My understanding is that teh other ships only had crew necessary to operate teh ships. All the activists were on the ship where they shot people.
As I have already said, there does not need to be masses of deaths. Just extremely unhealthy people.
Would you prefer “malnutrition”?
If you go up the thread, someone posted a link to, and quoted in it’s entirety, the GC on naval blockades. “God God, man! This thread is 9 pages long!” 
I hope you don’t expect me to go find that. 
But to sum up, blockades are legal when imposed on any belligerent. Not just one who’s territory you are occupying. Israel’s “occupying” status is totally irrelevant to it. On the contrary, if Israel is an “Occupying” power, it requires them to actually see that the stuff gets distributed to the civilians. They can’t do that, if they are not there on the ground. This actually allows them to legally restrict a much larger variety of goods, such as building materials. If they were an “Occupying” power they would have to actually provide those to the civilian population.
In this situation, Israel has acted perfectly legally. Ham-handedly, yes, definitely. But legally.
My opinion on the whole thing is there are 2 main obstacles to peace.
- Israel’s continual ham-handedness
- Palestinians’ continual intransigence in insisting on Israel’s total destruction.
Until BOTH are corrected, there will be no peace between them. Unfortunately, that gets me shouted at by both the “Israel always wrong, Palestinians always right” and the “Palestinians always wrong, Israel always right” crowds. Both of which are well represented in this thread. :smack:
Considering that the OP title is “what if” I wonder what would be the reaction from the usual corners if the outcome of this event was somewhat different… say couple of helicopters downed, patrol boats destroyed and say 20 or 30 soldiers killed.
Thanks, I must have missed it in my readthrough. And FWIW, there’s definitely some truth in your analysis, though the resolution of other ethnic conflicts around the world shows that it is possible. (Sometimes, at least.)
My reaction then, would have been
“peaceful activists my ass”
Such an action to me, would seem a deliberate act of murder and war, under the “color” of humanitarian aid. In short, the gloves come off, the ship is sunk, the perpertrators are seized or killed in battle, and the embargo/blockade gets ratcheted up in response. Nobody gets through then.
Reasonable?
I have a long list of things that Hamas has done that I would condemn. I have a much shorter list of things for which I would condemn Palestinian generally (even the ones in Gaza).
I don’t know if the Gaza embargo is collective punishment because it probably is a genuine (but ham-handed attempt to prevent arms entering gaza) but the effect certainly resembles collective punishment.
That’s not the opposite of Gandhi’s tactics. These guys didn’t come in with guns blazing. They didn’t throw bombs or anything like that. They were in international waters when they were boarded. I don’t know what happened but its hard to place all the blame on the people on the boat when IDF board a boat in international waters and as far as I can tell, the only people with guns were the IDF.
And you have no problem wi8th the blockade? Have you seen the list of things that they are trying to keep out of Gaza? Its not just Katushka rockets and stuff like that.
I think we should have an investigation, and we should wait to see what that investigation says. We should try to make the investigation as impartial as possible, with an understanding that full impartiality will be impossible.
If the results of the investigation concur with the flotilla’s account of events, these should be seen as the actions of a rogue nation and they should be treated as such. Obviously, if such is the case, we should also halt all funding to Israel, military and domestic.
I don’t like the idea of Israel withering due to our lack of support, but I’m even less happy with the idea of us giving our continued tacit approval.
The question, to me, is becoming less about what is right for all parties, and more about what we’re willing allow with our money. Because it’s our money that’s allowing this to happen. And as much as I sympathize with Israel, everyday that passes they make me feel more and more like I’m an accomplice to murder.
What do you think of all the reports of the living conditions in Gaza that result from the blockade?
These aren’t battles, its too lopsided to call these battles. Its a tough situation but it is made more difficult by Israel’s failure to recognize that you can’t beat people into submission in the long term, not even Palestinians.
Well, I’m pretty sure they weren’t fighting before they were boarded in international waters.
If you are trying to say that these deaths don’t really mean anything unless they were like Gandhi then you are setting an awfully high threshhold.
There’s video on all the news sites. The soldiers were attacked violently with hand weapons and one was actually thrown overboard. The soldiers try to retreat at first actually but they’re story is that two attackers had handguns and opened fire on them. So who knows what sparked it or how true that is.
My feelings are also roughly the same. When they assassinate Sadat, I thought, here are a people who do not want peace. When they assassinate Rabin, I thought, the arabs are not alone in their contempt for peace. I think my understanding of the situation has become a lot more refined since then but Israel is simply no longer blameless in the situation anymore and in very recent years I think the onus has shifted to Israel.
I don’t have a problem with the blockade. I do think that the list is overly broad and bans a lot of things that probably shouldn’t be banned.
And it’s entirely possible that both sides sincerely believes that the other side shot first. I can think of several scenarios where this could be true.
Yeah, but your argument seems to be taht your government should be able to protect you from imaginary threats as well.
One thing to keep in mind is that at this point we only get to hear the IDF’s side of the story, since everyone who was aboard the ship are(last I saw any news) still in custody and aren’t allowed to talk to the media.
I’m not saying anything about the truthfulness in what the IDF is reporting but they are currently in control of all the information about what happened on that ship and will undoubtedly try to cast themselves in an as positive light as possible(as will the activists when they get a chance present their version of the events).
If someone jumps in my car while I’m driving without my permission, it doesn’t matter if I hit him, it still counts as an attempted hijacking. In that situation, no matter who hits first, the hijacker is the attacker.
The soldiers attacked first. You can argue they initially attacked with non-lethal weaponry, and the flotilla struck the first dangerous blow, but they were not invited on-board. Hence, they attacked.