|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:01 am
So the other day Israel boarded a supposed humanitarian flotilla and were greeted with clubs, knives and some guns. Israel defended themselves and killed "civilians". I was watching the Colbert Report and he had the Ambassador of Israel for the US on his show. The Ambassador said they were not civilians, but hired thugs from Gaza. I have read in a few different reports very different views.
What is your view on what happened?
Is the media trying to make Israel look bad?
I personally believe that Israel was right. They suspected the ship and boarded. They did not use force, might have just scared them a little, but anyone who encounters the military is going to be scared. But once they boarded they were attacked. I believe many people are leaving out that part. They make is seem as if Israel was the first to attack.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:30 am
The news organizations misrepresent the facts all the time. It's nothing new. CNN, Fox, MSNBC, etc. they all do it. They have a particular audience that they are appealing to and will present a confirmation bias to their intended audience.
What you get concerning Israel is going to be mixed since there's a lot of mixed feelings. I mean the land given to Israel was stolen from the Palestinians. Israel and Palestine have both done some pretty cruel things to each other. It's hard to pick favorites between one who squish baby heads and one who cuts off baby heads. (Yes I know neither side is literally doing this, I'm just illustrating a point that both sides are equally atrocious). You really have skew some details to make one favorable over the other.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:34 am
I don't care who you are, if someone attacks you, you have the right to defend yourself. If someone is trying to kill you, you don't just try to bend them over your knee for a swat.
Just because the Israelis who boarded were soldiers, doesn't mean that they should have stood back and took a beating. Besides, anytime a civilian takes up arms for a cause, they become militants, and are no longer just innocent civilians.
Any soldier worth their salt isn't just going to stand by meekly and let someone take him/her out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 8:56 pm
Eltanin Sadachbia I don't care who you are, if someone attacks you, you have the right to defend yourself. If someone is trying to kill you, you don't just try to bend them over your knee for a swat. Just because the Israelis who boarded were soldiers, doesn't mean that they should have stood back and took a beating. Besides, anytime a civilian takes up arms for a cause, they become militants, and are no longer just innocent civilians. Any soldier worth their salt isn't just going to stand by meekly and let someone take him/her out. Quote: What you get concerning Israel is going to be mixed since there's a lot of mixed feelings. I mean the land given to Israel was stolen from the Palestinians. Israel and Palestine have both done some pretty cruel things to each other. It's hard to pick favorites between one who squish baby heads and one who cuts off baby heads. (Yes I know neither side is literally doing this, I'm just illustrating a point that both sides are equally atrocious). You really have skew some details to make one favorable over the other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 9:06 pm
I can't really say though since I'm ignorant and don't watch the news because it holds nothing but biased lies and tragedy anymore.
What it sounds like to me is clear cut self defense. If someone came at me, civilian or otherwise, with a weapon and intent of bodily harm, you can believe me when I say I will fight tooth and nail until said person is no longer a threat. In other words, I'll fight until the person A) passes out or B) is lying dead while I panic about taking another life. The latter is more likely to happen than not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:38 pm
I think all this news about the Flotilla is somewhat over-rated.
I say this, because of all the violence and animosity between Palestine and Israel for years, all the bloodshed, and NOW the world is giving a s**t abut what happened on a boat?
Too many innocent lives lost on both sides.
The question should not be, "Was Israel in the right?" but "Is this feud, and all the carnage that has come from it, adequately justified?"
- - - - - - -
The boat incident is only the tip of the Iceburg....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:31 pm
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/06/how-free-explains-israels-flotilla-fiasco/
As I recall, the Unitarian Aid ship was carrying concrete to help rebuild the Gaza land after the attack.
Israel had noted that they did not know what they were armed with, but DID know they were armed with media technology such as Cameras and internet accounts. Israel's military laws as I am sure do not abide by attacking a boat without knowing what was on it. Israel could have easily made communications with the boat and everything would have been fine.
Instead, they had the border-line sea patrol board the boat and had to "defend" themselves from the incoming attackers.
Let's also not forget the Flotilla wads entering seas not controlled by Israel, Israel was bordering 2x or 3x what the UN clearly gave it in 1947 ( Or was it 1937? Damn...) and therefor could not count as blockade running. If Israel did what happened clearly between Turkey and Greece, no blood would have been shed. The problem isn't the Flotilla making the first move, but military officers boarding the Flotilla in the first place.
Deadly force was not needed, especially against a bunch of violent teenagers armed with sticks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 1:53 pm
Israel has no right to blockade Gaza at all.
They killed a US citizen during that operation.
They are worse than useless to the US as an ally; they are not a "bastion of democracy" and do more to put us in danger in that region than they do to advance our interests.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 19, 2010 7:57 pm
Israel is pretty dickish. Honestly, the entire situation is a ********. The only thing that comes from a ******** of that magnitude is disease, and we're dumb enough as America to keep sticking our d**k into it, bareback. Metaphorically speaking, of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 02, 2010 11:32 am
Aakosir So the other day Israel boarded a supposed humanitarian flotilla and were greeted with clubs, knives and some guns. Israel defended themselves and killed "civilians". I was watching the Colbert Report and he had the Ambassador of Israel for the US on his show. The Ambassador said they were not civilians, but hired thugs from Gaza. I have read in a few different reports very different views.
What is your view on what happened?
Is the media trying to make Israel look bad?
I personally believe that Israel was right. They suspected the ship and boarded. They did not use force, might have just scared them a little, but anyone who encounters the military is going to be scared. But once they boarded they were attacked. I believe many people are leaving out that part. They make is seem as if Israel was the first to attack. ^ Yeah, that sounds like the usual sh*t. Israel peacefully investigates potential threat. Threat turns deadly and attacks. Israel defends self and eliminates threat. Media calls bloody murder on Israel. Where have I heard that before? Oh yeah, everywhere. Israel has never fought another nation without prior attack from that nation. Israel only captures other nations' land when at war, and even then Israel trades it back for nothing but some peace, a break from the constant attacks from other countries. But some medium, usually a few media in fact, always has to demonize Israel by twisting her words and actions. This is nothing new, just the same old sh*t.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 02, 2010 11:48 am
Captain_Shinzo http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/06/how-free-explains-israels-flotilla-fiasco/
As I recall, the Unitarian Aid ship was carrying concrete to help rebuild the Gaza land after the attack.
Israel had noted that they did not know what they were armed with, but DID know they were armed with media technology such as Cameras and internet accounts. Israel's military laws as I am sure do not abide by attacking a boat without knowing what was on it. Israel could have easily made communications with the boat and everything would have been fine.
Instead, they had the border-line sea patrol board the boat and had to "defend" themselves from the incoming attackers.
Let's also not forget the Flotilla wads entering seas not controlled by Israel, Israel was bordering 2x or 3x what the UN clearly gave it in 1947 ( Or was it 1937? Damn...) and therefor could not count as blockade running. If Israel did what happened clearly between Turkey and Greece, no blood would have been shed. The problem isn't the Flotilla making the first move, but military officers boarding the Flotilla in the first place.
Deadly force was not needed, especially against a bunch of violent teenagers armed with sticks. Israel was not established until 1948. And 'teenagers with sticks?' Seriously? Come back when your facts are accurate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 02, 2010 12:41 pm
Lumanny the Space Jew Captain_Shinzo http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/06/how-free-explains-israels-flotilla-fiasco/
As I recall, the Unitarian Aid ship was carrying concrete to help rebuild the Gaza land after the attack.
Israel had noted that they did not know what they were armed with, but DID know they were armed with media technology such as Cameras and internet accounts. Israel's military laws as I am sure do not abide by attacking a boat without knowing what was on it. Israel could have easily made communications with the boat and everything would have been fine.
Instead, they had the border-line sea patrol board the boat and had to "defend" themselves from the incoming attackers.
Let's also not forget the Flotilla wads entering seas not controlled by Israel, Israel was bordering 2x or 3x what the UN clearly gave it in 1947 ( Or was it 1937? Damn...) and therefor could not count as blockade running. If Israel did what happened clearly between Turkey and Greece, no blood would have been shed. The problem isn't the Flotilla making the first move, but military officers boarding the Flotilla in the first place.
Deadly force was not needed, especially against a bunch of violent teenagers armed with sticks. Israel was not established until 1948. And 'teenagers with sticks?' Seriously? Come back when your facts are accurate.
