UN demands actions

What's laughable is the assertion that the people with sticks and bars were the aggressors against IDF agents who FORCIBLY BOARDED THEIR SHIP ARMED WITH MACHINE GUNS.

Who do they think they are fooling?

This shit will not work anymore.
 
Superfreak said:
My take on this....

1) This was not a 'humanitarian' mission. This was a blockade buster. A blockade that is being run not only by Israel... but also by Egypt. Period. To call it a 'humanitarian' mission is little more than a joke. Humanitarian aid flows into Gaza on a daily basis. The offer was made to this flotilla multiple times to dock in the Israeli port and then transport the aid via ground into Gaza (after the materials were searched for weapons... which is the point of the blockade by Israel AND Egypt)

2) Israel was wrong to stop the ships in International waters. They should have waited until they were in territorial waters if they were going to pursue this course of action.

3) The actions of the 'humanitarians' when the Israeli's boarded shows what their true intent was.... confrontation.
Click to expand...

Undoubtedly there was an aspect of confronting the Israelis but to attack a flotilla in international waters at night from helicopters is nothing short of murder. It is strangely ironic that the Zionists used to use the same tactics against the British in the 40s to garner sympathy for a Jewish state.
 
tom prendergast said:
Undoubtedly there was an aspect of confronting the Israelis but to attack a flotilla in international waters at night from helicopters is nothing short of murder. It is strangely ironic that the Zionists used to use the same tactics against the British in the 40s to garner sympathy for a Jewish state.
Click to expand...

And the Irgun and the Stern Gang resorted to the exact same behavior their heirs now condemn. The King David Hotel bombing, the masacre of women and children at Deir Yassin. I know my history, but I refuse to paint the entire Jewish people with the same brush that Assmunch does.
 
AssHatZombie said:
were they transporting armaments?

Do you really believe your own bullshit? Stop being such a brainwash victim.
Click to expand...

No. They were transporting aid. Which they could have easily delivered via the Israeli port rather than trying to go through the Israeli AND Egyptian blockade.

Which again displays the intent of the flotilla. The primary goal was not to deliver the aid.... it was to break the blockade by Egypt and Israel.

If aid was not being received in Gaza, then there might have been a point to trying to break the blockade. But that is not the case.

I do understand your position... you hate the Jews. We get that.
 
tom prendergast said:
Undoubtedly there was an aspect of confronting the Israelis but to attack a flotilla in international waters at night from helicopters is nothing short of murder. It is strangely ironic that the Zionists used to use the same tactics against the British in the 40s to garner sympathy for a Jewish state.
Click to expand...

1) I agree that it was wrong to confront the flotilla in International waters.

2) To proclaim it was murder is a bit of a reach given the Israelis were attacked brutally as they were landing. It is also a reach given the flotilla was told it would not be allowed through the blockade. As I stated, the flotilla's primary intent was confrontation.... and they got just that.
 
AssHatZombie said:
What's laughable is the assertion that the people with sticks and bars were the aggressors against IDF agents who FORCIBLY BOARDED THEIR SHIP ARMED WITH MACHINE GUNS.

Who do they think they are fooling?

This shit will not work anymore.
Click to expand...

Please... the flotilla knew the blockade was there. They KNEW they were not going to be allowed through it. They were provided with a way to deliver their aid without any potential for conflict and they refused that route. They were the aggressors.

Israel's mistake was not waiting for the flotilla to enter territorial waters.

That said, do link us to where you saw they brought machine guns. Because I haven't seen that as of yet. Thanks.
 
Superfreak said:
1) I agree that it was wrong to confront the flotilla in International waters.

2) To proclaim it was murder is a bit of a reach given the Israelis were attacked brutally as they were landing. It is also a reach given the flotilla was told it would not be allowed through the blockade. As I stated, the flotilla's primary intent was confrontation.... and they got just that.
Click to expand...

They were coming down a rope with guns you fucking oaf. How you can dismiss that as a non hostile act just indicates your degree of brainwashedness.
 
Superfreak said:
1) I agree that it was wrong to confront the flotilla in International waters.

2) To proclaim it was murder is a bit of a reach given the Israelis were attacked brutally as they were landing. It is also a reach given the flotilla was told it would not be allowed through the blockade. As I stated, the flotilla's primary intent was confrontation.... and they got just that.
Click to expand...
IMO, their goal was to make it look bad for Egypt to continue the blockade. Israel isn't going to back down because of bad press, they never have before. However Egypt may think twice before backing this kind of thing and continuing the blockade.

I don't think they will either as the same people who attack Israel attack Egypt too, but they are the far more likely target of this attempt to create the propaganda that Israel just handed them.
 
Superfreak said:
Please... the flotilla knew the blockade was there. They KNEW they were not going to be allowed through it. They were provided with a way to deliver their aid without any potential for conflict and they refused that route. They were the aggressors.

Israel's mistake was not waiting for the flotilla to enter territorial waters.

That said, do link us to where you saw they brought machine guns. Because I haven't seen that as of yet. Thanks.
Click to expand...
What I heard this morning was that all the shootings were done by side arms and that the Israelis actually had paintball guns that they were going to use because they hurt like hell. It was only one ship that put up any fight and that the people on board were the first to use agressive actions. I think I might be agressive as well if my vessel was boarded in international waters. I might have been real agressive.
 
AssHatZombie said:
They were coming down a rope with guns you fucking oaf. How you can dismiss that as a non hostile act just indicates your degree of brainwashedness.
Click to expand...

1) Did the flotilla know of the blockade? Yes.

2) Did the flotilla know they were not going to be allowed through the blockade? Yes.

3) Did the flotilla know that if they tried to run the blockade that they would be boarded? Yes.

4) Does seeing a soldier with a gun justify attacking the soldier, when you KNOW in ADVANCE that the soldier is coming to inspect the cargo for weapons? Not a chance.

5) Why do you ignore the FACT that Egypt is a part of the blockade of Gaza? Because you hate the jews.
 
Damocles said:
IMO, their goal was to make it look bad for Egypt to continue the blockade. Israel isn't going to back down because of bad press, they never have before. However Egypt may think twice before backing this kind of thing and continuing the blockade.

I don't think they will either as the same people who attack Israel attack Egypt too, but they are the far more likely target of this attempt to create the propaganda that Israel just handed them.
Click to expand...

I would agree with the above.

That and the fact they knew they could once again start the 'Israel is evil' crowd up in full force again if something like this occurred.
 
Superfreak said:
1) Did the flotilla know of the blockade? Yes.

2) Did the flotilla know they were not going to be allowed through the blockade? Yes.

3) Did the flotilla know that if they tried to run the blockade that they would be boarded? Yes.

4) Does seeing a soldier with a gun justify attacking the soldier, when you KNOW in ADVANCE that the soldier is coming to inspect the cargo for weapons? Not a chance.

5) Why do you ignore the FACT that Egypt is a part of the blockade of Gaza? Because you hate the jews.
Click to expand...

Fuck the blockade. How is it legal to deny food to starving people for political reasons?

I don't hate jews. I cricize their actions, attitudes, and policy preferences on many issues.

Were there any armaments on board, or even any intelligence to that effect?

I don't hate jews, you're just in love with them, and it;s an abusive relationship, as apparent by your inability to think rationally regarding anything jews are involved in.

Keep on making your assinine argument, you only drive my point deeper. Deeper. faster. bang.
 
Socrtease said:
What I heard this morning was that all the shootings were done by side arms and that the Israelis actually had paintball guns that they were going to use because they hurt like hell. It was only one ship that put up any fight and that the people on board were the first to use agressive actions. I think I might be agressive as well if my vessel was boarded in international waters. I might have been real agressive.
Click to expand...

That is what I heard as well.

As for the international waters... I agree, that was a mistake on Israels part. However, there is a big difference to being boarded for no reason and being boarded because your ship is headed directly at a blockade and you refuse to alter course. Again, Israel should have waited until they were in territorial waters (at this point I am not aware how close/far away the flotilla was from territorial waters).

Bottom line... the 'humanitarians' knew exactly what was going to happen if they tried to run the blockade. They knew exactly how the Israeli's would respond if they were attacked. The fact that the other ships were boarded without incident shows the intent of both parties. The Israelis were there to make sure weapons did not enter Gaza. The 'humanitarians' were there to start a fight.
 
Superfreak said:
That is what I heard as well.

As for the international waters... I agree, that was a mistake on Israels part. However, there is a big difference to being boarded for no reason and being boarded because your ship is headed directly at a blockade and you refuse to alter course. Again, Israel should have waited until they were in territorial waters (at this point I am not aware how close/far away the flotilla was from territorial waters).

Bottom line... the 'humanitarians' knew exactly what was going to happen if they tried to run the blockade. They knew exactly how the Israeli's would respond if they were attacked. The fact that the other ships were boarded without incident shows the intent of both parties. The Israelis were there to make sure weapons did not enter Gaza. The 'humanitarians' were there to start a fight.
Click to expand...

who boarded who's boat? Is that not hostile?

your so fucked in the head it's laughable.
 
here's a video available on the internet that might shed some light on who began the aggression......reports indicate that troops boarded the ship for an inspection to see what was being delivered.....the ship had been advised that if there was nothing illegal on board they would be permitted to continue.....when the troops boarded the ship, this is what happened....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYjkLUcbJWo
 
You can even see the paintball gun in one of the IDF soldiers hands. And when the pipes were first broken out, the IDF still refrained from shooting people with bullets.
 
Socrtease said:
You can even see the paintball gun in one of the IDF soldiers hands. And when the pipes were first broken out, the IDF still refrained from shooting people with bullets.
Click to expand...

then they switched to real bullets and shot 9 of them.

It doesnt matter if they had paintballs at first.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top