[Closed] Would Nuking Israel Solve the Problems in the Middle East

you see what's happening here on this discussion, we ourselves are having the same issue in so much as we're not willing to concede that were as wrong as each other and will get nowhere until we agree or a bigger stick comes along to make us see sense, everything i have said has been taken and used against me and everything you have said has been used against you, this situation has gone on for so long now that no-one side is either right or wrong anymore they just keep on killing each other thinking that one day the other will give in! i won't convince you that you're wrong anymore than you'll convince me that i'm wrong and so the misery continues.

Cheers lifer - as I said, no allegation that its illegal, just a belief that it should be lifted.

UN resolution does not call the blockade illegal either, just that the UN thinks humanitarian aid should be permitted unimpeded

[i]1. The Security Council stresses the urgency of and calls for an immediate, durable and fully respected ceasefire, leading to the full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza.

2. The Security Council calls for the unimpeded provision and distribution throughout Gaza of humanitarian assistance, including of food, fuel and medical treatment.

3. The Security Council welcomes the initiatives aimed at creating and opening humanitarian corridors and other mechanisms for the sustained delivery of humanitarian aid.

4. The Security Council calls on member states to support international efforts to alleviate the humanitarian and economic situation in Gaza, including through urgently needed additional contributions to UNWRA and through the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee.[/i]

crikey you're right suggestions on probable solutions would be far more constructive, my suggestions would be constant mediation between both sides and some goodwill gestures from both sides! would anyone care to suggest any goodwill gestures?.

you point me to a UN resolution that says the blockade is illegal!

You are not aware that the UN has passed resolutions demanding Israel withdraws from occupied territories
ratty ? !!!

The UN does not recognise that Israel has withdrawn from Gaza [u]precisely[/u] because it maintains the land, sea, and air blockade. The blockade is illegal.

Furthermore, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights has declared the blockade illegal as it amounts to collective punishment of civilians. Which is prohibited under the Geneva Conventions on the conduct of warfare and occupation.

They rely on the actions of each other to maintain power. The blockade is perfect propaganda for Hamas to garner support, and the actions of Hamas are perfect propaganda for the continuation of the blockade.

United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights has declared the blockade illegal

Thats his personal [u]opinion[/u] - not the official opinion of the united nations which is expressed only in forms of a resolution, resolutions so far call for a ceasefire as a prerequisite for the withdrawal - the last ceasefire was broken by Hamas!

Ban Ki-moon recently called the blockade "not sustainable" and "counter-productive" - he clearly doesn't think its illegal else he would have said so.

as I said, show me a resolution that states the blockade is illegal, without that you've got nothing but an opinion.

The blockade is perfect propaganda for Hamas to garner support

The blockade was imposed in punishment for Hamas winning the elections in Gaza.
In other words, "this is what you get when we don't like the election results".

So it would appear that Hamas doesn't need the blockade to win support.

mmb - Member

"he took the bottom of the garden to push the trouble maker out of range!"

No he didn't. This is what's right at the bottom of it, and it's the one part that might be worth convincing you of. The whole moral equivelancy/neccesary protection etc arguments, you're right that those are too dyed in the wool but when you take it right back to the start, the first rock wasn't cast by palestinians. Violence begets violence and you get into the whole horrible cycle but there was a first step, and that shouldn't be forgotten.

show me a resolution that states the blockade is illegal

You really are stupid aren't you ?

The UN considers Gaza to be still be under Israeli occupation because of the blockade. The occupation is illegal. There is no need for further resolutions. Just for Israel to comply.

Thats his personal opinion

Funnily enough ratty, I am more interested in the opinion of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, on whether Israel is in violation of the Geneva Convention over the blockade - not yours.

He says that it is, and that's good enough for me.

who cares what a lone UN employee says? Its irrelevant.

There is ONE body at the UN that can make this determination, and they haven't - which speaks volumes!

Anyway, Israel isn't even a signatory of the 1977 addendum to article 4 of Geneva, so cannot be in breach of them!

