If Israel were to make such a request, framing as a way to improve conditions in Gaza - which it is, among other things - then I believe the U.S. at least will accept. Doing so would allow it to assert a leadership role in the Middle East and maybe win some points from the Muslim world.
If the U.S. announced it unilaterally, there would be some grumbling, but I think it would eventually be accpeted. Israel would extracate itself somewhat from the horrible diplomatic situation it currently faces, and the loss of face involved in appearing to cave in to the Americans will be much less than that lost in caving in to the Palestinians or the Turks.
You haven’t been of any help in this thread since you outlined the legal issues involving blockades. I’ll grant you that was useful stuff and I appreciated it. Everything you have argued (stridently) since then has been obvious nonsense. Your desperate need to prove you were right on the Lebanon issue is especially sad.
Your “basic logic” is so wrong you ought to be embarrassed. The captain seems to have a much firmer grasp of the subject than you do. For starters, the quarter of the necessary aid that IS getting through according to the UN might consist primarily of food, which would mean the Palestinians have a decent supply of food but (for example) a scarce supply of medicines or clothing or building equipment.
It doesn’t take a genius to imagine these things, it just takes someone who is able to think, you know, logically and with a little imagination.
Try to speak plainly. Are you saying they are NOT aid workers? Israel’s position, which you generally support strenuously, seems to be they are “anything but aid workers”. Perhaps my parsing is a bit rusty, but I am pretty sure that means they are unequivocally **not **aid workers. If they are not aid workers, what are they?
A fork is not a “real” weapon, it is an improvised weapon. i.e., an item with its own function which can be applied to cause serious harm to someone else. Most objects fit this category, therefore the category is meaningless in the larger argument of demonstrating a nefarious premeditated intent, which you have been alluding to repeatedly (but refuse to actually demonstrate).
I could understand your objections if we were talking about firearms, or bows and arrows even, that the aid workers brought with them in order to cause havoc. But they did no such thing as far as we know. Claiming that a rod of metal is a lethal weapon and that having a lethal weapon makes you “anything but an aid worker” is disingenuous to the point of mental oblivion. It’s that simple.
Are you really saying that food supply in the Gaza Strip is adequate?
Article 56:
As shown by my references on (I believe) the previous page the state of the water supply in the Gaza Strip is very much detrimental to public health and hygiene.
I could search for more, but frankly I don’t see the point.
I was, and am, right on “the Lebanon issue”. The entire country was not “flattened”. Even under the most liberal definition whereby “that city was flattened” means “one single building in it was significantly damaged.” (Which is a “liberal definition” in much the same way as “kissing” meant “seven months pregnant.”) As I pointed out, if someone uses “idioms” that can mean whatever they want, and that in fact change as they use them and admit that their claims were not correct (before they repeat those same claims alter on), it’s hardly improper to respond to the semantic value of the claims before they’re changed.
The north was not subject to the intensive bombing campaign that did indeed reduce large portions of several areas to ruins.
Or as I’ve already pointed out:
-The south was not “completely” flattened. “The whole of Lebanon” was not bombed, let alone rubbled. “All Palestinians are terrorists” is, likewise, not an “idiom”.
-Rather obviously your argument doesn’t also include the claims that “Hezbollah started the war by flattening the entirety of Israel!” or “Hamas completely flattened each and every Israeli population center within range of their rockets!” But “Israel flattened the entirety of Lebanon!” is just fine.
-Just like “All Muslims participated in flattening absolutely all of Manhattan in 2001” isn’t just an “idiom”, and we’d quite rightly take issue with someone who was using such a claim to support a narrative that was hostile to Muslims.
-“All of the people on the flotilla were murderous and they slaughtered absolutely all of the IDF commandos” would be objectionable because it was hyperbolic nonsense that was not factual. Right?
Goose, gander, sauce.
If your argument is only against hyperbolic nonsense that doesn’t support your political gloss, then it has no intellectual consistency.
