Thread: Deaths as Israeli forces storm Gaza aid ship

Breaking news. Israel is tired of being called hypocritical and has decided to stand up and be counted for what they are with a new flag to mark the occasion.

Originally Posted by MrG

Breaking news. Israel is tired of being called hypocritical and has decided to stand up and be counted for what they are with a new flag to mark the occasion.

Good one!

The representatives from Nigeria, France, USSR, Bulgaria, United Arab Republic (Egypt), Ethiopia, Jordan, Argentina and Mali supported this view, as worded by the representative from Mali: "[Mali] wishes its vote today to be interpreted in the light of the clear and unequivocal interpretation which the representative of India gave of the provisions of the United Kingdom text." The Russian representative Vasili Kuznetsov stated:

We understand the decision taken to mean the withdrawal of Israel forces from all, and we repeat, all territories belonging to Arab States and seized by Israel following its attack on those States on 5 June 1967.

unfortunately for that bunch of commie and other tinpot 1960s dictatorships and basket-cases, the wording of UNSCR 242 doesn't say 'all of the territories' or even 'the territories'. It just says 'territories' which mean that the precise boundaries are open to negotiation in a final peace deal and tht Israel is entitled to administer the territories until such time as such a settlement is achieved.

The Security Council did not say Israel must withdraw from "all the" territories occupied after the Six-Day war. This wasn't some sort of 'oversight' as the Arabs sometimes claim, but quite deliberate.

back to the topic, I know it makes you adolescents feel better to call Israelis names like 'pirates' and even fool around on photoshop to amuse yourselves, but unfortunately for you, Israel cannot be guilty of piracy over this incident under international law.

The legality of blockades as a response to acts of war is not subject to any doubt.

as announced by the leaders of the flotilla, who declared 'This mission is not about delivering humanitarian supplies, it's about breaking Israel's siege on 1.5 million Palestinians' the purpose of the mission was not to provide humanitarian aid to the residents of Gaza, but rather to break the lawful Israeli military blockade.

If there is no doubt that the offending ships have made a firm determination to break the blockade, then the blockade may be enforced before the offending ships cross the line into domestic waters. The United States and other western countries have frequently boarded ships at high sea in order to assure their security.

^ Are you a paid Israeli shill or do you like to do it for fun?

Obviously just in it for the argument, quite possibly a multi-nic of Dafney or Noodles or some similar troll. Seen the user name getting involved in such arguments before but it's not often on-line.

fact is that all the draftees of UNSCR 242 went on record to say that the resolution meant only some, not all of the territory and that the ommission of the 'the' was fully intended by each of them.

Lord Caradon (Hugh M. Foot) was the permanent representative of the United Kingdom to the United Nations, 1964-1970, and chief drafter of Resolution 242.

• Institute for the Study of Diplomacy, U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, pg. 13, qtd. in Egypt’s Struggle for Peace: Continuity and Change, 1967-1977, Yoram Meital, pg. 49:

Much play has been made of the fact that we didn’t say “the” territories or “all the” territories. But that was deliberate. I myself knew very well the 1967 boundaries and if we had put in the “the” or “all the” that could only have meant that we wished to see the 1967 boundaries perpetuated in the form of a permanent frontier. This I was certainly not prepared to recommend.

Eugene Rostow, a legal scholar and former dean of Yale Law School, was US Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, 1966-1969. He helped draft Resolution 242.
Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 ... rest on two principles, Israel may administer the territory until its Arab neighbors make peace; and when peace is made, Israel should withdraw to “secure and recognized borders,” which need not be the same as the Armistice Demarcation Lines of 1949.

Arthur J. Goldberg was the United States representative to the United Nations, 1965-1968, and before that a U.S. Supreme Court justice. He helped draft Resolution 242.
Does Resolution 242 as unanimously adopted by the UN Security Council require the withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from all of the territories occupied by Israel during the 1967 war? The answer is no. In the resolution, the words the and all are omitted. Resolution 242 calls for the withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the 1967 conflict, without specifying the extent of the withdrawal. The resolution, therefore, neither commands nor prohibits total withdrawal.
* If the resolution is ambiguous, and purposely so, on this crucial issue, how is the withdrawal issue to be settled? By direct negotiations between the concerned parties. Resolution 242 calls for agreement between them to achieve a peaceful and accepted settlement. Agreement and acceptance necessarily require negotiations.

Surely all your C&P crap will convince everybody..

I hope Israel pulls out the big guns for this one.

I hope it serves as a catalyst for moving things along with the Peace process.

Originally Posted by sabang

I hope it serves as a catalyst for moving things along with the Peace process.

You are a dreamer that's for sure, sabang...

^ And you are a minority.

Guess who is against lifting the blockade on Gaza? Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen), president of the Palestinian Authority, that's who :

Abbas to Obama: I'm against lifting the Gaza naval blockade - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is opposed to lifting the naval blockade of the Gaza Strip because this would bolster Hamas, according to what he told United States President Barack Obama during their meeting at the White House Wednesday. Egypt also supports this position.
…
One of the points that Abbas raised is that the naval blockade imposed by Israel on the Strip should not be lifted at this stage. The European diplomats said Egypt has made it clear to Israel, the U.S and the European Union that it is also opposes the lifting of the naval blockade because of the difficulty in inspecting the ships that would enter and leave the Gaza port.

Abbas told Obama that actions easing the blockage should be done with care and undertaken gradually so it will not be construed as a victory for Hamas. The Palestinian leader also stressed that the population in the Gaza Strip must be supported, and that pressure should be brought to bear on Israel to allow more goods, humanitarian assistance and building materials for reconstruction. Abbas, however, said this added aid can be done by opening land crossings and other steps that do not include the lifting of the naval blockade.

Egypt has made it clear to Israel, the U.S and the European Union that it is also opposes the lifting of the naval blockade.

so who, exactly, is in favour of lifting the naval blockade except Hamas and their apologists who don't want to understand that is the source of all the problems here and it's an extremist, violent, terrorist organization which has to be stopped?

Those immediately involved (not including Hamas) want the blockade.
Those peripherally involved want to break the blockade.

I'm looking forward to this next bit of interfering raghead kikin'.


Syria!
Absolutely full on!

Originally Posted by ENT

Syria!
Absolutely full on!

unlike the Turks, there's no chance of their Islamists breaking cover and making mischief under the guise of being some 'humanitarian' outfit.

they remember only too well what the current Syrian President's old man did to them at Hama in 1982. About 25,000 people were murdered in 3 days.

Originally Posted by callippo

Hamas ...it's an extremist, violent, terrorist organization which has to be stopped?

..and.. breathe.