There is ONE body at the UN that can make this determination, and they haven't - which speaks volumes!

What? the security council? the one body that has consistently seen the US veto any sanction of Israel.

We all know that Israel is turning into something too awful to behold.

It is an illegal occupation and lets face it we (us & the yanks) shouldn't have put the "isrealis" there in the first place . I'm inclined to say bomb 'em

FWIW, 124 Israeli children have been killed by Palestinians and 1,441 Palestinian children have been killed by Israelis since September 29, 2000.

lets face it we (us & the yanks) shouldn't have put the "isrealis" there in the first place

You're aware that hundreds of British troops died preventing them "being put there in the first place" ?

hora yes i agree they are but with reason, northwind, you may be right but without gestures nothing changes and so it goes on.

There is ONE body at the UN that can make this determination, and they haven't

Yes they have. United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 calls on Israel to withdraw from occupied territories. The continued blockade of Gaza means that Israel is still in breach as it has not withdrawn from the territories.

Also, from an Amnesty International report :

1.2.4 Collective punishment

The prolonged blockade of Gaza, which had already been in place for some 18 months before the current fighting began, amounts to collective punishment of its entire population.

The Fourth Geneva Convention specifically prohibits collective punishment. Its Article 33 provides: “No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.”

As explained in the authoritative commentary of the ICRC: “This paragraph then lays a prohibition on collective penalties... penalties of any kind inflicted on persons or entire groups of persons, in defiance of the most elementary principles of humanity, for acts that these persons have not committed.”4

The blockade is illegal on [u]at least[/u] two counts. Firstly it me determines that Gaza is still under illegal Israeli occupation. And secondly, it is in breach of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

No I wasn't aware of that, but I just hate the way the isrealis seem to act more like the nazi's every sodding year & the tactics they use to make themselves virtually untouchable from the US & UK like helping finance political leadership campains further helps me not like them.

This whole thing is a nightmare, Isreal can do whatever they want due to the support they have from the USA. I actually understand why Iran are going Nuclear and dont give a damn what anyone says especially when you have rouge states like Isreal being nuclear.

I dont really care what happens in the middle east anymore as everything is so corrupt, we should just leave them all to decide. The EU & USA should stop supporting Isreal and let them go it alone I am sure the situation would not be as bad as it is now.

Yes they have. United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 calls on Israel to withdraw from occupied territories. The continued blockade of Gaza means that Israel is still in breach as it has not withdrawn from the territories.

No, 242

[i]Affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:
i)Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;
ii)Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;[/i]

So, it says that part of the process of peace is a withdrawal, as is the right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force - since that has not been achieved by negotiation the withdrawal cannot take place, in other words, it takes two to tango - until other states accept the right of Israel to exist in peace, the resolution is unfulfilled!

Regards "collective punishment" - thats simply countered by commenting that there is no collective punishment, food and humanitarian aid supplies are being allowed through, however things useful for hostile enemy forces are prohibited, entirely within the law.

Gaza supermarket with Cherie Blairs Sister:

[img] [/img]

Oh well, that picture seals it then, nothing wrong at all is there|

ooh, look at the peaceful humanitarian protesters:

🙄

Zulu-Eleven, are you Melanie Phillips?

if i was attacked in international waters why not kick off,anyway zulu are you in charge of Isreali propaganda or something ?

Nope, simply don't agree with the leftie bandwagoning that jumps up and down calling anything "illegal" or "piracy" or "murder" because they don't agree with it!

Call it wrong, call it inhumane, call it whatever - but don't make wild claims of illegality just because you don't like it.

The sooner people can accept that both sides have committed brutal, murderous acts, and that both sides need to stop the killing and come to peace then there might be an end to this - but simply castigating the Israelis and denying the existence of a violent, manipulative and media savvy enemy is naive and ridiculous

Zulu-Eleven - Member

"Regards "collective punishment" - thats simply countered by commenting that there is no collective punishment, food and humanitarian aid supplies are being allowed through"

Are you completely mad? Just curious likes.

