Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it,
follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given
their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
UN Report on Gaza Flottila is out.
Posts
Again, based off of my somewhat limited knowledge, live fire =/= opening fire with bullets. I think it was pointed out above that flashbangs count as live ammunition.
He is also a slight douche, but I do know the guy well enough to say (as he taught me for a year or so at law school during post grad) he is perhaps one of the smartest guys I've ever met and one should assume that he would not sign off on a fundamentally flawed report.
Yes, there really is a meaningful line. It's the difference between firing before you are attacked, and firing after you are attacked. That's the difference between breaching ROE and abiding by them. That's the difference between acting legally as a soldier and acting illegally. [I'm assuming you are talking about firing at passengers, rather than simply firing warning shots / pyrotechnics]
Also, since everything that I've read from that report so far studiously avoids giving any testimony from the actual soldiers or Israeli command, it doesn't indicate whether (as suggested in the inital post) they thought they were under small arms fire. I agree that they are unlikely to have shot into a mob surrounding their own men, but if as the initial post states, someone called a small arms contact (whether they were found to be right or not after the fact), that would completely explain why they fired at other passengers on deck.
Why would they first mention "smoke and stun grenades" and then later add "live ammunition" if all they meant by "live ammunition" was "stun grenades"? This is quite a stellar combination of pedantry and ignorance.
Read the report: dead bodies with wounds consistant with rounds fired from above at a distance
"I think I can comment on this because I used to live above the Baby Doll Lounge, a topless bar that was once frequented by bikers in lower Manhattan."
No one ever gets shot at, and when it misses them, thinks "Oh hey they missed on purpose to tell me to stop what I'm doing."
Why would they first mention "Smoke and stun grenades" and then later add "live ammunition" if all they meant by "live ammunition" was "bullets"? This is quite a stellar combination of pedantry and ignorance.
See? It's not very fun when you start calling people names.
I am reading the report and attempting to not read my opinions into the paper. I am also trying to work by the principle that you should eliminate all of the reasonable answers, move on to human stupidity, and then, finally, once you have put all of those to rest, move on to "It was a conspiracy to commit murder". I will, however, admit to the fact that I was reading flashbangs into live ammunition. It could of also been warning shots fired along with stun grenades and the like to dissuade people from attacking them, after the protesters tied off the first rope, while the soldiers were repelling down, or at any time before the soldiers boots hit the deck. It could also, as you propose, could of been the Soldiers attempting to kill people before they landed. Using my defined logic trail as above, I would like to discount all of the reasonable options before moving into "Bloodthirsty Israelis", and this report is worded in an ambiguous way (they are oddly specific with what grenade types and then very open ended with 'live ammunition', as we argued about above) that makes that pursuit somewhat frustrating. That is, however, not absolving anyone of blame (or laying blame on the UN; using the same logic trail as outlined above I'm much more inclined to believe that this is someone who just can't write a clear paper as opposed to "hurf durf UN is lying!!111!!"). I am just pointing out what I see as the logic and wording flaws of the paper and attempting to get answers for them.
-edit- Slight edit in:
Unless it says somewhere in the report that it is those shots fired before soldiers landed were the same shots that hit protesters, I'm inclined to believe the much more reasonable situation of the helicopter firing more shots after the soldiers landed and were mobbed. I will admit, however, that I am basing what I see as logic/wording flaws off of the summary, and it's possible that the full paper is clearer.
consistent with an extra-legal, arbitrary and summary execution. Furkan Doğan and İbrahim
Bilgen were shot at near range while the victims were lying injured on the top deck. Cevdet
Kiliçlar, Cengiz Akyüz, Cengiz Songür and Çetin Topçuoğlu were shot on the bridge deck
while not participating in activities that represented a threat to any Israeli soldier. In these
instances and possibly other killings on the Mavi Marmara, Israeli forces carried out extralegal,
arbitrary and summary executions prohibited by international human rights law,
specifically article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
See this, the findings are that well IDF soldiers conducted executions on civilian prisoners. There is no heat of combat piffle or self defence: they murdered civilians.
"I think I can comment on this because I used to live above the Baby Doll Lounge, a topless bar that was once frequented by bikers in lower Manhattan."