Yet again, not only am I right but your claims are nonsensical non sequitors. If the supplies that are getting through are sufficient for the needs of the Gazan people (as proven by the fact that they’re not dying) then rather obviously the rest is not needed. You can define “need” as “not need”, but that doesn’t make it true.
If you can do without it, obviously it’s not something you need. Nothing you’ve said addresses, let alone contradicts that fact. Most likely because your argument is based on calling things that aren’t needed “needs”. It’s one thing to say that the blockade imposes undue hardship, as I already have. It’s quite another to claim that things that aren’t needed are “needs”, because it sounds much more impressive that way. :rolleyes:
I just did. They were people involved in deliberately trying to end a military blockade. That’s different from the function of an aid worker. There’s nothing plainer.
Yes, this kind of rhetorical nonsense does not help.
Attacking someone with a knife or a crowbar does not count as a “real” weapon.
Bombing only a portion of a country counts as “flatting absolutely all of it.”
Meeting the needs of a populace but not going beyond that is “not meeting their needs”.
When language obscures the facts rather than elucidates them, it is a *bad *thing.
You are now actually arguing that trying to beat someone with a crowbar does not demonstrate an intent. As for “nefarious” purposes, you’re welcome to cite anything I’ve said to that effect. Of course as I haven’t said it, you can’t cite it.
Ah well.
Indeed. What, then, does it say that such a claim exists nowhere in reality outside of your post?
Still waiting for those unbiased cites (i.e. nothing from any Israeli press: it’s de facto biased because I unilaterally claimed it to be so).
You were wrong on Lebanon. Northern Lebanon was subject to an intensive bombing campaign. The problem is, the south was subjected to an even greater bombing campaign. You want to downplay what happened in the north because it wasn’t as heavy a bombing as in the south. Kind of like downplaying a beating by a schoolyard bully as “not a beating” because it didn’t match the ferocity of a beating by a professional boxer. Rather typical.
There is no question that the blocade has had a bad effect on life in Gaza. But from the POV of the applicable laws on the application of blocades, that’s not the trigger for an “illigitimate” blocade. All blocades, by their very nature, impose hardship on the target.
The laws of war are designed to avoid the disproportionate or excessive imposition of hardship on the targeted population.
Recall the summary of laws cited upthread:
As noted, section 102(a) isn’t in issue - no-one (of any credibility) denies that Israel has a legitimate purpose in establishing the blocade aside from "starvation’.
The analysis has to focus on 102(b). Is the suffering - that no-one denies occurs - proportionate or excessive in relation to “… the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated from the blockade”?
Presenting a list of the sorts of suffering that the Gazans experience under the blocade is only half an answer. The other half is surely an analysis of the actual threat to peace and security posed by Hamas, the rulers of Gaza.
That’s an easy test, we can have someone beat you with a steel pipe and then you can tell us (maybe) if it’s a lethal weapon.
There is nothing about “aid worker” that involves physical conflict. They were deliberately confronting a military blockade and they did so using lethal weapons. No sane person would stand there while someone beat them without engaging in self defense.
The quoted post was in response to this from Babale:
It was not intended to satisfy legal definitions or whatnot. It was designed to enlighten the poster that seemed to genuinely believe that the Israelis have not been affecting power and water supply to the Gaza Strip.
The limitations and caveats to that article have already been cited.
If your’re saying they’re not, please cite the death rate of Gazans due to starvation.
Again ignores the caveats already cited.
Nor does the article, or your cites, say what you’re alleging. If Amnesty’s claims are true, then what percent of Gazans are dead from dehydration? Dehydration kills a hell of a lot faster than starvation. Surely there are hundreds of thousands dead from it so far, right? Your BBC cite comes from 2008. What’s the rate of deadly infectious diseases that have spread since 2008? Your cite from September of 2009 is also neither here nor there, since the GC article you’re relying on states that the occupying power must be able to rely on the cooperation of the party it’s dealing with. The recent sewer collapse was precisely because Hamas could not be relied upon and that there was a definite security threat inherent in giving them metal pipes.
