By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - 9 dead as Israeli forces board Gaza aid Convoy

mirgro said:
Kasz216 said:
mirgro said:
BrayanA said:
Badassbab said:

1 ArnoldRimmer

The IDF kills innocent civilians- FACT. Not an opinion but fact. In fact it has killed tens of thousands of innocent civilians since it's creation (Occupied territories and Lebanon). Resorting to massive use of violence is what it's well known for and what it does best when it's policies are challenged whether it's peacfully or violently.

The killing of civilians in this particular incident is unfortunate for Israel as it involves a wide mix of people from all over the world including activists from countries it has diplomatic relations with and members of NATO. This has bought it to major world wide attention.

IDF forces were attacked when they legaly try to board, check my previous post:
4. It is legal to attack neutral merchant vessels in international waters acording to International Law (SECTION V : NEUTRAL MERCHANT VESSELS AND CIVIL AIRCRAFT) if they "are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture" (See first link). As you can see from the second link: "breaching a blockade" - checked, "prior warning" - checked, "refuse to stop" - checked.
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/385ec082b509e76c41256739003e636d/7694fe2016f347e1c125641f002d49ce
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6jDIQr59Sk

As you can see from this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYjkLUcbJWo
they were attacked by the mob on the top deck - so they can not be "innocent civilians". Every police and army can defend if they were attacked. So here the question is when IDF kill the people. If they shoot at them when they attack them - they are not guilty. If they shoot after they surrender - they are guilty. Do you have prove for the second one !!!!!!

They fucked up because they sent in armed forces on board. Can you tell me what country uses armed forces against unarmed civilian mobs in this day and age?

All?

Last time I checked, even black riots back in the 60s were handled by police, and a fire hose. Even that was counted as despicable. Now think of all the times the civilian mobs actually had casualties and the shitstorm it led to. It has probably been 20 years since the world started using riot shields and gas to control unarmed mobs, not bullets. What israel did was just plain retarded.


The first round of troops that came down had nonlethal weapons.  Anytime a riot gets rough with the people with nonlethal weapons, lethal weapons are brought into the fray.

Aside from which... where would you expect Israel to hook up their fire hoses?

Also, the firehoses weren't considered despicable because of mehtods.   They were considered despicable because it was being used to keep a race down in the civil rights debate.



Around the Network
Kasz216 said:
mirgro said:
Kasz216 said:
mirgro said:
BrayanA said:
Badassbab said:

1 ArnoldRimmer

The IDF kills innocent civilians- FACT. Not an opinion but fact. In fact it has killed tens of thousands of innocent civilians since it's creation (Occupied territories and Lebanon). Resorting to massive use of violence is what it's well known for and what it does best when it's policies are challenged whether it's peacfully or violently.

The killing of civilians in this particular incident is unfortunate for Israel as it involves a wide mix of people from all over the world including activists from countries it has diplomatic relations with and members of NATO. This has bought it to major world wide attention.

IDF forces were attacked when they legaly try to board, check my previous post:
4. It is legal to attack neutral merchant vessels in international waters acording to International Law (SECTION V : NEUTRAL MERCHANT VESSELS AND CIVIL AIRCRAFT) if they "are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture" (See first link). As you can see from the second link: "breaching a blockade" - checked, "prior warning" - checked, "refuse to stop" - checked.
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/385ec082b509e76c41256739003e636d/7694fe2016f347e1c125641f002d49ce
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6jDIQr59Sk

As you can see from this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYjkLUcbJWo
they were attacked by the mob on the top deck - so they can not be "innocent civilians". Every police and army can defend if they were attacked. So here the question is when IDF kill the people. If they shoot at them when they attack them - they are not guilty. If they shoot after they surrender - they are guilty. Do you have prove for the second one !!!!!!

They fucked up because they sent in armed forces on board. Can you tell me what country uses armed forces against unarmed civilian mobs in this day and age?

All?

Last time I checked, even black riots back in the 60s were handled by police, and a fire hose. Even that was counted as despicable. Now think of all the times the civilian mobs actually had casualties and the shitstorm it led to. It has probably been 20 years since the world started using riot shields and gas to control unarmed mobs, not bullets. What israel did was just plain retarded.


The first round of troops that came down had nonlethal weapons.  Anytime a riot gets rough with the people with nonlethal weapons, lethal weapons are brought into the fray.

Aside from which... where would you expect Israel to hook up their fire hoses?

Also, the firehoses weren't considered despicable because of mehtods.   They were considered despicable because it was being used to keep a race down in the civil rights debate.

