Options

UN Report on Gaza Flottila is out.

2456

Posts

  • Options
    SimpsonsParadoxSimpsonsParadox Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Garthor wrote: »

    Is there even a meaningful line to draw between that and just opening fire before anybody was even off the helicopter? I guess maybe you could argue that if they were shooting BEFORE any soldiers had rappelled down, they could claim that they were POTENTIAL hostiles.

    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.

    SimpsonsParadox on
  • Options
    KalkinoKalkino Buttons Londres Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Just in case this is an issue, the proposed chair (iirc) was Geoffrey Palmer, former PM of NZ and noted constitutional lawyer and I assume he is still involved. This guy is responsible for most of the good reforms of NZ constitutional law in the 1980s and an incredibly talented constitutional lawyer and academic. So far as anyone who has an actual clue with regards to Westminster style constitutional law goes, he would be very high on the list.

    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.

    Kalkino on
    Freedom for the Northern Isles!
  • Options
    AltaliciousAltalicious Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Garthor wrote: »
    The soldiers who were on the deck were getting mobbed with clubs and kitchen knives. Shooting at a mob surrounding one of your own men is something I think we can reasonably assume is so recklessly insane that it simply didn't happen. So, that leaves us with the "covering fire" consisting of shooting at civilians who are armed with - at best - fucking slingshots, milling about on their own, not threatening anybody.

    Is there even a meaningful line to draw between that and just opening fire before anybody was even off the helicopter? I guess maybe you could argue that if they were shooting BEFORE any soldiers had rappelled down, they could claim that they were POTENTIAL hostiles.

    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.

    Altalicious on
  • Options
    GarthorGarthor Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Garthor wrote: »

    Is there even a meaningful line to draw between that and just opening fire before anybody was even off the helicopter? I guess maybe you could argue that if they were shooting BEFORE any soldiers had rappelled down, they could claim that they were POTENTIAL hostiles.

    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.
    The Israeli forces used smoke and stun grenades in an attempt to clear an area for the landing of soldiers. The first rope that was let down from the helicopter was taken by passengers and tied it to a part of the top deck and thereby rendered ineffective for the purpose of soldiers’ descent. A second rope was then let down from the helicopter and the first group of soldiers descended. The Mission does not find it plausible that soldiers were holding their weapons and firing as they descended on the rope. However, it has concluded that live ammunition was used from the helicopter onto the top deck prior to the descent of the soldiers.

    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.

    Garthor on
  • Options
    BastableBastable Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    JihadJesus wrote: »
    My big issue here is what the hell is specifically meant by "live ammo discharged onto the top deck". If this means warning shots, show of force, etc - tough nuts, protesters. Sure, it was illegal to board the ship - but you knew damned well they were going to do that, it was the whole point of the flotilla. Attacking them probably wasn't smart.

    On the other hand, if they were actually shooting AT the crew before roping down, screw 'em - they can't expect the under-fire civs NOT to fight back with whatever they have.

    My guess: the commandos fired warning shots/flash bangs etc. But they're dealing with you know civilians who believe they're being attacked and about to be slaughtered, and then fight back as innefectually as you'd expect and a few of them get killed. Assign blame how you like personally.

    Read the report: dead bodies with wounds consistant with rounds fired from above at a distance

    Bastable on
    Philippe about the tactical deployment of german Kradschützen during the battle of Kursk:
    "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."

  • Options
    Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Can't find a story on this on any of the major network websites.

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Warning shots aren't a thing that actually happens as far as people are concerned.

    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."

    Quid on
  • Options
    SimpsonsParadoxSimpsonsParadox Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Garthor wrote: »
    Garthor wrote: »

    Is there even a meaningful line to draw between that and just opening fire before anybody was even off the helicopter? I guess maybe you could argue that if they were shooting BEFORE any soldiers had rappelled down, they could claim that they were POTENTIAL hostiles.

    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.
    The Israeli forces used smoke and stun grenades in an attempt to clear an area for the landing of soldiers. The first rope that was let down from the helicopter was taken by passengers and tied it to a part of the top deck and thereby rendered ineffective for the purpose of soldiers’ descent. A second rope was then let down from the helicopter and the first group of soldiers descended. The Mission does not find it plausible that soldiers were holding their weapons and firing as they descended on the rope. However, it has concluded that live ammunition was used from the helicopter onto the top deck prior to the descent of the soldiers.

    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.

    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:
    Bastable wrote: »
    Read the report: dead bodies with wounds consistant with rounds fired from above at a distance

    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.

    SimpsonsParadox on
  • Options
    BastableBastable Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    170. The circumstances of the killing of at least six of the passengers were in a manner
    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.