That is the exact line of thought that lead to this tragedy. Lets just load up a bunch of boats and sail through a blockade to deliver "food and medical supplies" because Israel has a history of being such a calm reasonable bunch and will surely let us through. The report has concluded that various people are now dead because they thought running a blockade was a good idea. The other ships which surrendered immediately seemed to avoid being fired upon. This entire thing was a group of people deciding to run a blockade, cause an international incident, and thumb their nose as Israel. Congratulations you've caused an international incident, and several people are dead. Hope it was worth it. Do you think the world is operating under the illusion Israel is all candy and smiles?
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
You may not consider it Illegal but International law does not work that way:
2. Legal analysis of the use of force in intercepting the Gaza flotilla
(a) Excessive use of force and the right to life and to physical integrity
162. Article 6, paragraph 1, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
states:
Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by
law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life.
This right is non-derogable.
163. Insofar as the Israeli interception of the flotilla was unlawful—and the Mission
considers that it was unlawful—the use of force by the Israeli forces in seizing control of
the Mavi Marmara and other vessels was also prima facie unlawful since there was no legal
basis for the Israeli forces to conduct an assault and interception in international waters.
Moreover, in undertaking these operations and regardless of the legality of the operation,
the Israeli forces were obliged to do so in accordance with the law, including Israel’s
international human rights obligations.
"I think I can comment on this because I used to live above the Baby Doll Lounge, a topless bar that was once frequented by bikers in lower Manhattan."
All that tells them to do is hide and wait til the guys who are shooting at them are closer.
And whats with "food and medical supplies"? Are you implying that wasn't what they were delivering?
And if they just weren't wearing such short skirts.....
I don't think that the IDF committing executions and the like are up for question; I, at least, agree on that point and lay a good portion (if not a majority) of the blame for the incident on the Israelis shoulders. I believe the current argument is over if the IDF went in with the intent of shooting (or overreacted quickly), or if this went out of hand due to both sides. Again, I'm not arguing that somehow the protesters deserved it or anything silly/sick like that, but rather that both sides acted in ways incorrect as opposed to laying the entirety of the blame of the incident on the Israelis (I do lay the entirety of the blame for the executions on the Israelis, though; even if you were attacked, that's no reason to commit crimes).
No they were mearly beaten. . .
173. The Mission is also concerned with the nature of the force used by the Israeli forces
in the interception of the three further vessels in the flotilla: Challenger 1, Sfendoni and the
Eleftheri Mesogios. One each of the vessels some of the passengers merely used passive
resistance techniques – placing their bodies in the paths of the Israeli soldiers – as a
symbolic gesture in opposition to the respective boarding. However, in securing control of
these vessels the Israeli forces used significant force, including stun grenades, electroshock
weapons, soft-baton charges fired at close range, paintballs, plastic bullets and physical
force. This resulted in a number of injuries to passengers including burns, bruises,
hematomas and fractures. One passenger who was not participating in passive resistance
activities, a photo-journalist, received burns from an electroshock weapon. The Mission has
found that the force used by the Israeli soldiers in intercepting the Challenger 1, the
Sfendoni and the Eleftheri Mesogios was unnecessary, disproportionate, excessive and
inappropriate, and amounted to violations of the right to physical integrity, as stipulated in
article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Congratulations on defending a regime that considers it laudable to execute civilians then lie about it afterwards.
"I think I can comment on this because I used to live above the Baby Doll Lounge, a topless bar that was once frequented by bikers in lower Manhattan."
Telling Israel we are only carrying "food and medical supplies" is not going to prevent them from attacking you. It very well might have been just food and medical supplies, they might have only found food and medical supplies, or their could have been a ton of RPG components that mysteriously got dumped into the ocean after shit went down. The truth is largely irrelevant at this point.
Frankly, other than the death of a couple idiot protesters, what has this entire incident achieved?
I am not defending anyone. I am pointing out when you have a regime that will execute civilians and lie about it intentionally trying to get them to do just that does not elicit any sympathy. You stick your hand in the lion cage, don't come crying to me about being unable to us your WII anymore.
apparent exchanges between the Israeli Navy and the Defne Y which included insulting
references by unknown persons referring to “Auschwitz” and the 11 September 2001 attack
on the World Trade Centre in New York. However, the Mission is not satisfied that these
recordings are authentic, nor has the Government of Israel made this material available to
the Mission for appropriate examination. The Mission was given positive evidence that no
such statements were made by anyone involved in communications on the flotilla.
Don't think that's been mentioned yet.
So, uh, classy move there, Israel.
Attention. Had you honestly not figured that out yet?
Gives up.
