Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Then you're saying that Israel will cease to exist? I mean, I agree with that sentiment, but I'm not sure what you mean to describe with your 'middle-ground' approach. If the land to be given up isn't necessarily Israeli, then where are we left in terms of security?

You're very confusing in your drunkenness.

No, I'm not saying they'll cease to exist. I don't think they would allow that. What I am saying is that there are forces that exist that will not stop until Israel ceases to exist. These forces aren't an especially profound threat to Israel's existance, it's not like they can do much more but lob rockets and run their mouthes, but no amount of concession will cause them to stop.

Basically it comes down to the fact that both sides are full of gak.

The Arab side says "just give us this, and then we can all live in peace." And they're lying, they'll just try to take more.

Similarly, the Israelis say "we're just defending ourselves" even as they try to build new settlements, and are sledgehammer aggressive.

You're going to pains to defend a situation that I'm not entirely sure you read up on sufficiently.

Perhaps you should read this:

http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/news-207069-upcoming-aid-ship-convoy-may-stoke-tensions-between-turkey-and-egypt.html

When the ships saw helicopters, who did they think it was? And why did the Israeli marines have crowd control gear?

It's clear that the entire GOAL here was to create an incident and leverage public opinion against Israel. I don't think the activists meant to get killed, but it sure does make a good story for them.

It's also clear that the Israeli goal was NOT to kill anybody. That's what paintball guns and pistols tells you.

No question, the Israelis miscalculated on this, and are suffering backlash as a result, but I think it's fairly bogus to make this a story of Israeli piracy and lawbreaking.

It's the STANDARD dance that goes on in that region, day after day, year after year. Anti-Israeli forces try to toe the line as closely as possible, and provoke Israel to step over. Sometimes the anti-Israeli forces cross the line, get killed, and no special objections are made. Other times, the Israelis miscalculate, and shoot the wrong guy, and then they get the backlash.

Perhaps you should read this:

http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/news-207069-upcoming-aid-ship-convoy-may-stoke-tensions-between-turkey-and-egypt.html

When the ships saw helicopters, who did they think it was? And why did the Israeli marines have crowd control gear?

It's clear that the entire GOAL here was to create an incident and leverage public opinion against Israel. I don't think the activists meant to get killed, but it sure does make a good story for them.

It's also clear that the Israeli goal was NOT to kill anybody. That's what paintball guns and pistols tells you.

No question, the Israelis miscalculated on this, and are suffering backlash as a result, but I think it's fairly bogus to make this a story of Israeli piracy and lawbreaking.

It's the STANDARD dance that goes on in that region, day after day, year after year. Anti-Israeli forces try to toe the line as closely as possible, and provoke Israel to step over. Sometimes the anti-Israeli forces cross the line, get killed, and no special objections are made. Other times, the Israelis miscalculate, and shoot the wrong guy, and then they get the backlash.

You don't have to page break twice after every thought.

Also yes, an aid mission with the announced intention of violating an illegal blockade into a disputed territory policed militarily by a highly aggressive regime seems outright intended to cause an international incident.

Magical. Congratulations, welcome to yesterday.

You take your page broken lengthy repositories of text a bit far though when you implicate turkey as an anti israeli force attempting to toe the line.

You should probably more carefully inject lines of explanation or reasoning into your posts when you want to place suppositions that are either not supported at all or are so obvious as to not even be worth stating.

It's quite clear that this group wanted to either implicate israel and cause a loss of international trust or wanted to highlight the severe conditions within gaza.

However given that turkey was previously a fairly close ally of Israel the concept you put forth of this being an anti israeli force winning the game is a bit strained. The ship was largely composed of turkish nationals after all.

Thus in your post you probably should have more carefully stated what groups or what perhaps you believed their intentions were.

It's not that you are necessarily wrong. It's just that you are expressing yourself in a very poor manner.

The Turkish government is not composed of militaristic anti israeli ultra-nationals and it's populace is largely stable and well policed.

It's important to identify your pieces.

Before you place them onto your fictional chessboard.

Gwar! wrote:

sebster wrote:The troubles in Northern Ireland are all but over, without anyone committing genocide on the other.

Ha... HAHA.... HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

This made me laugh. Every other week they find a bomb outside a PSNI police station mate. The "Troubles" have lessened, but they are far from "all but over".

