How Would You Have Dealt With The Gaza Blockade-Runners?

[sunnyside]

Hey, wild idea. What if the poor Palestinians helped to get rid of the f***ing terrorists causing the problem?

The same could be (and is) said about the Israeli civilians.

However as far as I can tell groups like Amnesty International and at least some investigatory groups within the UN consider political entities and other organizations seperate from the civilian populace.

So Hamas shoots missiles at Israeli civilians, this makes them terrorists and at least the military arm of Hamas is recognized as such by about everybody.

However they consider the matter of how Israel treats the Palestinian civilians as a seperate matter, and the find that Israel is guilty of things like collective punshiment and so on which amount to crimes against humanity and/or war crimes. The issue keeps getting brought up because, unlike Hamas, the Israeli government is not widely officially recognized as a criminal or terrorist organization. It does provide a lot of fuel for activists though. And the only reason the UN isn't dropping sanctions on Israel, because of their findings of crimes, is that the US is protecting Israel. The US also gives Israel about 3 billion dollars a year in military aid.

In any case all this is off topic except that it sets the stage for why dealing with blockade runners is a sensitive matter as opposed to something Israel can be hardcore about.

[Tyyr]

Except that it does give them a reason to be hardcore about it. The Palestinians aren't docile innocent little sheep like people seem to want to make them out to be. They're giving aid and comfort to Hamas. Yes, some of them are cowed into submission by their strong arm tactics but many of them actively help and shelter the terrorists. If the Palestinians didn't want Hamas there they could get rid of them. If the population of the strip decided they were sick of all the shit they took because of Hamas do you really think Hamas could keep doing what they're doing if they were suddenly in the midst of a hostile populace? At a minimum the Palestinians turn a blind eye to what Hamas does, at worst they actively support it. Either way the Israeli show incredible restraint in allowing anything into Gaza and not just returning rocket fire with 155mm artillery indiscriminately.

[sunnyside]

Start a new thread (before the swarm of mods does it for you) if you want to discuss the philosophy of the situation. And I will admit that it is complicated.

However, aside from what I may think, and what Israel may claim to justify whatever they do, it seems essentially all international judicial bodies have decided that two wrongs don't make a right, and civilians are seperate from governments, especially coercive ones.

Now Israel may get a bit...exuberant...with their return fire, and they might get a steady stream of people killed by restricting access to medical aid, but they aren't simply targeting civilians straight up. So they I don't think any official body is trying to stick them with the terrorist label. But they are considered, by the earlier mentioned bodies, to be guilty of other crimes against humanity and/or war crimes due to collective punishment of a populace, I think maybe some of the medical aid stuff, probably some of the land grabbing etc I haven't read every line item in the list.

However death has been a common sentence for war crimes and crimes against humanity. The Israelis aren't overthrowing their government, so does that mean Hamas is simply dispensing justice when it kills Israeli civilians? There are many individuals throught the middile east and beyond who believe this to be true.

But the international bodies consider that as ridiculous as any claims that you get a free for all to kill, rob, etc Palestinians because of Hamas.

Thus Israel walks a tightrope with defending their population and expanding their land holdings on one side and international concerns on the other.

I'm not precisely sure on the extent of presidential powers in this area. But as I understand it if the political pressure ever got to hot, Obama could wake up one day, cut military support to Israel, dropping their military budget by a quarter instantly, and then stand aside in the UN letting the dam break on the mound of blocked sanctions against Israel, which I imagine would have a brutal affect on their economy and their ability to get replacement parts for some of their military equipment.

Similarly I think Egypt could continue to allow arms, munitions, etc to flow across their border. And the killings in the flottila raid are what instigated that.

So launching torpedos and whatnot would be a dangerous move, and probably one with consequences.

[Monroe]

Not to jump back into this topic too hard but I would recommend you guys check out The Young Turk's coverage this week on the blockade. They go into some of the facts from the UN about the blockade. Like how 95% of the drinking water is considered undrinkable by the UN, 60% go hungry, cement is outlawed so they can't rebuild the buildings, metal is outlawed for the same reason, Israel isn't releasing the full footage either. Its pretty amazing the stuff the American news networks aren't covering.

[Sionnach Glic]

RTÉ News recently reported that only about a quarter of the amount of aid that the people of Gaza require is actually allowed in. Unfortunately, they didn't go into detail on the matter as they just mentioned it in passing.

IIRC, isn't livestock also banned from being imported into the region?

