Israel Attacks Aid Convoy - Many Deaths Reported

1…1213141517

Comments

  • Pepe Silvia
    Pepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    Pepe Silvia wrote:
    yosi wrote:

    This whole argument simply no longer makes sense. A 9mm round means that the shots were fired from a sidearm. As Rafie has repeatedly stated clearly, and as you can see in the video, the soldiers who boarded the ship were carrying paintball guns as their primary weapons, and evidently were also armed with personal sidearms. If you just think rationally for a second, if the commandos had intended to board the ships and start killing people why would they have the paintball guns rather than rifles with live ammo? The use of sidearms is a pretty clear indication that the soldiers felt themselves to be in danger when they resorted to live ammunition.

    As for people being shot at close range and in the back, what do you expect? This wasn't the Napoleonic wars, with soldiers marching up to each other in the middle of open fields. This was a full on melee on the deck of a ship in the pitch black. You have commandos who perceive their lives to be in danger, surrounded on all sides by assailants. I've never been in combat, but I've spoken with friends who have been. They invariably talk about the fog of war, how in combat you very often only have a very sketchy idea of what is going on around you (and one would imagine that in the middle of this mess that would be all the more true). Seriously, what could anyone expect would happen in this situation? If you try to attack a commando, and the guy thinks that you mean to kill him, he's going to kill you on the spot. These guys don't joke around. We're talking about a situation which is quite literally kill or be killed. At the point where the soldiers felt their lives were at risk they did exactly what they were trained to do. They killed the people that they thought were aiming to kill them. It's a harsh thing to say, but frankly I have no sympathy for these guys. They knowingly provoked the Israelis (that was their stated aim after all), and then attacked armed commandos. What the hell did they think was going to happen?! Actions have consequences. As blunt and harsh as it is to say, if you don't want to get shot, you probably shouldn't try to beat a bunch of soldiers with a metal rod, or stab them with a freaking knife.

    submachine guns like uzi's use 9mm rounds. even if it was a handgun one guy was shot twice in the legs, once in the back, once in the face and once in the back of the head from less than 1 1/2ft away, you don't feel that is a bit excessive? or tazering an 83 year old man? also, people aboard the flotilla, including a member of the israeli knesset, say the commandos started shooting before they got on the boat and as they boarded. some say they were hit with the but of an assault rifle.

    a vessel in international waters flying the flag of a sovereign country, which is an ally and fellow member of NATO, had their communications and radar jammed and were forcibly boarded and taken over. how is that legal again? and how is the blockade legal again? collective punishment isn't legal.



    how can you really justify that level of force over humanitarian aid??? i know israel is used to taking land that doesn't belong to them but are they taking over international waters now, too?


    here is video of a commando holding an uzi with a suppressor
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oll6Hh8D ... re=related
    don't compete; coexist

    what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?

    "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama

    when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
    i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
  • rafie
    rafie Posts: 2,160
    Pepe Silvia wrote:
    Pepe Silvia wrote:
    yosi wrote:

    This whole argument simply no longer makes sense. A 9mm round means that the shots were fired from a sidearm. As Rafie has repeatedly stated clearly, and as you can see in the video, the soldiers who boarded the ship were carrying paintball guns as their primary weapons, and evidently were also armed with personal sidearms. If you just think rationally for a second, if the commandos had intended to board the ships and start killing people why would they have the paintball guns rather than rifles with live ammo? The use of sidearms is a pretty clear indication that the soldiers felt themselves to be in danger when they resorted to live ammunition.

    As for people being shot at close range and in the back, what do you expect? This wasn't the Napoleonic wars, with soldiers marching up to each other in the middle of open fields. This was a full on melee on the deck of a ship in the pitch black. You have commandos who perceive their lives to be in danger, surrounded on all sides by assailants. I've never been in combat, but I've spoken with friends who have been. They invariably talk about the fog of war, how in combat you very often only have a very sketchy idea of what is going on around you (and one would imagine that in the middle of this mess that would be all the more true). Seriously, what could anyone expect would happen in this situation? If you try to attack a commando, and the guy thinks that you mean to kill him, he's going to kill you on the spot. These guys don't joke around. We're talking about a situation which is quite literally kill or be killed. At the point where the soldiers felt their lives were at risk they did exactly what they were trained to do. They killed the people that they thought were aiming to kill them. It's a harsh thing to say, but frankly I have no sympathy for these guys. They knowingly provoked the Israelis (that was their stated aim after all), and then attacked armed commandos. What the hell did they think was going to happen?! Actions have consequences. As blunt and harsh as it is to say, if you don't want to get shot, you probably shouldn't try to beat a bunch of soldiers with a metal rod, or stab them with a freaking knife.