All that shows is that the people they sent in were inadequate for the situation, not that the mission could have been done without the loss of life due to idiots making decisions. Also, lethal force is generally used solely when the rioters start getting their hands on weapons, and in this case they had none, thus not warranting the deadly response.

Also any time a riot gets rough on the non-violent people, that's when the police breaks out the gas and the batons and wound some people, not shoot them dead. This entire operation was just an embarassment for Israel.



mirgro said:
Kasz216 said:
mirgro said:
Kasz216 said:
mirgro said:
BrayanA said:
Badassbab said:

1 ArnoldRimmer

The IDF kills innocent civilians- FACT. Not an opinion but fact. In fact it has killed tens of thousands of innocent civilians since it's creation (Occupied territories and Lebanon). Resorting to massive use of violence is what it's well known for and what it does best when it's policies are challenged whether it's peacfully or violently.

The killing of civilians in this particular incident is unfortunate for Israel as it involves a wide mix of people from all over the world including activists from countries it has diplomatic relations with and members of NATO. This has bought it to major world wide attention.

IDF forces were attacked when they legaly try to board, check my previous post:
4. It is legal to attack neutral merchant vessels in international waters acording to International Law (SECTION V : NEUTRAL MERCHANT VESSELS AND CIVIL AIRCRAFT) if they "are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture" (See first link). As you can see from the second link: "breaching a blockade" - checked, "prior warning" - checked, "refuse to stop" - checked.
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/385ec082b509e76c41256739003e636d/7694fe2016f347e1c125641f002d49ce
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6jDIQr59Sk

As you can see from this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYjkLUcbJWo
they were attacked by the mob on the top deck - so they can not be "innocent civilians". Every police and army can defend if they were attacked. So here the question is when IDF kill the people. If they shoot at them when they attack them - they are not guilty. If they shoot after they surrender - they are guilty. Do you have prove for the second one !!!!!!

They fucked up because they sent in armed forces on board. Can you tell me what country uses armed forces against unarmed civilian mobs in this day and age?

All?

Last time I checked, even black riots back in the 60s were handled by police, and a fire hose. Even that was counted as despicable. Now think of all the times the civilian mobs actually had casualties and the shitstorm it led to. It has probably been 20 years since the world started using riot shields and gas to control unarmed mobs, not bullets. What israel did was just plain retarded.


The first round of troops that came down had nonlethal weapons.  Anytime a riot gets rough with the people with nonlethal weapons, lethal weapons are brought into the fray.

Aside from which... where would you expect Israel to hook up their fire hoses?

Also, the firehoses weren't considered despicable because of mehtods.   They were considered despicable because it was being used to keep a race down in the civil rights debate.

All that shows is that the people they sent in were inadequate for the situation, not that the mission could have been done without the loss of life due to idiots making decisions. Also, lethal force is generally used solely when the rioters start getting their hands on weapons, and in this case they had none, thus not warranting the deadly response.

Also any time a riot gets rough on the non-violent people, that's when the police breaks out the gas and the batons and wound some people, not shoot them dead. This entire operation was just an embarassment for Israel.

Gas and Batons are all well and good on city blocks.  Not on boats. 

You can't use Batons on boats because it's FAR to easy to get pushed OFF the boats.

Boats are a much different situation that likely requires escalation quicker just due to the naure of it being a small island in the middle of the ocean.



Kasz216 said:
mirgro said:
Kasz216 said:
mirgro said:
Kasz216 said:
mirgro said:
BrayanA said:
Badassbab said:

1 ArnoldRimmer

The IDF kills innocent civilians- FACT. Not an opinion but fact. In fact it has killed tens of thousands of innocent civilians since it's creation (Occupied territories and Lebanon). Resorting to massive use of violence is what it's well known for and what it does best when it's policies are challenged whether it's peacfully or violently.

The killing of civilians in this particular incident is unfortunate for Israel as it involves a wide mix of people from all over the world including activists from countries it has diplomatic relations with and members of NATO. This has bought it to major world wide attention.

IDF forces were attacked when they legaly try to board, check my previous post:
4. It is legal to attack neutral merchant vessels in international waters acording to International Law (SECTION V : NEUTRAL MERCHANT VESSELS AND CIVIL AIRCRAFT) if they "are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture" (See first link). As you can see from the second link: "breaching a blockade" - checked, "prior warning" - checked, "refuse to stop" - checked.
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/385ec082b509e76c41256739003e636d/7694fe2016f347e1c125641f002d49ce
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6jDIQr59Sk

As you can see from this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYjkLUcbJWo
they were attacked by the mob on the top deck - so they can not be "innocent civilians". Every police and army can defend if they were attacked. So here the question is when IDF kill the people. If they shoot at them when they attack them - they are not guilty. If they shoot after they surrender - they are guilty. Do you have prove for the second one !!!!!!