Again, there’s quite a difference between “the blockade should be eased so life is easier for Gazans” (which I’ve already agreed with) and “it’s illegal”.
No, the facts show that it wasn’t.
But as your argument has, alternatively, been that
-the entire north was reduced to rubble along with the entirety of the rest of the country
=the north and the rest of the country wasn’t reduced to rubble but the entire south was
-an unsourced, uncited drawn map created based on unverified and uncited reports allegedly from identified sources as well as nebulous ‘other news sources’, that displays massive bias by calling Israel proper “occupied Palestine” should be taken at face value, and unless we can find news reports of bombs not hitting specific places on specific days, its claims must all be accepted as true even if they’re not proven. And even that unsourced, uncited map doesn’t show that the entire country was bombed, but you’ve claimed that as a fact, too.
Trying to figure out what “intensive bombing” means isn’t really a viable endeavor.
Just like I pointed out that news agencies themselves admitted that they’d engaged in fauxtography, and your response was to claim that it was Israeli propaganda. As well as stating that you would accept nothing from the Israeli press because “it’s de facto biased because I unilaterally claimed it to be so”.
There are certain arguments that are not supposed to be engaged.
I don’t believe they would. The USA (or another nation) can’t be viewed as implementing an Israeli policy like this . I also believe they would lose points in the muslim world doing so.
I could only see this happen if there was some kind of international agreement about Gaza on a larger scale that would include a ban on the import of weapons. I don’t see that happening either, because IMO it would probably have to include large-scale foreign aid, foreign military presence in the Gaza strip, probably to some extent foreign control on internal matters (something similar to what was implemented in Kosovo, for instance).
Also, I doubt anybody is going to be willing to put a foot in this hornet’s nest.
You just quoted what he said, which is that if they wanted to Israel would have cut off the power and water to the point where the Gazans all died. Your response to that was to cite limited interruptions to electricity and limited problems with water. You did not cite anything that refuted the fact that if Israel wanted to kill the Palestinians by starvation, they could cut off their power and water until they died.
Babale is saying that the Israelis have not simply cut off the Gazans from power and water.
It is also true that the Israelis have been restricting, or temporarily cutting, access to electrictity, and that the Gazan water infrastructure is inadequate and cannot be upgraded during the blocade, they dot have access to adequate supplies of chlorine, etc.
In short, your cites - which (I presume) accurately disclose the suffering undergone by Gazans as a result of the blocade - do not refute his point: if the Israelis wished, they could in fact “really” starve Gaza. They have not.
I have to say that when I started this thread not a single person here had any clue what I was on about and that shows a complete lack of awareness as to what is going on as you rely here on your own press and people like Alessan to tell you his truth. Staggering that you had no idea what I was talking about.
I living here knew what was going on and what was likely to happen.
This just proves my point that outside of the middle east you are simply not being made aware of what is really going on.
You all should have caught on straight away to my point but you didn’t.
Shame on you all. Even after Googling you couldn’t even get what my point was.
How come I knew that this catastrophe was about to happen and you out there had no clue? Shame on you who give opinions who know nothing of the facts.
As predicted Israel that ‘mad frothing pit bull’ has yet again shown it’s real face. This time however even though 19 have died and 30 have been injured the story is not going to be laid to rest quietly.
Erdogan has just given his speech.
Anyone see that?
Anyone even interested? do you even get that on cable? How much coverage is that getting?
This is not something Israel is going to be able to wriggle out of as it always does with the filthy hand of the American government.
The world is outraged. If that Sheikh HAS been killed then you have unleashed a dragon and that is most likely why the Israeli’s are terrified to release names of the dead.
I am awaiting the Arab League response which is due any time now.
That should be interesting.