Israel allows only 15000 tons of aid through to Gaza per week, which is around 1/4 of what the UN says is the minimum required. A complete block on concrete, cement and plumbing pipes is in force, because they can be "dual use"- though they're yet to explain how a 2 foot sewer pipe can be used as a weapon, unless they make a supergun. Other things seized over the years have included light bulbs, mattresses, shoes, clothes, chocolate and pasta, all highly dangerous in the wrong hands of course.

Now, ask yourself, if this convoy really was smuggling arms, why is it that no independant inspection is going to be allowed?

Lets look at the reality of it - nothing to do with humaitarian aid and everything to do with a publicity stunt for the terrorist Hamas government - Israel invited the ships to enter the one open port to unload their "humaitarian aid" , 5 out of 6 ships obeyed the 6th didn't whose rather large "crew" (100s to crew one cargo ship ???)then promptly attacked the boarding Israeli soldiers. The one mistake Istael made was playing into the hands of a deliberate set up by terrorists who put a low price on human life if it means getting their story into the headlines.

Would Nuking Israel Solve the Problems in the Middle East

Racist.

Would Nuking [s]Israel[/s] the middle east Solve the Problems in the Middle East

Yes.

ooh, look at the peaceful humanitarian protesters:

What was the phrase earlier about bears etc?

)then promptly attacked the boarding Israeli soldiers.

Why were they boarding in the first place? A reporter has also stated that the Israelis fired on the ship before boarding.

since that has not been achieved by negotiation the withdrawal cannot take place

United Nations General Assembly resolution 37/123 calls on :

[b][i]" the unconditional and total withdrawal of Israel from all the Palestinian and other occupied Arab territories"[/i][/b]

Do you understand what "unconditional" means ratty ?

.

Gaza supermarket with Cherie Blairs Sister

So the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights is lying. The UN Human Rights Council is lying. Amnesty International is lying. And a multitude of other humanitarian organisations are all liars - there is no humanitarian crises in Gaza.

But you on the other hand ratty, are telling the truth.

Funny that.

.

Zulu-Eleven, are you Melanie Phillips?

I'm not entirely convinced that Melanie Phillips is quite as right wing as ratty.

Why were they boarding in the first place

To check for contraband items such as weapons and/or explosives in accordance with the (entirely legal) blockade perhaps?

A reporter has also stated that the Israelis fired on the ship before boarding.

Then why land on the ship with paintball guns?

[img] [/img]

To check for contraband items such as weapons and/or explosives in accordance with the (entirely legal) blockade perhaps?

So why did they do it at night time then ? Is that what the Royal Navy does ?

And why did they cover their faces - if what they were doing was lawful ? Is that what the Royal Navy does ?

The whole incident was a terrorist act.

The whole incident was a terrorist act.

Hahahahahahahaha!

Now you're making a parody of yourself Ernie

Wouldn't it be easier to sink the boat with a torpedo than land on it with paintball guns?

How come there were no problems or violence on the other five ships that were boarded? answer me that!

To check for contraband items such as weapons and/or explosives in accordance with the (entirely legal) blockade perhaps?

Outside the exclusion zone?

Yes mate - state sponsored terrorism. If it had been carried out by Iran or North Korea, that's how the US government would be describing it. And the country responsible would have been classed as a terrorist state.

Why for example, is Dame Shirley Porter heiress to Tesco, living on land taken from the Palestinians - was she being persecuted in her home country ffs ?

Well, I saw a program a few years back of a Jewish family leaving Britain to live in Israel. When asked why, they said they felt threatened in the UK and they would rather be in a country with "their" people. Threatened? They now live in a country almost surrounded by hostile nations!

They rely on the actions of each other to maintain power.

In the case of Israel any of their actions past,present or future, support the ultimate goal of achieving a Zionist state.

The key is the US.

Ernie, I don't know why you are still arguing with Ratty, just treat his posts for what they are; comedy value.

