it a case of simply being strong enough to doing it and no one wanting to speak out against it in an authoratitive way, or something else? Basically, why is the blockaide there and how is it legal or at the least allowable.

Third, is Egypt blocking transport in and out of the Gaza Strip on their border, and if not why are people not instead simply sailing to Egypt and then transporting their "aid" over land?

Anyone know some answers for these, as I imagine it will help remove some of my confusion.
 

digsbe

Truth will set you free
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2009
Messages
20,224
Reaction score
14,223
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Okay, I am about as noob as noob can come with the whole issues surrounding Israel and Palestine so as I look into the flotilla thing a few things crossed my mind that I'm curious and was wondering if people could give me some answers...

First, is Gaza technically part of Israel that they simply are allowing others to live on, or is that land completely seperate to Israel and technically free in and of itself.
I'm not the most knowledgeable person on the issue either but I'll add what I think is true (someone correct me if I'm wrong). Gaza used to be an Israeli controlled territory but has been given an autonomous status. Gaza isn't it's own sovereign nation, and it's still under the jurisdiction of Israel. I believe several years ago Israel tried to help push the two state solution by militarily forcing all Jews out of their homes in the Gaza strip and allowing the Gaza strip to govern itself with their own political party. Gaza had elections, and coups, and eventually Hamas (a terrorist organization) rose to power and now currently rules the Gaza Strip. Hamas has attacked Israel since their creation and has a stance that Israel has no right to exist and that the Jews must be pushed into the sea. Israel gave Gaza a chance at independence and they chose to be ruled over by a terrorist nation that wants to take over Israel. Gaza is one of the Palestinian Territories, but it isn't a sovereign nation and I believe it can be described as an autonomous territory under Israeli control.
Second, if Gaza is independent from Israel what right or on what grounds does Israel have in forming a military blockaide around it? Is it part of an agreement for giving the land, is it something under international law, is it a case of simply being strong enough to doing it and no one wanting to speak out against it in an authoratitive way, or something else? Basically, why is the blockaide there and how is it legal or at the least allowable.
I believe that Gaza is politically independent, but not completely independent from Israel. Regardless of if Gaza is independent, Israel and Egypt have the grounds to create a blockade because the Gaza strip is governed by a terrorist organization that attacks Israel and calls for their destruction. Israel has the blockade for national security reasons, they can't allow weapons to be smuggled into the Gaza Strip. You could almost call the Gaza Strip an enemy combatant against Israel due to their current leadership and their actions.
Third, is Egypt blocking transport in and out of the Gaza Strip on their border, and if not why are people not instead simply sailing to Egypt and then transporting their "aid" over land?
Yes, Egypt is blocking transport in and out of the Gaza Strip. Both Israel and Egypt have a wall around their respective borders with Gaza, and both have checkpoint areas of entry where they allow or block people and items from entering Gaza.
Anyone know some answers for these, as I imagine it will help remove some of my confusion.
I hope some of what I posted helps. Again, I am not an expert on the legal status of these things, but that is what I do know. If I'm wrong on something someone please correct me because I would like to know for myself as well.
 

DeeJayH

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,728
Reaction score
1,688
Location
Scooping Zeus' Poop
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
It is my understanding that Israel & Egypt have blockades. Believe Egypt started its when suicide bombers attacked a hotel there
 

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
19,746
Reaction score
6,213
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Okay, I am about as noob as noob can come with the whole issues surrounding Israel and Palestine so as I look into the flotilla thing a few things crossed my mind that I'm curious and was wondering if people could give me some answers...

First, is Gaza technically part of Israel that they simply are allowing others to live on, or is that land completely seperate to Israel and technically free in and of itself.

Second, if Gaza is independent from Israel what right or on what grounds does Israel have in forming a military blockaide around it? Is it part of an agreement for giving the land, is it something under international law, is it a case of simply being strong enough to doing it and no one wanting to speak out against it in an authoratitive way, or something else? Basically, why is the blockaide there and how is it legal or at the least allowable.

