Latest Exploit of the Heroic Palestinians.

[Az]

I think that the US should have retaliated for the attack though.

if it was an accident , why?

if not , what was the reason for us to attack you?

the last one is a pretty basic question , DinoDoc. you have no case , if you have no motive.

[Eli]

Originally posted by Dalgetti
I think the general position about this in Israel , ( if one exists , since public has short-term memory ) , is , basically "oops.".
just like you and those canadian troops.

There is no general position about this in Israel because no one knows about this case. I never saw it mentioned in the media and if you start asking people on the street 95% will not know that this incident had happened.

[Az]

Eli :

"if one exists , since public has short-term memory "

did you think I said this in vain?

[Ned]

Originally posted by DinoDoc


I can give you several theories I've seen floated about as the reason for the attack. But, truth be told, I don't know the reason for the attack.

I don't think that Israel should burn in hell for this. I actually like the country. I think that the US should have retaliated for the attack though.

I think the general position about this in Israel , ( if one exists , since public has short-term memory ) , is , basically "oops.".

However, what I do know is that the excuse that you mistook it for an Arab ship is demonstrably false.

Did the Russians or Nato (other than the US) have ships in the area at the time?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Dalgetti
if it was an accident , why?

An accident doesn't last for more than two hours at least not in a military with the reputation of yours.

the last one is a pretty basic question , DinoDoc. you have no case , if you have no motive.

Motive is irrelevent.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Ned
Did the Russians or Nato (other than the US) have ships in the area at the time?

Israel didn't claim that they thought that it was a Russian or NATO ship. They claimed that they were attacking the out of service Egyptian horse carrier El Quseir.

[Arrian]

I think motive is relevent... lack of one means a deliberate attack makes no sense, and it is therefore difficult to believe.

I agree that the details of what happened (the long duration, for example) are strange and do suggest something other than an accident, but without a plausible motive I just don't buy it.

-Arrian

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Natan
Krazyhorse, those people are governed by Israeli law, so it's totally unreasonable to demand that they act in accordance with PA law instead. Even Palestinians in the territories followed Israeli law before the PA was set up; I don't think they're "border guards for the settlements."

Listen: either they're part of Israel, part of the PA, or their own independent fiefdom. Which one is it?

If the PA exists at all (questionable) and the settlements are not tiny little islands of Israel and are not states unto themselves, then they are part of the PA, and have no legal basis to resist the law of the land. If the settlements are either part of Israel or independent nations then any attempt to guard their "borders" from "invasion" by the forces of the PA is a military activity.

If the PA doesn't exist, then the situation is different, since then the law of the land is Israeli. You can't get the best of both worlds, Natan. If a settlement is surrounded by the PA and it refuses to submit to the laws of the PA, then it is either a den of criminals or part of a different country.