Lifer and Ernie - I suggest you go away and read up on the San Remo manual, which more than adequately describes the legality and rules of blockade!

So - can anyone summarise the 120 posts above? And perhaps also give us a bit of an insight into the legal position of Israel and the UN etc.

Yes.
It's just past 8 in the evening,the lupine's charged and I'm going for a ride with me mates. See ya chaps.

But it's going to be light for a good 3 hours yet.

"Lifer and Ernie - I suggest you go away and read up on the San Remo manual, which more than adequately describes the legality and rules of blockade!"

You get a genuine LOL for that, since the Manual only applies to "Armed Conflicts At Sea", there is no declared armed conflift here. But even if there was a state of war, it still wouldn't apply, it specifically exempts

"vessels engaged in humanitarian missions, including vessels carrying supplies indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, and vessels engaged in relief actions and rescue operations;"

"Lifer and Ernie - I suggest you go away and read up on the San Remo manual, which more than adequately describes the legality and rules of blockade!"

Why don't you point to the sections that you think apply to this?

We (Mrs JulianA and I) were in the Netherlands (Stadskanaal to be precise) on their Remembrance Day and we had the misfortune to hear the Israeli ambassador to the Netherlands give a speech at the Jewish Memorial. In English.

It went somthing along the lines of 'Anti-semites are threatening our country, Ahmedinajad is a threat to us and the whole world hates us' It was a polemic against anti-semitism at a memorial service for the Jews of Stadskanaal who were transported first to Camp Westerbork (which we visited) and some later to extermination camps in the east and was totally inappropriate to the occasion. His speech confirmed our negative opinions of the Israelis.

Mr Ambassador, you did harm and no good to your cause with your speech: you confirmed our opinions of you.

We have been to synagogues in Bourtange and Chania, and have sent messages of support to the synagogue in Chania following the tragic arson attack there, and have found them to be beautiful and peaceful and we have nothing but sympathy for those who lost their lives to the unspeakable Nazi purge, but we cannot find sympathy with the extremists who appear to inhabit Israel.

William Dalrymple's fantastic book 'From The Holy Mountain' opened my eyes to the treatment of the Palestinians by the Israelis (akin to the treatment of the Jews by the Nazis) and Robert Fisk's book 'The Great War For Civilisation - The Conquest Of The Middle East' confirmed my opinions.

it specifically exempts

"vessels engaged in humanitarian missions, including vessels carrying supplies indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, and vessels engaged in relief actions and rescue operations;"

Oh, Northwind - if only you'd bothered reading the next paragraph...

[i]137. Vessels listed in paragraph 136 are exempt from capture only if they:

(a) are innocently employed in their normal role;
(b) do not commit acts harmful to the enemy;
[b](c) immediately submit to identification and inspection when required; and[/b]
(d) do not intentionally hamper the movement of combatants and obey orders to stop or move out of the way when required.
[/i]

Lifer:

[i]98. Merchant vessels believed on reasonable grounds to be breaching a blockade may be captured. Merchant vessels which, after prior warning, clearly resist capture may be attacked.

99. A blockade must not bar access to the ports and coasts of neutral States.

103. If the civilian population of the blockaded territory is inadequately provided with food and other objects essential for its survival, the blockading party must provide for free passage of such foodstuffs and other essential supplies, subject to:

(a) [b]the right to prescribe the technical arrangements, including search, under which such passage is permitted; and[/b]
(b) the condition that the distribution of such supplies shall be made under the local supervision of a Protecting Power or a humanitarian organization which offers guarantees of impartiality, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross.

So did you not read my first paragraph?

The israelis had already stated not that the ships were to be inspected, but that they wouldn't be allowed to reach their destination. If you can't see the difference there there's really little point in trying to have a conversation. There was no intention to inspect them, only to stop them.

A lot of people are trying to use the same argument you are but it doesn't come close to applying- they had no intention of allowing the ships to complete their voyage, and they were completely open about that. Even if you (as you no doubt do) disregard the fact that Israel's policy is openly to block the import of legitimate aid supplies, you can't disregard this.