Third, is Egypt blocking transport in and out of the Gaza Strip on their border, and if not why are people not instead simply sailing to Egypt and then transporting their "aid" over land?

Anyone know some answers for these, as I imagine it will help remove some of my confusion.
1) Gaza was given to the Palestinians in the partition plan at the end of the British mandate over the land of Israel/Palestine.
When Israel was formed, a day later, it was attacked in what is known as the 48' war, or the Israeli independence war.
During that war Jordan has annexed the West Bank and Egypt has done the same with the Gaza Strip.
In 1967 Israel has conquered the Gaza strip from Egypt (Amongst the many other territories it has conquered in that war) and has occupied it.
In the late 80's Israel has given autonomy to the Palestinians over some West Bank areas and the Gaza Strip.
The PLO was having a degree of control over the Gaza Strip but it was still occupied by Israel.
In 2005 Israel has withdrawn and dismantled the occupation of the Gaza Strip, making it a self-governed non-sovereign territory.
Hamas has later on came into power and today the Gaza Strip is a Hamas-governed non-sovereign territory.

2) Gaza is not a sovereign entity and hence there are no issues in blockading it.

3) Both Egypt and Israel blockade the Gaza Strip.
You can't transfer cargo from the Egyptian side just as you can't from the Israeli side.
 

bub

R.I.P. Léo
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 2, 2006
Messages
9,649
Reaction score
2,173
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Okay, I am about as noob as noob can come with the whole issues surrounding Israel and Palestine so as I look into the flotilla thing a few things crossed my mind that I'm curious and was wondering if people could give me some answers...

First, is Gaza technically part of Israel that they simply are allowing others to live on, or is that land completely seperate to Israel and technically free in and of itself.
It's not free, it's besieged since Hamas has been elected over there. According to international law that means that technically Gaza is (like West Bank) still occupied, which is considered as a collective punishment towards civilian (= it is illegal) and the UN has repeteadly condemned Israel for that.
Second, if Gaza is independent from Israel what right or on what grounds does Israel have in forming a military blockaide around it? Is it part of an agreement for giving the land, is it something under international law, is it a case of simply being strong enough to doing it and no one wanting to speak out against it in an authoratitive way, or something else? Basically, why is the blockaide there and how is it legal or at the least allowable.
Blockades is an act of war. Israel has started the Six Days War because Egype made a blockade on the Straits of Tiran.

Six-Day War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Third, is Egypt blocking transport in and out of the Gaza Strip on their border, and if not why are people not instead simply sailing to Egypt and then transporting their "aid" over land?

Anyone know some answers for these, as I imagine it will help remove some of my confusion.
I read that Egypt had opened its border with Gaza today

Egypt decides to open Rafah crossing with Gaza - People's Daily Online
 
Last edited:

bub

R.I.P. Léo
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 2, 2006
Messages
9,649
Reaction score
2,173
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
1) Gaza was given to the Palestinians in the partition plan at the end of the British mandate over the land of Israel/Palestine.
When Israel was formed, a day later, it was attacked in what is known as the 48' war, or the Israeli independence war.
During that war Jordan has annexed the West Bank and Egypt has done the same with the Gaza Strip.
In 1967 Israel has conquered the Gaza strip from Egypt (Amongst the many other territories it has conquered in that war) and has occupied it.
In the late 80's Israel has given autonomy to the Palestinians over some West Bank areas and the Gaza Strip.
The PLO was having a degree of control over the Gaza Strip but it was still occupied by Israel.
In 2005 Israel has withdrawn and dismantled the occupation of the Gaza Strip, making it a self-governed non-sovereign territory.
Hamas has later on came into power and today the Gaza Strip is a Hamas-governed non-sovereign territory.

2) Gaza is not a sovereign entity and hence there are no issues in blockading it.