No, it’s over as a serious political movement. There have been a couple of thousand people killed by Maoist rebels in India in the last couple of years, but Maoism as a political movement is over, because it has no meaningful political following, it has no say and no influence in the political dialogue of India.

A collection of hardliners pretending otherwise doesn’t change that.

Phryxis wrote:Sure, and the possibility of the conflict ending does exist. I just don't think it's very likely, and I don't think there's any one thing to be "done" about it. I don't think there's even a collection of things. I think it's beyond the deliberate control of human beings.

I don't mean to imply that fights can't ever end. Clearly they end all the time. I just mean to suggest that fights don't end if both sides don't want them to, and I don't forsee either side of this particular conflict wanting it to end.

Fair enough. I disagree, mind you, in Israel itself there’s plenty of support for ending their more aggressive foreign policies. So at least some people are of a mind to end the conflict.

I was speaking of a whole spectrum of concessions, not just surrendering new settlements. Even so, the most obvious weakening is one of perception. Currently Israel is known for being relentless, aggressive and uncompromising, and they still have people testing them. Imagine what would happen if they were seen as being weak?

I think a country can make it clear attacks on its sovereign territory will see incredible retribution without continuing other policies. Note that, for instance, I agree with maintaining the quarantine of Palestine, as long as sufficient supplies are provided through other means, and a long term strategy is in place to eventually reach a conclusion.

There is an increasing perception of Israeli weakness coming from their poor military performance in the last few years. The bungled attack on Lebanon. A series of poorly operated raids into Palestine.

I read a piece a while back from a retired IDF officer, who said that their capabilities were quickly diminishing. His argument wasn’t for more money, his argument was that decades of occupation will cripple the fighting capabilities of any army. It demoralises troops, and it shifts training priorities towards patrolling and not conventional warfare. He didn’t outright say Israel needed to leave for their own sake, mind you, but it seemed a pretty safe conclusion for outside parties.

Additionally, while it's a cruel form of pragmatism, the Israelis attitude is that anything that empowers and liberates the Palestinians makes them more able to attack Israel. As things stand, rocket attacks are relatively common, even though Palestinians are broken up into numerous tiny neighborhoods, with checkpoints and other barricades to assembling such weapons. Were they given a reasonable state to live in, they'd be infinitely more capable of assembling and firing rockets. This would put Israel in a weaker position.

Sure, and this is the crux of the whole problem. Israel will never be rid of the Palestinian desire to fire rockets until Israel allows the Palestinians to have normal lives, but in opening up Palestine so they might start normal lives makes it easier for Palestinians to fire rockets into Israel. It’s a really tough problem, that will need a lot of goodwill on both sides to solve. To even begin to reach a point where it can be solved we first need to move past all the rubbish about Israel fighting for it’s survival day by day. It’s a serious problem that people can’t even do that.

dogma wrote:

halonachos wrote:
Sorry, but if someone declares embargo and blockades, I would call that a law.

You would be wrong to do so.

halonachos wrote:
Also, I don't stereotype I just enjoy stereotypes.

You just did.

If a nation declares that they are going to embargo a country that they have been at odds with for the past decades then that is a legal embargo. Seeing as though there has never been any true peace between Israel and Palestine, its mostly been a series of ceasefires, then I would assume that it alsmost a warlike state of relations. In this case embargo is legal and allowed. Stopping the flotilla was allowed seeing as though they were intentionally trying to break through the blockade which reminds me of this:

merriem websters wrote:1 : to import or export secretly contrary to the law and especially without paying duties imposed by law
2 : to convey or introduce surreptitiously
intransitive verb
: to import or export something in violation of the customs laws

— smug·gler \ˈsmə-glər\ noun

So in fact they were not bringing humanitarian aid, they were smuggling humanitarian aid. It was an illegal act committed in good nature, unfortunately it was an ILLEGAL act.

Secondly, the fact that they were some distance away from the blockade is trivial. If you know that someone is going to attempt to break through your door are you going to wait till they do in order to do something or are you going to do something about it before it happens? These people made it well clear that their mission was to break through the blockade, the fact that they weren't stopped earlier is a true puzzle. The turkish government dropped the ball on this one by allowing it to go through. The Israelis simply responded to the threat and were attacked, when this happened they opened fire. Another thing is the fact that Israel has a history of pre-emptive strikes which is one of the reasons people hate them even though its their #1 defense policy. If they know that someone is going to try to attack or try to run their blockade, they're going to act upon it.