I have no sympathy for either side, all as bad as each other, We (british) as a mongrol nation have no high horse to get on either.

Northwind - see paragraph 103 which I added above - the diversion to an alternative port before shipping the humanitarian supplies on for distribution was entirely legal, since the Israelis are allowed to set out the conditions for search and passage of the goods involved, as long as they get to the destination.

there is no declared armed conflict here

The parties to an armed conflict at sea are bound by the principles and rules of international humanitarian law from the moment armed force is used

Even when only one side is armed?

Even when only one side is armed?

read it again: [i]Merchant vessels believed on reasonable grounds to be breaching a blockade may be captured[/i]

The stated intention of the "humanitarian flotilla" was to breach the blockade - it was perfectly lawful to subject them to search and inspection of their cargo.

5 ships of the 6 ships involved accepted without problem! I don't see anyone calling that illegal - however on one ship people launched a violent sustained attack on the naval team sent on board - who acted in self defence. All pretty simple really!

Breaching, not intending to breach. Simple really!

International waters Zulu-Eleven.

If Turkey went to war with Israel, I wonder if it was non-Nuclear, just how badly would Israel lose?

Israel would lose badly unless they used tactical nuclear strikes. Israel better be careful. America can't influence everyone all of the time.

International waters Zulu-Eleven

Jesus, just read the rules!

[i]118. In exercising their legal rights in an international armed conflict at sea, belligerent warships and military aircraft have a right to visit and search merchant vessels outside neutral waters where there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that they are subject to capture.[/i]

outside neutral waters - ie, in international waters!

Israels explanation:

1. A maritime blockade is in effect off the coast of Gaza. Such blockade has been imposed, as Israel is currently in a state of armed conflict with the Hamas regime that controls Gaza, which has repeatedly bombed civilian targets in Israel with weapons that have been smuggled into Gaza via the sea.

2. Maritime blockades are a legitimate and recognized measure under international law that may be implemented as part of an armed conflict at sea.

3. A blockade may be imposed at sea, including in international waters, so long as it does not bar access to the ports and coasts of neutral states.

4. The naval manuals of several western countries, including the US and England recognize the maritime blockade as an effective naval measure and set forth the various criteria that make a blockade valid, including the requirement of give due notice of the existence of the blockade.

5. In this vein, it should be noted that Israel publicized the existence of the blockade and the precise coordinates of such by means of the accepted international professional maritime channels. Israel also provided appropriate notification to the affected governments and to the organizers of the Gaza protest flotilla. Moreover, in real time, the ships participating in the protest flotilla were warned repeatedly that a maritime blockade is in effect.

6. Here, it should be noted that under customary law, knowledge of the blockade may be presumed once a blockade has been declared and appropriate notification has been granted, as above.

7. Under international maritime law, when a maritime blockade is in effect, no boats can enter the blockaded area. That includes both civilian and enemy vessels.

8. A state may take action to enforce a blockade. Any vessel that violates or attempts to violate a maritime blockade may be captured or even attacked under international law. The US Commander's Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations sets forth that a vessel is considered to be in attempt to breach a blockade from the time the vessel leaves its port with the intention of evading the blockade.

9. Here we should note that the protesters indicated their clear intention to violate the blockade by means of written and oral statements. Moreover, the route of these vessels indicated their clear intention to violate the blockade in violation of international law.

10. Given the protesters explicit intention to violate the naval blockade, Israel exercised its right under international law to enforce the blockade. It should be noted that prior to undertaking enforcement measures, explicit warnings were relayed directly to the captains of the vessels, expressing Israel's intent to exercise its right to enforce the blockade.

11. Israel had attempted to take control of the vessels participating in the flotilla by peaceful means and in an orderly fashion in order to enforce the blockade. Given the large number of vessels participating in the flotilla, an operational decision was made to undertake measures to enforce the blockade a certain distance from the area of the blockade.