3) Both Egypt and Israel blockade the Gaza Strip.
You can't transfer cargo from the Egyptian side just as you can't from the Israeli side.
100% opposed answers...I'm not even astonished anymore :2razz:
 

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
19,746
Reaction score
6,213
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
It's not free, it's besieged. According to international law that means that technically Gaza is (like West Bank) still occupied, which is considered as a collective punishment towards civilian (= it is illegal) and the UN has repeteadly condemned Israel for that.
The UN has condemned Israel for that because it believes that Israel does so with the intent of collectively punishing the Gazan people.
The blockade on its own is absolutely not illegal.
And the occupation part is ridiculous, I didn't know that the UN considers Gaza occupied and I'd like a source for that (after 2005, if you may).
Blockades is an act of war.
Only against sovereign territories.
Since when is the Gaza Strip a sovereign territory?
I read that Egypt had opened its border with Gaza today

Egypt decides to open Rafah crossing with Gaza - People's Daily Online
And still more humanitarian aid is transferred through the Israeli side.
 

Zyphlin

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
51,312
Reaction score
35,172
Location
NoMoAuchie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Okay, so now I'm confused again...

Is Gaza simply self-governing but not soveirgn (and thus still under Israel, I guess akin to a U.S. Territory) or as they soverign and a state all unto themself?

If its the former, then how in the world can you "occupy" that which is technically yours? For example if we put soldiers in Puerto Rico or Guam I would not imagine that the U.S. would be an "occupier" because while they're independently government they're still a territory of the United States yes?

If its the latter, then how in the world could we NOT call it "occupying" if they have people inside, a fence around it, blockaides aroudn it, and are essentially establishing control and power upon it. (And not saying that technically occupying is bad, but more how could you not use the term)

Again, whether its an "act of war" or a "justifiable protective action regarding its own land" seems to hinge significantly on whether or not palestine is sovereign or not.

Additionally, in regards to the U.N.'s condemnation, can the UN condemn something if it is not being illegally done? And if they can, then why the assumptions or the seemingly dishonest implication that because the UN condemned the action that somehow it means it was actually bad or illegal?
 

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
19,746
Reaction score
6,213
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Okay, so now I'm confused again...

Is Gaza simply self-governing but not soveirgn (and thus still under Israel, I guess akin to a U.S. Territory) or as they soverign and a state all unto themself?
Gaza is not under Israel.
No sovereign entity claims responsibility for the strip of land, and it is governed by Hamas.
If its the former, then how in the world can you "occupy" that which is technically yours? For example if we put soldiers in Puerto Rico or Guam I would not imagine that the U.S. would be an "occupier" because while they're independently government they're still a territory of the United States yes?

If its the latter, then how in the world could we NOT call it "occupying" if they have people inside, a fence around it, blockaides aroudn it, and are essentially establishing control and power upon it. (And not saying that technically occupying is bad, but more how could you not use the term)
It's neither.
Again, whether its an "act of war" or a "justifiable protective action regarding its own land" seems to hinge significantly on whether or not palestine is sovereign or not.
The Gaza Strip is not a sovereign entity.
Additionally, in regards to the U.N.'s condemnation, can the UN condemn something if it is not being illegally done? And if they can, then why the assumptions or the seemingly dishonest implication that because the UN condemned the action that somehow it means it was actually bad or illegal?
They can say that they believe it's illegal and then condemn it.(That they believe Israel does it with the intention to collectively punish all of Gaza's residents)
The assumptions come because of the so-called credibility the UN holds.
 

Zyphlin

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
51,312
Reaction score
35,172
Location
NoMoAuchie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Okay, I was doing a little research...

I understand now what you're talking about in regards to being a soveriegn state or not, but that raises more questions.

I don't quite understand now how you can claim that Gaza, or more specifically Palestine, is not soveriegn.

It has a government, it has defined borders, it has a permanent population, and it appears it is recognized through diplomatic relations with over 100 states placing it as being recognized by at least half of the U.N. recognized states it seems.

