Unbelievable: US calls Israel to investigate into its own crime (Flotilla) - Polidicks

[QUOTE=CriticalThought;22363771]It's funny that if you go read that thread Chippays doesn't refute heatsketch's claims, and rampantly projects his own actions on heatsketch.[/QUOTE] I know you're not going to respond but I don't care. Heatsketches claims were valid, but they weren't the same ones you were making. If you make reputable claims and can back them up, they don't need to be refuted. If you make stupid claims and don't back them as you did in both this thread and that one, not only are they refuted, you are called an idiot.

[QUOTE=CriticalThought;22363771]It's funny that if you go read that thread Chippays doesn't refute heatsketch's claims, and rampantly projects his own actions on heatsketch. [editline]03:18AM[/editline] Good question, I'm sure he doesn't give a shit about you. Fuck it's past 3 I'm going to bed[/QUOTE] is project a word you learned recently and just want to fit into any and all conversation

,

[QUOTE=Chippay;22363854]how so? people were attempting to break a blockade that is starving a populace and then were assaulted in international waters, and then many were sent to israeli prisons for holding. how is this not serious?[/QUOTE] A starving populace is a reason to do something but it's hardly an excuse to go against a direct request from a government. They were sent to Israeli detainment camps for a short while as I'm sure most countries would do, they were released less than a few days later so it's hardly something to complain about. They WERE assaulted in international waters but it wasn't out of the blue, it was handled poorly with too many casualties and it was done prematurely but it wasn't Israel attacking a random boat out of nowhere.

[QUOTE=Devodiere;22363923]A starving populace is a reason to do something but it's hardly an excuse to go against a direct request from a government. They were sent to Israeli detainment camps for a short while as I'm sure most countries would do, they were released less than a few days later so it's hardly something to complain about. They WERE assaulted in international waters but it wasn't out of the blue, it was handled poorly with too many casualties and it was done prematurely but it wasn't Israel attacking a random boat out of nowhere.[/QUOTE] That still doesn't justify an act of war.

.

[QUOTE=Chippay;22363994]i could not disagree with you more. israel is preventing supplies going to the gaza strip, and has even admitted itself that not enough supplies are going. yet the blockade continues. people are in poverty and have no foreseeable way out. this is the kind of thing that causes people to turn into radicals. these same radicals are the ones that israel claims the blockade is stopping. and you're really missing the point. an attack in international waters is a gigantic deal. an attack on [B]civilians delivering aid[/B] in international waters is a monumentally huge deal. and when people are killed down and commandos use live ammunition in international waters, that's a story that cannot be blown out of proportion.[/QUOTE] Unless the commandos are using pepperballs and then have to switch to live ammunition because they are getting stabbed with metal spikes

[QUOTE=CriticalThought;22367637]Unless the commandos are using pepperballs and then have to switched to live ammunition because they are getting stabbed with metal spikes[/QUOTE] And you are basing this on the footage the IDF released in complete disregard of the testimony of the withnesses.

[QUOTE=Chippay;22363854]list of people i have replied to named heatsketch: 0 notable google searches for 'facepunch heatsketch' the post you just made lol wait, you were replying to my posts in a thread [B]over a year old[/B]. and even then you're still wrong. but i can't say i'm surprised you're [B]still[/B] defending someone who rampantly hates islam for no reason you are hilarious[/QUOTE] Hurp durp Still haven't changed Chippay, still haven't changed. Actually your overall post quality has decreased and the fact that you don't even try to find legitimate evidence anymore and act like a way bigger douche, but you are still consistently wrong. Have you refuted any of the claims in that thread? No. Have you refuted any of the claims in this thread? No. One subject is still up for debate, as to who fired something that makes a loud sound first, but so far I have heard of no injuries or damage from these loud sounds, and I believe history will vindicate me. [editline]09:23AM[/editline] [QUOTE=Hoffa1337;22367695]And you are basing this on the footage the IDF released in complete disregard of the testimony of the withnesses.[/QUOTE] Because someone's claim > video evidence Right? Your honour this is security footage of the defendant breaking into my house, stomping on my dog, and shooting my grandfather. Defendant: Nah man, you like, don't understand! I was there! That didn't happen.

