Israel Flouts International Law Again and Murders Innocent People.

[jodevizes]

The Israeli armed forces have flouted international law by attacking civilian ships in international waters and killing civillians.
As usual they lied and said they were shot at first. Then they said they were attacked with sticks and knives. Well, pardon my ignorance, but if you are sailing in international waters, if you are attacked, you are justified in defending yourself. If this were off the Somalia coast, they would be called pirates.

They are slowly strangling the Gaza strip by denying it access to building materials so that the people can rebuild their houses and schools.

They are not joining talks to keep the Middle East nuclear free

What a shame George and Tony aren't still in power, they could have found another country to invade.

There was at least one child on the flotilla. Why? Why did they take their child?

He and his mother have since been deported back to Turkey because jail conditions would be "too harsh".

It all sounds horrific and brutal and hideously upsetting.

"The idea Palestinian fighters use kids as human shields is just racist propaganda."

Racist propaganda? Therefore you support the view that Hamas could not do such a thing.

And before you accuse me of getting high and mighty - personal attacks galore! Dearie me - I am certain the Israeli government is guilty of evil too. Please read all my posts.

I am making the point that there are no innocents in authority in that region.

Sigh.

Look, you can take Hamas and drop them in the sea...clear?

Whatever Israel does to the Palestinians, it would not justify a commensurate slaughter of Israeli children/civlians.

Just like the slaughter of Iraqis didn't justify 7-7.

Saying there is no clear cut moral authority - pretty bloody obvious - is a tacit justification for the attacks on Gaza/Lebanon etc etc...

And your first link is a pile of rubbish, nothing to do with what has been said here. Peace with realism...jesus christ...

We are talking about IDF soldiers targeting and shooting dead thousands of Palestinian kids over the years. Some of whom may have even been throwing stones! The attack on Gaza killed 350 kids, nothing to do with hiding behind them. It is ethnicist/racist mania even to suggest the scale of those deaths is caused by martyr brigades, sick though they are. And they are.

The second one, no shit sherlock! Did you miss the killings and torturing Hamas did against Fatah? Mind you, at least they don't build and entire purpose-built facility to torture people.

You are trying to justify Israel's actions...good luck with that.

Erm, I'm afraid I'm not trying to justify Israel's actions at all. Not in the least. I am the last person to do that. Not really sure how or where you inferred that.

I do find that is a big lack of balance in the media however when it comes to this area.

Good luck with English comprehension.

I find it incredible that the Isralii forces do something illegal, slaughter a load of people, then say they are acting in self defence.

Pardon me, you were attacking an unarmed ship in international waters, that is piracy and those on board have thee right to protect themselves and try to repel the boarders.

If the ships are in Israelii waters, then you have a right to board, but not spray machine guns around.

Grim - the equation of Hamas (or whoever you'd like to pick) and the state of Israel is a highly dubious one.

Mainly in the name of scale.

So you are trying - and you say the media is biased in favour of the Palestinians - to equate the two sides.

The two sides are in no way equal.

The Israeli military could defeat the rest of the region combined, even if those countries wanted to invade Israel, which is highly unlikely.

You post up links to martyr speeches by religious nuts from Hamas as some kind of justification that Hamas "hides behind children" when fighting the IDF. There is no evidence of this crazy, racist nonsense, some of which has been posted on this thread.

Then you claim you are only interested in balance.

The argument that both sides are as bad as each other is false. Which is why I object to your posts.

Annie - that's really charming.

Well, Coolfonz, you seem to advocate violence as a legitimate political solution, which I find scary. Sorry if that offends you.

Good point Coolofonz, "The Israeli military could defeat the rest of the region combined" so why do you think it doesn't then, being the murderous state it is? Why would it go onto a ship with paintball guns in the first place, if it wasn't that the IDF go to extream lengths to use non-lethal force in all situations, inspite of it's military might. That the soldiers on board defended themselves with their side arms only when being stabbed and set on fire and seeing collegues thrown overboard.

And what exactly are the 'peace protestors' demanding Palestine be freed from? Occupation from Israel and back to occupation from Jordan? Palestine has never existed as a free state and Jews have lived tghere for thousands of years.

