The legality of Israel's actions
Michael Halila is trying to make a case (here and here) against Israel by making it seem that the illegality of the flotilla interception is clear. Of course, I'm no legal expert, so I don't know whether the interception was illegal or not but, contrary to the tone in Halila's post, the issue seems far from clear.
Moreover, the issue of legality is not important - at all. If international law prevents Israel from defending the lives of her citizens, she should have every right to violate such a law. Similarly, if any law prevents an individual from acting in self-defense, the law should rightfully be ignored. The issue that does matter is that the flotillas - sponsored by the IHH, a radical islamic organization with ties to terrorist groups - were headed toward Gaza which Israel had placed under an embargo due to valid security concerns. Israel is at war with Hamas - a terrorist group whose aim is the destruction of the Jewish state - and Hamas is in control of Gaza. Legal technicalities are just that - legal technicalities. Israel was right to act.
And while Michael calls the defenders of Israel "useful idiots", he better remember that his reaction to the incident is exactly what the "activists" set out to bring about.
And now that another ship, MV Rachel Corrie, is headed for Israel, the "humanitarians" on board better take note that their aid wouldn't reach Gaza anyway:
Moreover, the issue of legality is not important - at all. If international law prevents Israel from defending the lives of her citizens, she should have every right to violate such a law. Similarly, if any law prevents an individual from acting in self-defense, the law should rightfully be ignored. The issue that does matter is that the flotillas - sponsored by the IHH, a radical islamic organization with ties to terrorist groups - were headed toward Gaza which Israel had placed under an embargo due to valid security concerns. Israel is at war with Hamas - a terrorist group whose aim is the destruction of the Jewish state - and Hamas is in control of Gaza. Legal technicalities are just that - legal technicalities. Israel was right to act.
And while Michael calls the defenders of Israel "useful idiots", he better remember that his reaction to the incident is exactly what the "activists" set out to bring about.
And now that another ship, MV Rachel Corrie, is headed for Israel, the "humanitarians" on board better take note that their aid wouldn't reach Gaza anyway:
Israel has attempted to deliver humanitarian aid from an international flotilla to Gaza, but Hamas -- which controls the territory -- has refused to accept the cargo, the Israel Defense Forces said Wednesday.
Palestinian sources confirmed that trucks that arrived from Israel at the Rafah terminal at the Israel-Gaza border were barred from delivering the aid.
Labels: english, islam, israel, terrorism, united nations
posted by MSandt at 11:29 PM
4 Comments:
Maybe it's just me, but I'd have thought that it would have been polite to actually comment on my post, instead of just talking about me in the third person.
As for your own attitude, I'll just quote you:
"Moreover, the issue of legality is not important - at all."
I don't know what point you're trying to make by parroting Israeli propaganda. You're also totally failing to address the point I was trying to make. If you're going to advocate the right to self-defence, then you might want to note that as Israel was unlawfully attacking ships sailing under the Turkish flag, surely the people on board the ships have a right to defend themselves? The way I read your post, you've just painted yourself into a corner.
No doubt you'll reply that for some reason, the people on board the ships (in your lingo, activists -> anti-Semites -> terrorists) don't have a right to defend themselves, but Israel does. More specifically, Israel has a right to defend itself from humanitarian aid being given to its enemies, but Turkish citizens don't have a right to defend themselves against unlawful attack.
Frankly, I don't even really care what you come up with, as I've seen plainly enough from your posts and comments on this topic that you're not even trying to take any kind of balanced or objective view on anything that involves Israel. So I'll just wish you good luck on your chosen path. Try to walk safely even though you're wearing blinders.
Micheal Halila, have you seen any of the video footage? No propaganda there, I'm afraid. Just cold hard facts. The "peace activists" were pretty hostile and frankly, they were outright provocative in their actions. You might want to remember that Hama's declared war on Israel. No? Too convenient to just label Israel as the bad guy? Thought so.
You are in no position to judge anyone about taking any kind of balanced or objective view. Continue with your happy slumber...
To Halila! Frankly, I don't even really care what you come up with, as I've seen plainly enough from your posts and comments on this topic that you're not even trying to take any kind of balanced or objective view on anything that involves ISLAM.
I had no intention of being impolite. I was going to write about the flotilla situation anyway and as I was trying to come up with a more specific theme I came across your post.
"surely the people on board the ships have a right to defend themselves?"
Sure, if we agree that a criminal running from the police has a right to defend himself by shooting at his chasers, for example.
"Israel has a right to defend itself from humanitarian aid being given to its enemies"
Israel simply wants to inspect before allowing anything to enter Gaza, that's all.
Post a Comment
<< Home