Israel is like "Yesssssssssss"

[QUOTE=CriticalThought;22367710] Because someone's claim > video evidence Right? Your honour this is security footage of the defendant breaking into my house, stomping on my dog, and shooting my grandfather. Defendant: Nah man, you like, don't understand! I was there! That didn't happen.[/QUOTE] There's no video evidence at the moment, but I guess the biased, angled and the incredible selective footage available is good enough for you.

[QUOTE=CriticalThought;22367710]Because someone's claim > video evidence Right? Your honour this is security footage of the defendant breaking into my house, stomping on my dog, and shooting my grandfather. Defendant: Nah man, you like, don't understand! I was there! That didn't happen.[/QUOTE] haha no, not quite dear. it's more like a one minute clip of the defendant beating up someone in his own house, and the plaintiff saying that's proof that he was dragged into the house and accosted. And he has a four hour video showing the whole encounter he refuses to show to anyone. [editline]01:35PM[/editline] because he took the defendants house

Is this about the activists attacking the Israelis, forcing them to switch from non-lethal measures to lethal ones, or Israelis firing first on the boat. Because for the first there is irrefutable video evidence, even if it doesn't show what happens before the IDF ropes in, it clearly shows the IDF roping in using non-lethal measures and being fucking mob lynched. The second is more debatable, as at this point it's word against word. The Israelis were also there? Why is their testimony disregarded and pro-Palestinian testimony automatically taken as truth? Were there any injuries or damage done before the IDF was forced by the activists to use lethal measures? Nope. Do I have any reason to believe that the IDF fired on the activists and didn't fire warning shots? Nope. Did the IDF shoot at any of the other ships? Nope.

[QUOTE=CriticalThought;22368013] Because for the first there is irrefutable video evidence[/QUOTE] :laugh: You are now officially the comedy relief of this topic.

[QUOTE=Hoffa1337;22368061]:laugh: You are now officially the comedy relief of this topic.[/QUOTE] Refute it then.

[QUOTE=CriticalThought;22368160]Refute it then.[/QUOTE] We have had this discussion regarding the footage so many times now it's getting really tiresome. The events prior to the boarding are the key element in this, but guess what, Israel is keeping those tapes to itself for whatever reason. I wonder why..

[QUOTE=Hoffa1337;22368216]We have had this discussion regarding the footage so many times now it's getting really tiresome. The events prior to the boarding are the key element in this, but guess what, Israel is keeping those tapes to itself for whatever reason. I wonder why..[/QUOTE] I'm not using the video to support anything that happened before, maybe you should take the time to read my posts.

[QUOTE=CriticalThought;22368270]I'm not using the video to support anything that happened before, maybe you should take the time to read my posts.[/QUOTE] Did the IDF attack first and as a result of it the activists resorted to violence or was it an unprovoked lynching?

[QUOTE=Hoffa1337;22368377]Did the IDF attack first and as a result of it the activists resorted to violence or was it an unprovoked lynching?[/QUOTE] You mean, did the IDF demand their peaceful surrender and they refused? Even if the IDF didn't shoot first, and I believe they probably fired warning shots but not on the activists. It wasn't an unprovoked lynching, as the IDF roped onto the boat after they refused to surrender, so to the activists it was them being provoked, but it was a lynching none the less, which to the Israelis is them being provoked. It's a matter of who is justified. Israel tried to take a ship breaching it's military blockade using non-lethal weapons and got mob lynched so they had to defend themselves. I find that justified. The activists were trying to breach a military blockade and when confronted by the military refused surrender and attacked them clearly knowing they would be killed. I don't find their actions justified.

