What to do about Israel?

[Narnia]

This is probably a Drawing room type of thread but I'd much prefer to hear what the Loungers think. Their PM says all they wanted to do was stop weapons entering Palestine that could harm them. Yeah, I could understand that if that were the case. But they also have a list of humantarian supplies that are and aren't allowed in. You can have water but not fruit juice etc. So far there is no evidence of there being weapons aboard the ships but I'm pretty sure by the time they have been 'examined'in an Israeli port some will have been found. Will the Western countries allow the killing of x number of people in international waters go unanswered. I think it's about time the West imposed sanctions on Israel. I would have thought that given it's history Israel would understand the nature of a people oppressed. Israel existance is down to it people's will to have a homeland. Don't others have the same right and why is that so difficult to understand?

[cate]

I agree. But I doubt that The West (ie the United States) will impose sanctions on Israel because the Jewish vote (New York/California) is too important to them. But of course, Obama could surprise us/them. Israelis are some of the most obstinate and stubborn people in the world. It's a national trait. Obama needs to do something to distract people from his inept handling of the BP crisis.

[matthew123]

Ah I see the Chinese have come out and condemned Israel - "We were shocked by the Israeli attack which led to severe casualties and condemn it," which is a refreshing change from a few days ago when the same Foriegn Ministry spokesman said of the recent North Korea torpedo sinking, "The issue is highly complicated. China does not have firsthand information. We are looking at the information from all sides in a prudent manner,"

[taper]

Cate

I'm sure you meant well, but:

a) The Jewish vote thing is simplistic. American Jews overwhelmingly support the democrats, so how would that explain GWB's strong support for Israel? There is a large level of affinity with Israel in the US it's true, but this goes beyond ethnic or religious differences.

b) "obstinate and stubborn" a "national trait"! Very thin ice indeed. Might you reconsider?

[Tobester999]

Have just seen the videos online, may not be a popular viewpoint, but the soldiers who boarded were violently attacked, and if you attack an armed man, don't be surprised if he bites back...

[Keef]

My missus last night likened Israel's mindset to that of Millwall. Nobody likes us, we don't care! Made me giggle.

[HAL9000]

This incident is difficult to call. Israeli video coverage released so far shows the ship's passengers violently attacking the armed boarding party with metal pipes and bats - knives have been alleged and it is said a soldier's weapon was seized.

Regardless of the rights and wrongs of the underlying causes and the legality of the boarding, it is not surprising that the Israeli soldiers opened fire given the circumstances - self-defence is clearly a valid issue.

[p_glover]

Tobester999 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Have just seen the videos online, may not be a

> popular viewpoint, but the soldiers who boarded

> were violently attacked, and if you attack an

> armed man, don't be surprised if he bites back...

Totally agree with Tobester999. As a former soldier i would of done the same if i was geting attacked from all angles with iron bars etc. You cant tell me that if you get hit over the head you wont receive any serious injuries..including death. We all have the right to self defence. I didnt see the soldiers attacking people on the boat the moment they landed or shooting there way on to the boat.

I am led to believe if the boats followed the Israel instructions offered days before to dock in there port and have the cargo checked they could then transport it in to Gaza by land. Maybe they had something to hide on that ship.... guns, rockets, explosives etc to be used on innocent civilians.

[mockney piers]

I'm inclined to think that the organisation bringing in the aid considers (quite justifiably*) the blockade to be illegal, and their 'offer' an affront particularly in the light of the goods that would be considered contraband (as mentioned fruit juices etc).

Yes the running of the blockade was a deliberate provocation, but I can see why they did it. If a shopkeeper refuses to acknowledge the illegal demands of a gangster it may be unwise but ultimately they would have right on their side. If armed men came into his shop to enforce their rules, we might also think that attacking him might be unwise and almost certainly dangerous, but to say that the gangster shooting him dead is justifiable self defence seems to me a somewhat twisted world view.

As regards the Jewish vote it is indeed a simplification, this series of short essays makes for interesting reading

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/05/21/the_special_relationship

*the only support for it I've seen is that maritime blockades during wars are supported under international law. Rather weak considering the blockade was imposed as collective punishment for not playing ball and the 'war' that later ensued was a one sided and murderous assault, again as collective punishment destroying schools, industry, agriculture, 48% of health buildings and 14,000! homes - WHO figures)

[Narnia]

  Quote

If they didn't board the boat illegally they wouldn't have been attacked.If someone entered your home with a gun you would use whatever was at your disposal to defend yourself. Given the number of VIP's aboard the boat it's highly unlikely they would be carrying weapons. As for the Israeli's offering to transport the aid, it's well known that they limit the amount of aid going in.

[HAL9000]

Life is full of ifs. The fact is they attacked armed Israeli soldiers with clubs and were shot dead - my pet hamster could have predicted that outcome. What were they thinking?

[Ladymuck]

Narnia Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> >

> If they didn't board the boat illegally they

> wouldn't have been attacked.If someone entered

> your home with a gun you would use whatever was at

> your disposal to defend yourself.

