[ShepherdsDog]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011 ... tions.html

Quote:

Turkey's actions came a day after the leak of a United Nations report which found that the Israeli military used excessive force during the attack on the flotilla, which was trying to break Israel's blockade of Gaza. The report also says the blockade itself is legal.

Quote:

The New York Times said the report takes a generally supportive view of Israel's blockade of Gaza.

“Israel faces a real threat to its security from militant groups in Gaza,” the newspaper quoted from the leaked report's opening paragraphs. “The naval blockade was imposed as a legitimate security measure in order to prevent weapons from entering Gaza by sea and its implementation complied with the requirements of international law.”

it also states.

Quote:

while the Israelis used excessive and unreasonable force, they had little choice but to defend themselves from an organized group of violent passengers.

This is a prime example of damned if you do and damned if you don't. What you did was legal and necessary but you're still bad. Looks like Turks are trying to engage in some form rapprochment with the resty of the islamic world by sacrificing its relations with a long timeally. It used to be the Turks and Jews were equally hated in the ME, but with Turkey edging away from being a secular state.....well. This is one of the very few times I'd agree with the military overthrow of a civilian government.

[PostFactum]

Looks like someone is looking for new job.

[commanderkai]

ShepherdsDog wrote:

it also states.

Quote:

while the Israelis used excessive and unreasonable force, they had little choice but to defend themselves from an organized group of violent passengers.

Wait. How can they be using excessive and unreasonable force, when they had little choice in the matter?

[BartSimpson]

commanderkai wrote:

ShepherdsDog wrote:

it also states.

Quote:

while the Israelis used excessive and unreasonable force, they had little choice but to defend themselves from an organized group of violent passengers.

Wait. How can they be using excessive and unreasonable force, when they had little choice in the matter?

Because the Israelis are Jews and according to the UN General Assembly the Jews are wrong simply for existing.

[desertdude]

What choice picks shep.

Well bad blow for Israel guess it just leaves it with one less friend from a very short list, but then what do you expect from behaviour like that.

A little tid bit

Quote:

The loss of life and injuries resulting from the use of force by Israeli forces during the take-over of the Mavi Marmara was unacceptable. Nine passengers were killed and many others seriously wounded by Israeli forces. No satisfactory explanation has been provided to the Panel by Israel for any
4
Strictly Confidential
of the nine deaths. Forensic evidence showing that most of the deceased were shot multiple times, including in the back, or at close range has not been adequately accounted for in the material presented by Israel.

There was significant mistreatment of passengers by Israeli authorities after the take-over of the vessels had been completed through until their deportation. This included physical mistreatment, harassment and intimidation, unjustified confiscation of belongings and the denial of timely consular assistance

I bet the US would probably invade a small country if 9 of it citizens were excecuted by a foreign miltary and many others beaten up and its vessels boarded in international waters. BTW where was a Nato's rapid deployment force when ships of one of its members was being attacked.

Turkey was being rather polite when it just kicked out the Israeli diplomats.

The report also basicaly gives Israel a little finger pointing but falls short of full adomonishment, just stating the blockade is not illegal without going into detail which one ?
Basically since its under a state "armed conflict" but give it a thought.

Hamas could envoke the same laws and setup a similar blockade if it could. I would love to see how many would call that legal ?

Read the full report here
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/p ... report.pdf

[Psudo]

desertdude wrote:

I bet the US would probably invade a small country if 9 of it citizens were excecuted

I doubt it. A couple of precedents:
21 Oct 2000 -- 17 US soldiers killed by an al-Qaeda attack on the USS Cole off Yemen. No war results.
25 Jun 1996 -- 19 American servicemen killed in a Hezbollah attack in Saudi Arabia. No war results.

Obviously, things went bad in Israel, but you exaggerate the USA's willingness to go to war.

[desertdude]

Psudo wrote:

desertdude wrote:

I bet the US would probably invade a small country if 9 of it citizens were excecuted

I doubt it. A couple of precedents:
21 Oct 2000 -- 17 US soldiers killed by an al-Qaeda attack on the USS Cole off Yemen. No war results.
25 Jun 1996 -- 19 American servicemen killed in a Hezbollah attack in Saudi Arabia. No war results.

Obviously, things went bad in Israel, but you exaggerate the USA's willingness to go to war.

Well it can't anymore, cause its broke, otherwise Iran and Syria would have been toast long ago. And at that moment old bushy boy wasn't president.

BTW how many US citizens did the Iraqi and Afghani military kill before they were invaded ?

Not trying to be condesending here Pusdo but right about you really can't make any defense about the US and its willingness to go to war, specially after the two on going war.

Not to mention the debacle in Vietnam and that war in Korea. I think the US has engaged in more sizable and public wars with differnt countries than any other country since the end of WWII.

[Psudo]

Arguably international communism and various troubled parts of Africa have been involved in more wars, but you can disqualify them on the basis that they're not countries. And, more to the point, we've had better reasons than 9 citizens' lives for every one of those wars and for many times when we decided not to go to war. Your general point that we don't shirk from a fight is true, but your specific description was wrong.

Incidentally, the Iraqi military killed 148 US soldiers, including 15 women, before the 2003 invasion. Not immediately before, but you didn't specify.

[desertdude]

Psudo wrote:

Your general point that we don't shirk from a fight is true

More like looking for a fight. Well those were the good old days when you guys could afford to.

No American president in his right mind will initiate another war for the forseeable future. But ofcourse Bush proved not all American Presidents are always in their right minds.


Off or kinda on topic. Doesn't the dude in the link look like Ex Pakistani President Musharaf ?

[Zipperfish]

Not good for Israel. They need relations with Turkey, more than Turkey needs relations with them. But all in all, this will be just another false climax in the soap opera.

[Regina]

Oh...........no poultry.

[RUEZ]

Psudo wrote:

Obviously, things went bad in Israel, but you exaggerate the USA's willingness to go to war.

Anti Americans do that quite readily.

[DanSC]

Psudo wrote:

desertdude wrote:

I bet the US would probably invade a small country if 9 of it citizens were excecuted

I doubt it. A couple of precedents:
21 Oct 2000 -- 17 US soldiers killed by an al-Qaeda attack on the USS Cole off Yemen. No war results.

...

Obviously, things went bad in Israel, but you exaggerate the USA's willingness to go to war.

We didn't go to war in Yemen. We went to kinetic military exercises in Yemen.





Just remember, it's now official American policy that if American troops are not on the ground it's not war. It doesn't matter how many non-Americans are on the ground or killed. They don't count as people, only as 10 points.

[Psudo]

DanSC wrote:

Psudo wrote:

21 Oct 2000 -- 17 US soldiers killed by an al-Qaeda attack on the USS Cole off Yemen. No war results.

We didn't go to war in Yemen. We went to kinetic military exercises in Yemen.

I think that was a response to the 2009 Christmas Day bombing attempt, not the USS Cole bombing 9 years, 2 wars, and a 9/11 earlier. The so-called Underwear Bomber that carried out that attack had links to the Yemeni chapter of al Qaeda.

[Proculation]

So the blockade is right, Israel was right, but they used excessive forces. It sounds like normal people were all saying to those anti-americans and anti-semitic activists this year. Also, isn't the Egypt border to Gaza opened ? They can bring their meds from there without attempting to bypass the blockade.