    Bastable on
    Philippe about the tactical deployment of german Kradschützen during the battle of Kursk:
    "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."

  • Options
    HozHoz Cool Cat Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Quid wrote: »
    Warning shots aren't a thing that actually happens as far as people are concerned.

    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."
    Well, if they're wielding clubs and bladed weapons it's supposed to make them think "Hey, I'm in over my head here I should turn around and bolt." It obviously wouldn't work if you're firing at someone who can fire back.

    Hoz on
  • Options
    DetharinDetharin Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Sentry wrote: »
    Allow simple humanitarian aid into an impoverished place filled with starving people? Radical idea, I know, but hey, the process of shooting a bunch of unarmed humanitarians certainly seemed to work out well too.

    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.

    Detharin on
  • Options
    BastableBastable Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    lazegamer wrote: »
    Modern Man wrote: »
    Raiden333 wrote: »
    Detharin wrote: »
    Maybe if they had used some common sense back in Turkey and decided not to run a blockade this never would have happened. What did they honestly expect Israel to do?

    ...Well, not shoot people lying on the floor in the face, for starters.
    Soldiers aren't perfect machines, free of fear and panic. In a hostile situation, where they were outnumbered and set upon by people armed with clubs and pipes, they're going to make mistakes.

    It should be noted that nobody was harmed on the other ships that decided to cooperate and not violently resist the Israelis. If the people on this boat had done the same, they all would have been able to go home in one piece.

    Accepting the findings of the report that the helicopter fired live ammunition onto the deck before roping down, would you say that this was a reasonable response to the measures of defense taken by those on board?

    I don't consider the blockade to be particularly illegal, and so the international waters defense doesn't move me. However, the reckless response by the Israeli's during the boarding action seems pretty egregious.

    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.

    Bastable on
    Philippe about the tactical deployment of german Kradschützen during the battle of Kursk:
    "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."

  • Options
    CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
    The group got more than they wanted. It was a win for them.

    Couscous on
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Hoz wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Warning shots aren't a thing that actually happens as far as people are concerned.

    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."
    Well, if they're wielding clubs and bladed weapons it's supposed to make them think "Hey, I'm in over my head here I should turn around and bolt." It obviously wouldn't work if you're firing at someone who can fire back.

    All that tells them to do is hide and wait til the guys who are shooting at them are closer.

    Quid on
  • Options
    Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Detharin wrote: »
    The report has concluded that various people are now dead because they thought running a blockade was a good idea.
    The report concludes that several people died because they were murdered by israeli troops.

    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.....

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Options
    SimpsonsParadoxSimpsonsParadox Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Bastable wrote: »
    170. The circumstances of the killing of at least six of the passengers were in a manner
    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 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).

    SimpsonsParadox on
  • Options
    BastableBastable Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Detharin wrote: »
    Sentry wrote: »
    Allow simple humanitarian aid into an impoverished place filled with starving people? Radical idea, I know, but hey, the process of shooting a bunch of unarmed humanitarians certainly seemed to work out well too.

    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.

    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.

    Bastable on
    Philippe about the tactical deployment of german Kradschützen during the battle of Kursk:
    "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."

  • Options
    DetharinDetharin Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Detharin wrote: »
    The report has concluded that various people are now dead because they thought running a blockade was a good idea.
    The report concludes that several people died because they were murdered by israeli troops.

    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.....

    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?
    Bastable wrote: »
    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 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.

    Detharin on
  • Options
    EgoEgo Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    In early June 2010, audio recordings were released by the Israeli authorities of
    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.

    Ego on
    Erik
  • Options
    EgoEgo Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Detharin wrote: »
    Detharin wrote: »
    The report has concluded that various people are now dead because they thought running a blockade was a good idea.
    The report concludes that several people died because they were murdered by israeli troops.

    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.....

    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?

    Attention. Had you honestly not figured that out yet?

    Ego on
    Erik
  • Options
    Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Detharin wrote: »
    Detharin wrote: »
    The report has concluded that various people are now dead because they thought running a blockade was a good idea.
    The report concludes that several people died because they were murdered by israeli troops.

    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.....

    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?

    Gives up.

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Options
    DetharinDetharin Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Ego wrote: »

    Attention. Had you honestly not figured that out yet?

    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.

    Detharin on
  • Options
    BastableBastable Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Detharin wrote: »
    Detharin wrote: »
    The report has concluded that various people are now dead because they thought running a blockade was a good idea.
    The report concludes that several people died because they were murdered by israeli troops.

    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.....

    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?
    Bastable wrote: »
    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 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.