To simplify this, its almost as good as to say that 1) Israel had an embargo policy against a country that is basically still at war with them, 2)This is legal seeing as it was done in international waters, 3) The flotilla announced the fact that their goal was to run through the blockade, 4) The Israelis knew this and decided to pre-emptively end this attempt, 5) When the commandos landed on board the activists attacked them, 6) The Israeli commandos shot back, they did not fire first.

Thirdly, I did not "just stereotype" seeing as though I did not lay down a blanket statement about you. I did not say "Dogma always stereotypes" I said "you stereotype too much". There is in fact a difference. One being the blanketed statement and the other pointing out a single part of the vast character that is Dogma.

If a person told me that I eat too much then they would be pointing out a single part of me, now if they said that "halonachos is always awesome" then that would be a stereotype because they did not specifically say why I am so awesome all of the time.

While you in fact gave proof by saying that:

dogma wrote:Yep. Also, Americans love to be authoritative with respect to things they know nothing of. After all, politics is just like business, right?

I said that you do stereotype quite often, not always, but often. That in itself is not a stereotype, although your whole irony thing could be stereotyping as you infer that I always stereotype.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I know that there are a lot of people who side with Palestine on this, and I do at some point as well. Israel is really treating Palestine badly, but then again they've known almost constant warfare between the two a little after the FRENCH founded Israel for the jews after WW2. So all of the walls and such really are defensive measures.

Imagine this please: America is Israel and Mexico is Palestine. America expanded and took Mexico's land through war. After the war, the Mexicans wanted their land back so they tried to fight back. Mexico sets up rockets in populated neighborhoods and launches them into texas where they indiscriminantly kill numbers of civilians, america retaliates by attempting to destroy those rockets. This kills mexican civilians as the rockets were set up in neighborhoods. America also puts up a divider along the border to prevent any crossing(we're talking berlin wall style here). Mexican insurgents continue their activities and america embargos mexico. A flotilla from cuba announces that they are going to break through the embargo.

US Navy ships attempt to stop the flotilla and civilians are killed. America is now the evil one behind this whole issue.

Do the same with Northern Ireland, any larger nation that tries to place an embargo on a place that is smaller will most likely be seen as evil in this circumstance.

The fact is, the gaza strip has been highly militant against Israel and the Israelis want to stop them. A group of people try to break through a means of stopping the militants and Israel will not respond kindly.

halonachos wrote:
If a nation declares that they are going to embargo a country that they have been at odds with for the past decades then that is a legal embargo.

A country? Israel does not recognize the OT as a country.

halonachos wrote:
Seeing as though there has never been any true peace between Israel and Palestine, its mostly been a series of ceasefires, then I would assume that it alsmost a warlike state of relations. In this case embargo is legal and allowed.

Nope, revisit the Geneva Conventions.

halonachos wrote:
Stopping the flotilla was allowed seeing as though they were intentionally trying to break through the blockade which reminds me of this:

Nope. Intention cannot be enumerated in a case which lacks physical sustenance.

halonachos wrote:-

merriem websters wrote:1 : to import or export secretly contrary to the law and especially without paying duties imposed by law
2 : to convey or introduce surreptitiously
intransitive verb
: to import or export something in violation of the customs laws

— smug·gler \ˈsmə-glər\ noun

So in fact they were not bringing humanitarian aid, they were smuggling humanitarian aid. It was an illegal act committed in good nature, unfortunately it was an ILLEGAL act.

Awwwww, little baby looked up the definition of smuggle. So cute.

halonachos wrote:
Secondly, the fact that they were some distance away from the blockade is trivial. If you know that someone is going to attempt to break through your door are you going to wait till they do in order to do something or are you going to do something about it before it happens?

I'm waiting to break down your door. Will you shoot me in Illinois?

halonachos wrote:
These people made it well clear that their mission was to break through the blockade, the fact that they weren't stopped earlier is a true puzzle. The turkish government dropped the ball on this one by allowing it to go through.