They did attack the military people first, and a few did have guns. Not all, but a few. And they had more like clubs... Not sticks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 02, 2010 12:50 pm
Lumanny the Space Jew Aakosir So the other day Israel boarded a supposed humanitarian flotilla and were greeted with clubs, knives and some guns. Israel defended themselves and killed "civilians". I was watching the Colbert Report and he had the Ambassador of Israel for the US on his show. The Ambassador said they were not civilians, but hired thugs from Gaza. I have read in a few different reports very different views.
What is your view on what happened?
Is the media trying to make Israel look bad?
I personally believe that Israel was right. They suspected the ship and boarded. They did not use force, might have just scared them a little, but anyone who encounters the military is going to be scared. But once they boarded they were attacked. I believe many people are leaving out that part. They make is seem as if Israel was the first to attack. ^ Yeah, that sounds like the usual sh*t. Israel peacefully investigates potential threat. Threat turns deadly and attacks. Israel defends self and eliminates threat. Media calls bloody murder on Israel. Where have I heard that before? Oh yeah, everywhere. Israel has never fought another nation without prior attack from that nation. Israel only captures other nations' land when at war, and even then Israel trades it back for nothing but some peace, a break from the constant attacks from other countries. But some medium, usually a few media in fact, always has to demonize Israel by twisting her words and actions. This is nothing new, just the same old sh*t.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 02, 2010 6:08 pm
Aakosir Lumanny the Space Jew Aakosir So the other day Israel boarded a supposed humanitarian flotilla and were greeted with clubs, knives and some guns. Israel defended themselves and killed "civilians". I was watching the Colbert Report and he had the Ambassador of Israel for the US on his show. The Ambassador said they were not civilians, but hired thugs from Gaza. I have read in a few different reports very different views.
What is your view on what happened?
Is the media trying to make Israel look bad?
I personally believe that Israel was right. They suspected the ship and boarded. They did not use force, might have just scared them a little, but anyone who encounters the military is going to be scared. But once they boarded they were attacked. I believe many people are leaving out that part. They make is seem as if Israel was the first to attack. ^ Yeah, that sounds like the usual sh*t. Israel peacefully investigates potential threat. Threat turns deadly and attacks. Israel defends self and eliminates threat. Media calls bloody murder on Israel. Where have I heard that before? Oh yeah, everywhere. Israel has never fought another nation without prior attack from that nation. Israel only captures other nations' land when at war, and even then Israel trades it back for nothing but some peace, a break from the constant attacks from other countries. But some medium, usually a few media in fact, always has to demonize Israel by twisting her words and actions. This is nothing new, just the same old sh*t. Because Israel is largely Jewish. Hamas: I'm going to kill you, Israel! (Hamas takes out rifle) Israel: Who, whoa, can't we talk about this? Hamas: Stand still and let me aim! (Hamas aims rifle) Israel: Help, help! (Israel grabs a nearby baseball bat and hits Hamas) (Hamas falls over) CNN: Breaking News! The Jew just attacked that guy for no reason! Is there no stopping the bloodthirsty Israel?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 02, 2010 8:36 pm
Lumanny the Space Jew Captain_Shinzo http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/06/how-free-explains-israels-flotilla-fiasco/
As I recall, the Unitarian Aid ship was carrying concrete to help rebuild the Gaza land after the attack.
Israel had noted that they did not know what they were armed with, but DID know they were armed with media technology such as Cameras and internet accounts. Israel's military laws as I am sure do not abide by attacking a boat without knowing what was on it. Israel could have easily made communications with the boat and everything would have been fine.
Instead, they had the border-line sea patrol board the boat and had to "defend" themselves from the incoming attackers.
Let's also not forget the Flotilla wads entering seas not controlled by Israel, Israel was bordering 2x or 3x what the UN clearly gave it in 1947 ( Or was it 1937? Damn...) and therefor could not count as blockade running. If Israel did what happened clearly between Turkey and Greece, no blood would have been shed. The problem isn't the Flotilla making the first move, but military officers boarding the Flotilla in the first place.
Deadly force was not needed, especially against a bunch of violent teenagers armed with sticks. Israel was not established until 1948. And 'teenagers with sticks?' Seriously? Come back when your facts are accurate.
As for the weapons, that might be a misconception from the sources that I posted above my information.
My vote still stands that contact was not made indirectly, which is what should have been done first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