[Monroe]

I believe so. They also ban wheel chairs

So I'm like all caught up on this week's TyT coverage of this. Its been really good. Including reports of ballistic evidence of executions on board the ships and what not. I highly encourage everyone to check out this last week's TyT coverage on youtube. Its really good and I don't see how anyone can take the side of the commandos out there if what is being reported on The Young Turks true. Now granted you can still argue for the leaders who sent them out there in the first place but executions, plenty of gun shots after the captain is frantically saying in three languages he's surrendering and everyone is laying down on the deck... an American civilian shot four times in the head and once in the chest by pistols at close range... this is unreal.

Also it turns out the whole taking the Israeli guns away from them was mostly a lie. The guns were taken from the israelis but then thrown into the water immediately afterward in self defense. No Israeli commando was shot.

[sunnyside]

Watched a bit of TyT to see if I could catch the "execution" bit. Didn't find that, but found some other commentary. Man. First off all I'll reiterate that they don't even pretend to be non biased. They are exceptional at showing one side of the story, and calling the US media and anyone they disagree with an idiot or whatever ad hominem attack Cenk is in the mood to whip out. Not that he doesn't occasionally have a good point, but he leaves stuff out in ways that I've got to think are deliberate.



Anyway having now seen some video and the spin on it, I think one thing that might have led to this going pear shaped was that they went in firing paint, but the weapons look similar enough to rifles to be confused for them. I heard a comment from an activist that the people on the ship were fighting in self defense. Now that could just be an excuse. But I must admit that it's also plauseable that they saw Israelis descending, started hearing the pops of the weapons, saw some of their fellows recoiling from taking hits and thought that the Isrealis were just oppening up with actual bullets from the get go and responded violently.

So bring the XREPs and all for when its time to deal with some riley activits, but if you want something to use before that maybe get something more like a fire extinguisher, pepper gell, or the hose of a nearby ship to attack them in a way that won't be confusing to them, or TVaudiences viewing the footage later.

[Sionnach Glic]

So, basically, this entire situation could just be an even bigger fuckup than we originally thought it was?

[Mikey]

I'm trying to understand what Sunny considers to be terrorist actions levied by the Israeli government. I think much of what gets lost when people have already decided a viewpoint before listening to the facts is that yes, there is plenty of collateral damage from Israeli reprisals - but the fact is that it is collateral (it could be argued that this is because Hamas shields legit targets with unwilling human shields comprised of their own populace, but even disregarding that the poitn is that Israeli attacks target combatant targets.) Hezbollah, and Hamas' militant branch, selectively and purposefully target civilians. Surely everyone can see the difference?

No Israeli commando was shot.

True, but completely irrelevant. The fact is that Israelis were shot at first (aside from the less-than-lethal arms) - whether the attackers were good shots or not is hardly relevant.

Now, I'm not here to defend what Israel has chosen to ban or not to ban, because I don't agree with it. However, before this "aid" was sent anywhere near Gaza, it was already declared (at Cyprus, IIRC) to be material that was contraband to the blockade. So, what was the expected result... aside from (as has been said) a publicity stunt?

Lastly, and admittedly tangentially, if the Palestinian population of the Gaza Strip collectively put an end to the violent, overwhelming minority of Hezbollah and the terroristic branch of Hamas, Egypt and Israel would have no need to blockade building supplies bound for the Gaza Strip.

[Mikey]

IIRC, isn't livestock also banned from being imported into the region?

That sounds odd. I can't see any Islamic population importing much livestock at all, because of the rules of halal.

[sunnyside]

So, basically, this entire situation could just be an even bigger f****p than we originally thought it was?

Could be. It's possible neither side went in intending to hurt anybody or be hurt, and than things just spiraled out of control. Though it's still possible that a subset of hundreds on board fully intended to kick things up a notch.

I'm rather dubious of claims of "execution style killings" though I'll look at the evidence. Note that multiple hits to the head does not indicate an execution. Often multiple people will make multiple shots at a target and not stop shooting until they're quite certain the target is neutralized. This is compounded because you can fire multiple rounds every second with a semi auto and even if the first round was instantly fatal it's going to take their body a couple seconds to fall. Additionally I believe the standard drill US personell are trained in is to fire three rounds at the target (two center of mass and than one at the head) after instances where officers were injured or killed due to pausing after they delivered what turned out to be only a wound to a suspect. I'd expect the Israelis have something like that as well.

