Israeli raid on flotilla

[GabonX]

Totally justified. Israel is within their legal rights to conduct a blockade,

They are?

Are you daft?

I'm just asking how you come to the conclusion that Israel has the right to conduct a blockade (that is, one like this one). Because I'm pretty sure what they're doing falls under collective punishment and excessive damage and thus is illegal.

In electing Hamas, an organization dedicated the destruction of Israel with a direct lineage of power descended from the allies of the Third Reich, the Palestinian people made a choice.

The blockade is a consequence of their actions..

[GabonX]

That's why I made sure to include a mainstream source as well

What are your thoughts on Al Jazeera?

We may have to agree to disagree about the impartiality of a Zuckerman-owned newspaper with regards to Zionist topics.

Ol' Saxi has never seen Al-Jazeera so can't comment - whassup with Cox Cable Santa Barbara and their poor channel selection?! ACK! LOL, gang!

If you dispute the claims feel free to do your own investigative research..

This information isn't at all a secret. You can independently verify who it was that organized the the convoy, and what their record is...

[saxitoxin]

If you dispute the claims feel free to do your own investigative research.

Logically, any action in support of an immoral philosophy can not, itself, be moral. This can be demonstrated by a propositional calculus equation. Ergo, no matter how justified the Zionist forces may, or may not, have been situationally, it is mathematically impossible for them to have been acting morally.

That said, Ol' Saxi doesn't want to waste the water it would take for him to have to shower after participating in a thread in which he and a Dutcher were both on the same side of something so will regretfully bow out of this one. Thanks, gang!

[Snorri1234]

I'm just asking how you come to the conclusion that what they're doing falls under 'collective punishment and excessive damage and thus is illegal'.

Not that hard really.

Collective punishment is the punishment of a group of people as a result of the behavior of one or more other individuals or groups. The punishment is to be excessive of the actual crime or crimes that were committed.

Now, according to several aid-groups and independent organizations Israel allows only 25% of required humanitarian aid through the blockade. The Palestinians are not getting enough of what they need. That is by all sensible accounts collective punishment, much as the destruction of civilian homes is also collective punishment.

I'm pretty sure you're an anti-Israel bigot who turns an intentional blind eye to the barrage of rockets fired at civilian targets by Hamas that necessitates a blockade such as this.

Oh my yes. I couldn't possibly just be questioning the legality of a blockade, no I must be a bigot who has such a hatred for Israel that I ignore any action that is not theirs. Since I do not believe that a bunch of rockets necessitates oppression millions of people I must be a blind Israel-hater.

[Snorri1234]

Totally justified. Israel is within their legal rights to conduct a blockade,

They are?

Are you daft?

I'm just asking how you come to the conclusion that Israel has the right to conduct a blockade (that is, one like this one). Because I'm pretty sure what they're doing falls under collective punishment and excessive damage and thus is illegal.

In electing Hamas, an organization dedicated the destruction of Israel with a direct lineage of power descended from the allies of the Third Reich, the Palestinian people made a choice.

The blockade is a consequence of their actions..

It doesn't work that way dude. International law doesn't include "suckers had it coming" as a justification for punishments which are illegal.

[Serbia]

I'm just asking how you come to the conclusion that what they're doing falls under 'collective punishment and excessive damage and thus is illegal'.

Not that hard really.

Collective punishment is the punishment of a group of people as a result of the behavior of one or more other individuals or groups. The punishment is to be excessive of the actual crime or crimes that were committed.

Now, according to several aid-groups and independent organizations Israel allows only 25% of required humanitarian aid through the blockade. The Palestinians are not getting enough of what they need. That is by all sensible accounts collective punishment, much as the destruction of civilian homes is also collective punishment.

Got yourself any references there? Without references, it's opinion. And honestly, we've seen the likes of your pro-Palestinian aid groups - they align themselves with terrorists, harming their own credibility.

I'm pretty sure you're an anti-Israel bigot who turns an intentional blind eye to the barrage of rockets fired at civilian targets by Hamas that necessitates a blockade such as this.

Oh my yes. I couldn't possibly just be questioning the legality of a blockade, no I must be a bigot who has such a hatred for Israel that I ignore any action that is not theirs. Since I do not believe that a bunch of rockets necessitates oppression millions of people I must be a blind Israel-hater.