Yes, because Turks must behave in concurrence with Israelis

halonachos wrote:
To simplify this, its almost as good as to say that 1) Israel had an embargo policy against a country that is basically still at war with them,

Sweden?

halonachos wrote:
2)This is legal seeing as it was done in international waters,

No.

halonachos wrote:
Thirdly, I did not "just stereotype" seeing as though I did not lay down a blanket statement about you. I did not say "Dogma always stereotypes" I said "you stereotype too much". There is in fact a difference. One being the blanketed statement and the other pointing out a single part of the vast character that is Dogma.

You laid down at least 6 stereotypes in this post.

halonachos wrote:
If a person told me that I eat too much then they would be pointing out a single part of me, now if they said that "halonachos is always awesome" then that would be a stereotype because they did not specifically say why I am so awesome all of the time.

No. They would only be stereotyping if they alliterated your tendency to fear some form of violence which you could not fear otherwise.

halonachos wrote:
I said that you do stereotype quite often, not always, but often. That in itself is not a stereotype, although your whole irony thing could be stereotyping as you infer that I always stereotype.

Stereotype? I made a comment about thing which Americans do, I never said that all Americans do them.

halonachos wrote:Imagine this please: America is Israel and Mexico is Palestine. America expanded and took Mexico's land through war. After the war, the Mexicans wanted their land back so they tried to fight back. Mexico sets up rockets in populated neighborhoods and launches them into texas where they indiscriminantly kill numbers of civilians, america retaliates by attempting to destroy those rockets. This kills mexican civilians as the rockets were set up in neighborhoods. America also puts up a divider along the border to prevent any crossing(we're talking berlin wall style here). Mexican insurgents continue their activities and america embargos mexico. A flotilla from cuba announces that they are going to break through the embargo.

US Navy ships attempt to stop the flotilla and civilians are killed. America is now the evil one behind this whole issue.

Remember that the US agreed to national borders in the 70s but continues to settle lands beyond those borders. Remember that every border into Mexico is tightly controlled, and the US will frequently cut the supply of goods into Mexico to punish the civilian population for the actions of Mexican militants. Remember that within the US a significant portion of the population doesn't want to keep taking Mexican land, but are still drafted and forced to patrol the border and even enter Mexico, and be exposed to danger.

Then consider the idea that there isn't a good guy or a bad guy, but there are a lot of dead people and millions of refugees. Then consider that maybe all that really matters is moving towards a solution where people won't be dying and the refugees can be allowed normal lives.

halonachos ... Yeah those poor repressed isrealis.... it does not matter where you move this incedent to.

Fact: Isreal NEVER declared an Embargo. They Declared a Blockade. Big difference. Even their Government called it a Blockade in official statements before and after.
Fact: The Blockade was protested in the U.N. multiple times.
Fact: The ship they attacked was of Turkish registry. Not one of the smaller vessels from another country.
Fact: There was no evidence of fire arms on board UNTIL the commandos arrived and were confronted.

We can argue attitudes and opinions until the world ends. Can you counter any of these facts?

Listen to sebster. He makes sense.

Gwar! wrote:And speaking as an Englishman living in Ireland (not willingly, but do not have the funds to escape ) I can tell you the anti English sentiment is still high.

As down the glen one Easter morn to a city fair rode I
There Armed lines of marching men in squadrons passed me by
No pipe did hum, no battle drum did sound its loud tattoo
But the Angelus Bell o'er the Liffey's swell rang out through the foggy dew

Right proudly high over Dublin Town they hung out the flag of war
'Twas better to die 'neath an Irish sky than at Suvla or Sud-El-Bar
And from the plains of Royal Meath strong men came hurrying through
While Britannia's Huns, with their long range guns sailed in through the foggy dew

well, I suppose anywhere England practiced genocide and slavery, there might be some lingering resentment. Sort of like being a Nazi in Jerusalem.

Speaking of Nazis, I might point out with amusement that the esteemed professor is leaving out the, achem, nation that was the source of most of the 'legal' blockades of trade.

Germany, mien Fuhrer.

And I seem to vaguely recall public outcry against it when it made the next logical progression, which was that England started arming her merchantmen, at which point Germany escalated to 'unrestricted submarine warfare'.

So, when do we sink a tour ship full of Americans and Arabs?

By the way, my comparison, above, despite being legal in both the Seneca Nation of Indians and the United States, is considered an international crime and an act of Terror in Europe. Those of you with children may wish to cover your eyes and not read those last few sentences.

helgrenze wrote:halonachos ... Yeah those poor repressed isrealis.... it does not matter where you move this incedent to.

Fact: Isreal NEVER declared an Embargo. They Declared a Blockade. Big difference. Even their Government called it a Blockade in official statements before and after.
Fact: The Blockade was protested in the U.N. multiple times.
Fact: The ship they attacked was of Turkish registry. Not one of the smaller vessels from another country.
Fact: There was no evidence of fire arms on board UNTIL the commandos arrived and were confronted.

We can argue attitudes and opinions until the world ends. Can you counter any of these facts?

1)Pope Benedict XVI - The Pope Benedict during his visit to Bethlehem in May 2009 specifically mentioned the plight of Gazans, saying: "Please be assured of my solidarity with you in the immense work of rebuilding which now lies ahead and my prayers that the embargo will soon be lifted." [67]

On December 15, 2008, following a statement in which he described the embargo on Gaza a crime against humanity, United Nations Special Rapporteur Richard A. Falk was prevented from entering the Palestinian territories by Israeli authorities and expelled from the region.[55] The Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations Itzhak Levanon[56] said that the mandate of the Special Rapporteur was "hopelessly unbalanced," "redundant at best and malicious at worst."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7570605.stm

2) Although it was protested by the UN, so was the US invasion of Iraq. Seriously, just because the UN protests it doesn't mean the act is illegitimate. This is a fact, but does NOT truly affect this discussion.

3)The ship was of turkish registry, again this fact does NOTHING for the argument. It could've been of australian registry and it STILL would be a ship in international waters that was trying to run through a blockade. Changing where it came from does nothing to alter the discussion.

4) Seriously? http://www.mygoldmusic.co.uk/article.asp?id=1823435
Look at the video, tell me that the activists had no weapons.

You did list some facts, but they don't really change anything because they are trivial. You are wrong as Israel did have an embargo and also, the commandos were beaten.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
December 24, 2008: After a six-month negotiated lull in rocket attacks, Hamas resumed its campaign of terror by launching dozens of rockets and mortar shells on Israeli civilians. On December 24 alone, more than 60 rockets and mortar shells rained down on major civilian population centers in the southern Israeli cities of Ashkelon and Netivot. Hamas has also threatened to resume its campaign of suicide bombings inside of Israel. These latest statements and actions by Hamas only serve as further proof that the terrorist organization is committed to Israel's destruction

That may not be opressed, but it is attacked. I don't care who you are, if the little guy attacks the big guy and the big guy kicks his ass its kind of expected.

BaronIveagh wrote:So, when do we sink a tour ship full of Americans and Arabs?

1967, the USS Liberty. It killed 34 Americans and wounded 171 others.

Actually I wonder where Baron's entire post fit into this.

I've been comparing the strengths of the Turkish and Israeli navies and the Turkish navy is much stronger. It's a NATO country after all. I hope that the Turks send another aid convoy but escort it this time with 8 Oliver Hazard Perry class FFGs and the truly impressive Milgem class corvette.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_Navy#2000s

How ironic is it that the children of holocaust victims are getting step by step closer and closer to the practices of their murderers.

olympia wrote:I've been comparing the strengths of the Turkish and Israeli navies and the Turkish navy is much stronger. It's a NATO country after all. I hope that the Turks send another aid convoy but escort it this time with 8 Oliver Hazard Perry class FFGs and the truly impressive Milgem class corvette.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_Navy#2000s

I too hope that a Turkish policy of brinkmanship increases the chances of more people getting killed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ergotoxin wrote:How ironic is it that the children of holocaust victims are getting step by step closer and closer to the practices of their murderers.

Fair go, mate. I don't agree with Israeli policy but comparisons to the Nazis are ludicrous.

lol. That video of the boarding makes me smile because i can imagine it myself, and i can imagine the gak the officer in charge is now getting off his lads! I did a 60 foot fastrope onto a deck in Sierra Leone once, i remember looking down quickly before i jumped out the helo and i thought 'hmm, id better watch my speed and my footing, thats a bloody long drop, and there seems to be alot of swell... The deck will be slippery as well..' if my boss said 'go Matty your up!' and i had a quick look down and saw 40 irate Turks with Iron bars and chairs id probably laugh out loud and say something along the lines of 'boss, are you taking the fething piss!?! Im sure the soldiers are laughing their asses off talking about this between themselves at the moment though, the funniest part of operations is laughing about the things that went wrong with your mates and taking the mick out of the guys in charge who thought it was a good idea at the time. Im pretty sure the officers are in a bit of bother though! :-)

sebster wrote:

olympia wrote:I've been comparing the strengths of the Turkish and Israeli navies and the Turkish navy is much stronger. It's a NATO country after all. I hope that the Turks send another aid convoy but escort it this time with 8 Oliver Hazard Perry class FFGs and the truly impressive Milgem class corvette.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_Navy#2000s