What is the justification for why the claim is that it is not a soveriegn state?
 

bub

R.I.P. Léo
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 2, 2006
Messages
9,649
Reaction score
2,173
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
The outrage caused by the incident is a great victory for those who oppose the blockade ( Israel faces growing world pressure to lift Gaza blockade - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News ) but also, unfortunately, for the Hamas.

It looks like they've understood that the best way to hurt Israel was not to launch rockets, it's to let Israel escalate violence and commit mistakes.

Indeed, the blockade is probably their best tool: not only it allows them to control everything that enters Gaza, it also puts Israel in a very negative light in the eyes of the world. And the incident that occured 3 days ago has probably done more to hurt Israeli interests than several hundreds of rockets ( Gaza flotilla attack: world unites in condemnation of Israel's actions | World news | The Guardian )

Look at the consequences of the raid: Israel is isolated because everyone condemns the blockade, a blockade that actually gives more power to the Hamas, and the alliance with Turkey is weakening.

Now the appropriate answer if you want to weaken the Hamas and get closer to the rest of the world (particularly Turkey) again is probably to lift the blockade. The inappropriate answer is to say "they all hate us" and keeping on hurting yourself, isolating yourself from the rest of the world and destroying any hope for peace by not ending the siege of Gaza and the colonization of West Bank.
 

Tucker Case

Matthew 16:3
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
45,603
Reaction score
22,539
Location
Everywhere and nowhere
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Blockades is an act of war. Israel has started the Six Days War because Egype made a blockade on the Straits of Tiran.
If a blockade is an act of war, then how could Israel have started the six-day war? If Egypt put up the blockade first, and that is an act of war, we must conclude that Egypt started the war.
 

bub

R.I.P. Léo
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 2, 2006
Messages
9,649
Reaction score
2,173
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
If a blockade is an act of war, then how could Israel have started the six-day war? If Egypt put up the blockade first, and that is an act of war, we must conclude that Egypt started the war.
It goes both ways, indeed:
either you consider that blockades are not an act of war, then Israel started the 1967 war,
or you consider that it is an act of war, and then Hamas has the right to launch rockets at Israel and the people on the flotilla should have shot down the IDF helicopters.
 

Tucker Case

Matthew 16:3
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
45,603
Reaction score
22,539
Location
Everywhere and nowhere
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
It goes both ways, indeed:
either you consider that blockades are not an act of war, then Israel started the 1967 war,
or you consider that it is an act of war, and then Hamas has the right to launch rockets at Israel and the people on the flotilla should have shot down the IDF helicopters.
I wouldn't say that it being an act of war gives Hamas the right to launch rockets into Israel since the rockets are headed towards civilian targets or they are indiscriminately fired.

If they were headed at military targets, that'd be a different story.

If the IDF helicopters threaten a ship, and the ship has the means to shoot down the helicopters, then they are justified in doing so. Then the IDF would be justified in blasting the ship to hell as well even before the ship fires on them, though. If a ship ventures into war torn waters, it is placing itself at risk to be blasted to hell.
 
Last edited:

Zyphlin

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
51,312
Reaction score
35,172
Location
NoMoAuchie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Hey, crazy request, there's half a dozen threads arguing about rather than discussing the legality and talking about public perception. Could we not turn this into whether or not the blockade should be there based on your opinions or how much opposition there is to it or other things? Seriously, there was a bit of a discussion here, start your own thread if you want to take it in an entirely different direction.
 
Last edited:

alexa

DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
4,684
Reaction score
1,340
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I wouldn't say that it being an act of war gives Hamas the right to launch rockets into Israel since the rockets are headed towards civilian targets or they are indiscriminately fired.

If they were headed at military targets, that'd be a different story.
Yes, there has been problems with civilians there for a long time, like when it was the Palestinian town of Najd. There is nothing right in all this and the more I learn the more I think this.

The palestinians forced out of Najid, Sderot, now live in refugee camps in Gaza and some I hear fire rockets. I cannot imagine what I would be like if I was born in their shoes because I was not, but I suspect I would be very angry.