They fucked up because they sent in armed forces on board. Can you tell me what country uses armed forces against unarmed civilian mobs in this day and age?

All?

Last time I checked, even black riots back in the 60s were handled by police, and a fire hose. Even that was counted as despicable. Now think of all the times the civilian mobs actually had casualties and the shitstorm it led to. It has probably been 20 years since the world started using riot shields and gas to control unarmed mobs, not bullets. What israel did was just plain retarded.


The first round of troops that came down had nonlethal weapons.  Anytime a riot gets rough with the people with nonlethal weapons, lethal weapons are brought into the fray.

Aside from which... where would you expect Israel to hook up their fire hoses?

Also, the firehoses weren't considered despicable because of mehtods.   They were considered despicable because it was being used to keep a race down in the civil rights debate.

All that shows is that the people they sent in were inadequate for the situation, not that the mission could have been done without the loss of life due to idiots making decisions. Also, lethal force is generally used solely when the rioters start getting their hands on weapons, and in this case they had none, thus not warranting the deadly response.

Also any time a riot gets rough on the non-violent people, that's when the police breaks out the gas and the batons and wound some people, not shoot them dead. This entire operation was just an embarassment for Israel.

Gas and Batons are all well and good on city blocks.  Not on boats. 

You can't use Batons on boats because it's FAR to easy to get pushed OFF the boats.

Boats are a much different situation that likely requires escalation quicker just due to the naure of it being a small island in the middle of the ocean.


I am fairly sure any of the nine who are dead would have rather been in the water with a broken arm than shot. Same for being gased. In fact since it's so small, gas would have worked even better than on wide open city blocks.



mirgro said:
Kasz216 said:
mirgro said:
Kasz216 said:
mirgro said:
Kasz216 said:
mirgro said:
BrayanA said:
Badassbab said:

1 ArnoldRimmer

The IDF kills innocent civilians- FACT. Not an opinion but fact. In fact it has killed tens of thousands of innocent civilians since it's creation (Occupied territories and Lebanon). Resorting to massive use of violence is what it's well known for and what it does best when it's policies are challenged whether it's peacfully or violently.

The killing of civilians in this particular incident is unfortunate for Israel as it involves a wide mix of people from all over the world including activists from countries it has diplomatic relations with and members of NATO. This has bought it to major world wide attention.

IDF forces were attacked when they legaly try to board, check my previous post:
4. It is legal to attack neutral merchant vessels in international waters acording to International Law (SECTION V : NEUTRAL MERCHANT VESSELS AND CIVIL AIRCRAFT) if they "are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture" (See first link). As you can see from the second link: "breaching a blockade" - checked, "prior warning" - checked, "refuse to stop" - checked.
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/385ec082b509e76c41256739003e636d/7694fe2016f347e1c125641f002d49ce
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6jDIQr59Sk

As you can see from this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYjkLUcbJWo
they were attacked by the mob on the top deck - so they can not be "innocent civilians". Every police and army can defend if they were attacked. So here the question is when IDF kill the people. If they shoot at them when they attack them - they are not guilty. If they shoot after they surrender - they are guilty. Do you have prove for the second one !!!!!!

They fucked up because they sent in armed forces on board. Can you tell me what country uses armed forces against unarmed civilian mobs in this day and age?

All?

Last time I checked, even black riots back in the 60s were handled by police, and a fire hose. Even that was counted as despicable. Now think of all the times the civilian mobs actually had casualties and the shitstorm it led to. It has probably been 20 years since the world started using riot shields and gas to control unarmed mobs, not bullets. What israel did was just plain retarded.


The first round of troops that came down had nonlethal weapons.  Anytime a riot gets rough with the people with nonlethal weapons, lethal weapons are brought into the fray.

Aside from which... where would you expect Israel to hook up their fire hoses?

Also, the firehoses weren't considered despicable because of mehtods.   They were considered despicable because it was being used to keep a race down in the civil rights debate.

All that shows is that the people they sent in were inadequate for the situation, not that the mission could have been done without the loss of life due to idiots making decisions. Also, lethal force is generally used solely when the rioters start getting their hands on weapons, and in this case they had none, thus not warranting the deadly response.

Also any time a riot gets rough on the non-violent people, that's when the police breaks out the gas and the batons and wound some people, not shoot them dead. This entire operation was just an embarassment for Israel.

Gas and Batons are all well and good on city blocks.  Not on boats. 

You can't use Batons on boats because it's FAR to easy to get pushed OFF the boats.

Boats are a much different situation that likely requires escalation quicker just due to the naure of it being a small island in the middle of the ocean.