+1 for me. Knew that would get you a response. So, tell me wise one, what should Israel's response be? You want equal response? Because I know your type loves to scream about that... So, if the Palestinians knowingly target civilians; if their stated goal is the destruction of the Jewish state; should Israel intentionally target Palestinian civilians, and commit genocide against them? That, my friend, would be an equal response.

Now don't misunderstand, I'm not in anyway advocating that. But before you get on your morally defunct high-horse to decry Israel's actions, realize that what the other side is doing is in NO way justified, and if it were happening to a country other than Israel, who, for whatever the reason, be they current or historical, is en vogue to hate upon, you'd be taking up their side. So don't give me your bigoted bull shit. You're ignorant of what is really happening there.

[Queen_Herpes]

I'm looking forward to an Israel v Palestine World Cup match.

[Serbia]

I'm looking forward to an Israel v Palestine World Cup match.

LOLWUT?

Troll.

[Snorri1234]

I'm just asking how you come to the conclusion that what they're doing falls under 'collective punishment and excessive damage and thus is illegal'.

Not that hard really.

Collective punishment is the punishment of a group of people as a result of the behavior of one or more other individuals or groups. The punishment is to be excessive of the actual crime or crimes that were committed.

Now, according to several aid-groups and independent organizations Israel allows only 25% of required humanitarian aid through the blockade. The Palestinians are not getting enough of what they need. That is by all sensible accounts collective punishment, much as the destruction of civilian homes is also collective punishment.

Got yourself any references there? Without references, it's opinion. And honestly, we've seen the likes of your pro-Palestinian aid groups - they align themselves with terrorists, harming their own credibility.

References for what? that collective punishment is illegal? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention

+1 for me. Knew that would get you a response. So, tell me wise one, what should Israel's response be? You want equal response? Because I know your type loves to scream about that... So, if the Palestinians knowingly target civilians; if their stated goal is the destruction of the Jewish state; should Israel intentionally target Palestinian civilians, and commit genocide against them? That, my friend, would be an equal response.

Well they're already doing that, so no.

What ISrael should do, instead of killing tens times as many people and occupying a country for years, is actually work towards a solution. A solution where they have to make a compromise too and where they don't stop negotiations because of a few fringe groups.

Now don't misunderstand, I'm not in anyway advocating that. But before you get on your morally defunct high-horse to decry Israel's actions, realize that what the other side is doing is in NO way justified, and if it were happening to a country other than Israel, who, for whatever the reason, be they current or historical, is en vogue to hate upon, you'd be taking up their side. So don't give me your bigoted bull shit. You're ignorant of what is really happening there.

You don't seem to understand. Whatever the other side is doing does not justify the actions of Israel. That's the reason collective punishment is illegal, you don't get to break the law because the other side also breaks it.

[Serbia]

Laughable. I'm not arguing the definition of collective punishment. I'm arguing against the application of the definition.

You can go on believing in your theory that it's Israel in the wrong. Suit yourself.

[Snorri1234]

Laughable. I'm not arguing the definition of collective punishment. I'm arguing against the application of the definition.

What the f*ck are you talking about?

[Serbia]

Laughable. I'm not arguing the definition of collective punishment. I'm arguing against the application of the definition.

What the f*ck are you talking about?

Your fucking ignorance.
What the f*ck were you on about?

[Snorri1234]

Laughable. I'm not arguing the definition of collective punishment. I'm arguing against the application of the definition.

What the f*ck are you talking about?

Your fucking ignorance.
What the f*ck were you on about?

I'm saying that Israel's blockade is collective punishment. Feel free to argue that it isn't.

[Serbia]

Laughable. I'm not arguing the definition of collective punishment. I'm arguing against the application of the definition.

What the f*ck are you talking about?

Your fucking ignorance.
What the f*ck were you on about?

I'm saying that Israel's blockade is collective punishment. Feel free to argue that it isn't.