If the IDF helicopters threaten a ship, and the ship has the means to shoot down the helicopters, then they are justified in doing so. Then the IDF would be justified in blasting the ship to hell as well even before the ship fires on them, though. If a ship ventures into war torn waters, it is placing itself at risk to be blasted to hell.
of course this ship was only armed with kitchen knives. Turkey has said it has no intention of going to war with Israel for invasion of it's sovereignty, which I understand is what it is to forcefully and against the captains wishes board a ship flying the flag of another nation in open seas.

Nonetheless, many governments, including my own, (UK) have said Israel's behaviour is unacceptable.
 
Last edited:

Tashah

wʜɪтe яussɪaи
DP Veteran
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
18,379
Reaction score
9,227
Location
ישראל • אמריקה
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Centrist
Seriously, there was a bit of a discussion here, start your own thread if you want to take it in an entirely different direction.
It doesn't work to ask these people nicely Zyph. They don't understand nice.
 

mpg

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
7,795
Reaction score
1,784
Location
Milford, CT
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
It goes both ways, indeed:
either you consider that blockades are not an act of war, then Israel started the 1967 war,
or you consider that it is an act of war, and then Hamas has the right to launch rockets at Israel and the people on the flotilla should have shot down the IDF helicopters.
Weren't the rockets before the blockade?
 

Zyphlin

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
51,312
Reaction score
35,172
Location
NoMoAuchie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
It doesn't work to ask these people nicely Zyph. They don't understand nice.
Sadly I was kind of getting a little bit of an understanding, able to get a little from both sides perspective and ask follow ups. Was helpful
 

DeeJayH

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,728
Reaction score
1,688
Location
Scooping Zeus' Poop
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
It goes both ways, indeed:
either you consider that blockades are not an act of war, then Israel started the 1967 war,
or you consider that it is an act of war, and then Hamas has the right to launch rockets at Israel and the people on the flotilla should have shot down the IDF helicopters.
way not to answer the question regarding Egypt
#FAIL jew hater

The IDF showed tremendous restraint in dealing with this planned attack

sure looks like Rodney King all over again. board a ship to ensure no weapons are on it, and the animals on it assault the IDF UNPROVOKED
should have just killed them all
****ing animals
 

Zyphlin

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
51,312
Reaction score
35,172
Location
NoMoAuchie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Okay, I was doing a little research...

I understand now what you're talking about in regards to being a soveriegn state or not, but that raises more questions.

I don't quite understand now how you can claim that Gaza, or more specifically Palestine, is not soveriegn.

It has a government, it has defined borders, it has a permanent population, and it appears it is recognized through diplomatic relations with over 100 states placing it as being recognized by at least half of the U.N. recognized states it seems.

What is the justification for why the claim is that it is not a soveriegn state?
Anybody? Apoc?
 

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
19,746
Reaction score
6,213
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Okay, I was doing a little research...

I understand now what you're talking about in regards to being a soveriegn state or not, but that raises more questions.

I don't quite understand now how you can claim that Gaza, or more specifically Palestine, is not soveriegn.

It has a government, it has defined borders, it has a permanent population, and it appears it is recognized through diplomatic relations with over 100 states placing it as being recognized by at least half of the U.N. recognized states it seems.

What is the justification for why the claim is that it is not a soveriegn state?
Gaza is not sovereign because it is not the territory of any state.
There is no state governing the territory, only a government(Hamas), and one of the four keys for a sovereign state is independence, which Gaza lacks.
 

Tucker Case

Matthew 16:3
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
45,603
Reaction score
22,539
Location
Everywhere and nowhere
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Gaza is not sovereign because it is not the territory of any state.
There is no state governing the territory, only a government(Hamas), and one of the four keys for a sovereign state is independence, which Gaza lacks.
How would Gaza gain independence?
 

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
19,746
Reaction score
6,213
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
How would Gaza gain independence?
The blood of the martyrs and the willing of Allah is apparently the acceptable method amongst Hamas.

It is however more likely to become independent once a peace agreement would be signed, establishing the Palestinian state.
 
Top Bottom