    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?

    Bastable on
    Philippe about the tactical deployment of german Kradschützen during the battle of Kursk:
    "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."

  • Options
    CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Frankly, other than the death of a couple idiot protesters, what has this entire incident achieved?
    It gave reprieve to the Gaza strip thanks to the backlash against Israel's actions.

    Couscous on
  • Options
    DetharinDetharin Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Bastable wrote: »
    So more proof that Israel is run by a pack of psychopaths that ignore international law. I get it I really do.

    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.

    Detharin on
  • Options
    Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Detharin wrote: »
    Bastable wrote: »
    So more proof that Israel is run by a pack of psychopaths that ignore international law. I get it I really do.

    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.

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Options
    EgoEgo Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Detharin wrote: »
    Ego wrote: »

    Attention. Had you honestly not figured that out yet?

    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.

    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.

    Ego on
    Erik
  • Options
    DetharinDetharin Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Ego wrote: »
    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?"
    Again, blaming the victim.

    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.

    Detharin on
  • Options
    Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Detharin wrote: »
    Again, blaming the victim.

    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]

    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS2D5mJlv_00kQAd--ltFcFCj79d1pLPmMmIjRoDMFNP2Fccp0&t=1&usg=__Yv8uER6emK-F98VrPWB7Ag0Cpsk=

    Styrofoam Sammich on
    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Options
    EgoEgo Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Detharin wrote: »
    Ego wrote: »
    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?"

    This doesn't fit with your other posts in this thread, which are basically 'lol idiots running blockade = idiots.'

    Ego on
    Erik
  • Options
    DetharinDetharin Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Ego wrote: »
    This doesn't fit with your other posts in this thread, which are basically 'lol idiots running blockade = idiots.'
    It does quite well lets follow the logic.

    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.

    Detharin on
  • Options
    EgoEgo Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    I thought everyone was aware of statements made on the boat by people saying they were happy to become martyrs for the sake of spreading awareness and making a difference.

    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.

    Ego on
    Erik
  • Options
    falsedeffalsedef Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Ego wrote: »
    I thought everyone was aware of statements made on the boat by people saying they were happy to become martyrs for the sake of spreading awareness and making a difference.

    So I guess you were just ignorant of that? The answer, obviously, was B.

    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.

    falsedef on
  • Options
    EgoEgo Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Well, didn't say everyone said that. Some people though (I should think everyone who went with clubs and knives and sling-shots to the top deck to fight back) obviously were willing enough to die for their cause, though.

    Ego on
    Erik
  • Options
    SavantSavant Simply Barbaric Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Detharin wrote: »
    Ego wrote: »
    This doesn't fit with your other posts in this thread, which are basically 'lol idiots running blockade = idiots.'
    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.

    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.

    Savant on
  • Options
    falsedeffalsedef Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Ego wrote: »
    Well, didn't say everyone said that. Some people though (I should think everyone who went with clubs and knives and sling-shots to the top deck to fight back) obviously were willing enough to die for their cause, though.

    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.

    falsedef on
  • Options
    EgoEgo Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Right, didn't mean to imply everyone was ready to die (as a lot of folks, as you said, were foreign --to turkey, I mean-, or reporters, and the like.) Though I think everyone had an idea that it was a risky thing (I believe the last blockade running ship didn't get boarded, it got outright rammed to the point where it had to head for shore or sink.)

    Ego on
    Erik
  • Options
    falsedeffalsedef Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    Ego wrote: »
    Right, didn't mean to imply everyone was ready to die (as a lot of folks, as you said, were foreign --to turkey, I mean-, or reporters, and the like.) Though I think everyone had an idea that it was a risky thing (I believe the last blockade running ship didn't get boarded, it got outright rammed to the point where it had to head for shore or sink.)

    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.

    falsedef on
  • Options
    KiplingKipling Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    In terms of more reports from different viewpoints, Israel won't deliver. All we will get from them is the "Public Commission to Examine the Maritime Incident of 31 May 2010" report, which can't interview the military. So that will be pointless.

    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.

    Kipling on
    3DS Friends: 1693-1781-7023
  • Options
    EgoEgo Registered User regular
    edited October 2010
    falsedef wrote: »
    Ego wrote: »
    Right, didn't mean to imply everyone was ready to die (as a lot of folks, as you said, were foreign --to turkey, I mean-, or reporters, and the like.) Though I think everyone had an idea that it was a risky thing (I believe the last blockade running ship didn't get boarded, it got outright rammed to the point where it had to head for shore or sink.)

    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.

    No no, I see :).

    Ego on
    Erik
Sign In or Register to comment.