Pirate state of Israel

[orwellian]

The attack of the Turkish vessel was a declaration of war. Turkey is a NATO member and Israel is not. Article 5 of the NATO charter states that "an attack on any member shall be considered to be an attack on all".

And Israel published stolen confiscated video footage. That makes them into copyright pirates too.

What a mess they managed to get themselves into.

 

[bigbadwolf]

What a mess they managed to get themselves into.

It's not a mess. The Israeli cabinet deliberated on this for several days. This incident will die down -- is already dying down. They might make some token concessions with regard to the blockade of Gaza. The one place where they will really suffer is in trade with Turkey, whom they've been friendly with for years. There's both tourism and arms trade between the two. In addition, Turkey uses the Israel lobby in the USA -- for example for keeping a lid on the Armenian massacre. Israel's Ayalon was sent to the USA two or three years back for just this purpose. When Ayalon misbehaved a few months back, Turkey twisted Netanyahu's arm unti Ayalon made a full public apology to the Turks. The Israeli airforce has been using Turkish airspace for training exercises. It's with regard to relations with Turkey that the real damage has been done.

 

[orwellian]

And other practical implications for the attack was the iteration of international condemnation for the blockade. And that Egypt, at least temporarily, suspended theirs.
These things plus the Turkish reaction must be seen as a huge victory for the 'Ship to Gaza' movement. Surely this was more than they could ever have envisioned.
But yes, I do agree with you that this is dying down already.

 

[bigbadwolf]

This essay is insightful about how the strategic equation is changing between Israel, Turkey, and Iran.

Incidentally, contrast the essay with this piece by that sh!thead, Thomas Friedman.

 

[darmanad]

This event has produced A lot of heat, but not much light. The manner in which Israel (and Egypt) have conducted the blockade of an enemy whose governing party's constitution calls for the elimination of the state of Israel is subject to dispute. Some argue it is collective punishment which is a violation of international law of warfare. That can be debated. What cannot be reasonably argued is that the actions taken by Israel vis a vis the Maramar were illegal. The Helsinki Principles on the Law of Maritime Neutrality, a basis for international law on the subject, mandate the conclusion that Israel was well within its prescriptions in forcibly stopping the Gaza-bound flotilla. The relevant clauses in the Helsinki Principles read as follows:
5.1.1 Neutral ships in belligerent ports
A neutral ship in a belligerent port enjoys the same protection against attacks as civilian objects in land warfare… Neutral warships in belligerent ports retain their right of self-defense.
5.1.2 Protection against attacks
(3) Merchant ships flying the flag of a neutral State may be attacked 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, capture or diversion.
(4) Merchant ships flying the flag of a neutral State may be attacked if they
(a) engage in belligerent acts on behalf of the enemy;
(b) act as auxiliaries to the enemy’s armed forces;
(c) are incorporated into or assist the enemy’s intelligence system;
(d) sail under convoy of enemy warships or military aircraft; or
(e) otherwise make an effective contribution to the enemy’s military action, e.g., by carrying military materials, and it is not feasible for the attacking forces to first place passengers and crew in a place of safety. Unless circumstances do not permit, they are to be given a warning, so that they can re-route, off-load, or take other precautions.
5.2.1 Visit and search
… (B)elligerent warships have a right to visit and search vis-à-vis neutral commercial ships in order to ascertain the character and destination of their cargo. If a ship tries to evade this control or offers resistance, measures of coercion necessary to exercise this right are permissible. This includes the right to divert a ship where visit and search at the place where the ship is encountered are not practical.
5.2.10 Blockade
Blockade, i.e. the interdiction of all or certain maritime traffic coming from or going to a port or coast of a belligerent, is a legitimate method of naval warfare. In order to be valid, the blockade must be declared, notified to belligerent and neutral States, effective and applied impartially to ships of all States. A blockade may not bar access to neutral ports or coasts. Neutral vessels believed on reasonable and probable grounds to be breaching a blockade may be stopped and captured. If they, after prior warning, clearly resist capture, they may be attacked.

Israel complied with the applicable maritime laws. Hamas-led Gaza and Israel are belligerents. There is a war. Let's not forget that. Now I suppose BBwolf will come forth spewing some insulting venom if past performance is any prediction of future conduct. Cries of neocon and zionist world domination will cloud a reasonable debate. And the terrorist ties of IHH will be glossed over like the UN mandated legitmacy of the state of Israel.

 

[bigbadwolf]

Israel complied with the applicable maritime laws. Hamas-led Gaza and Israel are belligerents. There is a war. Let's not forget that. Now I suppose BBwolf will come forth spewing some insulting venom if past performance is any prediction of future conduct. Cries of neocon and zionist world domination will cloud a reasonable debate. And the terrorist ties of IHH will be glossed over like the UN mandated legitmacy of the state of Israel.

