ISRAEL THREAD (Post new Israel threads = get banned)
1,592 replies, posted
I don't think they're giving it to him because he actualy did something.
It's just more dick waving, trolling maybe.
what a shitstorm
again
who cares if they get medals, israel is already a fucked up country and a couple of medals are not going to change anything.
[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;22408994]Educated assumptions based upon the information that has been given[/QUOTE]
Okay, but that's an assumption based only on the IDF side of the story.
[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;22408994]Why one earth would a "Peaceful protestet" need weapons and body Armour?[/QUOTE]
They are going into an area with plenty of violent conflicts, hence the vests. And the weapons were just shit lying around the ship. Sticks, rods, etc.
[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;22408994]
[URL]http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=177452[/URL]
[/QUOTE]
Great source.
[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;22408994]
[URL="http://www.facepunch.com/#"]View YouTUBE video[/URL]
[URL]http://youtube.com/watch?v=pWdd6_ZxX8c[/URL]
[/QUOTE]
So yeah it's just my opinion it's wrong to shower civilians with WP and murdering them.
[QUOTE=DogGunn;22408685]They won't want it rebuilt under Hamas.[/QUOTE]
Neither does Palestine. Hamas treats the Palestinians worse than Israel does, except Israel also does cruel things.
However, overall, Israel's main purpose here is to gain a bit of land and wipe out Hamas, then rebuild Palestine.
[editline]09:25AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=A.C.I.D;22411227]You do realise that Gaza needs at least double that amount of supplies to give its people basic living standards?[/QUOTE]
You do realize Gaza is currently controlled by Hamas, right? It'd be stupid for Israel to flood supplies in to enemy-occupied territory.
[editline]09:27AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Devodiere;22410209]Do you have evidence that people on here are terrorist supporters? There may have been some people who were terrorists on the boat but no-one supports anyone who wanted to get themselves killed.
Christ, can't you just not call them terrorist supporters? It's not that hard and you are making an enemy of pretty much everyone.[/QUOTE]
Capslock, the guy who keeps saying "people who are pro-Israeli or deny they are pro-Israeli are terrorists and terrorist sympathizers", is a troll, methinks.
So the civilians in Gaza are the enemy as well?
[QUOTE=Devodiere;22409515]Ok, before we get into anything, the people who attacked the commandos were certainly not aid workers in the traditional sense. There were plenty of people on the ship who were, but they aren't the ones who attacked them.[/QUOTE]
If you watch the video, the flotilla crew almost instantly got aggressive. They weren't even provoked.
[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;22414281]
Capslock, the guy who keeps saying "people who are pro-Israeli or deny they are pro-Israeli are terrorists and terrorist sympathizers", is a troll, methinks.[/QUOTE]
I'm not trolling, I'm just doing the exact same thing as he is doing. :v:
[QUOTE=starpluck;22408470]I honestly think Israel doesn't want Palestine rebuilt.[/QUOTE]
That's been obvious since the beginning, hasn't it? Even if they do they'll never allow them to create a military and stuff, and it makes sense because the only thing that will change is rocks being thrown onto the highways to mortars.
[editline]08:39AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=JDK721;22409686]he lives in israel
they probably indoctrinate everyone from day one[/QUOTE]
I know that's a joke but it brings up the fact that most of you have never been there or in Palestinian territory and have no clue what it's like.
[QUOTE=Soldier32;22383502]Oh, they were trained Commandos? Shouldn't they be trained better than to use live ammo on a crowd of mostly innocent people? I mean Israel is funded A LOT of money they should be have some non-lethal tactics they use or are they dull to the concept due to the horrible treatment the give to the people of Gaza?[/QUOTE]
That's ridiculous. If they stormed the ship with non-lethal weapons do you think they'd have anywhere near as much presence as they did with real fire-arms?
[QUOTE=Raiskauskone;22412502][img]http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/7046/1274899848291.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
thanks for your enlightening viewpoint on this situation, it has entirely changed my mind and i can feel at ease knowing i have an educated standpoint on this topic based solely on your views.
thank you again.
[editline]10:12AM[/editline]
a heads-up: just because people have conflicting views from yours, it doesn't make them a troll. when you start waving the "troll" flag, it means you're too incompetent to continue intelligent discussion and try to discredit the opposition.
