Israel kills to Maintain Blockade

[LeftEyeNine]

Lâ.

The turkish ship "Mavi Marmara" (Blue Marmara) was the head ship of the fleet. Boarding it would mean taking control of the whole fleet, so Israeli army prioritized her, with some killings here and there you know. Israeli demonstrated a bunch o' slingshots and marbles as means of brutal resistance.

Moreover, there are obviously reasonal comments such as "Israel fell into the trap". Sorry but what will happen ?

WHAT HAS HAPPENED UNTIL TODAY, HOW DIFFERENT IS THIS ONE AND WHAT CAN BE THE SUFFERING OF THEM SO THAT WE COULD CALL THIS A TRAP ?

Israel, the bully boy of the mafioso father Sam, will be terrorizing the area just as he wishes to. Thoroughly emotionallY and impulsively. 'Cause they resemble the controlling outpost for USA to mess with whole Middle East until oil runs out.

Bleh. Israel fell into the trap my arse.

[Incongruous]

Here we have it, yet again another act of state-terrorism and murder, Israe; has really shot itself in the head this time. I hope this leads to the expulsion of Israeli diplomate from all across Europe and Asia and a strong demand from the EU that Israel cease its illegal and murderous siege on Gaza.
Israel is now a complete international pariah, what is so shameful is that it took so long for this to be the case, at the cost of too many lives.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Here we have it, yet again another act of state-terrorism and murder, Israe; has really shot itself in the head this time. I hope this leads to the expulsion of Israeli diplomate from all across Europe and Asia and a strong demand from the EU that Israel cease its illegal and murderous siege on Gaza.
Israel is now a complete international pariah, what is so shameful is that it took so long for this to be the case, at the cost of too many lives.

Oh come on Israel isn't really the bad guy in the bigger perspective. They've had the blockade since 2007 because that's when Hamas took control and refused to say that they would not continue their conflict with Israel. Well guess what if you say you are going to kill people then they are not going to let aid get to you are they?

Of course, Israel was out of line here, they really don't do PR. They should never have boarded a ship in international waters (although I'll be cautious on that point as Kukri recommended), and they could have dealt with this without the excessive force and killing.

But on the wider scale there's no need for such anti-Israel raging.

[LeftEyeNine]

What benefit did non-anti-Israelism bring up to now, sire ?

Are we expecting USA to give up on Israel, UN to act as it is supposed to ? Mushrooms, anyone ?

Not advocating the bashing of another country here but isn't it obvious that this international inertia feeds anti-semitism ?

[Incongruous]

Oh come on Israel isn't really the bad guy in the bigger perspective. They've had the blockade since 2007 because that's when Hamas took control and refused to say that they would not continue their conflict with Israel. Well guess what if you say you are going to kill people then they are not going to let aid get to you are they?

Of course, Israel was out of line here, they really don't do PR. They should never have boarded a ship in international waters (although I'll be cautious on that point as Kukri recommended), and they could have dealt with this without the excessive force and killing.

But on the wider scale there's no need for such anti-Israel raging.

Bollocks. Hamas "took control", ha! Hamas one the lections, it is Fatah that took control because the West is too pathetic to accept that democracy does not mean a load of ass-kissing prats all the time. Israel is the bad guy in the bigger perspective, Israel continues to steal land from the Palestinians and continues it's illegal "blockade" of Gaza, no sir, Israel is what one may term, evil.

[Tellos Athenaios]

At any rate Israel is still considered the occupying force of the Gaza strip...

[Furunculus]

hmmm, six hours later, and nothing substantive to change my opinion.

still a blockade run that violently resisted a boarding party from a nation that feared the convoy offered succour to a hostile power.

*fails to care*

[Crazed Rabbit]

Seeing the video at the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/mid...t/10199480.stm

I can say with good confidence that if a US police officer found himself in a similar situation on land (surrounded and being attacked by people with weapons) they would have opened fire as well.

And seeing the way the 'humanitarian activists' reacted, I can't say I'm overwhelmed with grief. What do you expect when you attack soldiers with guns?

CR

[Rhyfelwyr]

Bollocks. Hamas "took control", ha! Hamas one the lections, it is Fatah that took control because the West is too pathetic to accept that democracy does not mean a load of ass-kissing prats all the time. Israel is the bad guy in the bigger perspective, Israel continues to steal land from the Palestinians and continues it's illegal "blockade" of Gaza, no sir, Israel is what one may term, evil.

Their democratic election isn't relevant here, not so long as they officially state that they want to wipe a country of the face of the earth, then bitch when that same country refuses to let supplies get to them!

As for the bigger picture, it is complicated, far from black and white. As I said earlier, Palestine was a backwater long before either the Zionists or the 'Palestinians' as we call the various Arab economic migrants today arrived. These people in Gaza aren't the original Palestinian people you know, they weren't kicked off their land during the initial creation of the Israeli state. As I said earlier, Palestine was a backwater before the Jews and the Arabs which we call 'Palestianians' today arrived, and both the native Jews/Muslims actually identified as Palestianian.

