Israeli army: More force was needed for ship raid

Good for them, that whole shit was fubar. The ship was bound for Gaza waters and was going to attempt to go through the blockaid. They wouldn't change course as suggested or answer there radio. Israel sent commandos to go search the ship as there is a likely reason why a "aid ship" would disobey blockaid rules and not answer there comms.

They beat and tried to kill the commandos when they tried to borde the ship. The commandos came in with riot weapons and tactics, nothing that could kill anybody on borde and only when met with extreme violence that risked the lives of the commandos did they pull out there sidearms and shoot to kill. Israel did everything right. I am pissed that countries have the balls to condem them for what is actually trying to defend there country. By ensuring this blockaid works so Hamas cannot get anything they can use against Israel.

All those aid ships get through one way or another, all Israel asks is they unload at a Israeli port for cargo inspection before Israel themselves send the cargo by truck into Gaza. Very simple demands, demands that wasn't met by this ship. Sometimes I wish the Canadian Government had Israel's balls. The way they back there military despite unjustified international condemnation of them.

Looks like the terrorists better watch out, wont be so easy for them next time.

Watch the whole bullet examination make barely a peep in Western media.

A well placed torp would have been enough force i believe

I'll just state the points already done to death in the Gaza aid flotilla thread just for fun.

1) Ship attacked in international waters where Israel has no jurisdiction is illegal equals to an act of piracy.

2)Nato is legally obliged to defend and take action against one of its members. Turkey.

This whole internal Israeli inquiry is a joke, with no testimony or evidence from the other side. If Israel is innocent why were all the cameras and videos confisticated from people on board and never returned. What are they trying to hide so hard ?

1. The flotilla was on course to what is internationally recognized as Israeli administered territory. Israel had a right to intercept it under those grounds just the same as Canada is right now intercepting a ship full of Tamils that has a published heading for a Canadian port. Therefore, the Israeli action was legal under the UN Law of the Sea treaty to which Israel is a signatory.

2. NATO is obliged to defend Turkish territory if/when Turkey requests such an action. Which they haven't. Given that the Turks have generally good relations with Israel they have opted to pursue diplomatic solutions to the problem key of which is prohibiting Turkish flagged ships from entering sovereign waters without permission.

3. The IDF seized the cameras to prevent the terrorists from identifying and then threatening the Israeli troops involved in the assault. This is essentially SOP for the Israelis and they do the same to Israeli reporters when needed, if that makes you feel better.

4. The moral lesson here is you don't enter Israeli (or Canadian) controlled waters without permission. Like it or not, the Israelis can enforce their blockade. If the Hamas want to break the blockade then they need a navy. Until such time as they have one, they need to play by the rules.

Also, if you hit a guy who has a gun with a steel bar, you really shouldn't be all that surpriied if you wind up shot.

That said, I don't believe a thing the Israelis say, or Hamas. They're both inveterate liars.

Funny, for all their supposed differences you really can't tell them apart sometimes.

More fucking bullshit facts pulled out of your own ass. Buddy spend more than 1 sec googling shit and then you might actually learn something for a change

Look up UN Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone specially article 22 on warships boarding ships on high seas. Only justified if the ship is suspected of piracy, slave trade or flying under false flag and if none of these are true the ship has to be compensated.

Legal my ass.

Anyways this thing has been discussed to death and I've said anything I've got to say in this matter over here so there is no point in beating a dead horse

current-events-f59/ten-dead-after-israeli-forces-clash-with-aid-flotilla-t89596.html

More fucking bullshit facts pulled out of your own ass. Buddy spend more than 1 sec googling shit and then you might actually learn something for a change

Look up UN Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone specially article 22 on warships boarding ships on high seas. Only justified if the ship is suspected of piracy, slave trade or flying under false flag and if none of these are true the ship has to be compensated.

Legal my ass.

Anyways this thing has been discussed to death and I've said anything I've got to say in this matter over here so there is no point in beating a dead horse

current-events-f59/ten-dead-after-israeli-forces-clash-with-aid-flotilla-t89596.html

And you can't use just one article to prove your case either.

Here's just one paragraph in support of the legality of Israels actions:

Abbas Al Lawati, a Dubai-based Gulf News journalist on board the flotilla, opined that Israel is likely to cite the Gaza–Jericho Agreement (Annex I, Article XI) which vests Israel with the responsibility for security along the coastline and the Sea of Gaza. The agreement stipulates that Israel may take any measures necessary against vessels suspected of being used for terrorist activities or for smuggling arms, ammunition, drugs, goods, or for any other illegal activity.

Well his opinion is a bit biased seeing that he he refers to Israel as a rogue state.

And its not just me



http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/ja ... -palestine

With regard to the Gaza–Jericho Agreement, Diana Buttu, a Palestinian-Canadian lawyer and former spokesperson for the Palestine Liberation Organization, said that Israel declared the Oslo Accords dead in 2001, and actually breached the agreements, so that a call to the applicability of the Gaza-Jericho Agreement is not plausible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_asse ... tilla_raid

Fools can have their opinions. Even fools in Israel (well in this case, an Israeli who has become a British professor). As long as your opinions don't start inciting violence or are libel, free to spew. God help you if you attempt to defend Israel in a majority of Muslim states, however.

Also, don't you think using a former spokesperson for the PLO for their assessment on Israel a bit questionable?