Hundreds die in Israel raid on Gaza

[Cyrus]

How about the words "International Waters"?

What about it?

 

[Phrak]

For one thing, it is wrong to just indiscriminately attack people on international waters.

It was not indiscriminate.

Second, they could have boarded the ship and searched them for weapons.

No. The ship was running.

Third, it is in-humane to block humanitarian aid.

What evidence did the Isrealis have that the boat did not contain arms? None. I find your argument inhumane: you don't seem to care if they were running arms.

You are way too easy. Why?

 

[jreelawg]

I would like to hear a convincing argument that blocking humanitarian aid, including medical supplies, doesn't amount to collective punishment. And this includes, not only the attack on the dignity, but also the on going blockade all together.

 

[jreelawg]

For one thing, it is wrong to just indiscriminately attack people on international waters.

It was not indiscriminate.


No. The ship was running.


What evidence did the Isrealis have that the boat did not contain arms? None.

You are way too easy. Why?

By all first hand accounts of the passengers of the ship, no warning was issued, and they were hit in the night by a ship who had turned it's lights off. Meanwhile the other ships surrounding them had their lights on. Unless the CNN reporter is a lier, then it seams near impossible that they were not intentionally rammed.

 

[jreelawg]

For one thing, it is wrong to just indiscriminately attack people on international waters.

It was not indiscriminate.No. The ship was running.What evidence did the Isrealis have that the boat did not contain arms? None.

You are way too easy. Why?

That is kind of pathetic logic. I suppose this is how attacks can be justified no matter what or who is attacked. Where is the evidence that they were not...? Please. Where is evidence that they were? I guess they must have thought for a few moments, and decided, they are a ship, and they are in the water, they could be carrying weapons...

 

[russ_watters]

I would like to hear a convincing argument that blocking humanitarian aid, including medical supplies, doesn't amount to collective punishment.

Well, assuming in this case the Israelis knew the boat contained humanitarian aid...

Humanitarian aid is often used by dictators and criminal regimes for their own profit and as leverage against their own citizens. Hamas does this:

Jordan says Hamas seizes aid covoy sent to Gaza," by Suleiman al-Khalidi for Reuters (thanks to Sr. Soph):

AMMAN, Feb 9 (Reuters) - Jordan said on Saturday the Islamist Palestinian group Hamas has confiscated a convoy of humanitarian aid sent to people living under an Israeli blockade in the Gaza Strip.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/019880.php

Hamas is as the Taliban was in 1991. They should be given the same treatment.

 

[russ_watters]

That is kind of pathetic logic. I suppose this is how attacks can be justified no matter what or who is attacked. Where is the evidence that they were not...? Please. Where is evidence that they were? I guess they must have thought for a few moments, and decided, they are a ship, and they are in the water, they could be carrying weapons...

Really, this lack of logic you are displaying is mind-boggling to me. How can you not see how absurd your way of thinking is here? *It's a blockade!* <-reread that again until it sinks in. That means no one gets through and it also means that to challenge the blockade is automatically a threat. How are you not getting this?

 

[Phrak]

For one thing, it is wrong to just indiscriminately attack people on international waters.

That is kind of pathetic logic. I suppose this is how attacks can be justified no matter what or who is attacked. Where is the evidence that they were not...? Please. Where is evidence that they were? I guess they must have thought for a few moments, and decided, they are a ship, and they are in the water, they could be carrying weapons...

I would like to know why you seem to be so inhumane that you don't care whether or not the boat was running arms to kill people (humans, as you may refer to them). Use CNN as a reference. They don't seem to care either.

 

[jreelawg]

If nothing comes into Gaza, then where will it come from? Whether or not Hamas may or may not profit off of imports, you can't deny the people of the country the possibility of somehow receiving things as simple as band aids.

I could also argue that leaving a civilian alive is a risk because they may be recruited by Hamas.

 

[Cyrus]

I could also argue that leaving a civilian alive is a risk because they may be recruited by Hamas.

And you should just stop posting right...about...now.

 

[jreelawg]

Please, deny my logic if you can.

I would like to know why you are so inhumane that you don't care whether the boat was running arms to kill others, or not.

I think you know I meant that trying to sink a boat of people smuggling arms would be fine.

 

[jreelawg]

And you should just stop posting right...about...now.

Before I stop, why don't you address some of my arguments, and let me know where you stand.

