Conquer Club

Hey, I have not been on this forum in a while, I thought I would jump in spontaneously. I think this is a good topic to discuss and I am interested in other opinions on the matter.

I'm sure you have all heard about this raid, and if you have not, here are some links:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/01/world ... ?th&emc=th
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/137825
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middl ... 37484.html
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Government/Co ... y-2010.htm

The last link has a good amount of videos dealing with the actual fighting, albeit it is from an Israeli source. You can probably find many more videos and links on the internet.

What do you guys think? Was Israel justified in boarding the ships and in defending themselves, or did they have no right, and is its blockade of Gaza wrong/unlawful?

Totally justified. Israel is within their legal rights to conduct a blockade, and are conducting it according to the laws of the sea. This is not the first time they've boarded a ship; it's the first time there was a significant resistance, which led to the Israeli commandos having to defend themselves and each other with lethal force. Israel always offers to receive the shipments in an Israeli port and ship the supplies to Gaza themselves. Remember, Hamas (a terrorist organization) runs Gaza. Hamas is financially tied to Iran, which has publicly and repeatedly expressed a desire to "wipe Israel off the map". Israel needs the blockade.

i agree if it was a true humanitarian ship WHY DID THEY FIGHT BACK????

targetman377 wrote:i agree if it was a true humanitarian ship WHY DID THEY FIGHT BACK????

The Israeli commandos fought back because they were being beaten which clubs and rods, stabbed with knives, and shot with their own pistols (do not quote me on that last on, sorry). If you look at the al-jazeera vid, the commandos were getting the shit kicked out of them and if they did not respond they would have most likely been killed. And for what? The activists that died have become martyrs and now the world is (again) condemning Israel. Had the commandos not fought back and died, I doubt the international community would be any less sympathetic to the "activists" on that ship.

I had a friend mention recently that, being commandos, the Israelis could have theoretically fought back using hand-to-hand combat without having killed anyone. I replied that they were severely outnumbered, not mention they were being dropped onto the ship one by one (and potentially being shot by their own pistols).

Thoughts?

LYR wrote:

targetman377 wrote:i agree if it was a true humanitarian ship WHY DID THEY FIGHT BACK????

The Israeli commandos fought back because they were being beaten which clubs and rods, stabbed with knives, and shot with their own pistols (do not quote me on that last on, sorry). If you look at the al-jazeera vid, the commandos were getting the shit kicked out of them and if they did not respond they would have most likely been killed. And for what? The activists that died have become martyrs and now the world is (again) condemning Israel. Had the commandos not fought back and died, I doubt the international community would be any less sympathetic to the "activists" on that ship.

I had a friend mention recently that, being commandos, the Israelis could have theoretically fought back using hand-to-hand combat without having killed anyone. I replied that they were severely outnumbered, not mention they were being dropped onto the ship one by one (and potentially being shot by their own pistols).

Thoughts?

I have been using al-jazeera as a source throughout the entire fiasco. They continue to put their foot in their mouths. I shared an al-jazeera story in the other israel link, where AJ was showing and interviewing the flotilla members bragging about how they were going to run the blockade, while they were already being escorted near Cyprus, because Cyprus refused to dock the Flotilla (fear of illegality) and also employed military police to stop Cyprian politicians from joining (?) the flotilla. Israel had already been warning them for hours, even days before the blockade.

It really is as simple as Israel drew a line in the water, and the flotilla crossed it. Israel did exactly what it had said it would do. The strategic use of force should not come as a surprise to any adult human being that is alive on the earth today....especially when it comes to Israel

Does anyone have a map or a link which shows exactly where the boarding took place? I've not really come across this (tbh this story hasn't really interested me that much, it was obvious what was going to happen), and the only thing that might make it wrong imo is if Israel boarded the ship before it was in its waters. Everything else atm I agree with, although the report thats going to come out in a year or so might shed a bit more light on some areas.

I cannot copy and paste it, but the map is on the first link I provided (NY Times), somewhere on the left side of the page, you have to scroll down a bit.

I have heard it was in international waters, but I am not totally sure about the accuracy of what I was told.

