Galactus Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 only by UN decision from 1917. Read it up!Leageu of Nations decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteHaven Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 Look at the video. The soldiers are immidiately beaten and stabbed. There are witness accounts of soldiers being thrown from the higher decks of the ship, soldiers throwing themselves into the sea to avoid the lynch mobs, etc.. ofcourse, it could all be lies, but we will see once the fog clears.Yus. I think we can agree on that. It seems that this group really has connections to extremists (even the Turkish media does admit that), however, even if so, no one gave the IDF the right to kill them, right?Maybe I am biased - but since the IDF is killing civs all the time I have a hard time believing that they were running around with Paint-Ball guns. I looked at the pictures and I have to be honest, it could be a Paint-Ball gun. Or something that looks like one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoadm Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 And again, I did so and can't see why you would assume that I didn't. Is it because I didn't immediately agree with your source that you assume I didn't read it?No, I did not ask you to agree with the source, rather, it was your kneejerk response denouncing the source, and not the info and documents presented in it.As I said, these were fragmentary secondary sources: their significance depends very much on interpretation.Well, documents showing IHH payed suicide bombers families is hardly of little significance. But you are right that more evidence is needed to make a 100% conclusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elmis Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 Tell me one army in the world that doesn't have a history of killing civilians? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoadm Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 Yus. I think we can agree on that. It seems that this group really has connections to extremists (even the Turkish media does admit that), however, even if so, no one gave the IDF the right to kill them, right?Maybe I am biased - but since the IDF is killing civs all the time I have a hard time believing that they were running around with Paint-Ball guns. I looked at the pictures and I have to be honest, it could be a Paint-Ball gun. Or something that looks like one.Well, you can say the same about the US and UK, since civilians (on a far larger scale) were killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Does it mean we can deduce that their whole armed forces simply murder civilians for fun? Israel had absolutely no interest in commuting PR suicide. They planned this for weeks, indoctrinated the soldiers not to respond to any provocation unless life threatening, even if someone burnt them with a cigarette butt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Iceman of the North Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 Leageu of Nations decision.What kind of League of Nation was in existence in 1917? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteHaven Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 Tell me one army in the world that doesn't have a history of killing civilians?I can't - but we are talking about the IDF here, right? Well, you can say the same about the US and UK, since civilians (on a far larger scale) were killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. Does it mean we can deduce that their whole armed forces simply murder civilians for fun? Israel had absolutely no interest in commuting PR suicide. They planned this for weeks, indoctrinated the soldiers not to respond to any provocation unless life threatening, even if someone burnt them with a cigarette butt.I didn't say that the IDF is killing civilians for fun, now, did I? I just stated the fact that they used force against innocent civilians in the past. That's why it is easy for most of us to say that the IDF did, again, something wrong.I dunno, but the current governement, doesn't give a shit about their rep in the world, no? Else, why affront your allies?Don't get me wrong here - if this ships were carrying guns, then, by all means they had to be stopped. But since the Israeli governement is the only one who says so, I have a hard time believing this story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Nobody Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 Tell me one army in the world that doesn't have a history of killing civilians?Switzerland.Israel also deliberately targets civilians, blowing up hospitals and shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoadm Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 Israel also deliberately targets civilians, blowing up hospitals and shit.And the US blows up embassy's, refugee columns, mosqs and weddings. What's your point? It doesnt mean it targets them, but rather that urban war is dirty dirty buisness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowbinding shoe Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 Does it need to be martyrs? Anarchists regularly attack police forces with enthusiastic amounts of violence often injuring and at times even killing them. They don't want to be martyrs. They just want to harm law forces as much as possible, believing that forced restraint on the part of the law forces would give them some protection. These people didn't go with a bomb strapped around their chest, so calling them martyrs without their declaring their intent to die and not just kill is doubtful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galactus Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 D'aw. It's kind of cute. With all the focus on the Koreas Israel is acting up because no one is paying attention to them anymore... Sheesh, international politics really are just like children throwing tantrums :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samalander Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 Get your ass back to this thread Salamander, it's quite boring without you.Ok, ok ,I'm backDude, seriously, I don't know a lot about this IHH group but I do know that the Israeli Army has a history for killing civilians, so I don't think that these guys are the ones who started the whole mess.And what army on earth does not have a history of killing civilians (don't say the Swiss)?Recap of what we know thus far:All but one ship went peacefully. That ship and some of the people on it have ties with an organization that is illegal in Israel and probably supports Hamas. This was the largest ship with some 600 people on it.The Israeli army, having bad intelligence on this issue has opted for a "soft touch" policy in this manner and sent only two small teams to take charge of the ship and seize the helm. Active opposition was not expected. Upon landing, armed with flash grenades, paintball guns, and personal revolvers the troops were met by a large lynch mob (no other way to describe it) armed with pipes, knives and swords(!!!). Some of the soldiers were thrown off the boat, some jumped off and some were mobbed, clubbed, stabbed and, in one instance, shot at. 2 handguns were also forcibly taken from the soldiers. Live fire was authorized and some of the attackers were killed. Ship was taken over and is now waiting in Ashdod harbour for the people to be processed by police SWAT, as opposition to being removed from the ship is expected. This will probably happen late in the evening, after all the other people from the other boats have been processed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galactus Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 . Live fire was authorized and some of the attackers were killed.The defenders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samalander Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 The defenders.Like it was said before, if you try to run a blockade we can take action against you. Also, you know, even if we go with your slanted view, I don't know in what country it's legal to lynch someone if he broke into your house but poses no threat to your life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galactus Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 Like it was said before, if you try to run a blockade we can take action against you. Also, you know, even if we go with your slanted view, I don't know in what country it's legal to lynch someone if he broke into your house but poses no threat to your life.Texas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Nobody Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 Like it was said before, if you try to run a blockade we can take action against you. They hadn't "tried" anything.Also, you know, even if we go with your slanted view, I don't know in what country it's legal to lynch someone if he broke into your house but poses no threat to your life.Castle doctrine. Also any time someone breaks into your house with a gun he poses a threat to your life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samalander Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 1) They hadn't "tried" anything.2) Castle doctrine. 1) What else would you call it? Playing "chicken" with the IDF? At the last minute they intended to turn about and go back?2) Most of the world (even Israel) does not recognize the legitimacy of the radical interpertation some of the states in the US have for Castle Doctrine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoadm Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 The San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea says in paragraph 67:67. Merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral States may not be attacked unless they:(a) are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture.http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/385ec082b509e76c41256739003e636d/7694fe2016f347e1c125641f002d49ce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Nobody Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 2) Most of the world (even Israel) does not recognize the legitimacy of the radical interpertation some of the states in the US have for Castle Doctrine.Orly? http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/121605 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samalander Posted May 31, 2010 Share Posted May 31, 2010 http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/Flash.aspx/121605That's still not as radical as Texan law. Read the law itself, not some news flash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.