I am fairly sure any of the nine who are dead would have rather been in the water with a broken arm than shot. Same for being gased. In fact since it's so small, gas would have worked even better than on wide open city blocks.

I'm not talking about them.

I'm talking about the Israeli's who legally boarded.

I don't think you can do much swimming with riot gear on.

So then, instead you've got a bunch of drowned Israeli soldiers, and another round of people with life guns go down... and you end up with ATLEAST those 9 dead if not more.  You can't control people on a boat with riot gear.  That's just stupidity... not enough room to backup, and if you fall off the side, your dead.  People shouldn't have to put up with that.

If people didn't want to die... they should of surrendered.

Like the other 2 boats did.  In situations like that... when people riot, they put their lives in their own hands. 

Or this boat.  http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/middle_east/10245176.stm

They have noone to blame but themselves in the first place for the whole situation because they willingly and knowingly left port to try and break a blockade.



Around the Network
mirgro said:
BrayanA said:
Badassbab said:

1 ArnoldRimmer

The IDF kills innocent civilians- FACT. Not an opinion but fact. In fact it has killed tens of thousands of innocent civilians since it's creation (Occupied territories and Lebanon). Resorting to massive use of violence is what it's well known for and what it does best when it's policies are challenged whether it's peacfully or violently.

The killing of civilians in this particular incident is unfortunate for Israel as it involves a wide mix of people from all over the world including activists from countries it has diplomatic relations with and members of NATO. This has bought it to major world wide attention.

IDF forces were attacked when they legaly try to board, check my previous post:
4. It is legal to attack neutral merchant vessels in international waters acording to International Law (SECTION V : NEUTRAL MERCHANT VESSELS AND CIVIL AIRCRAFT) if they "are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture" (See first link). As you can see from the second link: "breaching a blockade" - checked, "prior warning" - checked, "refuse to stop" - checked.
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/385ec082b509e76c41256739003e636d/7694fe2016f347e1c125641f002d49ce
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6jDIQr59Sk

As you can see from this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYjkLUcbJWo
they were attacked by the mob on the top deck - so they can not be "innocent civilians". Every police and army can defend if they were attacked. So here the question is when IDF kill the people. If they shoot at them when they attack them - they are not guilty. If they shoot after they surrender - they are guilty. Do you have prove for the second one !!!!!!

They fucked up because they sent in armed forces on board. Can you tell me what country uses armed forces against unarmed civilian mobs in this day and age?

Nobody board a ship with police. All blockades are enforced by army. Did USA blockade Cuba with police forces? This is a job for the army. Did you care to read the International Law for Armed Conflicts at Sea I already posted? Do you know what word "attacked" means . Nobody use police for attack operation.

How other 5 vessels were capturted without any force? Because the people in them does not resist.



Kasz216 said:
mirgro said:


I am fairly sure any of the nine who are dead would have rather been in the water with a broken arm than shot. Same for being gased. In fact since it's so small, gas would have worked even better than on wide open city blocks.

I'm not talking about them.

I'm talking about the Israeli's who legally boarded.

I don't think you can do much swimming with riot gear on.

So then, instead you've got a bunch of drowned Israeli soldiers, and another round of people with life guns go down... and you end up with ATLEAST those 9 dead if not more.  You can't control people on a boat with riot gear.  That's just stupidity... not enough room to backup, and if you fall off the side, your dead.  People shouldn't have to put up with that.

If people didn't want to die... they should of surrendered.

Like the other 2 boats did.  In situations like that... when people riot, they put their lives in their own hands. 

Or this boat.  http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/middle_east/10245176.stm

They have noone to blame but themselves in the first place for the whole situation because they willingly and knowingly left port to try and break a blockade.


Alright fair enough, but what about the gas? What is their excuse for not using gas and instead opted for deadly force?

Also maybe you aren't aware of riots, or civilian mobs, but they aren't the types of mass gatherings that just surrender. Whatever their reason was, they were ust an unarmed mob of rioters. A very small one at that. Yes they were on a ship, however that does not change the fact that they were an unarmed mob, and killing them is probably the most reatrded action anyone could have done in this day and age. Send them to jail, break a bone or two, but killing no. Killing rioters is on the same level of retarded and fucked up as Kent State and Tananmen Square, as far as this is concerned it's really no different. Israel just fucked up hard.



BrayanA said:
mirgro said:
BrayanA said:
Badassbab said:

1 ArnoldRimmer

The IDF kills innocent civilians- FACT. Not an opinion but fact. In fact it has killed tens of thousands of innocent civilians since it's creation (Occupied territories and Lebanon). Resorting to massive use of violence is what it's well known for and what it does best when it's policies are challenged whether it's peacfully or violently.