Hmmm? I guess the real red flag is that the boat was still in international waters. I'd say that if the vessel entered Israeli waters then it was okay, but the boat was boarded outside of Israeli waters which makes this an international incident. But, it was Israel, so nobody will do anything about it anyway, so, if that is the case...Israel was totally within their rights to kill international peace activists who were only armed with clubs and sling shots.

If Israel was truly in international waters when the incident occurred then I would say Israel has some explaining to do, and the peace activists had every right to defend their vessel at sea. However, if the boat was in Israeli waters, then Israel had every right to demand a full inspection of cargo before entering into Gaza.

That's all I have to really say about this ordeal.

Titanic wrote:Does anyone have a map or a link which shows exactly where the boarding took place? I've not really come across this (tbh this story hasn't really interested me that much, it was obvious what was going to happen), and the only thing that might make it wrong imo is if Israel boarded the ship before it was in its waters. Everything else atm I agree with, although the report thats going to come out in a year or so might shed a bit more light on some areas.

the exact location will probably be whatever Israel claimed it was, and the other side will deny it.

However, to assume that Israel was just being a hardass and ignored the law because it could not wait to bash some skulls in is unrealistic IMO. On the contrary, Al-Jazeera has documented all the way, just how much of a hardass the humanitarians were. Confirmed, before the incident, by AJ and Cyprus.

Video showing the "aid" bound for Gaza.

http://www.flix.co.il/tapuz/showVideo.asp?m=3423928

Serbia wrote:Video showing the "aid" bound for Gaza.

http://www.flix.co.il/tapuz/showVideo.asp?m=3423928

Holy crap... I knew it the mission was not actually humanitarian, but did not think they would attempt to bring THAT much without being checked.... That is not to mention that the rest of the "aid" they sent was mostly crap.

LYR wrote:Holy crap... I knew it the mission was not actually humanitarian, but did not think they would attempt to bring THAT much without being checked.... That is not to mention that the rest of the "aid" they sent was mostly crap.

Ol' Sax has a supremely difficult time believing that aid ships were carrying shipping containers full of fragmentation grenades, and assorted other arms and munitions, but the occupants of said ships had to resort to seizing the sidearms of the Zionist boarding parties.

Nonetheless, it is fortunate these munitions were all clearly labeled in English for the benefit of TV News cameras.

saxitoxin wrote:

LYR wrote:Holy crap... I knew it the mission was not actually humanitarian, but did not think they would attempt to bring THAT much without being checked.... That is not to mention that the rest of the "aid" they sent was mostly crap.

Ol' Sax has a supremely difficult time believing that aid ships were carrying shipping containers full of fragmentation grenades, and assorted other arms and munitions, but the occupants of said ships had to resort to seizing the sidearms of the Zionist boarding parties.

Nonetheless, it is fortunate these munitions were all clearly labeled in English for the benefit of TV News cameras.

That footage is of a ship boarded in 2009..

What is interesting is that the convoy was orchestrated by Al Qaeda affiliated terrorists and that the crew included a round the clock militant security presence.

Serbia wrote:Video showing the "aid" bound for Gaza.

http://www.flix.co.il/tapuz/showVideo.asp?m=3423928

... Somebody needs to show this video on Hi-Def big screen when the UN (and the US) move to condemn Israel.

http://weeklystandard.com/blogs/sources ... -next-week

...

Nobunaga wrote:

Serbia wrote:Video showing the "aid" bound for Gaza.

http://www.flix.co.il/tapuz/showVideo.asp?m=3423928

... Somebody needs to show this video on Hi-Def big screen when the UN (and the US) move to condemn Israel.

http://weeklystandard.com/blogs/sources ... -next-week

...

Critics would argue that it's irrelevant to the issue at hand, and that it doesn't justify the blockade..

GabonX wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

LYR wrote:Holy crap... I knew it the mission was not actually humanitarian, but did not think they would attempt to bring THAT much without being checked.... That is not to mention that the rest of the "aid" they sent was mostly crap.

Ol' Sax has a supremely difficult time believing that aid ships were carrying shipping containers full of fragmentation grenades, and assorted other arms and munitions, but the occupants of said ships had to resort to seizing the sidearms of the Zionist boarding parties.