12. Israeli personnel attempting to enforce the blockade were met with violence by the protesters and acted in self defense to fend off such attacks.

So, according to people on here - the Israelis are guilty of Piracy, murder and terrorism - but so far no-one seems to have actually demonstrated a single fact which supports their allegation that a naval blockade is illegal!

As an Israeli living in Israel I wish to add a few comments before getting flamed ragged by members of the forum.

There seems to be a tendancy to refer to "Israelis" in this thread as some sort of homogenous racist extremist group without any concern for international opinion against their coutry's actions towards the Palestinian people. I wish to state that not all Israelis necesarily agree with all of their government's actions any more than citizens of any other country support every action of their respective governments. Are the "British" universally responsible for the Blair government's decision to join in the invasion of Iraq?

Personally I am deeply concerned about Israel's image in the eyes of the world and it's difficult to see how this latest incident will improve matters.

So far the Israeli media has concentrated on pictures of Israeli marines fast-roping onto the deck of the ship and getting the shit kicked out of them. Two soldiers have suffered gunshot wounds possibly from side-arms taken by force from members of the unit, others have stab wounds. Apparently they opened fire as a result of the threat to their own lives. Al-Jazeera is concentrating more on Israeli aggression. I think it is too soon to interpret exactly what unfolded, we haven't heard much from the side of ship's passengers yet, no details have been released about the identities and backgrounds of those killed. There were five other vessels involved which have presumably been towed to the port of Ashdod without harm to life?

Unfortunately such incidents are inevitable so long as a political solution (i.e., the creation of an independent Palestinian State)is not found. This is a symptom of our occupation of the Palestinian territories. The present Israeli government seems intent on alienating world opinion against us, including our closest ally the USA, failing to realise that it doesn't look good when you wield a spectacular array of modern weaponry against a weak and poverty stricken civilian population, even in spite of terrorism against Israelis. Both sides need to realise the fact that the other isn't going to go away, stop scoring points about who did what to who, and get on with the act of just living without killing each other. This will involve compromise which I don't see us making, and so it goes on to the detriment of the whole region and possibly myself and my kids who will eventually be called up to serve in the army.

In direct response to the subject of this thread, would nuking Israel help the Middle East? - This is plainly idiotic, as this would obviously involve nuking the Palestinians, and the neighboring Jordanians, Syrians, Lebanese, and Egyptians, and in all likelyhood cause world war III.

Anyway, I'm just going to go polish my horns and comb my tail. Tomorrow I'll probably go for a ride and clean my head of all this bad Karma for a couple of hours.

Paul Friedman

Complain about the Middle East and Israel on the forum... 🙄

Yet everyone is arguing on here? good thing you lot don't have weapons.
Britain is not innocent-we need to sort out things here before moaning about others.

If the forum can't be civilised, how the **** do you think 2 countries will???

Give Peace a Chance. 😕

(Well said Paul)

What Israel did was indefensible but it is also naive to suggest that their paranoia isn't at least partially justified. Statements like,

'Anti-semites are threatening our country,

are, essentially, true. Look at the flow of ex-Nazis (for instance Gehlen, Skorzeny, and Schacht) into the security forces of the Arab nations following WWII; these were stopping off points in the ODESSA network. (And let's not start on the Grand Mufti Amin al-Husseini, Yasser Arafat's uncle, who thought Eichmann was too easy on Jews). The tentacles spread quite far into the region.

And then there's the continuing popularity of TV shows, school lessons and so on about The Protocols of the Elders of Zion - which, was, of course, a bad forgery which 'proved' a Jewish global conspiracy. Hitler referred to it in Mein Kampf and Hamas refer to it in the 'Covenant' (Article 32, fact fans).

It is almost impossible to seperate anti-Zionism from anti-Semitism in the middle east; it is, at best, a very tangled web.

So, yeah, Israel is acting like a paranoid psycho but then, just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean They're not out to get you....

