Ships to Gaza incident

[Wezil]

Apparently, it was chartered by the Soviet Union but I have no idea how that maritime stuff works... Chartering means what? The article on wikipedia for chartering is not clear.

"Chartered by" means it was rented/leased for service. It was "flagged" (registered) in Lebanon. Who knows who actually owned it.

[Az]

AFAIK, flagging carries slightly more weight under the law of the sea than just "registration purposes", but is, in fact, a ship's nationality.

no matter who that ship belonged to, was that an act of war by the US against that nation?

[Wezil]

AFAIK, flagging carries slightly more weight under the law of the sea than just "registration purposes", but is, in fact, a ship's nationality.

I don't understand the distinction you are trying to make. My car was manufactured in the US but is registered (flagged if you will) in Ontario. It's nationality is Canadian.

no matter who that ship belonged to, was that an act of war by the US against that nation?

In that case Lebanon. Easy to understand why they didn't get too uppity.

[dannubis]

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.

Grow some pubic hair first, and then talk to me, boy. Makes you look less stupid.

[Whoha]

My give-a-**** reading on this one is flatlining.

someone should put together a highlights video, the guy getting dumped overboard was pretty funny.

[C0ckney]

I consider myself a supporter of Israel but this is just beyond the pale.

yeah that's pretty much where i am.

israel boards a crowded ship carrying aid, in international waters, at night and in the chaos that inevitably ensues nine people die. it's incredible that the IDF didn't foresee this kind of outcome.

it's not surprising to see that some people here have already swallowed whole the weak propaganda that israel has released in response.

there needs to be a full investigation into this to see exactly what happened but on its face it looks pretty outrageous.

[duke o' york]

So should the British government withdraw their diplomats from Israel, as has been suggested? Turkey, Spain and a number of other countries already have. Now I'm neither pro-Israel nor pro-Palestine, but I'd like them to get on with one another for a start. It seems as though Israel's heavyhandedness in dealing with this minor non-threatening import will lead to them losing international favour, and could do them a lot of damage (on a political level - the Palestinians weren't looking to build weapons with the equipment Israel suggests were aboard these ships) in the long term.

[Az]

(on a political level - the Palestinians weren't looking to build weapons with the equipment Israel suggests were aboard these ships)

who suggested that? what is feared and the reason for the blocade is that this sailing would enable other ships entering, some of those with armaments ( as has been attempted on numerous occasions in the past ) .

it's incredible that the IDF didn't foresee this kind of outcome.

lol. the military is stupid. it's not an israeli thing- it's a military thing. the more I observe operations of different militaries the more I realize this. However, one must point out that it isn't just chaos. rather brutal violence was used against the IDF troops in the incident, it wasn't just sporadic mayhem that escalated into a cluster****.

[Az]

don't understand the distinction you are trying to make. My car was manufactured in the US but is registered (flagged if you will) in Ontario. It's nationality is Canadian.

I am actually agreeing with you. btw manufacturing is completely irrelevant.

[duke o' york]

(on a political level - the Palestinians weren't looking to build weapons with the equipment Israel suggests were aboard these ships)

Who suggested that? What is feared and the reason for the blocade is that this sailing would enable other ships entering, some of those with armaments (as has been attempted on numerous occasions in the past).

I didn't, I just wanted to explain what kind of damage they might do themselves by attacking this convoy. The equipment was specifically building materials to repair homes, etc in the area, not the shipping of metal pipes to Iraq that the British were guilty of a few years ago.

The Israelis have the right to search individual vessels within their waters, not board them outside as happened here. This is a major faux-pas by Israel diplomatically, and countries who have previously been sympathetic may have good cause to think otherwise.

[Az]

I am not that familiar with the law of the sea, but I believe that they would have the right to do in, say, waters of an entity they were hostile to ( Gaza Strip ) . as to the equipment itself, what it was declared to be, while maybe true in this case does not matter. It causes a precedent, and a whole in the blocade renders it useless. as to the materials themselves, they were nothing but a pretence, obviously, as the navy offered to unload them and transport them themselves.

[DaShi]

I don't understand the distinction you are trying to make. My car was manufactured in the US but is registered (flagged if you will) in Ontario. It's nationality is Canadian.

Good point. My president was manufactured in Kenya, but was registered in Hawaii. His nationality is American!

[C0ckney]

well there was resistance certainly, but the IDF troops landed on a crowded ship in the dead of night, so it should have been obvious that it would descend into chaos. it's not good enough to shrug and say 'well the military are stupid'. what they did was not only stupid, but also illegal (i, like others, do not accept the israeli position on this issue) and has resulted in a tragic and unnecessary loss of life.

if they wanted to board the ship why not in their own waters, why not in the day, and why could they not have warned people that they were coming aboard. that way everything is clear and there is much less risk of death or injury.

[Sirotnikov]

If the ships were outside of Israeli terrirorial waters then Israel had no right to board them, hence the crew had the right to defend themselves.
One of the articles posted said a crew member grabbed the handgun from an Israelis soldier as he landed on deck, so the gunfire did not come fromm guns carried on the ship. Also note that there are no reports of Israeli casualties, which make me wonder about reports of the ship crews firing on the Israelis. Basically it's just like the Gaza invasion - numerous dead brown people and not one Israeli scratched, which leads to the logical conclusion that the brown people lacked the means to fight back.

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.

[Frozzy]

So should the British government withdraw their diplomats from Israel, as has been suggested? Turkey, Spain and a number of other countries already have. Now I'm neither pro-Israel nor pro-Palestine, but I'd like them to get on with one another for a start. It seems as though Israel's heavyhandedness in dealing with this minor non-threatening import will lead to them losing international favour, and could do them a lot of damage (on a political level - the Palestinians weren't looking to build weapons with the equipment Israel suggests were aboard these ships) in the long term.

I doubt it will be a huge reputational disaster, mainly because their recent reputation is so terrible to begin with.

Rather than being a sudden Israeli volte-face towards the Palestinians, it's come during a period where they don't have carte blanche from the Americans any more, the Gaza conflict and the white phosphorus fiasco, the Dubai blunder, and they've shown a belligerent streak towards the Palestinians.

Anyone who suddenly feels betrayed by the Israelis probably needs to look at the last 12 months. If they were comfortable with that, they should be fairly comfortable with this.