[QUOTE=Enishi;22415045]
a heads-up: just because people have conflicting views from yours, it doesn't make them a troll. when you start waving the "troll" flag, it means you're too incompetent to continue intelligent discussion and try to discredit the opposition.[/QUOTE]
Tell that to Mr. Scorpio.
[QUOTE=capslock;22414372]I'm not trolling, I'm just doing the exact same thing as he is doing. :v:[/QUOTE]
Except I'm not doing it to win an argument.
[URL="http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2010/06/201063114723151689.html"]Source[/URL]
[I]
There has been extensive debate since Monday about whether Israel's decision to raid the Gaza aid flotilla was legal. Douglas Guilfoyle, a maritime legal expert at the University College of London, says the raid itself could have been legal under international law - but only if the Gaza blockade itself is legitimate
[/I] [media] [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UegRc9phwjY&feature=player_embedded[/url][/media]
[release]
[B]Al Jazeera: A lot of people are talking about whether or not Israel had any right to intercept [the ships].[/B]
[B]Guilfoyle:[/B] Whether or not Israel had a right to intercept the ship on the high seas depends on whether it was engaged in a legal blockade. A blockade is a recognized tool of warfare that could allow the stopping and search of a ship on the high seas, but there are a number of requirements. There needs to be an armed conflict; the limits of the blockade need to be defined and properly publicized; and most importantly, a blockade should not proceed if it violates the principle of proportionality, if it inflicts excessive damage on the civilian population in relation to the concrete military advantage expected.
If those requirements were met, then yes, a ship could have been intercepted on the high seas, if there was a suspicion it was attempting to breach the blockade.
[B]So who decides if a blockade is legal? If that's all it comes down to, it would appear to be an entirely subjective decision.[/B]
Well, each state is going to take its own view on whether or not it meets the requirements of international law. But I suppose a good metric is whether it's been accepted by other states, and there's certainly been a lot of condemnation of this blockade.
[B]Where does that leave the international community, if it wants to pursue any kind of action against Israel?[/B]
The principle options would lie, I think, with the United Nations and with condemnation from the Security Council and action by other United Nations organs. I note that the Security Council has already called, this morning I believe, for a cessation of the blockade, referring to it as counterproductive and wrong.
[B]It all depends to what extent Israel is prepared to cooperate, and we haven't seen a great deal of that when it comes to investigations in the past. But if another country wanted to launch an investigation... would it have any means by which to subpoena anybody in Israel, to force them to hand over what it considers to be crucial evidence or statements?[/B]
Well, it could certainly attempt to do so. That's going to turn on the national criminal law of the investigating state, or the investigating body. Compelling evidence from another state is difficult; it requires international cooperation, and may run into issues of state immunity or state secrecy when you're trying to get information out of a government.
If there's a United Nations investigation, in theory, the Security Council could call upon Israel to co-operate fully, and under the UN charter, Israel would be obligated to co-operate with that decision.
[B]When it comes to establishing this blockade, a nation had to make announcements, it had to inform the international community that this was happening, that it was at war, etc. From what you've been able to learn, did any of that happen as far as Israel was concerned?[/B]
It's difficult, and I think something that commentators and international lawyers need to look at closely: whether there was proper notification of this blockade. It's been going on for a number of years, and normally if there had been notifications to what we call neutral powers, you'd expect [them] to show up in things like instructions to the merchant fleet in potentially affected flagged states. I haven't seen any of that; that doesn't mean it's not there, but it requires further investigation.
The real issue, to my mind, is the question of damage to the civilian population. If you have UN agencies saying insufficient aid is getting through to Gaza - and I've seen one BBC report saying what's getting through is less than one-quarter what they need on a daily basis - that alone, to my mind, raises serious concerns about the legality of the blockade, even if the formal requirements for notification have been complied with.
[B]Where do you see this going now? Is there any point in anybody pursuing this legally, given the fact that, as many of us know, Israel has ignored countless UN resolutions over the course of the last 30-40 years?[/B]
That's a difficult question. I think... what speaking [about the] law does, in this situation, is it forms a channel through which political pressure is applied. And it certainly seems there's been an awful lot more pressure arising out of this incident in the international community, and it would seem within Israel itself.
So maybe this is an occasion we might see some kind of breakthrough, or at least a lessening of the blockade that is in place.
[/release]
-------
[B]Starpluck[/B]: List of blockaded items are found [URL="http://gisha.org/UserFiles/File/HiddenMessages/ItemsGazaStrip060510.pdf"]here[/URL], it ranges from jam and chocolate to cement and cattle.
It is legal. They're blockading Gaza, which is currently controlled by Hamas.
[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;22415520]It is legal. They're blockading Gaza, which is currently controlled by Hamas.[/QUOTE]
You didn't even read one word, you posted within seconds of me publishing this thread.
[editline]03:40PM[/editline]
Which contributes to why you were wrong.
This just proves how useless the UN can be at times.
"Israel has ignored countless UN resolutions over the course of the last 30-40 years" is what I'm talking about.
Enough Israel threads.
[QUOTE=CheeseMan;22415767]Enough Israel threads.[/QUOTE]
"enough discussion about a developed nation potentially violating human rights, i only want to make austin power news puns and see the same news that doesn't affect my everyday life"
[editline]10:56AM[/editline]
sure thing, champ
There should just be a megathread for Israel news.
[QUOTE=Dank Dave;22415908]There should just be a megathread for Israel news.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=666104[/url]
That was the most replies ever in a news thread. Though, I suppose megathreads would only be created on special occasions, the Gaza Massacre for example deemed it necessary to.
[QUOTE=starpluck;22415941][url]http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=666104[/url]
That was the most replies ever in a news thread. Though, I suppose megathreads would only be created on special occasions, the Gaza Massacre for example deemed it necessary to.[/QUOTE]
You sure do like showing everyone who biased you are.
[QUOTE=Thom12255;22416193]You sure do like showing everyone who biased you are.[/QUOTE]
I thought the avatar gave it away.
[QUOTE=Thom12255;22416193]You sure do like showing everyone who biased you are.[/QUOTE]
[URL]http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=YVx&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&defl=en&q=define:massacre&sa=X&ei=D7sLTKrSNY_u0wSasMBb&ved=0CBoQkAE[/URL]
[B]
Massacre[/B]
[LIST]
[*]kill a large number of people indiscriminately
[/LIST]
Human Rights Watch [URL="http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2009/03/25/rain-fire-0"]has already concluded with substantial evidence[/URL] that the Gaza Massacre was indiscriminate, hence why I call it a massacre.
[editline]04:22PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;22416310]I thought the avatar gave it away.[/QUOTE]
Just changed it, for you :)
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3L7OV414Kk[/media]
I'll just leave this here
If any other country were defending themselves or doing this there wouldn't be all this outrage over it.
[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22409496]How is that defending this?
I just said that if someone was killing me I'd try to kill him back and make sure he was dead. Notice I also said that the commandos would probably know how to kill someone in one single shot and not 5. Now tell me how is this defending it?
[/QUOTE]
Lol would you really need to shoot someone in the head four times to make sure he's dead? If there's a shot in the upper head area he's gone, the only time I could ever imaging shooting someone twice like that is if you hit them in a questionable place on the face as far as lethality goes and want to make sure with a quick shot to the forehead area.
Not to mention, when defending you don't want to make sure someone is [b]dead[/b], you want to make sure someone is [b]stopped[/b], if they have a gunshot wound and only access to a melee weapon/don't appear to be moving, lethal action is hardly justifiable.
[QUOTE=Carbon Knight;22407100]Either you must be 100% for Israel or 100% for the destruction of Israel.[/QUOTE]
I for one am not for the destruction of Israel, nor do I support what is being done. I just wish the IDF and Israel would stop treating the Palestinians like animals.
[QUOTE=Perfumly;22416916]Lol would you really need to shoot someone in the head four times to make sure he's dead? If there's a shot in the upper head area he's gone, the only time I could ever imaging shooting someone twice like that is if you hit them in a questionable place on the face as far as lethality goes and want to make sure with a quick shot to the forehead area.
Not to mention, when defending you don't want to make sure someone is [B]dead[/B], you want to make sure someone is [B]stopped[/B], if they have a gunshot wound and only access to a melee weapon/don't appear to be moving, lethal action is hardly justifiable.[/QUOTE]
This.
death to the Israeli regime
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.