Absolutely! However, any force used must be "reasonable". What is reasonable? Ha! Lawyers and the judiciary have been arguing over that since time immemorial.

@ HAL9000

You have a pet hamster? (LOL)

[jimmy two times]

The fact is Israel is surrounded on all sides by enemies who would like to see it annihilated. You can't blame them for not fcuking about when it comes to their own security.

[mockney piers]

Dubious fact there jimmy.

Can you back it up?

Egypt, peace and cooperation. Jordan, peace and settlement. Lebanon, happy if Israel just stopped bombing/killing/interfering with them.

Turkey, once stalwart ally. Saudi Arabia, america's best friend. Iraq, American puppet state.

So, basically there is tension over occupied land with Syria and the ridiculous bluster of the idiot ahmedinajad, Iran not exacty a neighbour.

Try thinking before trotting out trite nonsense.

In Europe we Leary that peace is created through friendship, trade and mutual security. Armed tension as a delicate balance of power resulted on the first world war and 20 million deaths.

Israel is pursuing a strategy of permanent conflict with acceptable level if threat rather than deal with it's own internal conflicts or address settlements and the theft of land and water in occupied lands.

Pity the death of Rabin sadly and that Sharon did not die soon enough.

[jimmy two times]

Haven't most of them tried to bomb Israel at one time or other?

[mockney piers]

Eh? Germany killed 60,000 British civilians with bombs and we half a million Germans, all only 4 years before this nonsense kicked off. Using past acts to justify current aggression is the refuge of demagogues and fanatics.

The fact is that if Israel doesn't want this sort of thing to continue it has to talk and normalise relations with everyone. But it won't settle with the Palestinians, hell it won't even agree to stop building new illegal settlements, so current strategy I think was most succintly described by Keef's missus*!!

*'Noone loves us we don't care' for those who don't read whole threads and want everything in quotes

[jimmy two times]

Let's be honest about this. They're surrounded by muslim countries and muslims hate jews. The only reason those countries you mention are behaving themselves is because they've had their a*ses kicked at one time or other by Israel.

[mockney piers]

In fact the last time Israel was genuinely the victim rather than the agressor was 1973, hardly yesterday. I was born then and I'm almost middle aged, so half a lifetime to try and make some progress and zip. In the meantime northern Ireland and south Africa, supposedly intractable conflicts are virtually unrecognisable compared to their 1973 situations.

I guess the only comparable conflict are the koreas, and impretty sure south Korea would happily normalise relations, meaning there is one candidate maintaing a state of conflict (in this case to justify immense state control by sowing the seeds of fear and paranoia).

Israel uses similar language of victimhood and fear to justify it's continued imperial colonial control through the use of violence.

I also loved HAL's 'what were they expecting', thank god some people have been willing to fight for freedom or we'd still have a bloody monarch ruling through Divine right wouldn't we!!

[mockney piers]

"muslims hate jews"

Wow, and 'national trait' was skating on thin ice!!!!

You might want to read about the hugely long history of tolerance of Jews by Muslims and compare that with the Christian world's, but hey, maybe that's the past.

You're conflating the rhetoric of Arab (or indeed Perisan) regimes with widespread disgust at Israel's actions (not just in the muslim world to be frank, it's just that our leaders never want to rock the boat (ie upset the US)) with your own Islamophobia.

[DJKillaQueen]

Isreal have consistently broken international law....that began with illegal settlements way back and continues today with further incursions outside of her borders. Now any other country putting two fingers up to the UN like that would almost certainly be dealt with but Isreal has consistently got away with it.....probably because they are a nuclear nation.

With regards to terrorism (and Hamas IS a terrorist movement) then Isreal have a right to defend themselves against that, however many countries have been living with terrorism for decades but do not respond with the force and number of illegal invasions and retaliations that Isreal do.

Aid does arrive in Gaza every day, ships allowed by Isreal. It's nowhere near enough aid of course but ships are let through all the same. There must have been some reason for armed soldiers storming these particular ships, whether the intelligence was true or false, and the soldiers were met with some low level armed resistance. In that scenario it's hard for a safe and organised search to happen.

[mockney piers]

"Isreal has consistently got away with it.....probably because they are a nuclear nation."

Probably more to do with the US veto truth be told, wielded more times by the US to the benefit of Israel than even the Soviet Union managed full stop in the Cold War.

[Jah Lush]

When the IRA terrorists where planting bombs in England did we go and constantly bomb the shit out of Northern Ireland? No, of course not. But Israel seems to constantly get away with doing just that to Palestine. It's not right. They should give back the occupied territories.

[Narnia]

  Quote

I'm not sure about your analogy Jah. NI is 'owned' by the British. Perhaps bombing the Republic would be a better one.

[jimmy two times]

One of reasons the IRA was planting bombs in England was because the British army had occupied Northern Ireland and the catholics were being victimised by both the British army and the Ulster protestants.

[Jah Lush]

Narnia Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> >

> I'm not sure about your analogy Jah. NI is 'owned'

> by the British. Perhaps bombing the Republic would

> be a better one.

Hmmm... I see your point but surely there is a similar scenario with the illegal occupation of Palestine.