1) Is it right to blockade a country (not permitting entry) of Medical Supplies?

how about that one for starters.

 

[jreelawg]

For one thing, it is wrong to just indiscriminately attack people on international waters. Second, they could have boarded the ship and searched them for weapons. Third, it is in-humane to block humanitarian aid. Fourth, it is sad that for months, people have to try and smuggle medical supplies, food, and fuel into their own land.

It would be fine if they stopped and searched people, arrested weapons smugglers, and confinscated weapons, but to not let people bring in fuel, or medical supplies seams a little harsh.

Where did I imply that I was cool with letting in weapons?

Putting words in other peoples mouths and using deception is a sure sign of a bias.

 

[jreelawg]

I would like to know why you seem to be so inhumane that you don't care whether or not the boat was running arms to kill people (humans, as you may refer to them). Use CNN as a reference. They don't seem to care either.

You know how else people die, victims of bombings who can't get medical treatment because medical supplies aren't permitted into your country.

 

[Cyrus]

You know how else people die, victims of bombings who can't get medical treatment because medical supplies aren't permitted into your country.

This is bad argument to make. They are in need of medical supplies as a result of their own actions. The blockade didn't injure them.

 

[Phrak]

You know how else people die, victims of bombings who can't get medical treatment because medical supplies aren't permitted into your country.

I see we have common ground. What would your course of action be? You are on a blockading patrol boat. You have a boat attempting to make port in Gaza. You don't know if it is transporting arms or medicine or wrist watches. What would you do if it won't stop for a search, but bolts?

 

[jreelawg]

This is bad argument to make. They are in need of medical supplies as a result of their own actions. The blockade didn't injure them.

Look, I'm part Jewish myself. I don't wish harm to Israelis, I don't wish harm to the people of Gaza. I do feel Israel has the right to try and stop Hamas from attacking them. I do think that a blockade is ok if necessary, but only to try and keep weapons out, not to keep food, fuel, and medicine out. If anything, jewish people should be speaking up when Israel does things that give them as a people a bad name. It is not in the interest of Jewish people for Israel to do things that bring about so much racism against them.

 

[drankin]

Last night I watched a PBS interview with the Isreali-American Ambassador, and he said that they have been sending ambulances and medical supplies into Gaza in between strikes. Bringing Palistinian wounded into Isreal for treatment. Of course, this isn't on the news channels, it's doesn't exploit the choas needed for ratings.

 

[jreelawg]

I see we have common ground. What would your course of action be? You are on a blockading patrol boat. You have a boat attempting to make port in Gaza. You don't know if it is transporting arms or medicine or wrist watches. What would you do if it won't stop for a search, but bolts?

You still haven't addressed the fact that Gaza, is, and has been, for months, deprived of medical supplies. If they had boarded it and discovered it was aid, they still would not have let the supplies enter.

 

[Phrak]

You still haven't addressed the fact that Gaza, is, and has been, for months, deprived of medical supplies. If they had boarded it and discovered it was aid, they still would not have let the supplies enter.

Gaza has a common boarder with Egypt. Is Egypt embargoing the west bank too? You don't get it. So called Humanitarians are in love with feeling good about their humanitarianism. People are a vehicle. They didn't need a boat to deliver drugs; they needed a boat so they could be embargoed and get indignately self-rightious abou it. These are some nasty-*ss folks.

 

[jreelawg]

Gaza has a common boarder with Egypt. Is Egypt embargoing the west bank too?

Yes.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7655184.stm

 

[Phrak]

The following in {} is an honest misquote by jreelawg:

{Originally Posted by Phrak:
"This is bad argument to make. They are in need of medical supplies as a result of their own actions. The blockade didn't injure them."}

In the frantic sparing between us, she/he mixed up some quotation marks.

 

[Phrak]

Yes.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7655184.stm

This article says something about some medial supplies embargoed on Gaza. Do you have something more concrete? I'm searching the Web.

 

[Phrak]

I'm coming up empty on "Gaza embargo medial", "Gaza embargo full", and stuff like it. See you Dec 31, maybe."

 

[tiny-tim]

"I should apologise?"

How about the words "International Waters"?

Blockades, either military, or economic, are recognised and legitimate under international law.

Blockade (provided sufficient humanitarian supplies are allowed) is a non-lethal method of warfare, to be used either instead of lethal force or in addition to it.

Maritime blockades almost always take place in international waters … why do you expect Israel to follow a different rule?