Thank you, I do feel free.
It isn't. Gaza is run by Hamas. Hamas was elected by the people of Gaza. Hamas refuses to recognize the legitimacy of Israel. By extension, the people of Gaza refuse to recognize the legitimacy of Israel. Israel, via a legal means of self defense, refuse to allow Iranian arms into Gaza which would then be used on he Israeli civilian population. Very reasonable course of action, IMO.

Oh, but I forgot, it's ISRAEL doing it. Must be evil. Those poor, murderous Palestinians. They're only killing innocent Israeli civilians because their land is being occupied. (because they're direct descendants of the original Canaanites who lived there first, right?)

Thanks for some more bull shit snorri. You are quite good at it. Too bad you're lacking in facts.

[GabonX]

If you dispute the claims feel free to do your own investigative research.

Logically, any action in support of an immoral philosophy can not, itself, be moral. This can be demonstrated by a propositional calculus equation. Ergo, no matter how justified the Zionist forces may, or may not, have been situationally, it is mathematically impossible for them to have been acting morally.

Israel is fully justified in defending itself against the declared ambitions of those who seek a second genocide on it's people..

Laughable. I'm not arguing the definition of collective punishment. I'm arguing against the application of the definition.

What the f*ck are you talking about?

Your fucking ignorance.
What the f*ck were you on about?

I'm saying that Israel's blockade is collective punishment. Feel free to argue that it isn't.

Thank you, I do feel free.
It isn't. Gaza is run by Hamas. Hamas was elected by the people of Gaza. Hamas refuses to recognize the legitimacy of Israel. By extension, the people of Gaza refuse to recognize the legitimacy of Israel. Israel, via a legal means of self defense, refuse to allow Iranian arms into Gaza which would then be used on he Israeli civilian population. Very reasonable course of action, IMO.

Oh, but I forgot, it's ISRAEL doing it. Must be evil. Those poor, murderous Palestinians. They're only killing innocent Israeli civilians because their land is being occupied. (because they're direct descendants of the original Canaanites who lived there first, right?)

Thanks for some more bull shit snorri. You are quite good at it. Too bad you're lacking in facts.

Exactly..

The siege of Gaza isn't about punishment. It's about preventing weapons from being delivered to people who want to kill civilians. Despite the lies which are told, it does not prevent legitimate aid from entering Gaza. Israel provides Gaza with billions of dollars worth of goods. The blockade is not a spiteful act. It's an inconvenience which Israel would be much better off without, but the alternative is far worse..

Also, Hamas isn't a fringe group. It is the democratically elected body of the Palestinian people which is dedicated to the destruction of Israel. They've declared that ambition in their chartar and refuse to remove it.

Hamas has no interest in compromising with Israel as demonstrated by their responding to Israel's unilateral pullout of Gaza by firing thousands of rockets on Israeli civilian centers. Likewise on the West Bank, it has been the Palestinians who refuse to engage in negotiations with Israel, not Israel which has refused to sit down with the Palestinians..


And spare me the bull shit about international law too. The international community has persecuted the Jewish people for the better part of the last 2000 years. The international community does not stop genocides..

.. The International Community failed to intervene in Armenia, the International Community failed to intervene in Rwanda, and perhaps most significantly, the International Community failed to prevent the German Holocaust. In addition, the International Community has repeatedly failed to live up to the commitments they've made to maintaining peace in the region. The International Community always turns tail and runs...

Frankly, the International Community is completely out of line and has no right to criticize Israel for defending itself against the impending genocide. The international community doesn't seem to think that this is a problem.

[saxitoxin]

If you dispute the claims feel free to do your own investigative research.

Logically, any action in support of an immoral philosophy can not, itself, be moral. This can be demonstrated by a propositional calculus equation. Ergo, no matter how justified the Zionist forces may, or may not, have been situationally, it is mathematically impossible for them to have been acting morally.

Israel is fully justified in defending itself against the declared ambitions of those who seek a second genocide on it's people..

UGH - I'm violating my oath gang and now I'm swimming in the the Dutcher's dirty bath water again ... someone get a hose to spray ol' Saxi down when he gets outta the tub with Snoori - he's gonna be stanky, gang! LMAO! J/K

Annnywho, nationalist Zionism being a fundamentally immoral philosophy, no action taken in support of it - even if situationally justified - can, itself, be moral.