Israel is a pull bull which has been rampaging for years with the full authority and backing of the USA. Now it is time for the International Vet to come and put it down.
Should have been done 60 years ago.
Israel is finished.
For your information knives are part of a sailors equipment. Therefore they will be found aboard all ships. FACT!
It’s actually quite sad to watch the Israeli spokespersons on TV.
Marbles, a single slingshot, some wooden posts they removed the metal hatchets from that are aboard ALL ships!!!
God they even knocked the metal axes off the posts before they used them in self defence!!!
Is that seriously all they could come up with.
Sorry Alessan. The world as Erdogan said has been fed enough of your lies and it’s over now.
Erdogan and Ahmedinejad are the rising powers here. The Arabs have more respect for these two than their own leaders. The Arabs leaders now know this and their situation is very precarious.
Let’s see if the side with their Muslim brothers or the USA.
What “facts”? You like to play the cite game, but your own cites are a long time coming. How can you have facts demonstrating that the north wasn’t bombed? What form does evidence for these “facts” take? Sworn testimony from all northern Lebanese? Perhaps you have a statement from the UN along the lines of “FinnAgain is correct when he states northern Lebanon wasn’t bombed”? Where is the evidence for these “facts” that you claim to exist? You sure haven’t posted them in this thread.
Your whole argument is a tower of cards built on a pillar of sand. It’s a string of false claims glued together with a series of fallacies and rhetorical bluster.
The evidence clearly shows that northern Lebanon was subject to an intensive bombing campaign over multiple days. Again, you’re trying to draw an equivalence between what happened in the south, i.e. total obliteration in an epic Israeli overreaction, and what happened in the northern provinces (where the bombing was lighter, but still subjected even minor northern towns as far away from the Israeli border as you possibly can be to multiple airstrikes).
So you cannot substantiate the arguments you previously made? Again, you like to de facto claim that a map produced showing locations of bomb hits (which sometimes you acknowledge to be true, re: Tripoli bridge bombings, and other times claim to be categorically false and terribly biased) is untrustworthy without producing any evidence or argumentation of why we should take your word on this, whilst claiming things you cannot substantiate? Then you start crying when I pull the same trick on you?
I don’t know. I think the sight of U.S warships escorting feighters filled with coriander, washing machines and construction materials blissfully past Israeli defenses will do wonders for America’s reputation. After all, it’s not as if the U.S. doesn’t already consider Hamas a terrorist organization - this way it can portray itself as Gaza’s savior in spite of both Hamas and Israel.
I think the bottom line is that Israel has to cut its losses and compromise. If the Palestinians would be willing to compromise in return, then maybe we could make some progress here. The world is divided into those willing to compromise and those unwilling to. Only the latter group would oppose such a settlement.
The world isn’t surprised that a bunch of Muslims acted like howler monkeys and attacked Israeli Soldiers. It was a given. As far as Ahmedinejad being a rising figurehead, that’s just a joke. His own country is in civil turmoil.
Care to point me to where? I’ve been up and down the past two pages and haven’t seen them anywhere. Maybe at the grand old age of 35 I need to be retired.
Are you seriously saying that “adequate” food is simply “enough so they don’t die of starvation”? Seriously?
Sorry, but that is just fucked up.
That I couldn’t find.
But fuck it. No. Don’t go back and quote them. I can’t be arsed. I’m not a fucking lawyer well versed in the art of decrypting international law and I’m guessing you aren’t either.
I’m going to go out on a limb and say the bombing of the Gaza Strip back to the stone age in 2008 didn’t exactly help the water and power infrastructure. No doubt you will disagree.
No doubt, as the occupying power, Israel has rebuilt the water and power infrastructure? Then they wouldn’t need to give anyone metal pipes.
Regarding “death rates” (as again, apparently “not dying” is adequate), I don’t know. I’m not quite sure why it is me that should be searching for this stuff. But even then, this is the very first hit for “gaza infectious disease” on Google: