Thread: What's your opinion about the new"israeli" Massacre?

Originally Posted by portable

I'll start from the last comment .... the attacking in ships in the international waters is considered by all means a piracy ...

Okay I don't care much about who is right or wrong in this conflict, but just doing some research led me to this -

WHAT ARE INTERNATIONAL WATERS?

Under the U.N. Convention of the Law of the Sea a coastal state has a "territorial sea" of 12 nautical miles from the coast over which it is sovereign. Ships of other states are allowed "innocent passage" through such waters.

There is a further 12 nautical mile zone called the "contiguous zone" over which a state may take action to protect itself or its laws.

"However, strictly beyond the 12 nautical miles limit the seas are the "high seas" or international waters," Roche said.

The Israeli navy said on Monday the Gaza bound flotilla was intercepted 120 km (75 miles) west of Israel. The Turkish captain of one of the vessels told an Istanbul news conference after returning home from Israeli detention they were 68 miles outside Israeli territorial waters.

Under the law of a blockade, intercepting a vessel could apply globally so long as a ship is bound for a "belligerent" territory, legal experts say.

CAN ISRAEL USE FORCE WHEN INTERCEPTING SHIPS?

Under international law it can use force when boarding a ship.
"If force is disproportionate it would be a violation of the key tenets of the use of force," said Commander James Kraska, professor of international law at the U.S. Naval War College.

Israeli authorities said marines who boarded the Turkish vessel Mavi Marmara opened fire in self-defense after activists clubbed and stabbed them and snatched some of their weapons.

Legal experts say proportional force does not mean that guns cannot be used by forces when being attacked with knives.

"But there has got to be a relationship between the threat and response," Kraska said.

The use of force may also have other repercussions.

"While the full facts need to emerge from a credible and transparent investigation, from what is known now, it appears that Israel acted within its legal rights," said J. Peter Pham, a strategic adviser to U.S. and European governments.



"However, not every operation that the law permits is necessarily prudent from the strategic point of view."

OPPONENTS HAVE CALLED ISRAEL'S RAID "PIRACY." WAS IT?

No, as under international law it was considered a state action.
"Whether what Israel did is right or wrong, it is not an act of piracy. Piracy deals with private conduct particularly with a pecuniary or financial interest," Kraska said.

HAVE THERE BEEN ANY SHIPPING DISRUPTIONS AFTER THE RAID?

None so far but the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), an association which represents 75 percent of the world's merchant fleet, has expressed "deep concern" over the boarding by Israeli forces, arguing that merchant ships have a right to safe passage and freedom of navigation in international waters.

"These fundamental principles of international law must always be upheld by all of the world's nations," the ICS said.

And this -

CAN ISRAEL IMPOSE A NAVAL BLOCKADE ON GAZA?

Yes it can, according to the law of blockade which was derived from customary international law and codified in the 1909 Declaration of London. It was updated in 1994 in a legally recognized document called the "San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea."
Under some of the key rules, a blockade must be declared and notified to all belligerents and neutral states, access to neutral ports cannot be blocked, and an area can only be blockaded which is under enemy control.
"On the basis that Hamas is the ruling entity of Gaza and Israel is in the midst of an armed struggle against that ruling entity, the blockade is legal," said Philip Roche, partner in the shipping disputes and risk management team with law firm Norton Rose.

Source - Reuters

I dis-regard all the journalism in this matter, it is only the opinion of the writer, these are not completey true facts. We know the truth behind all of this, it's a fricken political agenda. It's the never ending war, and US, behind Britain, continue to fuel it. Somebody just needs to do what the US did to Japan, either to Palestine or Israel. Eliminate one of the parties for good and all the problems are gone, no matter what the world has to say, who gave a $h!t about Japan at the time?

Yes it is a tragedy that many died. I believe a lot more deaths could of been prevented. I believe the military commander, even if he issued the orders to attack could of done it in a more planned out manner to minimize casualties if any because deaths on either side should never be a solution.

Great PR! Calm the public, and nobody will care. We can continue. Drop Bombs. LOL

Originally Posted by superbad09

I dis-regard all the journalism in this matter, it is only the opinion of the writer, these are not completey true facts. We know the truth behind all of this, it's a fricken political agenda. It's the never ending war, and US, behind Britain, continue to fuel it. Somebody just needs to do what the US did to Japan, either to Palestine or Israel. Eliminate one of the parties for good and all the problems are gone, no matter what the world has to say, who gave a $h!t about Japan at the time?



Great PR! Calm the public, and nobody will care. We can continue. Drop Bombs. LOL

Congratulation mate you just make the problem extremely worst with such solution. Happy atoming! err one more thing... why don't you test your plan on your country first. Let's see who give a $*it about that.

if you all continue to bash users who are only attempting to express their opinions this thread will be closed and those users bashing will be permanently banned.

Keep it civil, keep it intelligent.

-ethicks