    submachine guns like uzi's use 9mm rounds. even if it was a handgun one guy was shot twice in the legs, once in the back, once in the face and once in the back of the head from less than 1 1/2ft away, you don't feel that is a bit excessive? or tazering an 83 year old man? also, people aboard the flotilla, including a member of the israeli knesset, say the commandos started shooting before they got on the boat and as they boarded. some say they were hit with the but of an assault rifle.

    a vessel in international waters flying the flag of a sovereign country, which is an ally and fellow member of NATO, had their communications and radar jammed and were forcibly boarded and taken over. how is that legal again? and how is the blockade legal again? collective punishment isn't legal.



    how can you really justify that level of force over humanitarian aid??? i know israel is used to taking land that doesn't belong to them but are they taking over international waters now, too?


    here is video of a commando holding an uzi with a suppressor
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oll6Hh8D ... re=related

    Speaking as some one who actually has served in the Israeli army, shot an UZI and serves in reserve duty every year, I can tell you that there is one main problem with this theory. Despite the image that the UZI has around the world as the "ultimate machine gun", no infantry units in the IDF really use them, especially special forces. It is just not that good of a weapon and is very unreliable. I have seen the video footage posted here a while ago already and have no idea what weapon they are actually holding, but I am 99,9 percent sure that it is not an UZI
    Still can't believe I met Mike Mccready at the Guggenheim and got a pic with him!!!!!

    2010: 9/7/10 - Bilbao
    2012: 26-27/6/12 - Amsterdam ~~ 29/6/12 - Werchter ~~ 4-5/7/12 - Berlin
    2014: 25/6/14 - Vienna ~~ 26/6/14 - Berlin
  • Pepe Silvia
    Pepe Silvia Posts: 3,758
    ^^ word
    http://files.uzitalk.com/images/paraUzi.jpg


    they are phasing them out in place of one of israel military industries newest weapons, which has been in use for a few years with certain units, the Tavor TAR-21 assault rifle which uses either a 5.56 or 9mm round depending on variant/options
    don't compete; coexist

    what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?

    "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama

    when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
    i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
  • Commy
    Commy Posts: 4,984
    Pepe Silvia wrote:
    yosi wrote:

    This whole argument simply no longer makes sense. A 9mm round means that the shots were fired from a sidearm. As Rafie has repeatedly stated clearly, and as you can see in the video, the soldiers who boarded the ship were carrying paintball guns as their primary weapons, and evidently were also armed with personal sidearms. If you just think rationally for a second, if the commandos had intended to board the ships and start killing people why would they have the paintball guns rather than rifles with live ammo? The use of sidearms is a pretty clear indication that the soldiers felt themselves to be in danger when they resorted to live ammunition.

    As for people being shot at close range and in the back, what do you expect? This wasn't the Napoleonic wars, with soldiers marching up to each other in the middle of open fields. This was a full on melee on the deck of a ship in the pitch black. You have commandos who perceive their lives to be in danger, surrounded on all sides by assailants. I've never been in combat, but I've spoken with friends who have been. They invariably talk about the fog of war, how in combat you very often only have a very sketchy idea of what is going on around you (and one would imagine that in the middle of this mess that would be all the more true). Seriously, what could anyone expect would happen in this situation? If you try to attack a commando, and the guy thinks that you mean to kill him, he's going to kill you on the spot. These guys don't joke around. We're talking about a situation which is quite literally kill or be killed. At the point where the soldiers felt their lives were at risk they did exactly what they were trained to do. They killed the people that they thought were aiming to kill them. It's a harsh thing to say, but frankly I have no sympathy for these guys. They knowingly provoked the Israelis (that was their stated aim after all), and then attacked armed commandos. What the hell did they think was going to happen?! Actions have consequences. As blunt and harsh as it is to say, if you don't want to get shot, you probably shouldn't try to beat a bunch of soldiers with a metal rod, or stab them with a freaking knife.

    submachine guns like uzi's use 9mm rounds. even if it was a handgun one guy was shot twice in the legs, once in the back, once in the face and once in the back of the head from less than 1 1/2ft away, you don't feel that is a bit excessive? or tazering an 83 year old man? also, people aboard the flotilla, including a member of the israeli knesset, say the commandos started shooting before they got on the boat and as they boarded. some say they were hit with the but of an assault rifle.

    a vessel in international waters flying the flag of a sovereign country, which is an ally and fellow member of NATO, had their communications and radar jammed and were forcibly boarded and taken over. how is that legal again? and how is the blockade legal again? collective punishment isn't legal.



    how can you really justify that level of force over humanitarian aid??? i know israel is used to taking land that doesn't belong to them but are they taking over international waters now, too?




    a problem with your logic yosi, lies in the fact that Israel, like always, was the aggressor here. the fog of war excuse as to why Israeli militants shot civilian protestor on a humantiarian mission in the back of the head is something that COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED, because they knew about the fog of war going in.



    Shit anybody that plays video games knows about the fog of war. I'm sure israeli military leaders know about it. And knowing that and sending armed militants to assault civilian ships in the middle of the night was the most irresponsible foolish idea, (IF casualties were the concern) they could have come up with short of sinking the ships, knowing what a sitution like that entails.

    If Israel gave a shit about human lives they would have simply approached these vessels in daylight, and spoken with leaders over the radio. Their approach shows how little they value human life (other peoples lives).
  • yosi
    yosi NYC Posts: 3,158
    I certainly agree that Israel's leaders fucked up huge, and that tactically the whole thing should have gone down differently, or not at all. That said, I still think that the most plausible explanation for what happened is that the Israelis expected to take over the ship peacefully, as they had the other five ships in the convoy, found themselves under attack, and acted in self-defense. All the arguments I've seen people make contrary to this essentially rest on the assumption that Israel is some sort of blood thirsty monster state, and so clearly they set out to murder people.
    you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane

  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    yosi wrote:
    I certainly agree that Israel's leaders fucked up huge, and that tactically the whole thing should have gone down differently, or not at all. That said, I still think that the most plausible explanation for what happened is that the Israelis expected to take over the ship peacefully, as they had the other five ships in the convoy, found themselves under attack, and acted in self-defense. All the arguments I've seen people make contrary to this essentially rest on the assumption that Israel is some sort of blood thirsty monster state, and so clearly they set out to murder people.

    this wasn't an all out assault on a civilian ship ... this was a targeted assasination attempt on specific activists ... mossad agents were on board ... the raid happened at night and the orders were to shoot to kill specific activists ...

    evidence: video showing activist being shot while totally subdued; video showing targeted list of activists; missing passengers on the ship

    and we know already that israel has no problems going into sovereign countries and assassinating people using doctored passports ...
  • yosi
    yosi NYC Posts: 3,158
    Do you realize how paranoid you sound? Why would Israel want to assassinate a bunch of random activists? Why would they do it on a ship full of witnesses? Why am I even engaging seriously with crazed conspiracy theories?
    you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane

  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    do you realize how naive you sound?

    seriously, quit with the name-calling tactics ... they only reinforce the fact you don't have actually anything to say ...

    care to comment on some of the stuff in this video?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WW2R4Iw5 ... r_embedded
  • yosi
    yosi NYC Posts: 3,158
    Ok, I'm sorry for insulting you. But I really do think you're being paranoid and indulging in conspiracy theories. I watched the video and I don't know what to make of it. Most of it is a blur, it's heavily edited, clearly has a strong editorial bias. I really don't think you can take that video as proof of anything, other than that somebody is handy at splicing together bits of assorted video footage.
    you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane

  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    it's only a conspiracy theory because you refuse to open your mind and heart to the possibility that your gov't is engaged in PR campaign and is willing to do whatever it takes to win ...

    you yourself have stated the mission was a disaster ... you want everyone to believe this was some poor planning on the israeli military side ... a military that is heavily trained and experienced ... there is only one reason to come in the middle of the night via helicopter and boats while jamming communications and seizing cameras and recording devices ...

    you are calling me paranoid but yet you are the one that is chalking all the above up to some poor planning ...
  • dimitrispearljam
    dimitrispearljam Posts: 139,725
    noone leaves his external policy to 22 years old soldiers to act of how they think in a sutuation..
    soldiers take ORDERS....who give those orders???GOVERMENTS...
    "...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
    "..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
    “..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
  • yosi
    yosi NYC Posts: 3,158
    Dimitri, we've been over this, soldiers are not expected to wait for orders while their lives are in immediate danger. They are expected to defend themselves. These guys were sent out with orders to take over these six ships and steer them to port. They took over five of the ships peacefully, but on the sixth ship they were violently attacked, at which point they defended themselves. I don't see how any of this is logically inconsistent.

    By the way, I just spoke with my cousin, who is in an elite Israeli special forces unit (not the one involved in this ship thing). Apparently the Israeli naval commandos are furious at the government because they feel that they were put into an impossible situation without the proper intelligence or equipment, and they are pushing hard for an investigation to determine who should shoulder the consequences.
    you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane

  • dimitrispearljam
    dimitrispearljam Posts: 139,725
    yosi wrote:
    Dimitri, we've been over this, soldiers are not expected to wait for orders while their lives are in immediate danger. They are expected to defend themselves. These guys were sent out with orders to take over these six ships and steer them to port. They took over five of the ships peacefully, but on the sixth ship they were violently attacked, at which point they defended themselves. I don't see how any of this is logically inconsistent.

    By the way, I just spoke with my cousin, who is in an elite Israeli special forces unit (not the one involved in this ship thing). Apparently the Israeli naval commandos are furious at the government because they feel that they were put into an impossible situation without the proper intelligence or equipment, and they are pushing hard for an investigation to determine who should shoulder the consequences.
    and always soldiers are the ones to blame after this types of mission and politics get away..i know from imia islands at 1996 with greek and turkish ships and helicopters...same old story...
    "...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
    "..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
    “..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
  • redrock
    redrock Posts: 18,341
    yosi wrote:
    Dimitri, we've been over this, soldiers are not expected to wait for orders while their lives are in immediate danger. .

    In this 'ship thing' case, if their lives are in immediate danger (which is debatable), of course they don't wait for orders, but they know what orders are - they are trained elite force soldiers. Usually the soldiers would abide by the rules of engagement. Doesn't seem they think these rules of engagement apply to them.
  • rafie
    rafie Posts: 2,160
    polaris_x wrote:
    do you realize how naive you sound?

    seriously, quit with the name-calling tactics ... they only reinforce the fact you don't have actually anything to say ...

    care to comment on some of the stuff in this video?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WW2R4Iw5 ... r_embedded

    Sorry, but I can not take seriously a video that in the details links to videos that blame 9/11 on the Mossad....
    Still can't believe I met Mike Mccready at the Guggenheim and got a pic with him!!!!!

    2010: 9/7/10 - Bilbao
    2012: 26-27/6/12 - Amsterdam ~~ 29/6/12 - Werchter ~~ 4-5/7/12 - Berlin
    2014: 25/6/14 - Vienna ~~ 26/6/14 - Berlin
  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    rafie wrote:
    Sorry, but I can not take seriously a video that in the details links to videos that blame 9/11 on the Mossad....

    that's convenient for you isn't it ... so, i can show a video of someone assaulting an elderly lady but if i flash something like 9/11 was orchestrated by mossad - you will ignore it completely?
  • redrock
    redrock Posts: 18,341
    rafie wrote:
    polaris_x wrote:
    do you realize how naive you sound?

    seriously, quit with the name-calling tactics ... they only reinforce the fact you don't have actually anything to say ...

    care to comment on some of the stuff in this video?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WW2R4Iw5 ... r_embedded

    Sorry, but I can not take seriously a video that in the details links to videos that blame 9/11 on the Mossad....

    It would be funny if not so sad. Bury your head in the sand, ignore what the rest of the world sees. Concentrate on the video, not comments by individuals.
  • OnTheEdge
    OnTheEdge Posts: 1,300
    Out of 100 U.S senators, 87 of them signed a petition supporting Israel in the Flotilla incident.
  • fuck
    fuck Posts: 4,069
    OnTheEdge wrote:
    Out of 100 U.S senators, 87 of them signed a petition supporting Israel in the Flotilla incident.
    LOL, is this meant to help your point? if anything, it hurts your cause. US politicians have sold their souls long ago
  • TriumphantAngel
    TriumphantAngel Posts: 1,760
    OnTheEdge wrote:
    Out of 100 U.S senators, 87 of them signed a petition supporting Israel in the Flotilla incident.
    this is hardly a big surprise. these are the same senators who voted to condemn Goldstone's UN investigation on Israels war crimes and violations of international law. this just makes Americans look like fools once again to the rest of the world.

    Netanyahu will be laughing his ass off. the senate is full of such dumb asses. seriously. all this letter proves, is that the US Congress is another Israeli occupied territory. what's the deal America? when did you become so afraid?

    I applaud the 13 who did not sign.

Categories