I’ve always thought it to be akin to two kids in the backseat of a car fighting. One kid tries to advance on the other kid’s “territory” and they other kid fights back by advancing on the first kid’s “territory”. And they keep antagonizing each other. “Mommy! He kicked me!” “Well, he started it by breathing on me!” “Well, that’s because you went over the line to my side!”
And there’s no parent there to threaten to turn the car around.
I personally think it began when Moses took his people out of Egypt and put them in Canaan.
Again with this Orwellian framing that activists “started the assault” by attempting to maintain control of their boat, and Israeli soldiers hijacking a ship in international waters were “defending themselves.”
I wish Israel’s apologists in this instance would have the intellectual honestly to actually admit what are defending - if you truly think bringing humanitarian aid into Gaza in defiance of a blockade is a crime deserving of a death sentence, why is it so hard to say it?
They went on board with pantball guns and pistols, not assault rifles. They were battered with chairs and clubs and stabbed. One soldier was thrown overboard (lol). In my opinion, action had to be taken against those “aid workers”.
The Israeli commandos were equipped with riot control gear, such as “paintball guns” (actually firing pepper spray in the projectiles rather than paint), so they clearly expected resistance. They were also equipped with live fire weapons as evidenced by the 10-15 dead civilians.
Again, why aren’t the apologists intellectually honest about what they are apologizing for? It makes me think they aren’t sincere.
Yeah, I understand that. My point is that painball markers can’t be loaded with live ammo. It shows that they tried to use non-lethal force, but were eventually forced to open fire with their side arms. if they raided the ships waving assault rifles in their faces, it would be a different story.
Again, with the propaganda framing - Soldiers were “forced to open fire” on civilians when all they wanted to do is peacefully hijack foreign boats in international water. In the propaganda framing, delivering humanitarian aid is an act of aggression which justifies the use of lethal force, and the hijacking itself is an act of self defense.
Why is it so hard to admit that what you’re defending is Israel’s right to kill as many civilians as they deem necessary to maintain the status quo in the Middle East?
Are we arguing morality or legality here?
I think it was fairly clear that it was illegal, but frankly, I couldn’t give a fuck. sure, it was a stupid move to do it in international waters, but it makes no effective difference. The Israeli’s merely enforced their blockade, they tried to negotiate, they warned them multiple times, they even offered to allow the goods to be brought into Gaza on trucks after being checked by them, but no. They said no, then attacked them with sticks when they arrived. And there was some shifty Turkish organisation behind the scheme.
So you don’t have a right to defend yourself if your boat is getting boarded?
EDIT: they had pepperspray ffs. They could’ve used that, or any other non lethal weapon. If you see riots in the western world, you don’t see them shooting autmaticly with guns, now do you? No, because they first try to enforce nonlethal actions.
We’re arguing over the causality of the violence. The only way it’s possible to argue that the humanitarian convoy initiated the violence is by defining the attempting to deliver humanitarian aid in defiance of an aid embargo as a violent act deserving of any force necessary to stop it, which is the Orwellian framework I keep referring back to.
They, did, but it didn’t work. Also, the “civilians” stole guns from the soldiers, and were firing at them.
If you read my post, you would realise that I understand this;
They were not attempting to deliver humanitarian aid, they were trying to stir up shit, and they fucking succeeded.
EDIT: Bringing up Orwell out of context does not make you sound clever. It makes you sound like you’re saying “Oh, yeah, well I’ve read good books so I’m great”.
Going to bed now. Eagerly awaiting the incoming rage tomorrow.
Founded in 2004, Leakfree.org became one of the first online communities dedicated to Valve’s Source engine development. It is more famously known for the formation of Black Mesa: Source under the 'Leakfree Modification Team' handle in September 2004.