Hey look you have just proven to the world that Israel will do some screwed up stuff. Of course anyone paying attention already knew this. Of all the reasons the US supports Israel because they are really nice people is not one of them.
Nobody should be surprised by Israel's actions.
So more proof that Israel is run by a pack of psychopaths that ignore international law. I get it I really do.
And the Magneta, I don't even know what mixed metaphor you are blithering on about. Is it a really subtle attempt at godwin?
"I think I can comment on this because I used to live above the Baby Doll Lounge, a topless bar that was once frequented by bikers in lower Manhattan."
The point is most of us already knew that, and are wondering why the hell a group of people decided to run a blockade put in place by these same people. You have a blockade in place already in violation of international law. You get the great idea to run said illegal blockade. You tell them you are going to do it, but don't worry it is just "food and medical supplies", expect them to believe you, wonder why bad shit goes down, and then looked shocked that they are lying about it.
Again, blaming the victim.
You may or may not have noticed this, but the PA D&D crowd is pretty far away from your average citizen when it comes to paying attention in general. Pretty sure plenty of people learned a lot about Israel from all the hoopla.
Which is largely the point, THIS is the incident that has caused people to go "Hey maybe Israel is not so nice after all." Which leads to the response of "Well no shit, have you not been paying attention to the last 20+ years of crap they had pulled?"
The victim knowingly set out to be a victim. They went into this knowing they were going to get a response, and it was likely to be a bad one. They brought this upon themselves. At most they have accomplished some short term backlash, that will quickly fade, and bring us back to the status quo.
The victim knowingly set out to be a victim. They went into this knowing they were going to get a response, and it was likely to be a bad one. They brought this upon themselves. [/QUOTE]
This doesn't fit with your other posts in this thread, which are basically 'lol idiots running blockade = idiots.'
1. Israel is batshit crazy and has been for some time.
2. Israel sets up an illegal blockade to prevent people from giving their RPG tennis partner any more ammo, as well as make their lives as miserable as possible by blocking as much stuff as possible.
3. People decide to run said blockade. Tell Israel they are doing it. They are either A. Idiots, or B. Expect bad shit to go down that they can spin for political gain and are willing to get people killed to do it.
4. They arrive at blockade, most ships immediately surrender. Some don't. Israeli special forces (not nice people) are deployed to deal with the last ship. Bad shit happens.
5. Random people who couldn't be bothered to pay attention up until now suddenly start freaking about how Israel has become batshit crazy and there was no way to expect bad shit would go down.
6. People point out that Israel has been batshit crazy for some time, and anyone attempting to run their blockade was either A. an Idiot, or B. Provoking this very response.
So either A. they deserved to get shot, or B. they wanted to get shot. Oddly enough the not wielding lead pipes boats seemed to come out ok. How odd the boat with the guy running the whole show had the most problems. Odd that.
So I guess you were just ignorant of that? The answer, obviously, was B.
edit: oh, I see, you think people willing to die for something are idiots. Right, that makes sense then. I disagree, personally, but I see where you're coming from.
Not really. Only a few said that. Reporters and various activists wouldn't have boarded if they thought they'd actually get shot at.
Most were expecting Israel to back down when they went through international waters and then along Egypt/Gaza's coast, or just simply capture the boat when it ended up at port. This wasn't the first time an aid boat had been sent.
Murder was not very likely, since it'd not be in Israel's interests to do so, especially in international waters with so much public press around. It was largely considered a botched operation, not business as usual.
See, you're already missing key elements of what actually happened, which kind of matters. The flotilla didn't reach the blockade, the Israelis raided them in international waters. That's something you don't do unless you're at open war with the target, prepared for war with the target as a result of the raid, or are a pirate.
From everything I've read what Israel did is very contrary to how blockades are normally performed.
Some were willing to die for the cause for sure, but don't forget about men who were simply pissed at helicopters shooting at their boat with women and old people below deck.
I wasn't trying to attack your argument, just trying to fill in the gaps.
Detharin claimed they were idiots or they were trying to provoke an attack, in a false dichotomy. Just pointing out that they weren't just idiots nor were they just trying to provoke an attack.
Like you said, they felt the benefits outweighed the risks, but they weren't asking to die.
For Turkey, there is even better stuff coming. This Turkish movie about revenge on the Israeli commander of the raid looks good.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valley_of_the_Wolves:_Palestine
A description of that series? One episode showed Israeli security forces kidnapping children and shooting old men.
No no, I see