Nonetheless, it is fortunate these munitions were all clearly labeled in English for the benefit of TV News cameras.

That footage is of a ship boarded in 2009..

What is interesting is that the convoy was orchestrated by Al Qaeda affiliated terrorists and that the crew included a round the clock militant security presence.

a. That is good we can clarify the footage of armaments being discovered was not from the Turkish aid convoy.

b. While I have no doubt that debka.com has talented and experienced writers, and I am certain they provide excellent reportage on any number of issues, their stridently Zionist credo raises a credibility gap in the believability of their famously unnamed, always anonymous "intelligence sources" [sic] on this specific one. IMO only, I'm certain - others may disagree! It's wonderful we can share our diversity of opinion in this marketplace of ideas, gang!

Titanic wrote:Does anyone have a map or a link which shows exactly where the boarding took place? I've not really come across this (tbh this story hasn't really interested me that much, it was obvious what was going to happen), and the only thing that might make it wrong imo is if Israel boarded the ship before it was in its waters. Everything else atm I agree with, although the report thats going to come out in a year or so might shed a bit more light on some areas.

All reports indicate it was in international waters. Israel claims that is OK. Others say not. Most legal experts say the issue is very dicey, with no clear right or wrong on either side.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Titanic wrote:Does anyone have a map or a link which shows exactly where the boarding took place? I've not really come across this (tbh this story hasn't really interested me that much, it was obvious what was going to happen), and the only thing that might make it wrong imo is if Israel boarded the ship before it was in its waters. Everything else atm I agree with, although the report thats going to come out in a year or so might shed a bit more light on some areas.

All reports indicate it was in international waters. Israel claims that is OK. Others say not. Most legal experts say the issue is very dicey, with no clear right or wrong on either side.

It's a blockade. They do not have to wait until they make it out of international waters.

saxitoxin wrote:

GabonX wrote:

saxitoxin wrote:

LYR wrote:Holy crap... I knew it the mission was not actually humanitarian, but did not think they would attempt to bring THAT much without being checked.... That is not to mention that the rest of the "aid" they sent was mostly crap.

Ol' Sax has a supremely difficult time believing that aid ships were carrying shipping containers full of fragmentation grenades, and assorted other arms and munitions, but the occupants of said ships had to resort to seizing the sidearms of the Zionist boarding parties.

Nonetheless, it is fortunate these munitions were all clearly labeled in English for the benefit of TV News cameras.

That footage is of a ship boarded in 2009..

What is interesting is that the convoy was orchestrated by Al Qaeda affiliated terrorists and that the crew included a round the clock militant security presence.

a. That is good we can clarify the footage of armaments being discovered was not from the Turkish aid convoy.

b. While I have no doubt that debka.com has talented and experienced writers, and I am certain they provide excellent reportage on any number of issues, their stridently Zionist credo raises a credibility gap in the believability of their famously unnamed, always anonymous "intelligence sources" [sic] on this specific one. IMO only, I'm certain - others may disagree! It's wonderful we can share our diversity of opinion in this marketplace of ideas, gang!

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

What are your thoughts on Al Jazeera?

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Titanic wrote:Does anyone have a map or a link which shows exactly where the boarding took place? I've not really come across this (tbh this story hasn't really interested me that much, it was obvious what was going to happen), and the only thing that might make it wrong imo is if Israel boarded the ship before it was in its waters. Everything else atm I agree with, although the report thats going to come out in a year or so might shed a bit more light on some areas.

All reports indicate it was in international waters. Israel claims that is OK. Others say not. Most legal experts say the issue is very dicey, with no clear right or wrong on either side.

They (Israel) were charging a blockade which was established to prevent weapons from being delivered from a group that has their destruction outlined in it's charter.

Given that the international community has spent the better part of the last 2000 years dispersing and persecuting these people everywhere they were forced to go, I find the idea that people are going to throw allegations that Israel violated international law in defending themselves against the declared genocidal intent of their enemies to be laughable.

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

They are?

Snorri1234 wrote:

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

They are?

Are you daft?

GabonX wrote: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!

Serbia wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:

Serbia wrote: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.

Snorri1234 wrote:

Serbia wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:

Serbia wrote: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.

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'. 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.