I too hope that a Turkish policy of brinkmanship increases the chances of more people getting killed.

Clearly the Israelis only understand and respect force. It's important to speak to them in a language they understand.

Oh and Olympia finally we agree on something regards this issue mate, i hope thats what happens too! Firstly because im not a very nice person and i think war between two nations i dont really care about is kinda cool. Also i dont like the Turkish soldiers as they pulled numerous hijinx when i worked with them in Kabul, and thirdly cos i love seeing the Israeli military get underestimated. They dont have a really sizeable navy as its not that sensible tactically, but id love to see them sink all of the Turks ships with some of their truly awesome arsenal, aircraft and long range missles. And im so confident that would be the outcome that ill give you ten to one odds thats what would happen. Big ships dont like getting things fired at them from range, even if they do have a goalkeeper or equivalent. Shall i stick ten euros on for you? :-)

mattyrm wrote: and thirdly cos i love seeing the Israeli military get underestimated.

Well after the ass-beating that Hezbollah put on the IDF in July 2006 one can be forgiven for underestimating the IDF.

olympia wrote:Clearly the Israelis only understand and respect force. It's important to speak to them in a language they understand.

Nah, Israel is very aware of it's international reputation. It's incredibly aware of it's reputation in Washington. It's why they spend so much money on PR.

Any threat that they'd lose US support would send them scuttling home. Not that the US will ever try to restrain Israel.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

mattyrm wrote:lol. That video of the boarding makes me smile because i can imagine it myself, and i can imagine the gak the officer in charge is now getting off his lads! I did a 60 foot fastrope onto a deck in Sierra Leone once, i remember looking down quickly before i jumped out the helo and i thought 'hmm, id better watch my speed and my footing, thats a bloody long drop, and there seems to be alot of swell... The deck will be slippery as well..' if my boss said 'go Matty your up!' and i had a quick look down and saw 40 irate Turks with Iron bars and chairs id probably laugh out loud and say something along the lines of 'boss, are you taking the fething piss!?! Im sure the soldiers are laughing their asses off talking about this between themselves at the moment though, the funniest part of operations is laughing about the things that went wrong with your mates and taking the mick out of the guys in charge who thought it was a good idea at the time. Im pretty sure the officers are in a bit of bother though! :-)

On average, how long did you spend laughing about a screw up that got people killed? Ten minutes?

halonachos wrote:
4) Seriously? http://www.mygoldmusic.co.uk/article.asp?id=1823435
Look at the video, tell me that the activists had no weapons.

I have... and several others.. I never said no weapons.. I said no FIRE ARMS. The pistols used were taken from the Israeli commandos and thus were not on the ship until said commandos arrived bearing them.

halonachos wrote:
December 24, 2008: After a six-month negotiated lull in rocket attacks, Hamas resumed its campaign of terror by launching dozens of rockets and mortar shells on Israeli civilians. On December 24 alone, more than 60 rockets and mortar shells rained down on major civilian population centers in the southern Israeli cities of Ashkelon and Netivot. Hamas has also threatened to resume its campaign of suicide bombings inside of Israel. These latest statements and actions by Hamas only serve as further proof that the terrorist organization is committed to Israel's destruction

That may not be opressed, but it is attacked. I don't care who you are, if the little guy attacks the big guy and the big guy kicks his ass its kind of expected.

The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs reports that at least 1,440 Palestinians were killed during the Israel’s assault on the Gaza strip, between December 27, 2008 and February 5, 2009. The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs reports that 5 Israeli soldiers and 4 civilians were killed by Palestinians between December 27, 2008 and January 18, 2009, and 1 soldier was killed on January 27, 2009.