[QUOTE=CriticalThought;22368637]You mean, did the IDF demand their peaceful surrender and they refused? Even if the IDF didn't shoot first, and I believe they probably fired warning shots but not on the activists. It wasn't an unprovoked lynching, as the IDF roped onto the boat after they refused to surrender, so to the activists it was them being provoked, but it was a lynching none the less, which to the Israelis is them being provoked. It's a matter of who is justified. Israel tried to take a ship breaching it's military blockade using non-lethal weapons and got mob lynched so they had to defend themselves. I find that justified. The activists were trying to breach a military blockade and when confronted by the military refused surrender and attacked them clearly knowing they would be killed. I don't find their actions justified.[/QUOTE] Except it wasn't in their territorial waters so they had no right to intervene the ships where they did, they took a massive shit on alot of countries by doing this. Besides the blockade is only recognized by Egypt, Israel and USA. why would the rest of the world recognize or support an action that is killing far more than it is saving?

Hoffa, the IDF had to intervene in international waters. As you might know the territorial waters of Israel is only 12kms long from the shore. The waters near Gaza have fishing boats near them, the IDF chose to board the ships in international waters to avoid unnecessary civilian deaths in them. Also, the Hamas could have sent people on these boats to interfere with the boarding, which would really risk everyone. That is also the reason why IDF boats usually don't go near Gaza. Let me ask you this, why didn't anybody care that the IDF boarded the Iranian ship about a year ago? Let me tell you why: Because there were tons of weapons found on board. Now, as far as Israel is concerned, if the ships wouldn't surrender and let them check the ships for weapons, that raises the suspicion that they have weapons, and makes it the IDF's duty to board the ships and check them. The fact that no weapons were found doesn't make the boarding illegal, since the supplies were still sent to Gaza.

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22369481]Hoffa, the IDF had to intervene in international waters. As you might know the territorial waters of Israel is only 12kms long from the shore. The waters near Gaza have fishing boats near them, the IDF chose to board the ships in international waters to avoid unnecessary civilian deaths in them. Also, the Hamas could have sent people on these boats to interfere with the boarding, which would really risk everyone. That is also the reason why IDF boats usually don't go near Gaza. Let me ask you this, why didn't anybody care that the IDF boarded the Iranian ship about a year ago? Let me tell you why: Because there were tons of weapons found on board. Now, as far as Israel is concerned, if the ships wouldn't surrender and let them check the ships for weapons, that raises the suspicion that they have weapons, and makes it the IDF's duty to board the ships and check them. The fact that no weapons were found doesn't make the boarding illegal, since the supplies were still sent to Gaza.[/QUOTE] The boarding is only considered legal in Israel, the rest of the world kind of disagrees. Were the Iranian ship sent by a humanitarian aid organizations with delegates from all over the world? They disagreed to let Israel inspect the ships because Israel is taking the supplies, hell, you are so paranoid for rocket sites that you don't even allow wood into Gaza. Israel says that the aid sent to gaza isn't enough yet they keep taking the sendings? Pretty fucking stupid isn't it? Edit: I'm going to turn gold from debating ignorance :sigh:

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22369481]Hoffa, the IDF had to intervene in international waters. As you might know the territorial waters of Israel is only 12kms long from the shore. The waters near Gaza have fishing boats near them, the IDF chose to board the ships in international waters to avoid unnecessary civilian deaths in them. Also, the Hamas could have sent people on these boats to interfere with the boarding, which would really risk everyone. That is also the reason why IDF boats usually don't go near Gaza. Let me ask you this, why didn't anybody care that the IDF boarded the Iranian ship about a year ago? Let me tell you why: Because there were tons of weapons found on board. Now, as far as Israel is concerned, if the ships wouldn't surrender and let them check the ships for weapons, that raises the suspicion that they have weapons, and makes it the IDF's duty to board the ships and check them. The fact that no weapons were found doesn't make the boarding illegal, since the supplies were still sent to Gaza.[/QUOTE] And since there are only three country's that do recognize the blockade, it is considered illegal for almost the whole world.

.