In corollary, any action taken in opposition to Zionism - even if situationally ambiguous - is moral.

That said, Israel is not a Zionist state. It could engage in mathematically right action under a non-Likud government. At present, however, it can only be wrong in everything. We don't even need to look at the specific circumstances of any single situation. We only need to establish that a nationalist Zionist government is the controlling actor.

But that's just ol' Sax jibber-jabberin!

[GabonX]

Such a state is moral and necessary because of the many atrocities carried out and the millions of Jews killed throughout places like Russia, Germany, and pre-Israeli Palestine...

Aside from rare exceptions in places like the US (and even this can change), the world has shown that they cannot live harmoniously with the Jewish people.

[saxitoxin]

Such a state is moral and necessary because of the many atrocities carried out and the millions of Jews killed throughout places like Russia, Germany, and pre-Israeli Palestine...

Aside from rare exceptions in places like the US (and this may be changing), the world has shown that they cannot live harmoniously with the Jewish people.

Well, first, Sax doesn't believe Zionism and Judaism are inextricably linked.

Second, the natural conclusion of this line of thought is that a Zionist state will be ultimately exterminated as the world is infinitely larger than any Zionist state could base a population upon. The argument then becomes that, just as redheads and short people will eventually be culled from the human genetic makeup, so - too - will Hebrews, that this is a natural, evolutionary process no different than the fertilization of a human egg in a competitive breeding environment.

Of course, as you know Gabby - ol' Sax is a socialist - so is not inclined to believe that. However, I think the choices to which you limit yourself perpetrate an A/B sophistry.

Like I said, though, that's just ol' Sax jibber-jabberin!

[Snorri1234]

Thank you, I do feel free.
It isn't. Gaza is run by Hamas. Hamas was elected by the people of Gaza. Hamas refuses to recognize the legitimacy of Israel. By extension, the people of Gaza refuse to recognize the legitimacy of Israel. Israel, via a legal means of self defense, refuse to allow Iranian arms into Gaza which would then be used on he Israeli civilian population. Very reasonable course of action, IMO.

Yes. And it would be very reasonable if it wasn't actually punishing the palestinians. The whole electing Hamas thing matters not. Nor does the fact Hamas doesn't recognize Israel.

All that truly matters is whether you are punishing the many for the actions of the few. In a democracy it would be foolish to do so anyway. I mean, that's saying that people who voted for Gore are responsible for the actions of Bush. The actions of Hamas (they're not even the major shooters of rockets nowadays) do not justify a blockade the likes of which Israel has implented. Punishing the whole village for actions by groups in that village is illegal. So what you do is see whether those who have done nothing are truly negatively affected by the actions of a few. And in that case it's obviously that Israel is punishing the palestinian people for actions they can't help.

Oh, but I forgot, it's ISRAEL doing it. Must be evil. Those poor, murderous Palestinians. They're only killing innocent Israeli civilians because their land is being occupied. (because they're direct descendants of the original Canaanites who lived there first, right?)

Thanks for some more bull shit snorri. You are quite good at it. Too bad you're lacking in facts.

Yes, you accurately described my position.

[Juan_Bottom]

It doesn't work that way dude. International law doesn't include "suckers had it coming" as a justification for punishments which are illegal.

There goes my argument.

Punishing the whole village for actions by groups in that village is illegal. So what you do is see whether those who have done nothing are truly negatively affected by the actions of a few. And in that case it's obviously that Israel is punishing the palestinian people for actions they can't help.

I do agree with Snorri here. And this itself is part of the Geneva conventions. You also can't deny a civilian population what it needs to live healthy lives.... even if they are supporting your enemies. You can deny them what they need to lead happy lives, but that's a different issue. This is a direct result of the total warfare of WWII.


I think that the overall shade might be gray, but the issues are black and white.
Were the Israelis justified in boarding that ship? *Militarily speaking, yeah.
Are they justified in denying aid to Palestine? No.
Is Hamas a bunch of douche bags who have it coming? Yes.
Were the Israelis justified in responding with deadly force? Probably yes, but I'm not sure about how much they needed.

But like sorta like Saxi is saying, the blockade itself is unjust and illegal. So the whole fact that the Israelis were even on that ship doesn't seem right.
Then again, I can't condemn anyone particularly for what happened. It is what it is.



