State Sponsored Terrorists Attack Relief Convoy on the High Seas - 10 Dead - GDNet Lounge

386

June 01, 2010 02:38 AM

Quote:Original post by way2lazy2care
http://www.vilp.de/Enpdf/e025.pdf
Helsinki principles of the law of maritime nuetrality.

Read the document more carefully. It only applies in national waters of neutral nations - it does not in any way apply to international waters, which is where Israel boarded these ships.

Quote:They were armed with paintball guns and of the whole force there was a single handgun to be used in situations of life or death. The majority of the deaths didn't happen till after the second armed force arrived.

Okay, but I don't see how that changes anything, other than implying that the Israeli forces willfully responded to the lawful, non-lethal defense of the vessel with lethal, illegal force.

Quote:
There were plenty of ways. They announced their intentions over loudspeaker as well as maintaining radio contact with the ship's captain. And while you might think they didn't use lethal force, it was more by good luck than by choice.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/10199480.stm

see the videos of the attacks.

Fine. But how does that change anything?

Quote:Because they would get boarded otherwise resulting in possible injuries and death. Whether or not it was right does not excuse that the captain could have avoided all of this by docking in an Israeli port. Now there are dead civilians and they still can't dock in Gaza.

So if the Israelites had been Somali pirates - which, from a legal point of view, they were equivalent to in this situation - would you have argued the same way?

Quote:If a police officer pulls you over for something you clearly didn't do, is your first instinct to attack him with a knife? Of course it's not, because you would get shot.

A more apt analogy would be to ask what you would do if an armed burglar broke into your home.

-------------Please rate this post if it was useful.

DaBookshah

175

June 01, 2010 02:48 AM

Quote:Original post by way2lazy2care
If a police officer pulls you over for something you clearly didn't do, is your first instinct to attack him with a knife? Of course it's not, because you would get shot.

Your analogy is ridiculous. If you have a serious problem with a police officer, there are ways for you to have that dealt with, such as internal affairs. There isn't anything remotely like an "internal affairs" for nations. If you paid attention you'd see the shit national governments get away with, western and third world, on almost a daily basis.

Yann L

1,806

June 01, 2010 03:38 AM

Quote:Original post by way2lazy2care
If a police officer pulls you over for something you clearly didn't do, is your first instinct to attack him with a knife? Of course it's not, because you would get shot.

A police officer has no right to pull you over if he's outside of his jurisdiction. Israel has no jurisdiction over international waters.

All this wouldn't be a problem if the attack was done within territorial waters. Whether justified or not (I personally believe it to be justified, as I understand the ship was actively trying to violate the embargo multiple times, and has been warned), Israel acted outside its jurisdiction. And that is a major problem. If this was done by civilians, it would have been classified an act of piracy.

In short, Israel should have waited a little more before attacking.

_the_phantom_

11,263

June 01, 2010 04:09 AM

Quote:Original post by Yann L
If this was done by civilians, it would have been classified an act of piracy.

What annoys me is that if this had been done by someone like NK or Iran the US/UK, at the very least, would be rattling sabres about now...

klems

513

June 01, 2010 04:48 AM

Quote:Original post by Yann L
Quote:Original post by way2lazy2care
If a police officer pulls you over for something you clearly didn't do, is your first instinct to attack him with a knife? Of course it's not, because you would get shot.

A police officer has no right to pull you over if he's outside of his jurisdiction. Israel has no jurisdiction over international waters.

All this wouldn't be a problem if the attack was done within territorial waters. Whether justified or not (I personally believe it to be justified, as I understand the ship was actively trying to violate the embargo multiple times, and has been warned), Israel acted outside its jurisdiction. And that is a major problem. If this was done by civilians, it would have been classified an act of piracy.

In short, Israel should have waited a little more before attacking.

I think it's quite significant that the convoy in question was carrying essential supplies, not materials for making weapons (even though some news outlets have seriously tried to make the case that you can make great weapons with concrete and water bottles.) If you think Israel's "right" to turn Palestinian territory into a huge concentration camp (not extermination camp; learn the difference) is important enough that humanitarian organizations should back off and leave the Palestinians to their fate, then yes, their state piracy would be justified.

Nobody would object if they wanted to check the cargo for weapons; that's understandable (even though I disagree that Palestinians shouldn't have the right to defend themselves against their nuclear overlords - smuggling weapons to the jews of the Warszaw ghetto would also have been breaching a blockade, you know) However, anything beyond that is clearly unacceptable.

Straudos

100

June 01, 2010 06:14 AM

">

- Video of the boarding

">

- Video of the warning

The response from the crew is "Negative, Negative, our destination is Gaza".