Is it right to blockade a country (not permitting entry) of Medical Supplies?

how about that one for starters.

You still haven't addressed the fact that Gaza, is, and has been, for months, deprived of medical supplies.

That's simply not true.

Israel has been continuously allowing sufficient supplies of both medical aid (and food and power supplies) throughout the blockade.

Israel (and Egypt, remember) has kept Gaza short of these items … sometimes supplies have almost run out … but has never allowed them to actually run out.

And yes, a blockading country is perfectly entitled to stop medical aid … it can insist that all imports (including medical aid) go through only when and where and in the amounts that it allows … provided of course that it does allow enough.

Also …

Last night I watched a PBS interview with the Isreali-American Ambassador, and he said that they have been sending ambulances and medical supplies into Gaza in between strikes. Bringing Palistinian wounded into Isreal for treatment. Of course, this isn't on the news channels, it's doesn't exploit the choas needed for ratings.

… and Egypt has done the same.

I never tried to deny the existence of any racism, I only think that the term anti-semitism only applying to certain semites and not others doesn't make sense. I demand you say your sorry for accusing me of racism for simply posting a definition of a word from the dictionary.

"I should apologise?"

I did not actually accuse you of racism … I accused you of helping to deny the existence of anti-semitism as a form of racism …

To say "both sides are semites" (meaning both Arabs and Jews) is to deny the existence of anti-semitism as a form of racism.

You're still doing it …

insisting on a general definition of "semite" so as to help deny the existence of anti-semitism as a form of racism

And my accusation was not "for simply posting a definition of a word from the dictionary" …

it was for posting a definition of a word ("semite") when nobody had used it

while not posting a definition of the word which had been used ("anti-semitic"), which would have completely demolished your argument.

"anti-semitism" (and "anti-semitic") has always only referred to Jews (and still does) … "semite" is a later word whose meaning has broadened …

this is an tactic of anti-semitic racists who, when accused of anti-semitism, re-define it to include all "descendants of Shem", thereby including the Ishmaelites who of course are the modern Arabs, so that they can say "Well, I'm certainly not anti-Arab, so by definition I can't be anti-semitic".

"I should apologise?"

 

[tiny-tim]

I'm coming up empty on "Gaza embargo medial", "Gaza embargo full", and stuff like it. See you Dec 31, maybe."

I think you're running on empty, Phrak!

I get 92,200 hits for Gaza embargo medical, and 1,160,000 for Gaza embargo full.

Get some sleep! :zzz:​

 

[seycyrus]

Running a blocade is running a blocade. It doesn't matter if the Pope is on board, it is still considered a threat.

What do people expect? That the declarations of the blocade runners be taken at face value? As if...

"Sergeant, stop that boat on the right. The captain informed us that they are carrying bombs and mortars. But the one on the left is ok, they told us they are just carrying milk and baby food, it can go through."

Ludicrous!

This is obvious. There is simply not enough manpower to search every vessel that approaches a port that is blocaded.

 

[Astronuc]

One will find little or no sympathy for Hamas in the west.

Why? Perhaps because of their violent and criminal activities.

Here is a timeline on the Israel-Hamas conflict, which was exacerbated by the kidnapping of the Israeli solider, Gilad Shalit, by Hamas in June 2006.
TIMELINE: Israeli-Hamas violence since Gaza takeover
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKTRE4BS1M520081229

(Reuters) - Israeli warplanes pounded the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip on Monday, the third day of an air offensive that has killed more than 300 Palestinians. Here is a timeline since Hamas seized the Gaza Strip in 2007:

June 14, 2007 - Hamas seizes Gaza after overpowering Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah forces in a week of fighting in which at least 100 people are killed.

-- Abbas dismisses Hamas-led unity government and appoints a Fatah-backed administration, led by Salam Fayyad, a technocratic economist favored by the West.

-- Israel and the new Palestinian government open formal contacts. The Jewish state tightens a blockade of Gaza.
. . . .

Israel-Hamas violence disrupts Gaza truce
http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE4A37B520081105
By Nidal al-Mughrabi

GAZA (Nov 5, 2008 - Reuters) - Hamas fired dozens of rockets at Israel on Wednesday after Israeli forces killed six Palestinian militants in an eruption of violence that disrupted a four-month-old truce along the Gaza Strip's frontier.
. . . .
On Tuesday, Israeli airstrikes killed five militants and Israeli soldiers shot dead a gunman during an incursion into the Gaza Strip. Israeli forces quit the coastal enclave in 2005 and Hamas took control after routing Fatah forces two years later.