JulianA - Member

we have nothing but sympathy for those who lost their lives to the unspeakable Nazi purge, but we cannot find sympathy with the extremists who appear to inhabit Israel.

It should never be forgotten that some of the vociferous critics of Israel and it's treatment of the Palestinian people, are Jewish - many in fact survivors of the Holocaust.

Indeed 85-year-old Hedy Epstein who is Holocaust survivor, lost both her mother and father, and all her family bar two, at the Auschwitz Nazi death camp, and is an outspoken supporter of the Palestinian people, was due to be on board one of the ships on the aid flotilla.

Thankfully, the Free Gaza Movement's office in Cyprus claims she changed her plans at the last minute and was not on board any vessel.

[url= http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/world/breakingnews/elderly-holocaust-survivor-did-not-join-gaza-flotilla-is-safe-in-cyprus-95253484.html ]Elderly Holocaust survivor did not join Gaza flotilla, is safe in Cyprus[/url]

"since the Israelis are allowed to set out the conditions for search and passage of the goods involved, as long as they get to the destination."

Which they would not <bangs head> Sorry for not making that clearer but I thought it too obvious to need to be stated. A large part of the cargo is material which Israel would not allow to be delivered to Gaza, despite it being neccesary aid by any reasonable standards. Cement, concrete, to name the 2 most important ones- but Israel's policy has consistently been to block other aid, as we've covered further up the page at least twice. mattresses, shoes, lightbulbs, clothes, even food, all have been seized in the past on occasion.

You can't with any credibility claim that the aid organisations could depend on Israel handling the cargo with any integrity, or on the materials actually getting to where they're needed. There's no prospect of Israel getting the benefit of the doubt here.

It should never be forgotten that some of the vociferous critics of Israel and it's treatment of the Palestinian people, are Jewish - many in fact survivors of the Holocaust.

That's why I made a distinction between Jews and Israelis.

Paul Freidman's post is most encouraging - fair play and good luck to you. Sorry your government sends out such bad vibes. Totally agree on the Tony Blair / Iraq comment! We weren't in favour of the war either, but Bliar didn'r listen...

LOL @ Israel still using ancient technique to board the ship.

Boarding technique needs reviewing as they are shite ... LOL! Not even near to Steven Segal Hollywood style landing. Israel you need to learn from Hollywood as that sort of landing is embarrassing. At least the "commando" should go in all gun blazing with rubber bullet if they considered those people as not hostile, I mean all rubber bullet blazing from helicopter. More explosive etc. Poor show.

I mean c'mon even the Somali pirates can do better than that without being beaten up and still enjoy their fruit of the labour by demanding heavy ransom.

They should learn from North Korea in defending territorial water after all there is something call submarine with torpedos ...

WTF are those "humanitarian flotilla" doing? Start a war? Bet that is the objective.

Why don't they help the Burmese, the Tibetans or even the starving North Korean?

😈

wtf?!

i go away for a nice weekend's biking with my friends, and i come back to this?

the way israel is behaving is starting to make iran and ahmadinejad look reasonable.

Chewie: it seems that most of the dead* civilians were from Turkey, which is a predominantly Muslim country, and i can understand the connection that they may have felt with Palestine, and turkey isn't far from Palestine by sea.

(* trying hard not to use the emotive word: murdered)

"The first victims of the Nazis were the Jews; The second victims of the Nazis were the Palestinians"

Look into my eyes, look into my eyes ... use the torpedos fools!

ahwiles: "Chewie: it seems that most of the dead* civilians were from Turkey, which is a predominantly Muslim country, and i can understand the connection that they may have felt with Palestine."

(* trying hard not to use the emotive word: murdered)

eerrmmm ... what's that got to do with torpedos? You know torpedos do not discriminate if use and everyone is treated fairly.
-------------------------------
FFS! So the Israeli should welcome all with open arms?

In a similar sort of situation do you think North Korean should welcome everyone with open arms? Who are going to make them? Also why not tell China to hand off Tibet? Who are going to tell them? Burma? Who are going to tell them?

