1. I dont see why anyone is objecting to this - Erdogan states that the warships are there to protect humanitarian aid ships not ships carrying weapons so if they want to protect it I say go ahead. From what i understand the gaza blockade is so unreasonable that they dont even allow cement in for reconstruction purposes which is insane.

2. Considering what happened on the Mavi Mamara, i think the Turks have a right to demand an apology. Remember the Israelis invaded the boat, and in international waters. Yes they were beaten upon by the activists on board but we dont know what really happened. The people on the boat claim that prior to the commandos boarding, they fired shots from the helicopters, and that the people that were killed were shot in cold blood not self defense. We dont know what happened but its very convenient that the only footage released by the Israelis shows only the attack on the commandos as they landed on the boats, NOT what happened prior to the boarding, OR what happened after the activists' attack.

3. Those who say Turkey wants a war with Israel are idiots. There is a huge difference with removing support and stopping ties with a country, to going to war with that country. Any war with Israel would cost lives not to mention taking attention away from the kurds. political instability would increase (and possibility of a coup) as opposition would claim its a move to a more islamic stance, wars are expensive and fighting such a major war would affect Turkey's economy which is currently one of the healthiest in Europe.

I support the move (and the Palestinian cause). I dont see how Israel can object to humanitarian aid UNLESS they are collectively punishing the gazans for Hamas. Its not had any effect except bad publicity for israel and suffering for the palestinians and now with the egypt crossing open, its no longer going to be effective.  

why do we even care about israel again? o right they run everything

as with all humanitarian aid working with a blockade, they must submit to identification and inspections as well as to move if they are told to move.  and if they are directed to dock in haifa to have their "aid" (cement is restricted but permitted btw) checked over and sent over land then that is what they are required to do.  any vessel refusing to do so can be legally captured.  if the vessel cannot be captured or diverted the ship itself can be attacked. 

the mavi marmara was not an aid vessel, it was a passenger vessel carrying hundreds of people.  it had no humanitarian purpose, its purpose was solely to breach of the blockade as the organizers stated(there was NO aid on the ship!).   it was the only vessel where they were any problems.   why in the world would the israels peacefully land and take control of the other vessels but start shooting down into this one and then land with paintball guns as their main weapon?  if there was shooting at the boat, why would so many be gathered at the landing area ready to assault the troops?  why are all the injured and dead shot with the handguns?  use some common fucking sense bud. 

israel has no problem with aid and plenty of aid is shipped daily across the border.  there is no reason for these boats to attempt to breach the blockade.

The most recent UN-Commissioned report found that the blockade was legal and justified.

If terrorists began raining down missles on Northern-USA from Canada, and those missles were coming in partially via sea routes, you'd surely argue screening of all Canadian-bound cargo is justfied?

@ MrBubbles - I suggest you reread my previous post. All I can do is repeat myself. Israel is entitled to use reasonable force to enforce their blockade. If Turkish warships fire upon they, they are legally allowed to fire back. If Turkish soldiers shoot at them with small arms, they are entitled to fire back with small arms. They are not entitled to fire back with their ship's weapons - this would be disproportionate force.

In the example where the 9 died, the soldiers were being attacked with primitive melee weapons, and thus firing back with small arms is legally disproportionate - it is illegal. As I said above, it is enough of a grey area that the law will almost never be applied in such a situation, particularly being as the Israeli soldiers didn't have enough time to return to shore, and come back with riot shields + nightsticks. I am making no comments on whether or not I believe it to be immoral, but, it is illegal.

If Israel was any other religion than Judaism, they would easily be the most hated nation by every other country in the world. If they were Islamic, the US would have bombed them instead of Iraq.

I would agree that the activists on board the Mavi were trying to confront the blockage but only an idiot would think they were bringing anything that could be used as weapons. The authorities at the port they left stated that the boats had been checked and there was only aid equipment on the ships (which Israel knew). Likewise the activists themselves, even those on Mavi, were not carrying weapons since they used railing pipes or kitchen knives or things-at-hand to attack. Israel knew there were no threatening items being carried on the ships so the only reason they attacked was to prevent them from reaching gaza, NOT to check the aid they were carrying?

There is no doubt that some of the activists wanted to fight and that they did attack and injure some of the commando but to assume that the commandos were blameless is wrong - according to the UNHRC report five had gunshot wounds to the head and at least four were shot from both back and front. Also, six were the victims of "summary executions", including two shot after they were severely injured. In fact the american national was shot FIVE times. Add to this  the fact that the Mavi boat had around 250 bullet holes in it after the raid and it raises the question what the commandos were doing shooting so much. I have read reports by activists and journalists on board and they mention that some of the people that got injured/died did so because of live fire before the boarding took place. As the israeli footage doesnt cover what happened prior to the actual boarding we dont know the exact details.

Finally, cement was only allowed into gaza AFTER the flotilla raid and the pressure and criticism that came on Israel.

You are clearly not going to be convinced by me and vice versa so i will simply say that the move by Turkey is a good one and hopefully see that there are no more deaths from the flotilla movements.

I would agree that the activists on board the Mavi were trying to confront the blockage but only an idiot would think they were bringing anything that could be used as weapons. The authorities at the port they left stated that the boats had been checked and there was only aid equipment on the ships (which Israel knew). Likewise the activists themselves, even those on Mavi, were not carrying weapons since they used railing pipes or kitchen knives or things-at-hand to attack. Israel knew there were no threatening items being carried on the ships so the only reason they attacked was to prevent them from reaching gaza, NOT to check the aid they were carrying?

There is no doubt that some of the activists wanted to fight and that they did attack and injure some of the commando but to assume that the commandos were blameless is wrong - according to the UNHRC report five had gunshot wounds to the head and at least four were shot from both back and front. Also, six were the victims of "summary executions", including two shot after they were severely injured. In fact the american national was shot FIVE times. Add to this  the fact that the Mavi boat had around 250 bullet holes in it after the raid and it raises the question what the commandos were doing shooting so much. I have read reports by activists and journalists on board and they mention that some of the people that got injured/died did so because of live fire before the boarding took place. As the israeli footage doesnt cover what happened prior to the actual boarding we dont know the exact details.

Finally, cement was only allowed into gaza AFTER the flotilla raid and the pressure and criticism that came on Israel.

You are clearly not going to be convinced by me and vice versa so i will simply say that the move by Turkey is a good one and hopefully see that there are no more deaths from the flotilla movements.

your link actually says the 9 deaths were legal, and that guns can be used to defend oneself from clubs and knives.

you may wish to reread your own post even "Legal experts say proportional force does not mean that guns cannot be used by forces when being attacked with knives"    this means that guns CAN be used. 

one again, please read through the document mentioned in your link.

Israel used reasonable force - they put their commando teams in danger and risked life of their soldiers while they could have used anti-ship missiles or ship artillery guns  to stop the movement of ship when it refused to stop.