The Israeli military said the aircraft went into action after militants attacked soldiers who entered Gaza to destroy a tunnel that Hamas had planned to use to kidnap Israeli soldiers.
. . . .
Hamas-led gunmen tunneled into Israel from Gaza in June 2006 and seized Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, who is still being held at a secret location in the territory.

Hamas has offered to release him in exchange for hundreds of Palestinians in Israeli prisons, including militants who killed Israelis. Israel has not agreed to the terms.

"We are all exploiting the calm, and its extension, in order to find the way to return Gilad Shalit home," Barak said.

So let Hamas renounce violence, stop firing rockets and shooting into Israel, and stop engaging in criminal activity.

 

[Alfi]

Enough!
I have read 13 pages of this back and forth 'who's at fault' thread.
When does 'Thou shall NOT kill' or the equivalent in what ever ancient book you refer to, come into play in this humans killing humans thing.


Just a quick question
If I am against ALL organized religions.?..( And I am!)
Does that automatically make me a anti-semitic?
Is this one of those 'you are with the jews or you are a anti-semitic' ?
In that case;
I AM anti-semitic! I AM anti-idiot! I AM anti-religion.

I just don't get it. Is this whole thing just a case of ' my invisible god can kick your invisible god's butt?

Or just a pack of criminals on every side?

 

[tiny-tim]

What's it all about, Alfie?
Is it just for the moment we live?
What's it all about when you sort it out, Alfie?
Are we meant to take more than we give
Or are we meant to be kind?
And if only fools are kind, Alfie,
Then I guess it's wise to be cruel.
And if life belongs only to the strong, Alfie,
What will you lend on an old golden rule?
As sure as I believe there's a heaven above, Alfie,
I know there's something much more,
Something even non-believers can believe in.
I believe in love, Alfie.
Without true love we just exist, Alfie.
Until you find the love you've missed you're nothing, Alfie.
When you walk let your heart lead the way
And you'll find love any day, Alfie, Alfie

Just a quick question
If I am against ALL organized religions.?..( And I am!) …

ah, but are you against the people who believe in those religions?

 

[Cyrus]

Enough!
I have read 13 pages of this back and forth 'who's at fault' thread.
When does 'Thou shall NOT kill' or the equivalent in what ever ancient book you refer to, come into play in this humans killing humans thing.


Just a quick question
If I am against ALL organized religions.?..( And I am!)
Does that automatically make me a anti-semitic?
Is this one of those 'you are with the jews or you are a anti-semitic' ?
In that case;
I AM anti-semitic! I AM anti-idiot! I AM anti-religion.

I just don't get it. Is this whole thing just a case of ' my invisible god can kick your invisible god's butt?

Or just a pack of criminals on every side?

If you are so ill informed, don't post. I see no point to your post. Please take it down. Its a waste of our time reading.

 

[seycyrus]

...
I AM anti-idiot!...

You must make a judgement call on who's behavior is the most idiotic. It is a far easier decision to simply label *everyone* as idiotic than to sift through the evidence.

It seems that you are looking for a reason to condemn religion and using the fact that wars have been fought for religous reasons as a basis for condemnation.

Using your logic, religion is not the greatest detriment to mankind, but *freedom* is.

How many wars have been fought, how many lives lost due to this mythical concept?

*Freedom* from oppression, *freedom* from tyranny, *freedom* from taxes, *freedom* to travel here or to live there. When shall we as a human race learn to cast aside this most evil of concepts? Freedom-Bah!

:tongue2:

 

[Cyrus]

You three take the talk about religion somewhere else. Cut it out now, please.

 

[Alfi]

If you are so ill informed, don't post. I see no point to your post. Please take it down. Its a waste of our time reading.

Thank you for the song. ? Just for the play on my name? Had to dig deep eh. whATEVER.
I see no point to your post. Please take it down. Its a waste of our time reading.

SO ...
religion and RELIGIOUS beliefs have no place is this discussion of this WAR.
Does that imply that it is just a criminal act and a conflict that the world courts should have a say in?
ALL the combatants don't believe the teachings they received as young people?
That has nothing to do with the murders of late.

I don't think the issues are separate.I believe, Religion = exclusion = war
I am against religion, I am against war.

 

[Astronuc]

Time out!