Zionist piracy

[Billy T]

A bit of a break. Roger Waters for Palestine: We shall overcome. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnMMHepfYVc Really nice

I don't think that is a "break." It is right on target in that only by control of information flow is Israel able to do what it does with so little global outrage.

For example: Exterminate the Bedouin culture and confine those still living in Negev Desert concentration camp cities with Israeli guards surrounding them. The few who do slip out and try to resume their independent life style soon find that an Israeli crop duster plane has sprayed herbicide on their crops, so hungry they return to the concentration camp to get the food and water Israel gives out there. WESTERN PRESS DOES NOT COVER THESE FACTS, with the rare exception of one BBC documentary a few years ago - How I learned of them.

Your link is the first I had ever heard of the "freedom march" of 1500 people from 42 different countries, and I live in Sao Paulo Brazil where we have two very good newspapers (If you don't mind that some of their news is a day late. - They steal from other sources all over the world but do have a few dozen globally stationed reporters who do occasionally even scoop the NYT etc..) I have noticed that they have more balanced coverage of the conflict between Israel and Hamas than US papers do, but this freedom march was either not covered or I missed reading it.

It is hard to deny as you can see the participants, in large numbers in your link.

 

[Black Jack]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvS9PXZ3RWM

http://www.flickr.com/photos/israel-mfa/sets/72157624179998488/

But the point is moot I suppose... the very act of posting pictures that prove that the Israeli's acted accordingly, or that their blockade is justified is pointless as the people who I'm arguing with will ignore the obvious, and simply say:

"Hurr they're fake"
"Hurr the Israeli's planted it"
"Hurr the people in a way kind of acted in self defense even though the soldiers didn't fire first and every other ship going through the blockade has made it to port just fine"
or my favorite
"Hurr, Durrr, Derp Derpity Derp Derp, It's a Zionist Conspiracy, the media lies"

That, and the fact that this thread grows faster than a weed which I'm too lazy to catch up on all that I've missed... I'm gonna say this is my final word on the topic: The Rachael Corrie didn't have any problems because there weren't any idiots on that ship.

 

[Billy T]

... So what does Israel want more? To sustain the blockade of Gaza or war with Iran? ...

I am inclined to think Israel may want both, a quick war before Iran has nuclear weapons. The US has given (or sold?) some Patriot anti-IBM missile system to Israel (back when Saddam was in power) as I recall and probably believes that even if a couple of HE missiles hit Tele Vive, that loss would be acceptable given the gain of destroying Iran's nuclear program etc..

I think that Pakistan will "think twice" before using its weapons, which it thinks are needed to counter balance India's. I think also that they may not have rockets with the range? If not they would need to take their nuclear bombs and shorter range missiles (designed to hit India) into Iran where they might just be ceased. But one can not be sure how the Pakistan army, which has practical control of these nuclear resources, will react if Israel is bombing a fellow Muslim state with sub launched nuclear bombs. (They may fear a pre-emptive strike on Pakistan from these same subs. - a "use em or lose em" instability)

 

[S.A.M.]

I don't think that is a "break." It is right on target in that only by control of information flow is Israel able to do what it does with so little global outrage.

For example: Exterminate the Bedouin culture and confine those still living in Negev Desert concentration camp cities with Israeli guards surrounding them. The few who do slip out and try to resume their independent life style soon find that an Israeli crop duster plane has sprayed herbicide on their crops, so hungry they return to the concentration camp to get the food and water Israel gives out there. WESTERN PRESS DOES NOT COVER THESE FACTS, with the rare exception of one BBC documentary a few years ago - How I learned of them.

Your link is the first I had ever heard of the "freedom march" of 1500 people from 42 different countries, and I live in Sao Paulo Brazil where we have two very good newspapers (If you don't mind that some of their news is a day late. - They steal from other sources all over the world but do have a few dozen globally stationed reporters who do occasionally even scoop the NYT etc..) I have noticed that they have more balanced coverage of the conflict between Israel and Hamas than US papers do, but this freedom march was either not covered or I missed reading it.

It is hard to deny as you can see the participants, in large numbers in your link.

A break for sciforums only - everyone likes Roger Waters surely.

I wasn't referring to any freedom march. The total number of people in the eight ships of the Gaza Freedom Flotilla according to the news was 1500 people from 42 countries. Almost half or 700 of them were in the Turkish ship attacked by the Israelis.