If you want to invoke history here, look up 'pogrom'. Look up Hamas neck tie lynchings and human shields.

You are right, the argument that both sides are as bad as the other is false. Israel attempts to maintain has high ethical standards under constant threat of extermination - and that is the goal of Hamas and it's cowardly western apologists.

Will there be dancing on the streets if a new exodus is forced on the Jews of Israel? Will the good and fair minded liberals not be satisfied until they force another death march? Msst of these people will never have to face the kind of existential crises Israeli's deal with every day. Its pathetic. Israel has a right to fight for its survivial. These people would gladly tie it's hands behind it's back and let it be stoned to death. They all have blood on their hands, and especially Hamas apologists. But maybe the Jews just have it coming to them, eh?

Just one final question, and until you put forward some robust evidence for this claim, don't engage with me on any other subject."We are talking about IDF soldiers targeting and shooting dead thousands of Palestinian kids over the years". Oh, really? Where is your source? I won't be holding my breath, this is the kind of endlessly dissemintaed mindless propoganda that comes out of pious mouths.

Annie - Everyone believes in violence, sadly. Just at who/where it is aimed.

Monkey - Well, there's a lot of nonsense in your post.

"Palestine has never existed" - there was a UN settlement in 1947-8 which seems to say it did. And yes the Palestinians demand a right of return to land/property which was taken from them.

That isn't really a matter of debate. Ariel Sharon's autobiog is good reading for the cleansing of villages for example.

There are countless, filmed, documented accounts of children being targeted, shot dead. As well as civilians in general. It's pretty amazing you deny that. I suggest even films of kids being shot - which there are many, even shown on prime time news channels - wouldn't convince you.

Then you start really losing it about "death marches"...and the exodus, presumably from Biblical times. Well, that's a point of view...

Look, no Israeli citizen should die. This concept that Israel will be wiped out if it makes peace has little basis in reality.

When the ANC were fighting against the apartheid state - and committing atrocities on the way - the same arguments were put forward, that black folks would slaughter white folks, that the ANC were as bad as the state. They were not and the widespread reprisals never happened.

This crazy paranoia in Israel is driven by right wing politics, nothing to do with being Jewish or not. The right have complete control of Israel (like they do in a lot of places) and attempts to undermine or oppose their positions are met with this kind of ranting about death marches and the bible.

Israel could quite easily have peace, it's easy to sue for peace when you are powerful...but then the right would lose control of power...so this is what you get...

End the occupation, disarm, recognise elected administrations (which would completely undermine Hamas), reparations for Palestinians, truth and reconciliation...or more war...

Hi Monkeytrousers, thank you for your usual childish rant.

I will just answer the last paragraph. You have a short selective memory. The unofficial policy of targeted killings is well documented documented despite the lid Israel's spin doctors want to keep on it.

Rachel Corrie, Tom Hurdnall , James Miller & Brian Avery

Just to name western peace activists/Journalists. The "human shield" only got what they deserved right?

It is difficult to argue Israel holds the moral high ground. Killers on both sides.

monkeytrousers I thought that was a really good post from you, it's a shame that coolfonz and slim22 seem a bit dim; Coolfonz has taken your statements completely out of context (ie you said that Palestine has never existed as a free state and Slim seems to have forgotten the lengths 'peace activists' like Rachel Corrie went to to put themselves in danger. Of course, only the deaths of Palestinian children are worth talking about; who cares about all the Israeli children killed and maimed by suicide bombers and rockets being fired into Israel?

Coolfonz your statement that 'This concept that Israel will be wiped out if it makes peace has little basis in reality' is either retarded or excessively naive. Seriously, go away and do a bit of research.

Bessie123 - its a shame you are having to resort to personal insults to try and win this argument. Slim and Coolfonz are far from dim they make articulate and convincing points which is more than can be said for the utter nonsense you keep spouting.
As for Monkeytrousers, please don't make this into something as simple as anti semitism. It is not aboout hating jews, we are allowed to have a debate about ISRAEL and ZIONIST policies. Thats a very cheap angle to play. You say Israel has a right to fight for its survival then surely Palestine has the same right?

sootysmummy Coolfonz and Slimm22 are not at all articulate or convincing, they are refusing to acknowledge proven facts or even the reality of the threats Israel faces. Any 'personal insults' are borne out of frustration at their insistence on being obtuse and naive.

