I very much see this as a ploy to provoke Israel and to enrage the ubber liberals. Israel had said that it was fine with the ships going there as long as Israeli military officials would be able to check whats on board the ships. With everything that has happened to Israel, its a legitimate request. Why is it so inplausible to believe that that there could have been weapons on those ships. Anyway, the ships just kept on going. I don't see how else Israel could have responded. Of course, no matter what action Israel takes, the public is always outrage. And I think that was the whole point of this "Aid Mission."
Under attack by a shipment of building supplies? ooooh scary.
Seriously though, I see your point, but the law is the law. His point was that you seem to pump up the rule of law when you find it convenient and discard it when you don't just as you accuse liberals/democrats of doing when they proposed raising the liability limits for BP after their happy-fun spill.
How about, "Waiting until the ships are out of international waters and have entered the area controlled by Israel to start making demands"?
Yes, you're completely right. The public would be so outraged if Israel wanted to inspect ships that were in Israeli waters.Of course, no matter what action Israel takes, the public is always outrage.
Bull . If you want to go there, that ship already declared war on Israel. There is no doubt they were on their way to supply port at a land in conflict with Israel. Right or wrong by written law, Israel has every natural right to protect themselves with natural laws rather than man made laws.
Natural Rights theories
The existence of natural rights has been asserted by different individuals on different premises, such as a priori philosophical reasoning or religious principles. For example, Immanuel Kant claimed to derive natural rights through "reason" alone. The Declaration of Independence, meanwhile, is based upon the "self-evident" truth that "all men are ... endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights".
Likewise, different philosophers and statesmen have designed different lists of what they believe to be natural rights; almost all include the right to life and liberty as the two highest priorities. H. L. A. Hart argued that if there are any rights at all, there must be the right to liberty, for all the others would depend upon this. T. H. Green argued that “if there are such things as rights at all, then, there must be a right to life and liberty, or, to put it more properly to free life.” John Locke emphasized "life, liberty and property" as primary. However, despite Locke's influential defense of the right of revolution, Thomas Jefferson subs uted "pursuit of happiness" in place of "property" in the United States Declaration of Independence.Any first world nation recognizes natural laws and rights. Most intelligent people would agree that man's law is in question when it interferes with these.Natural Law or the law of nature (Latin: lex naturalis) has been described as a law whose content is set by nature and that therefore has validity everywhere. As classically used, natural law refers to the use of reason to analyze human nature and deduce binding rules of moral behavior. The phrase natural law is opposed to the positive law (which is man-made) of a given political community, society, or nation-state, and thus can function as a standard by which to criticize that law.
Israel doesn't know if it's just food and building supplies until they inspect. They cave confiscated several tons of weapons bound to Hamas terrorists inspecting past shipments.Under attack by a shipment of building supplies? ooooh scary.
There are often reasonable exceptions.
If the law makes it such that you will die without breaking the law, will you break the law, or not?
believe as you will. That isn't the case. This is a special case because natural rights of preservation are in play.
It was absolutely a provocation. I have no doubt about it.
That said, Israel demanded the ships to go to a nearby port for inspection, a demand that has no basis at all in international law. They never requested to inspect them at sea, which IS lawful under the UN Laws of the Sea.
The difference here is in the lasting image. Israel could have been seen as simply enforcing international laws from a bunch of protestors that broke it. Instead, they broke the law first and now they're going to have to deal with a lot more international pressure to sustain that blockade.
Since you are so stuck on the law issue, what do you think of Hamas attacking Israel, therefore the reason of the blockade. Because of this, Israel has every right through natural law and natural rights to do as they think best to protect themselves. I see two laws in conflict. I will go with the one that allows a nation to protect itself.
Do you even know what a declaration of war is?
What does Hamas has to do with it?
Do you have any evidence that the people on the ships were not civilians?
You know, not liking Israel or chanting Jihad doesn't automatically make you a) a terrorist or b) a member of Hamas or any other terrorist organization.
Israel attacked the ships, when they had a recourse not to. What's so hard to understand?
My God, you are being a stupid . It's obvious you haven't absorbed the points I make. One by one, I would say you are right. However, the sum of the reasons make any shipment a highly possible threat that must be dealt with.
Considering I don't believe you to be that stupid, I will now believe you are a Jew hater. I bet you deny the holocaust also.
What? Did I hit a nerve?
BTW,
On Wednesday, Israel moved to deport those activists by bus and airplane, opting to release them all, including those it suspected of having taken part in attacks on soldiers who boarded the floating convoy.
Ya know... all those terrrerists chanting Jihad! were so dangerous that even Israel is letting them walk away...