In just over 2 months Israel killed 1440 Palestinians many nonviolent civilians. In the same time period Palestine killed 10, less than half civilians.
But Palestine is the terrorist country.
Since 2000 Palestinian "terror attacks" have killed fewer than 1200 people total.
Israeli attacks have killed 6300+.
But Palistinians are the terrorists.
Hamas rocket attacks and other violence have killed 123 Israeli children.
Israeli rocket attacks and other violence have killed 1500 Palestinian children.
But Hamas is the terrorist group.
6217 Palestinians were killed on their own land.
584 Israelis were killed on their own land.
But Palistinians are the ones practicing genocide.
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/deaths.html

Still think the attack on the flotilla was anything but an act of war?

As for the listing of the Turkish ship being attacked... it was the only one registered from an Arab nation.

In an earlier post i stated nuclear missiles in turkey, sorry my mistake.
I meant nuclear bombs,
Turkey hosts an estimated 90 B61 gravity bombs at Incirlik Air Base.
As part of NATO

In the video i saw pickaxe handles, proberly from the cargo of building supplies the ship was carrying

halonachos wrote:Actually I wonder where Baron's entire post fit into this.

Baron was romanticising the 'plight' of the IRA during the struggle for Irish independence in response to a comment Gwar! made. But that's an entirely different argument (which I'm not trying to start). The rest of his post is entirely relevant and shows the nationally subjective views of legality and so on.

EDIT removing unintended antagonism

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/israel-just-making-it-easier-for-guardian-readers-to-look-good-201006012778/

reds8n wrote:http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/israel-just-making-it-easier-for-guardian-readers-to-look-good-201006012778/

Israel should stop so he gets a blow job.

hahahaha

That puts things in perspective, funnily enough Reds8n.

I don't necessarily agree with the tactics of either side but I do give consideration to the fact that Israel (the state of) has existed for ~50 years or so, surrounded by nations, people and cultures who would do anything in their power to wipe them from the face of the world. I think if I were an Israeli bobbing around in that sea of hatred, I might get a wee bit defensive too.

I would laugh at people getting killed for a good ten minutes as long as they were not my comrades at arms seb. I laughed my ass off when a taliban fighter blew his own hand off with a grenade when he jumped out of his car in front of my vehicle as well. And i laughed my ass off when a suicide bomber blew himself up, only managed to kill a donkey, and we found his head in a tyre 200 yards down the road. And i tell my mates in the pub those stories and they all laugh too. Ive got plenty of stories if you want to hear more, but ive repeated myself ten times to you now. I happily admit all of my failings because i dont buy your incessant mentioning of your moral superiority, or anybody else who mentions it too much for that matter. The more people tend to crow on about how good they are, the worse a person i tend to think they are. Its how ive found people to be during my 30 years of life. I admit i have a bias, and i care little for the lives of palestinans. The difference is, most the pro-palestinian people wont concede they care little for the lives of the Israeli defence force, but we know it is so, human beings do this, and it doesnt make you evil, you pick a group you empathire with and you distance yourself from others. Im aware im getting into another topic here, like some sort of amateur psychology 101, but all i will say is, im aware i say things that you can cut and paste and then say 'look im a nicer man than you', im aware before i click submit. I fail to see the point in it, if you want to rebut a specific point i make, then crack on, but your collection of 'matt being immoral' quotes are pointless, because everyone knows how i feel before you post them. Oh and Olympia, i cant get into 2006 on my puny phone, but i do of course disagree with you regarding the capabilities of the IDF, time will tell of course, as more scrapping is inevitable out there! Ill simply say this to you. Who do you think gets the most practice? :-)

See, this is why I have alternativing views of you, mattrym. One day I'll be all, 'this guy is crazy cool!', the next I'm like 'dude...no.'

Basically:

I'll say it again. When you have the knife to your throat, like Israel has had since it was formed, you're going to have to act differently then when you're sitting well protected thoudands of miles from the situation.
The land Israel has occupied was previously used as an area to fire missles and launch attacks into Israel from.
The Arabs say the reason Israel gets attacked is because of the occupation, yet Israel was routinely attacked before any of the contested territories were occupied.

This thread is closed. Many of the statements are borderline racist and the level of vitriol is not acceptable on a board that is fundamentally about toy soldiers (or historical miniature gaming if its ever brought up in court-just fyi).

If you find this decision unacceptable, you have the option to find other websites to post on.