I don't know why so many people on here persist in this misconception that if Israel would only hand over a bit of land everything would be fine. It would not be fine. Israel would be attacked continuously until it ceased to exist. There is a strange dichotomy of behaviour among Palestinian groups whereby they present themselves as victims and bemoan how terrible their situation is while showing no ounce of civilised human behaviour to Israel. They refuse to acknowledge they should not blow up innocent civilians (yes, including children), they are unapologetic for constantly attacking Israel and threatening it at every opportunity and yet they are still apparently whiter than white.

I can't help feeling sometimes that if Israel were less apologetic and if it did not try to explain itself or be reasonable, it would be criticised less.

Bessie, seems the NYTs this morning is filled with commentary supporting the perspective you consider so 'naive'.

From an Israeli:
?It?s time we started using our wits. If we used even a tiny fraction of the brain-power and resources we put into ?defense? into finding a way forward in terms of living with the Palestinians, we would have solved the problem long ago. The strategic situation has never been more opportune ? the Arabs are scared of the Iranians, the Saudi peace plan is still on the table, and the Palestinians are beginning to act rationally. But we lack the leadership to help us make a real change.? (from this).

And here for more on the trouble with Israel's military approach to all problems.

And here for another call for Western intervention in Israel's insanity.

I can't see anything there that says Israel should just hand over the land and everything will be ok. Perhaps I'm reading it wrong. Can you show me?

The point made yesterday was that Israel needs to stop relying on military strength to 'defend' itself and instead commit to developing peaceful relationships and solutions with its neighbors. The start would be to gratefully respect the gift that the international community granted it in 1948 and go from there in a productive and constructive manner (and I don't mean walls and settlements.)

All these articles support that perspective. I think you read through the filter of your own unshakeable opinions. Israel has a tremendous amount of work to do building bridges rather than smashing them before everything "will be okay," and it needs to start immediately.

I'll cut and paste for you . . .

"But ever since the Six-Day War in 1967, Israel has been fixated on military force. To a man with a big hammer, says the proverb, every problem looks like a nail."

"Thus, the only way for Israel to edge out Hamas would be to quickly reach an agreement with the Palestinians on the establishment of an independent state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip as defined by the 1967 borders, with its capital in East Jerusalem. Israel has to sign a peace agreement with President Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah government in the West Bank ? and by doing so, reduce the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to a conflict between Israel and the Gaza Strip."

"Even if Israel seizes 100 more ships on their way to Gaza, even if Israel sends in troops to occupy the Gaza Strip 100 more times, no matter how often Israel deploys its military, police and covert power, force cannot solve the problem that we are not alone in this land, and the Palestinians are not alone in this land. We are not alone in Jerusalem and the Palestinians are not alone in Jerusalem. Until Israelis and Palestinians recognize the logical consequences of this simple fact, we will all live in a permanent state of siege ? Gaza under an Israeli siege, Israel under an international and Arab siege."

"But we cannot allow ourselves to forget for even a moment that force is effective only as a preventative ? to prevent the destruction and conquest of Israel, to protect our lives and freedom. Every attempt to use force not as a preventive measure, not in self-defense, but instead as a means of smashing problems and squashing ideas, will lead to more disasters, just like the one we brought on ourselves in international waters, opposite Gaza?s shores."

"No idea has ever been defeated by force ? not by siege, not by bombardment, not by being flattened with tank treads and not by marine commandos. To defeat an idea, you have to offer a better idea, a more attractive and acceptable one."

I am not merely saying hand over land and all will be ok.

1. I am saying hand over land THAT YOU USURPED + admit that you did. That is for the legitimity bit.

2. STOP illegal SETTLEMENTS of NON ISRAELI fanatic immigrants. That is for the legality bit.

3. See a window of opportunity to discuss when there is one instead of provoking the hardest fanatic hezbollah supporters into firing yet another rocket and then cry foul. That is for the goodfaith bit.

Its not the Palestinians who created this vicious cycle.