No . I read that. It's because of public pressure, not because they have no reason to.Ya know... all those terrrerists chanting Jihad! were so dangerous that even Israel is letting them walk away...
Hit a nerve. Only the one that hates ignorance and racism.
Which is it. Are you a Jew hater, or believe man made laws supersede natural laws?
What would you do...
If you knew that someone was out to track you down and kill you with a gun, but guns were illegal, and someone you knew offered you a gun to equal the odds... would you take and use that gun to protect your life?
Hit a nerve, indeed. You are stuck on stupid. Israel has been at warWhat? Did I hit a nerve?
BTW,
On Wednesday, Israel moved to deport those activists by bus and airplane, opting to release them all, including those it suspected of having taken part in attacks on soldiers who boarded the floating convoy.
Ya know... all those terrrerists chanting Jihad! were so dangerous that even Israel is letting them walk away...
since their inception in 1948. Of course you may be a product of our
schools and not know history.
They have every right to protect themselves. And these damn
"love" boats are nothing more than what they are people who want to
invoke a conflict. Civilians, what
in the has that got to do with having clubs, knives and whatever
on board. Like those aren't weapons.
Our left wing, communist, President sits around and demands Israel give
him a full accounting.
I would give him a full accounting. A boot up the rearend.
lol, the jew-hater card.
Holy , it is getting even more annoying than the because I'm black excuse.
Its quite sad tbh. I guess 80% of the world hates jews right now and are just ed in the head.
you're calling him stupid? What part of international law are you too stupid to interpret?Hit a nerve, indeed. You are stuck on stupid. Israel has been at war
since their inception in 1948. Of course you may be a product of our
schools and not know history.
They have every right to protect themselves. And these damn
"love" boats are nothing more than what they are people who want to
invoke a conflict. Civilians, what
in the has that got to do with having clubs, knives and whatever
on board. Like those aren't weapons.
Our left wing, communist, President sits around and demands Israel give
him a full accounting.
I would give him a full accounting. A boot up the rearend.
Pull israel's left testicle out of your asshole and talk with common sense and less of a bias, unless you are an Israeli.
If that is the case, its clear whose interests you have at hand.
Bravo!
I'm concerned about my own life and have a right to protect myself. The only thing giving way to you in this case would be THE LAW.
There are certain gray areas, they are there because it is presumed that over 90% of the people aren't stupid enough to bring up stupid arguments like yourself.
If you don't like it, than shut the up.
I agree that Israel has the right to defend itself, but they are either too stupid to realize that you can't invade in international waters, or that they feel that they can get away with the jew hater excuse just like everyother time, and be let loose.
Man up WC, you're better than this.
Has Xray or myself tried make this a legal issue? My only point to the constant illegal cry was that it is proper under natural law and rights.
Why can't the two of you acknowledge natural rights and laws?
That doesn't give it any rights to attack civilian ships in international waters. Talk about being stuck on stupid.
Is that the evidence you have that they were not civilians?
Considering that you probably have both a knife and a club on your premises and by inciting violence against the executive of this country you have effectively declared war against the United States, so you're no longer to be considered a civilian, but instead a terrorist.Our left wing, communist, President sits around and demands Israel give him a full accounting.
I would give him a full accounting. A boot up the rearend.
This is the re ed logic I'm dealing with here.
Israel has a right to protect itself. It does not however have the right to act under utter stupidity.. They don't have a hold over their use of force, it keeps happening over and over.
WC, you're absolutely right when it comes to that, but this isn't "Just" an act of protecting itself. Its an act of bullying and flexing its muscles.
Ever since Natayu has come into office there has been this constant excessive use of force.
Rabbin was probably the best, its sad that he was killed by one of his own people for helping with the peace process, and sharon to an extent.
Full WC meltdown in progress.
What part of suicide do you not understand. International waters. You are
eat up with dumbass.
Bias, you bet your no brain, brain, I am bias. Israel is the country that is
going to save your dumbass from Iran. And Obama's stupidity from himself.
If you think I am taking sides with a bunch of radical Muslims you got
rocks in your head. I'll take my chances with Israel. You go do a little
living under the Muslims Shari’a law and see how you like it. Or better
still have someone tell you, you are doomed and we will annialiate you.
Nice, huh?
They boarded the ship. They defended themselves. Did their boarding warrant getting two of their own shot, and other beaten by metal pipes?
If getting fed up with lib s is a meltdown, then OK.
What does have to with radical islamists? It was a humanitarian vessel, and sorry I don't understand the beginning paragraph, probably because English may not be your first language and you're posting from a diff country.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