*I mean this in the same way the American government was justified in taking Native American lands. They were a militarily defeated people.

[Snorri1234]

Punishing the whole village for actions by groups in that village is illegal. So what you do is see whether those who have done nothing are truly negatively affected by the actions of a few. And in that case it's obviously that Israel is punishing the palestinian people for actions they can't help.

I do agree with Snorri here. And this itself is part of the Geneva conventions. You also can't deny a civilian population what it needs to live healthy lives.... even if they are supporting your enemies. You can deny them what they need to lead happy lives, but that's a different issue. This is a direct result of the total warfare of WWII.


I think that the overall shade might be gray, but the issues are black and white.
Were the Israelis justified in boarding that ship? *Militarily speaking, yeah.
Are they justified in denying aid to Palestine? No.
Is Hamas a bunch of douche bags who have it coming? Yes.
Were the Israelis justified in responding with deadly force? Probably yes, but I'm not sure about how much they needed.

Pretty much this, yeah. The legality (not morality) is linked to how just the whole thing is. I condemn the action of boarding the flotilla and killing a bunch of people but since I don't know them I don't care that much about what happened. It's just that I think that Israel should've never done it and really shouldn't be there in the first place.


All this shit should've never happened in the first place. I don't care about who started what, I am more concerned about who has the power to stop this and in this case Israel can stop it but they don't. What they're doing is not conductive to peace.

[saxitoxin]

What they're doing is not conductive to peace.

nor is it conducive

(LOL, steenkolenengels)

[LYR]

Collective punishment:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/11/world ... ?th&emc=th

All this shit should've never happened in the first place. I don't care about who started what, I am more concerned about who has the power to stop this and in this case Israel can stop it but they don't. What they're doing is not conductive to peace.

Hamas is dedicated to the destruction of Israel. The only things currently preventing Hamas from attacking Israel is Israeli martial superiority (not even), and the blockade. The Hamas government will not compromise. If Israel lifts the blockade, supplies will most certainly be delivered to Gaza. Along with terrorists, weapons, ammunition, etc.

Israel's blockade of Gaza is essential to the Israeli people's security and livelihood.

The blockade sucks for the Gazans (obviously). It really does. However, Israel's foremost priority is not the comfort and livelihood of the Palestinian people. Its foremost concern is its survival and the survival of its citizens. The blockade is by no means good; however, it is the only one method that will keep the Israeli people safe.

So, for those of you who condemn Israel for its blockade, I ask you (this is for you, Snorri): what should they do? (I'm looking for a solution that will both satisfy the needs of the Gazans while maintaining the security and livelihood of the Israelis)

[PLAYER57832]

Collective punishment:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/11/world ... ?th&emc=th

All this shit should've never happened in the first place. I don't care about who started what, I am more concerned about who has the power to stop this and in this case Israel can stop it but they don't. What they're doing is not conductive to peace.

Hamas is dedicated to the destruction of Israel. The only things currently preventing Hamas from attacking Israel is Israeli martial superiority (not even), and the blockade. The Hamas government will not compromise. If Israel lifts the blockade, supplies will most certainly be delivered to Gaza. Along with terrorists, weapons, ammunition, etc.

Yes, and Israel is intent upon taking all of Palestine, particularly all of Jerusalem and pretty universally declares that they don't really have to consider Palestiniens -- their culture, etc, because there is no such thing as a "Palestinien", they are "just Arabs" pretty much put up to declaring themselves as "a people" by other Arabs.

So, who really and truly is more justified?

The Palestiniens, who can trace their ownership and occupation of those lands back several hundred, even thousands of years ? (yep, some pre-date the old Israel!.. many are actually descendents of Jewish remnants)? OR
these new people, from Europe and America largely (some Jews definitely remained, but they were a minority, who decide that the Bible tells them they should have the land?

Before you answer, remember that Native Americans have absolute and complete religious claim to most of the US... and they have not even been "gone" a full 200 years in many cases.

Israel's blockade of Gaza is essential to the Israeli people's security and livelihood.