The killing of civilians in this particular incident is unfortunate for Israel as it involves a wide mix of people from all over the world including activists from countries it has diplomatic relations with and members of NATO. This has bought it to major world wide attention.

IDF forces were attacked when they legaly try to board, check my previous post:
4. It is legal to attack neutral merchant vessels in international waters acording to International Law (SECTION V : NEUTRAL MERCHANT VESSELS AND CIVIL AIRCRAFT) if they "are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture" (See first link). As you can see from the second link: "breaching a blockade" - checked, "prior warning" - checked, "refuse to stop" - checked.
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/385ec082b509e76c41256739003e636d/7694fe2016f347e1c125641f002d49ce
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6jDIQr59Sk

As you can see from this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYjkLUcbJWo
they were attacked by the mob on the top deck - so they can not be "innocent civilians". Every police and army can defend if they were attacked. So here the question is when IDF kill the people. If they shoot at them when they attack them - they are not guilty. If they shoot after they surrender - they are guilty. Do you have prove for the second one !!!!!!

They fucked up because they sent in armed forces on board. Can you tell me what country uses armed forces against unarmed civilian mobs in this day and age?

Nobody board a ship with police. All blockades are enforced by army. Did USA blockade Cuba with police forces? This is a job for the army. Did you care to read the International Law for Armed Conflicts at Sea I already posted? Do you know what word "attacked" means . Nobody use police for attack operation.

How other 5 vessels were capturted without any force? Because the people in them does not resist.


So I guess an unarmed mob now consitutes an attack on a country? Man, I don't know what fucked up world you live in, but you should really lighten up and realize that the people on the boat were nothing more than unarmed civilians.



mirgro said:
Kasz216 said:
mirgro said:


I am fairly sure any of the nine who are dead would have rather been in the water with a broken arm than shot. Same for being gased. In fact since it's so small, gas would have worked even better than on wide open city blocks.

I'm not talking about them.

I'm talking about the Israeli's who legally boarded.

I don't think you can do much swimming with riot gear on.

So then, instead you've got a bunch of drowned Israeli soldiers, and another round of people with life guns go down... and you end up with ATLEAST those 9 dead if not more.  You can't control people on a boat with riot gear.  That's just stupidity... not enough room to backup, and if you fall off the side, your dead.  People shouldn't have to put up with that.

If people didn't want to die... they should of surrendered.

Like the other 2 boats did.  In situations like that... when people riot, they put their lives in their own hands. 

Or this boat.  http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/middle_east/10245176.stm

They have noone to blame but themselves in the first place for the whole situation because they willingly and knowingly left port to try and break a blockade.


Alright fair enough, but what about the gas? What is their excuse for not using gas and instead opted for deadly force?

Also maybe you aren't aware of riots, or civilian mobs, but they aren't the types of mass gatherings that just surrender. Whatever their reason was, they were ust an unarmed mob of rioters. A very small one at that. Yes they were on a ship, however that does not change the fact that they were an unarmed mob, and killing them is probably the most reatrded action anyone could have done in this day and age. Send them to jail, break a bone or two, but killing no. Killing rioters is on the same level of retarded and fucked up as Kent State and Tananmen Square, as far as this is concerned it's really no different. Israel just fucked up hard.


You know... you'd have a point, if it wasn't for the fact that the other 4-5 ships DID just surrender. It's not even remotley similiar to those other two... you really need to put things in perspective if you think otherwise... think if your bias isn't creeping in.

As for why they didn't use gas.

Again... THEY DID USE GAS.  It didn't stop the rioters.   Gas pretty much never does.

They exhausted all non-lethal options.


So, once again, your non-lethal force is getting beaten, you've used gas, the mob hasn't dispersed?

What other option is there?

It's either Lethal Force or let your troops die.  Period.



Badassbab said:

1 ArnoldRimmer

The IDF kills innocent civilians- FACT. Not an opinion but fact. In fact it has killed tens of thousands of innocent civilians since it's creation (Occupied territories and Lebanon). Resorting to massive use of violence is what it's well known for and what it does best when it's policies are challenged whether it's peacfully or violently.

The killing of civilians in this particular incident is unfortunate for Israel as it involves a wide mix of people from all over the world including activists from countries it has diplomatic relations with and members of NATO. This has bought it to major world wide attention.


Really, im not sorry for people who sing "die jews, the army of mohammed will come over you once again"

Im not sad if people like them die, they kind of deserve it.



Fedor Emelianenko - Greatest Fighter and most humble man to ever walk the earth:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVVrNOQtlzY