Israel vs. Middle Eastern Arab states

[Gibber]

In what way was an aid convoy killing Israeli civilians? Seriously. There were no weapons found on the ships.

 

er...how was Israel supposed to know there were no weapons on the ships? or any subsequent ships that sail to Gaza that you are categorically against intercepting because you regard it as piracy?

 

There were no weapons found on the ships.

 

What does that mean? no weapons have ever been smuggled into Gaza ever and never will be? Lift the blockade and no subsequent ships will try to get weapons into the strip based on the evidence of this one convoy that didn't have weaponry for Hamas? (although plenty of weaponry was found on the Mavi destined for the IDF soldiers heads and internal organs).

 

Upholding the blockade to stop weapons transfers from the sea is the point. That means stopping all shipping subject to inspection. They were given the option of unloading their humanitarian aid (of which there was none on the Mavi) in Israel and having it transferred to Gaza, they chose to attempt to run the blockade.

 

Why do you find it so impossible to admit that the Israeli's might have f*cked this one up?

 

I've already said they messed it up operationally, stopping weapons getting to the strip is an aim I support though. Your thinking is f*cked up if you think arming Hamas is a good idea.

 

Why is it so difficult for you to admit that there is no right side or wrong side in this conflict, that both sides have committed crimes and atrocities?

 

I don't but if I disagree with your idea of an Israeli (or a Palestinian) crime I'll do so. And I've done just that to everything in your post already in the thread.

[Gibber]

Well said Arabia Terra.

 

Why don't you join in Gorg if you feel strongly enough about this to post your appreciation?

[Gorgonzola Butt-cheese]

I did join in Gibber, I am infull agreement with Arabia Terra's statement, BOTH sides have committed atrocities.

 

You are clearly very biased in defending Israel.

[Gibber]

You're right of course in saying that a measure of blame should be attributed to both sides.

 

And you also agree Israel shouldn't enforce the blockade?

[EM]

There were no weapons found on the ships.

What does that mean? no weapons have ever been smuggled into Gaza ever and never will be?

I expect that what AT meant was exactly what he said. Had he intended to say something similar to your bizarre interpretation, he would have said something quite different.

 

As for the blockade, I note that you still fixate on its necessity, but have not provided any response to my request for information on why the export blockade is justified. Without any better explanation I am left to conclude that it is, as claimed, purely an exercise in collective punishment.

[Gibber]

I expect that what AT meant was exactly what he said. Had he intended to say something similar to your bizarre interpretation, he would have said something quite different.

 

er...how was Israel supposed to know there were no weapons on the ships?

 

What does this mean then?

 

There were no weapons found on the ships.

 

What relevance does this have for what happened and what will happen if the blockade is lifted. I think it will be something like this but from the sea.

 

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/egypt-police-seize-missiles-ammunition-bound-for-gaza-1.310677

 

I did answer you, but to spell it out in simple terms, empowering Hamas by permitting exports means they retain support from the residents of the strip. Isreal doesn't want Hamas supported.

[EM]

er...how was Israel supposed to know there were no weapons on the ships?

What does this mean then?

Just what it says. You are asking a question.

 

There were no weapons found on the ships.

What relevance does this have for what happened and what will happen if the blockade is lifted.

That is for AT to answer, I was highlighting your bizarre re-interpretation of what he had specifically and clearly written.

 

..., empowering Hamas by permitting exports means they retain support from the residents of the strip. Isreal doesn't want Hamas supported.

Interesting. Do you believe this view of yours dissents from the opinions of the Israeli government? If not I would be interested to know about their statements on this matter. As far as I was aware the Israeli government was not being so overtly honest about a policy which is a form of collective punishment, and, accordingly, a war crime.

[Gibber]

There were no weapons found on the ships.

 

[That is for AT to answer, I was highlighting your bizarre re-interpretation of what he had specifically and clearly written.

 

You can see that the bold, italics and size of the statement means it has some important relevance to the discussion according to AT right?

 

What is the relevance is my question. If my interpretation is bizarre according to you, then you (and indeed AT) will be able to tell me the real (or at least a less bizarre) interpretation.

 

I wait with excited anticipation.

 

As far as I was aware the Israeli government was not being so overtly honest about a policy which is a form of collective punishment, and, accordingly, a war crime.

 

The export ban is hardly a secret

 

http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=179953

[EM]

If my interpretation is bizarre according to you, then you (and indeed AT) will be able to tell me the real (or at least a less bizarre) interpretation.

 

Right. You ask the following:

There were no weapons found on the ships.

What does that mean?

 

Here are two answers to your question:

 

(a) There were no weapons found on the ships.

( No weapons have ever been smuggled into Gaza ever and never will be?

 

I would choose answer (a), whereas you choose (. I posit that it is entirely bizarre to choose answer (, hence your interpretation is bizarre.

[Gibber]

What does that mean? no weapons have ever been smuggled into Gaza ever and never will be?

 

Its a rhetorical question EM. Have you just come from a car crash or something?

 

You can see that the bold, italics and size of the statement means it has some important relevance to the discussion according to AT right?

 

What is the meaning of AT's emboldened and italicized statement in relation to the topic? not what does that particular collection of words taken without context literally mean.

[EM]

Its a rhetorical question EM.

That is blindingly obvious.

 

Have you just come from a car crash or something?

No, though I have sat through 50% of the Sovereign Shetland conference.

 

It is interesting how often you opt to throw in such slimy elitist remarks. I could easily sprinkle my postings with similar insulting material about you. I doubt if that would really help clarify any of the deeper issues.

 

... not what does that particular collection of words taken without context literally mean.

Quite so. It is precisely the context which was relevant. Your rhetorical suggestion of what AT meant was inane. I would be amazed if anyone, anywhere, would make a claim that no weapons have been imported to Gaza, not AT, not Hamas, not the ghost of Arafat. Nobody. Your introduction of the claim as rhetoric is therefore yet another of your feeble straw-man diversionary strategems.

[Gibber]

The context is upholding the blockade to stop weapons arriving by sea. It doesn't matter if there were no weapons on that convoy it matters (to the Isralis that the blockade is upheld) hence their actions.

 

Why does AT need to point out there were no weapons on the convoy considering this context, how is it relevant? and once again, this time with feeling

 

er...how was Israel supposed to know there were no weapons on the ships?

[Gorgonzola Butt-cheese]

So you didn't enjoy the conference EM ?

Surely couldna have been as bad as a car crash?.

 

I know, off topic .

[Gibber]

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/4-israelis-shot-dead-shattering-years-of-relative-calm-in-west-bank-1.311351

 

Hamas' bombing campaign in 1996 was to put Peres out of the running so Netanyahu would be elected (and thereby ending the peace process). Hamas are doing the same thing now that direct talks are starting.

 

Its as if these health service administrators and school inspectors...

 

Hamas is a nationalist, Islamist organisation consisting of a political party, with a military wing, which for years was largely responsible for running hospitals and schools in Gaza,

 

...are not actually interested in peace with Israel.

 

I look forward to reading the Shetlink outrage. Or is that reserved only for the seaborne lynchmob?

[EM]

I look forward to reading the Shetlink outrage.

I have no problem in agreeing that the murderous attack is highly lamentable and makes things worse not better. What is particularly damning is that Hamas took responsibility and did not blame it on uncontrolled loose cannons.

 

I do, however, wonder what your take is on the Shas spiritual leader's recent extremist incitements. These, presumably, were timed to undermine the peace negotiations?