The blockade sucks for the Gazans (obviously). It really does. However, Israel's foremost priority is not the comfort and livelihood of the Palestinian people. Its foremost concern is its survival and the survival of its citizens. The blockade is by no means good; however, it is the only one method that will keep the Israeli people safe.

Actually, the occupier of another nation has an obligation to care for the people of the lands they occupy. Israel has NEVER honored that obligation, has instead treated the entire population as if they were prisoners of war, denied them most opportunities, and worse.

So, ask yourself how long most of us in the US would endure such conditions without fighting back?

So, for those of you who condemn Israel for its blockade, I ask you (this is for you, Snorri): what should they do? (I'm looking for a solution that will both satisfy the needs of the Gazans while maintaining the security and livelihood of the Israelis)

We would undoubtedly have faught Israel long before this.

[LYR]

Yes, and Israel is intent upon taking all of Palestine, particularly all of Jerusalem and pretty universally declares that they don't really have to consider Palestiniens -- their culture, etc, because there is no such thing as a "Palestinien", they are "just Arabs" pretty much put up to declaring themselves as "a people" by other Arabs.

Israel is intent upon taking all of Palestine? Link please.

So, who really and truly is more justified?

The Palestiniens, who can trace their ownership and occupation of those lands back several hundred, even thousands of years ? (yep, some pre-date the old Israel!.. many are actually descendents of Jewish remnants)? OR
these new people, from Europe and America largely (some Jews definitely remained, but they were a minority, who decide that the Bible tells them they should have the land?

Before you answer, remember that Native Americans have absolute and complete religious claim to most of the US... and they have not even been "gone" a full 200 years in many cases.

This is not what I am discussing, and so I will not bother making a counterargument. I can (quite easily), but there have been a thousand debates like this already, and I am sure no one is interested in reading the same old shit again and again. That is not to mention I would rather stay on topic.

Israel's blockade of Gaza is essential to the Israeli people's security and livelihood.

The blockade sucks for the Gazans (obviously). It really does. However, Israel's foremost priority is not the comfort and livelihood of the Palestinian people. Its foremost concern is its survival and the survival of its citizens. The blockade is by no means good; however, it is the only one method that will keep the Israeli people safe.

Actually, the occupier of another nation has an obligation to care for the people of the lands they occupy. Israel has NEVER honored that obligation, has instead treated the entire population as if they were prisoners of war, denied them most opportunities, and worse.

Obligation to care? Well, the Palestinians in the West Bank can care for themselves. So can the Palestinians in Gaza (did you read the article to which I gave a link?). The people of Gaza are not starving as the people in North Korea are. This is not to mention that Israel does let humanitarian aid through. Perhaps not enough (that is debatable), but some. Israel needs to care more about its own survival, which is under a constant, overbearing threat (albeit more eminent at some time than others), than about the needs of the Gazans, who have vast support worldwide.

Israel is letting the Gazans live, which is the most it can do under the circumstances. If the Hamas government was overthrown (I'll admit, unlikely - see the article), then things would be much better. Israel is not committed to the annihilation of Arabs. It is just trying to survive, and provide a homeland for people who have been abused for as long as it can remember. Take into consideration the fact that the Arabs have devout support all over the world, yet Israelis are condemned at every possible turn. When were the terrorists who sent thousands upon thousands of rockets into Israel condemned?

So, ask yourself how long most of us in the US would endure such conditions without fighting back?

So, for those of you who condemn Israel for its blockade, I ask you (this is for you, Snorri): what should they do? (I'm looking for a solution that will both satisfy the needs of the Gazans while maintaining the security and livelihood of the Israelis)

We would undoubtedly have faught Israel long before this.

Your comparison between the United States and Gaza... it does not make sense. Taking the time to explain it would take more time than I have, but please, before you post your next response in retaliation to what I said, think about it. It really does not make sense.

However, if you would like to make a comparison that does make sense, why do we not compare the United States and Israel? What would the United States have done if Native Americans were sending rockets into the United States from a neighboring country (this neighbor is theoretical, please do not use Canada as an example)(although, Mexico, albeit not a good example, good provide some interesting insight, both in the drug trade and in illegal immigration)(just some food for thought)?


By the way, you seem to regard Israel as being an extremist country. From where have you received this perception?