It is illegal to attempt to run a blockade, and Israel is legally allowed to intercept in international waters.

While I think this was bad for Israel and I think they should have been more prepared for the possibility of violence, I don't think these deaths are their fault. When a group tries to beat a soldier to death with metal bars, you have to expect that someone is going to get shot.

Hnefi

386

June 01, 2010 06:23 AM

Quote:Original post by Straudos
It is illegal to attempt to run a blockade, and Israel is legally allowed to intercept in international waters.

No, they are not, which is the entire point of all the uproar.

-------------Please rate this post if it was useful.

Bregma

9,461

June 01, 2010 08:07 AM

Quote:Original post by phantom
What annoys me is that if this had been done by someone like NK or Iran the US/UK, at the very least, would be rattling sabres about now...

The difference being that nobody has vowed in the case of North Korea or Iran that they would not rest until the sand of the desert ran red with the blood of children and that every last man, woman, and child of some ethnic groups in those countries would be driven into the sea and drowned. Further, neither North Korea nor Iran are surrounded by those very same folk who make that vow and have the backing of billions in oil money and a worldwide propaganda network that has been lately very successful, and an international political network that control many if not all of the large geopolitical organizations like the UN.

North Korea and Iran are not bombarded daily with rockets and high explosives and under constant thread of suicide bombings (which are occasionally successful).

I think you need to take context into account before comparing apples and rain barrels.

I certainly don't support everything Israel does, but I can understand their approach to protecting themselves and their families. Especially given the way so many people around the world eagerly gobble the anti-Israeli propaganda that stands proudly erect in front of their faces.

I think rather than prejudging the situation because it's Israel, the best approach is to wait for more information and then judge the situation on the facts. The facts are not yet fully available.

Stephen M. Webb
Professional Free Software Developer

Hodgman

52,717

June 01, 2010 08:41 AM

Quote:Original post by LessBread
If there was any doubt about it before now, it is becoming more difficult to argue against branding Israel as a rogue nation.

The country was founded as a rouge nation through civil war and a never-ending history of UN-defiance... Just like the US... They've always been this way and the US has always been there to sell them missiles, cluster bombs and nukes. I really don't see either of those 2 "rouge states" turning on each other now.

Quote:Will the US shield Israel from the consequences of this rogue behavior?

Will the biggest state-sponsor of terrorism in the world take any real action against the predictable state-sponsored terrorism of it's allies?

Are you serious???
Of course not.
I thought you were more in-touch than to ask such silly questions, LB...

Quote:Will the incident distract the public from the oil spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico?

Ask the TV, not the public...

. 22 Racing Series .

_the_phantom_

11,263

June 01, 2010 08:52 AM

Quote:Original post by Bregma
Quote:Original post by phantom
What annoys me is that if this had been done by someone like NK or Iran the US/UK, at the very least, would be rattling sabres about now...

The difference being that nobody has vowed in the case of North Korea or Iran that they would not rest until the sand of the desert ran red with the blood of children and that every last man, woman, and child of some ethnic groups in those countries would be driven into the sea and drowned. Further, neither North Korea nor Iran are surrounded by those very same folk who make that vow and have the backing of billions in oil money and a worldwide propaganda network that has been lately very successful, and an international political network that control many if not all of the large geopolitical organizations like the UN.

North Korea and Iran are not bombarded daily with rockets and high explosives and under constant thread of suicide bombings (which are occasionally successful).

I think you need to take context into account before comparing apples and rain barrels.

I certainly don't support everything Israel does, but I can understand their approach to protecting themselves and their families. Especially given the way so many people around the world eagerly gobble the anti-Israeli propaganda that stands proudly erect in front of their faces.

I think rather than prejudging the situation because it's Israel, the best approach is to wait for more information and then judge the situation on the facts. The facts are not yet fully available.

Yes, because the actions of other nations totally justifiy the boarding of a turkish ship carrying relief supplies in international waters. Aid, it should be added, from a country who until recently were Israel's closest Muslim ally. Hardly a country who wants them driven into the sea...

I'm not saying they shouldn't defend themselves, but that defense should not be done in what amounts to an act of piracy.

The facts are pretty clear; they boarded ships in international waters from a friendly nation. Everything beyond that was pretty much the fall out from that action.

State Sponsored Terrorists Attack Relief Convoy on the High Seas - 10 Dead

This topic is closed to new replies.

Popular Topics

Recommended Tutorials

State Sponsored Terrorists Attack Relief Convoy on the High Seas - 10 Dead

This topic is closed to new replies.

Popular Topics

Recommended Tutorials

Reticulating splines