Ships to Gaza incident

[Dinner]

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_15200395

And the US does the right thing even if Imran thinks it is "nedaverse".

[Frozzy]

Israel's relations with Turkey mean **** all.

The opinions of the masses in Europe and the US may mean something.

Turkey and Israeli relations are related to Europe and the US though. We saw this during the Gaza war where Turkey ramped up the anti-Israel rhetoric and was told to tone it down by the US and Europe.

If Turkey goes all anti-Israel, then if the US still sides with Israel then Turkey feels alienated. Also bearing in mind the whole EU admission scenario with Turkey, which the US backed last year, and then further onto the Cypriot issue with Turkey and the EU.

There's a whole tinderbox of relational issue based around Turkish-Israeli relations and the rhetoric that comes from Europe and the US about this.

[SlowwHand]

If it came down to Turkey or Israel, guess what?

[Frozzy]

If it came down to Turkey or Israel, guess what?

If a choice had to be made, it would undermine the entire credibility of NATO as a military alliance. To back a non-member over a member would pretty much destroy its integrity.

It almost came to blows in 2003 when France, Germany and others vetoed the defence of Turkey if Iraq attacked it... to actually eschew a member in the real event of an invasion would be one thing, to actively back the enemy of a member would be quite another.

[notyoueither]

Turkey and Israeli relations are related to Europe and the US though. We saw this during the Gaza war where Turkey ramped up the anti-Israel rhetoric and was told to tone it down by the US and Europe.

If Turkey goes all anti-Israel, then if the US still sides with Israel then Turkey feels alienated. Also bearing in mind the whole EU admission scenario with Turkey, which the US backed last year, and then further onto the Cypriot issue with Turkey and the EU.

There's a whole tinderbox of relational issue based around Turkish-Israeli relations and the rhetoric that comes from Europe and the US about this.

I'm thinking you're going a long way down a dead-end.

[SlowwHand]

I don't see the U.S. abandoning Israel under any circumstances.

[Frozzy]

I'm thinking you're going a long way down a dead-end.

I really don't see why they mean **** all though. It's not like the US/EU could happily sit idly by and not choose sides if they chose to hammer each other to pieces.

[notyoueither]

I really don't see why they mean **** all though. It's not like the US/EU could happily sit idly by and not choose sides if they chose to hammer each other to pieces.

You think Turkey is likely to declare war and invade Israel through Lebanon?

[a.kitman]

Not according to my understanding of San-Remo

the san remo manual only apply to armed conflicts. its non-binding and useless here.

[Frozzy]

You think Turkey is likely to declare war and invade Israel through Lebanon?

It's not 1914 any more if that's what you mean by the consequences of relations freezing.

If Turkey goes offside with Israel to the extent that it claims some sort of Middle Eastern preeminence, that makes the US job much harder because it's another stakeholder to satisfy.

It certainly gives Turkey a stronger bargaining position in arguments with the West, of which there are several that have and can crop up. Cyprus, EU accession, NATO, Iran, the peace process, even Armenian genocide debates to name a few.

So yes, if Turkey and Israel freeze all ties and Turkey moves further away from the West because of this, that has implications for Western soft power in the region as it becomes relatively weaker.

There doesn't need to be armed conflict for the West to choose sides if the Turks and Israelis fall out, doing nothing can amount to the same thing.

Incidentally, I've read that Turkey has announced it will escort future flotillas to Gaza (though I haven't seen this in a major news agency, so it might be wrong). If true though, that's another potential spark for a further relations freeze.

Either way, no degree of conflict between Turkey and Israeli is conductive to Western diplomacy.

[Al B. Sure!]

The people on those boats no longer count as civilians when they disobey orders to divert

what the ****?

There's these things called rules of engagement, law of land warfare, and the Geneva Convention. Wait a second... There's not even a war going on! You'd shoot up people when on a policing action!

Go take a look at DoDD 5210.56.

Thank God you're not manning a .50 cal at a checkpoint in Iraq. Your retarded ass would be slaughtering people for the hell of it.

[Dinner]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/10200517.stm

New video is up. The first video I linked to earlier was from a Turkish TV crew on the ship while this footage was taken by an Israeli helicopter crew.

[Ellestar]

Wezil:

But to be fair it's piracy because they steal the ships and hold them and the crew for ransom. That's why it's called piracy.

And Israel kills people. So, if you agree that human life is more important than money, Israel is worse than Somali.

Did the Navy board Soviet vessels during the Cuban Missile Crisis?

That should have been a bad idea. The only USSR merchant vessel USA intercepted was protected by USSR submarine. That submarine was prepared to fire a nuclear-armed torpedo at an US carrier. I think USA had no other choice but to start a WW3 after it lost a carrier.

False:

The San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea (adopted in June 1994), paragraph 67 permits belligerents to attack merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral States outside of neutral waters if they "are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture". Paragraph 146 permits the capture of neutral merchant vessels outside neutral waters if they are engaged in any of the activities referred to in paragraph 67.

So far i heard Israel citing about "contraband concrete". What's next? Contraband water? Contraband air?

Actually, I take take back. They also want to score propaganda points to claim that Jews are evil monsters.

It's obvious without any propaganda.

Technically incorrect. The Soviet ships were told they would be sunk or captured if they continued on course. It had not resulted in actual force before the Soviet ships changed course. There is no doubt the US ships would have enforced the naval blockage but the Soviets chickened out before trying it.

Actually, there was a deal that USA removes missiles it installed recently near USSR territory (in Turkey? i don't remember, but somewhere close), and USSR removes missiles from Kuba (that were installed in responce to USA actions). So it was a reinstatement of the status quo.

There is a blockade on gaza to encourage Hamas to step down from power. You clearly have no idea how hard it is to protect a country the size of New Jersey from terrorist attacks when you are surrounded on all sides by either the sea or radical muslims. This is a country fighting for its life. If you think it doesn't have the right to use extreme measures to keep its people alive, you are either a tool or an anti semite.

Democratically elected Hamas.
I'm not against "semites", i'm against anti-democratic "evil monsters" (c)

Besides, that statement means that all other neighbours of Israel (including Hamas) have exactly the same right to use extreme measures to keep it's people alive. If you think they don't, you're a nazi i guess? Because that will mean that you think that one race have more rights than others.

[Dinner]

Ellestar, the deal was struck a few days later but had not been struck at the time the ships were pressing the naval blockade. The deal was the Soviets take out missiles in Cuba and the US takes out missiles from Turkey.

[Sirotnikov]

I wouldn't call it a summary. It's a narrative. The motivations that are given as fact in the 'summary' are speculation. It's a nice narrative, potentially plausible, but not fact or summary.

The motivations given fit facts on the ground best.

Now it turns out that the humanitarian equipment on the boats is incredibly lower in amount than declared. And the ship with the least humanitarian equipment on board is... bingo! The Marmaris. The ship carrying extremists and the only one on which conflict occured.

Medical supplies from the flotilla have already been loaded and on their way to the Gaza crossing.

Most of the 'humanitarian' equipment was in fact cement. Things which Israel specifically bans from entering Gaza without an international organization vouching for the project where the building materials are used.
This is done of fear Hamas would use building materials to fortify defenses for its rockets armory.