The idea of Zionists v the purely Muslim Palestinians is a quite modern concept, a hostility which exploded over time and had not been there initially. In many ways it is similar to the situation with Scots settlers in Ireland, people forget how much they integrated with the native population for several decades, and then suddenly ethnic violence came out of nowhere.

[gaelic cowboy]

In many ways it is similar to the situation with Scots settlers in Ireland, people forget how much they integrated with the native population for several decades, and then suddenly ethnic violence came out of nowhere.

Much of that violence was attributable to the earlier Stuart and Tudor policies, the economic and property imperative on both sides was unfortunately a major plus in both sides calculations for violence. There is indeed a disheartening level of history having the exact same pattern here too in a generic sense

[Incongruous]

Their democratic election isn't relevant here, not so long as they officially state that they want to wipe a country of the face of the earth, then bitch when that same country refuses to let supplies get to them!

As for the bigger picture, it is complicated, far from black and white. As I said earlier, Palestine was a backwater long before either the Zionists or the 'Palestinians' as we call the various Arab economic migrants today arrived. These people in Gaza aren't the original Palestinian people you know, they weren't kicked off their land during the initial creation of the Israeli state. As I said earlier, Palestine was a backwater before the Jews and the Arabs which we call 'Palestianians' today arrived, and both the native Jews/Muslims actually identified as Palestianian.

The idea of Zionists v the purely Muslim Palestinians is a quite modern concept, a hostility which exploded over time and had not been there initially. In many ways it is similar to the situation with Scots settlers in Ireland, people forget how much they integrated with the native population for several decades, and then suddenly ethnic violence came out of nowhere.

Having spent the greater part of the year in reasearching for my thesis, upon the history of Palestine in the modern era, I can say that you are talking complete bollocks. A backwater... right, so try and explain away the ardent romantic nationalism of what may be termed the elite of Palestinian society in the early 20th century and why the felaheen were such ardent supporters of their rights as the inhabiatants of Palestine. Religion, it may surprise you was not such a divisive factor in these early years of what one may term Palestinian identity, many of the leading figures of the movement were not Muslim, or even religious.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Always a thorny subject.


Did Israel fall into the same old trap -- almost certainly. Any of you who think that there are no parties with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo -- constant low grade warfare -- are being far too positive in your outlook. This group wanted to get aid to Gaza or an international incident. They did. In addition, there are elements in Israel who want things to continue as they are. I am fairly certain that a majority of both the Palestinians and Israelis (you know, the bog standard types who'd like to see their kids grow up, make a few dollars, and play with the grand kids) would love to see a reasonable compromise deal brokered -- but those are not the voices that can be heard when violence such as this occurs.

The USA has always worked to further what it perceives to be in its best interests, though we sometimes have trouble defining those. Are these interests likely to be informed by realpolitik as well as (or sometimes in place of) principles and higher moral goals? The unshocking answer is: of course.

For years I have suspected that this state of low grade war will continue and worsen until Israel is brought, at last, to the real choice. A pogromatic removal of the Palestinians or the assimiliation of Israel into a Palestine dominated by Palestinian arabs. A beautiful lose-lose scenario for Israel.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Having spent the greater part of the year in reasearching for my thesis, upon the history of Palestine in the modern era, I can say that you are talking complete bollocks. A backwater... right, so try and explain away the ardent romantic nationalism of what may be termed the elite of Palestinian society in the early 20th century and why the felaheen were such ardent supporters of their rights as the inhabiatants of Palestine.

Well maybe you need a bit of context to your early 20th century studies, since Palestine was indeed a backwater before the Jewish settlers arrived. 19th century Palestine had a population of something like a quarter of a million, and its population had been in gradual decline over the past century. There was no 'Palestianian people', just some Arabs living in an Ottoman province and then a British colony. There was no evil zionist invasion like you want there to have been, most foreign Jews were only allowed to settle in towns with native Jewish populations, while the rest were sold the poorest land at extortionate prices by the Ottoman landlords. But when they actually redeveloped the land for farming and what not, then all the Arabs from Syria/Egypt/Jordan etc flooded in. And its these non-native Arabs that got pissed off at the economic situation they found themselves in with having the poorer jobs (which was not due to evil zionist oppression, just the fact that Jews brought the technology to develop the land), and its these guys that kicked off the first major pogroms in 1920. Hey, at what date did the first Jewish militant groups emerge eg Haganah? That's right!

Religion, it may surprise you was not such a divisive factor in these early years of what one may term Palestinian identity, many of the leading figures of the movement were not Muslim, or even religious.

Did you even bother to read what I said? I made it clear that both the native Jews and Muslims had a shared identity regardless of their religion, the whole ethnic conflict comes from non-native Jews and non-native Arabs.