I recall a cop shooting in Philly where the coke filled suspect was surround by a number of officers, he went for something in his jacket, and than someone yelled "he's got a gun". He took dozens of rounds in a matter of seconds, and when he finally hit the ground his brains actually rolled out of his skull and down the road a ways. Of course it then turned out that he didn't have a gun... I guess the lesson there is that if a cop is pointing a gun at you, don't try and show them whatever you have in your jacket without discussing it with them first...



@Mikey, I don't think Israel is a terrorist state or that it's actions should be considered terrorism. I'm not sure what comment of mine you are referring to, but I was likely refering to an argument other people use.

[Mikey]

@Mikey, I don't think Israel is a terrorist state or that it's actions should be considered terrorism. I'm not sure what comment of mine you are referring to, but I was likely refering to an argument other people use.

I don't think you used the "t" word, and it seems likely that you were referencing a third-party point. You are definitely correct in stating that a trained military man NEVER waits to see how the first shot does before firing rounds two and three. Further, it goes against all common sense to perform Jersey-style executions in a situation like that... and if Tzahal has anything, it's common-sense in war-fighting. In a situation with an unknown of armed hostiles, why would you take the time to round people up, kneel them down, and put two behind the ear? It's ludicrous.

While I strongly feel that the Israelis played right into the activists' ploy for a PR stunt, I also still can't help but feeling the truth of the old adage "Don't start none, won't be none." No matter how little the Israelis care for international opinion or even for being overall good guys, I simply can't believe that they would have opened fire with live lethal rounds if they hadn't been fired upon.

[sunnyside]

I simply can't believe that they would have opened fire with live lethal rounds if they hadn't been fired upon.

Oh, I'd believe that they'd go live if they were getting metal poles swung at them, especially if their only options were paint, lead, or trying to block a metal bar with their forearm.

Also for clarity, while I don't believe Israel to be a terrorist state, I do think they are the origional "bad guys" in the refugee/settlement component of the conflict, at least as defined by international law. I acknowledge that this is a bit arbitrary and unfair. The land had changed hands hostilly many times over history, often being violently taken from the Jews, why should one rail against Israel for taking back what was taken from them? Why should it be considered to rightfully belong to the descendents of those who massacred innocent Jews in order to take it?

The only reason is that the cycle of violence has to stop somewhere, and that somewhere was defined by the international community in 1949. Arbitrary, but it needed to placed somewhere, otherwise the wars the UN was created to stop would have no reason to, and the fights over land would continue. These international laws both acknowledges Israel's right to exist in the territory they controlled prior to that point, while denying them the abillity to add more land, even if won during a "defensive" war.

Personally I think the UN should eventually step in and assert itself, and probalby take over the Gaza blockade (at which point they should buy some XREPS). The only reason it has not is that the US is giving Israel time to get more land in order to be a good ally, even though our official line is that we do not agree with the settlement actions Israel has been making. I do hope Israel sometime proves to have been worth the diplomatic damage and billions upon billions in military aid that the US has shouldered for them. At least they took out that Iraqi nuclear reactor,

[Monroe]

True, but completely irrelevant. The fact is that Israelis were shot at first

But we don't know that. Israel isn't releasing the full tapes. Where's the rest of the footage? Where's the footage of people being shot? Why isn't Turkey allowed to do the investigation as it is there right to since it was on their boats in International waters. There's just too much gray area to blame this on the activists. Why won't Israel release all of the footage if it did nothing wrong? That's the (New) thing that bugs me the most. We are only getting one side of the argument from American news outlets.

Lastly, and admittedly tangentially, if the Palestinian population of the Gaza Strip collectively put an end to the violent, overwhelming minority of Hezbollah and the terroristic branch of Hamas, Egypt and Israel would have no need to blockade building supplies bound for the Gaza Strip.

True, but I really don't see the population there able to do that unfortunately.

[Monroe]

I'm rather dubious of claims of "execution style killings" though I'll look at the evidence. Note that multiple hits to the head does not indicate an execution. Often multiple people will make multiple shots at a target and not stop shooting until they're quite certain the target is neutralized. This is compounded because you can fire multiple rounds every second with a semi auto and even if the first round was instantly fatal it's going to take their body a couple seconds to fall. Additionally I believe the standard drill US personell are trained in is to fire three rounds at the target (two center of mass and than one at the head) after instances where officers were injured or killed due to pausing after they delivered what turned out to be only a wound to a suspect. I'd expect the Israelis have something like that as well.

It was with a pistol no semi-auto fire there. That was my first guess as well. We don't know if it was an execution but it looks to be one from eyewitness accounts. If Israel would just release the dang footage we'd know one way or another. Right now though its a big question. And its an American citizen, we should be sure they killed him in self defense.