Stop spewing silly ad hominems. The Turkish PM states the cargo was inspected three times. To say that Israel and Hamas are "belligerents" is another red herring. The Palestiinians are under the thumb of the Israelis. There's about as much of a "war" as there is in US-occupied Afghanistan and Iraq: a subjugated domestic population is hitting back sporadically.

What is allowed in to Gaza is listed (not much); likewise with what is not allowed (a much longer list). Gaza is an open prison of 1.5m people. No warning was given before boarding the boat in the night. The commandos didn't board to ask a few polite questions.

Even this absurd discussion shouldn't be taking place. The first Zionist objective is to ensure that a discussion takes place, with two "sides." Half the battle of propaganda and disinformation is won right there. Then a lengthy "public inquiry" -- this one may be supervised by the Israelis themselves. Then after something fairly clear has been muddied and distorted beyond belief, and a fickle ADD public has moved onto some other distraction, drop the whole thing.

Ultimately these things will not be decided in the court of public opinion or toothless UN resolutions. It will be decided through armed conflict.

 

[bigbadwolf]

The Latin American response seems to have been fairly vigorous -- ignoring US vassals and puppet states like Colombia, Guatemala and Costa Rica, if this piece is any indicator:

Other strong US allies, like Peru and Chile, both issued harsh words of protest, with the former "condemning" the "violent intervention" and the latter "deploring" the "violent reaction of the Israeli forces." Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez -- never one to mince his words -- "energetically" condemned the "brutal massacre committed by the State of Israel". And, in addendum, Chavez tweeted: "Wow, what a terrible massacre that Israel has again committed! Where is the UN? Where is the International Criminal Court?"

Other left-of-center governments, like Argentina, Ecuador, Bolivia, Paraguay and Uruguay also issued strong "condemnations" though in a somewhat softer tone than their Venezuelan neighbor. On June 3rd, Ecuador announced that it would withdraw its ambassador in Jersualem for "consultations".

Although in the past the Brazilian government has rarely engaged in strong criticism of Israel, in this case it has issued a scathing statement that "vehemently condemns the Israeli action, since there is no justification for a military intervention against a peaceful convoy of a strictly humanitarian nature." The foreign ministry release goes on to state that Israel's action "is further aggravated by having taken place, according to available information, in international waters" and calls for an "independent investigation" and the immediate lifting of the Gaza embargo.

 

[bigbadwolf]

This is an interesting essay on the raison d'etat for the incident:

The real motive behind the Israeli assault is far more sinister: to deliberately undermine (if not entirely abort) consequential, substantive peace talks with the Palestinians and Syrians, and repay the Turks for negotiating a nuclear fuel-swap deal with Iran (which significantly set back Israel’s case for military intervention).

In essence, it was done to sabotage peace.

... the attack effectively severs relations with Turkey. Israel wants no part of a non-military solution to the Iranian nuclear issue like the one just brokered by Turkey and Brazil. Turkey’s role in mediating between Syria and Israel, for all the perfunctory plaudits the latter gave it, was actually unwelcome and is now off the table as well.

If we could rewind to the time before this happened, would the Israelis do it again? Yes they would. The Israeli cabinet discussed this for several days. It was premeditated. They are not stupid men (though they may be psychopaths). The hijacking and murder serve clearly determined strategic ends.

 

[bsas]

Now I suppose BBwolf will come forth spewing some insulting venom if past performance is any prediction of future conduct. Cries of neocon and zionist world domination will cloud a reasonable debate. And the terrorist ties of IHH will be glossed over like the UN mandated legitmacy of the state of Israel.

Don't forget Orwellian chiming in with his usual diatribe, starting by calling you names and talking shit that would get him knocked the fuck out if he acted the same way in real life. Its really pointless to carry on any conversation with these guys.

 

[darmanad]

Stop spewing silly ad hominems. PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN GLASS HOUSES...
The Turkish PM states the cargo was inspected three times.
TRUST ME, I'M A LAWYER. "WAR IS DECEIT" (MOHAMMED).
To say that Israel and Hamas are "belligerents" is another red herring. The Palestiinians are under the thumb of the Israelis. There's about as much of a "war" as there is in US-occupied Afghanistan and Iraq: a subjugated domestic population is hitting back sporadically. YOU WANT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY, BUT DENY THAT THEY ARE BELLIGERENTS? WHY? BECAUSE IT SUITS YOUR ARGUMENT WHEN THE LAW IS AGAINST YOU.

Even this absurd discussion shouldn't be taking place.
YEAH, TRY TO REASON AND YOU ARE WRONG FOR DOING SO. FANTASTIC.

Ultimately these things will not be decided in the court of public opinion or toothless UN resolutions. It will be decided through armed conflict.
BETWEEN WHOM? THERE ARE NO BELLIGERENTS (SEE ABOVE).
IF YOU REALLY BELIEVE THIS , THEN WHY SHOULDN'T ISRAEL IMPOSE AN EMBARGO THAT INSURES NO POSSIBLE WAR MATERIEL CAN ENTER GAZA? IT WOULD BE SUICIDAL NOT TO.

More to follow.