Yes, I guess so ... bloody racial discrimination. Racists!

Is it because they are all from the far east so nobody cares?

😈

There were at least 3 UK nationals on the boat that was attacked.

Obi_Twa:"There were at least 3 UK nationals on the boat that was attacked."

Everyone is treated equally! It's equal opportunity. No racial discrimination.

😈

have to say, I think mr Tim Minchin has the right idea...

Only two solutions peace love and tolerance in the hearts of the people who live there BOTH sides.
There respective God decides which one got the lAnd and smite the other into the sea with rightous fury.
I am not holding my breath for either anytime soon.

That's why I made a distinction between Jews and Israelis.

Not enough imo. Not all Israelis are Zionists - Orthodox Jews being the obvious example.

The distinction should be between Jews and Zionists.

The German Nazi party exterminated 2.8 million Jews. Just incase anyone has forgotten, Stalin exterminated an estimated 26million people (yes, 3m vs 26m). And, I think some figure much greater was estimated before and during the cultural revolution in China. What Nazi Germans carried out was terrible, of course, but the largest scale, mass exterminations have all but been forgotten. Why?

And does anyone know how many of those 26 million were Russian Orthodox Christians? And do we have a rememberance/Holocaust day for them?

Food for thought, people?

Where do you get your figures from B.A.Nana .........David Irving the renowned neo-Nazi historian ? Whilst the figures for Stalin's Purges and the Cultural Revolution are somewhat contentious and open to some debate, practically no one disputes the figure of 6 million for Jews exterminated by the Nazis.

But what is your point anyway ? ...........it seems to have gone right over my head. Are you saying that the Israelis didn't kill enough people yesterday ?

Everybody's stopped now i'm back

William Shirer

Sorry, I was just trying to send another Ostrich spinning out of the burning car.

It may not be directly relevent to the OP, but I'm just asking why we know or care little about these mass exterminations done on a gargantuan scale around WW2 and yet, we are only ever reminded relentlessly about the jewish Holocaust, terrible as it was.

It's a question I've always pondered on since a teenager.

[img] [/img]

The distinction should be between Jews and Zionists.

I stand corrected.

Nice choice Ernie, now what was i saying about the pan-Arab Nazi legacy? And where did I last see the zionist-octopus? Somewhere in central Europe? 1930s was it?

[img] [/img]

The Israelis acted terribly but their old enemies are seldom far away...

Ernie - seriously not cool.

Some facts for the undecided. Might help you make up your mind on how fair the situation is.

[url= http://www.ifamericansknew.org/ ]http://www.ifamericansknew.org/[/url]

A little taster:

Gaza War 2008 - 2009

Palestinian total deaths: 1385 (762 civilians including 107 women and 318 children)
Israeli total deaths: 13 (3 civilians)

I used to have a great deal of sympathy for the Jews,based on the treatment of their religion since the middle ages.Even the likes of Martin Luther (German not American)suggested burning down their houses.However how can the children of Holocaust survivors (the originals are getting thin on the ground)justify the treatment of people in their sphere of influence?
Cram many more people into an area than it was designed for..check.
Give them 25% of the basics necessary to survive...check.
Convince your own people they are the bogeyman...check.
Humiliate and persecute any who try to move between the areas...check.
Warsaw...Gaza...No difference.Must look really familiar to any European Jew in their 70's.

And you could add the economic blockade which includes any form of cancer medicine...
I make no difference or allowances over Israel or the carpetbaggers who populate it to Paul F above,what did you do during your national service?...If you live there and condone your government,you are complicit.It was Israel who radicalised the Palestinians enough to vote for Hamas? [b]Still[/b],They bang on about the right they have to protect the land they have stolen,and refuse to accept the problems they have created.
Our foreign policy in the ME has been a disaster since the times of the Empire.Israel are starting to make us make us look benign.

duckman they are referred to as 'Hawks' in their government.

I can think of many other terms to describe them but 'Hawks' is definitely not one of them.