'The start would be to gratefully respect the gift that the international community granted it in 1948' and where the international community thought it could get rid of the problems of the Jews, appease its collective conscience for the Shoah and have a buffer / foothold along the Mediterranean coast.

The Palestinian problem could have been solved long ago if any of the Muslim countries surrounding Israel had offered a piece of land to the Palestinians for their homeland, but I haven't seen that happening. So much for the Ummah. They don't want the problems of the Palestinians either it seems.

I have to say that I think Israel has at times been remarkably restrained seeing that they could just blow Gaza to perdition.

The problem with what some of you are advocating is that it is hard for Israel have a dialogue with someone who doesn't want to talk, and has no intention of coming to any sort of agreement with you.

San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea:

67. Merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral States may not be attacked unless they:

(a) are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture;

68. Any attack on these vessels is subject to the basic rules in paragraphs 38-46.

69. The following classes of enemy vessels are exempt from attack:

(a) hospital ships;
(b) small craft used for coastal rescue operations and other medical transports;
(c) vessels granted safe conduct by agreement between the belligerent parties including:
(i) cartel vessels, e.g., vessels designated for and engaged in the transport of prisoners of war;
(ii) vessels engaged in humanitarian missions, including vessels carrying supplies indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, and vessels engaged in relief actions and rescue operations;

48. Vessels listed in paragraph 47 are exempt from attack only if they:

(a) are innocently employed in their normal role;
(b) submit to identification and inspection when required; and
(c) do not intentionally hamper the movement of combatants and obey orders to stop or move out of the way when required.

Let's not have any more of this "Israel flouts international law" nonsense.

In fact, from the moment the "peace flotilla" announced its intention to run the blockade, and certainly the moment they refused an order to divert to the port in Ashdod, they were valid military targets. Israel had the right to take whatever military action it liked, up to sinking the entire flotilla.

For goodness' sake, this has been established international law since the Royal Navy established the precedent in the 18th century.

That said, of course Israel did not attack the flotilla. They attempted to carry out an inspection. Those on the Mavi Marmara were required to allow it. They had no legal right to resist being boarded (they had the physical capacity to, obviously). The boarding party had every right - in fact, a duty - to protect their own lives. Considering that they were attacked with deadly intent while the first commando was still hanging from a rope, their restraint is bordering on miraculous.

"Someone who doesn't want to talk, and has no intention of coming to any sort of agreement with you." I'd say this is the current Israeli stance, and I think one of the cabinet of seven are on record stating that now is not the time for peace. Once Israel reaches border agreements, there will be no more expansion. If they play the waiting game and continue to settle, build walls and evict Palestinians from their homes they acquire more territory. For those Zionists who want to extend the state of Israel to its biblical borders of Lebanon, the Sinai and all the way east to the Euphrates (that would be the border of Iraq), peace is anathema and Jordan and Syria are rightly concerned.

Israel needs encouragement to cease this nonsense and make peace. I wish this to happen through serious and stringent sanctions from the West, though even this may not be successful.

My Jewish DP has an even more negative perspective, and he believes that even for reform Jews the deep cultural belief in their entitlement to the land will override any modern sensibilities. He sees no solution until all Jewish people intermarry with other people and the Jews thus cease to exist. (He's modelling the way . . .)

I take a more hopeful and optimistic view that with international help Israel can cease to be a nuclear armed rouge state and come to creative and productive solutions with their neighbors. I'd say the current West Bank government with their emphasis on peaceful resistance and nation-building are providing Israel with the ideal opportunity for conversation, and would support the UN recognising the nascent state of Palestine next year regardless of Israel's disposition.

Perhaps this is all wishful thinking and the chosen-people smite-them eye-for-eye Old Testament mentality will prevail, and the Israeli voices of enlightened reason are indeed a minority. This is certainly DP's belief.

Trouvere, see here for the fundamental flaw in your argument.

I think it's sad that your dp is unable to connect with his cultural heritage and hopes for its dissolution. I feel sorry for him and wonder what brought it about.

I am genuinely at a loss re your argument, it seems (like some others on here) so far from reality and so unbalanced that it is too frustrating to engage with it.