I am inclined to think Israel may want both, a quick war before Iran has nuclear weapons.

I doubt it, Iran will hit back and Israelis are real cowards when it comes to facing armed combatants. Why do you think the IDF never sends any soldiers to help their ally the United States, in their wars?

 

[hypewaders]

"A break for sciforums"
-Roger that, enjoyed it, amen Sister.

"Why do you think the IDF never sends any soldiers to help their ally the United States, in their wars?"

:runaway:

 

[GeoffP]

I doubt it, Iran will hit back and Israelis are real cowards when it comes to facing armed combatants.

Er - 1948, 1967, 1973?

:shrug:

 

[hypewaders]

Lessee: Yep, Israel killed a lot of Americans in each of those years (even some U.S. Sailors). Why were you bringing these skeletons out of the locker, Geoff? Which side are you on anyway?

 

[GeoffP]

Lessee: Yep, Israel killed a lot of Americans in each of those years (even some U.S. Sailors). Why were you bringing these skeletons out of the locker, Geoff? Which side are you on anyway?

Hype...seriously. Sam proposed crap. I said "hey, that smells like poo". You say "hey, look at the flies".

Seriously.

 

[hypewaders]

Are you going to help Israel defend her [in]sanity/[in]security from the TerrorFlotilla or not?

Or are you bobbing around alone in your life preserver? Pick a vessel! Storm coming! Swim, Geoff!

 

[quadraphonics]

I have said long ago, but just to be clear now: I want to kill the Gaza launch crew. As I stated long ago - let's tear them to shreds with exploding artillery shells.

Err... You realize that Gaza rocket launch crews already make it a routine tactic to fire from the cover of civilian housing, right? That they have highly mobile launch systems (easy when the rockets have near-zero accuracy - not much equipment to carry), which they roll into an area, fire off a few shots, and then move elsewhere. By the time your artillery arrives to demolish the unrelated civilian's home and family, the perpetrators are long gone - they're gone before the rockets even land in Israel.

Start returning routine artillery fire at rocket sites, and all you'll do is guarantee Hamas routine propaganda victories: you won't take out any susbtantial number of their rocket units (which are dirt cheap to replace anyway), but you will regularly kill considerable numbers of unrelated civilians, destroy their homes and livelihoods, etc. By making such responses routine, you would even allow Hamas to dictate how many such blunders, and where. Which would be why Israel doesn't do this - they have no shortage of artillery or knowledge of how to use it, after all.

 

[Echo3Romeo]

Good guess, but there is an identical problem when an automatic fire gun is mounted on the ship. Thus, CIWS has adjustable "lockout zones" to keep it from shooting up the bridge, etc. of its own ship. Also the best place (takes least bullets, probably 50, fired at 10% of the normal rate, would do) is when the Gaza rocket is slowing moving at the peak of its parabolic trajectory - I.e. only half way to its target.

Actually if I were setting system up I would start to fire sooner. - begin immediately after rocket is inertial (burnt all its fuel) and still climbing. Then perhaps the CIWS bullets would fly over GAZA and fall in the sea. - I don't know their max range (fired at ~45 degrees up) and that is not why I would fire earlier - I would just like to kill it ASAP even if that costs a couple of dollars more in bullets as it is faster moving target then. That would be well worth it psychologically as then the launch crew would see their "baby" explode high in the air. That, combined with the counter battery artillery falling on them in less than a minute, might discourage future launches pretty quickly.

It is true the perhaps 49 of the 50 bullets would continue on and fall in Gaza, but those jerks spray many more than that up into the air just to celebrate a wedding etc.

Do you have any idea what kind of nightmare this would create for people in the beaten zone of the cannon? It wouldn't be as bad as the full-on counterbattery fire you're advocating employing against a couple of dudes launching rockets from a rusty pipe, but it would still result in noncombatant casualties and property damage.

What you're suggesting has been tried by the US in Iraq (the C-RAM system) using rounds that self-destruct after rising and then falling back to a preset altitude. While C-RAM does work pretty well against high-angle fires (mortars and rockets) it is only useful when fired out over a rural area. Less than 100% of the rounds will fuze properly so the beaten zone remains a UXO hazard until properly cleared.

 

[S.A.M.]

Err... You realize that Gaza rocket launch crews already make it a routine tactic to fire from the cover of civilian housing, right?

Whats the evidence for this beside the deceitful Israelis?

There are plenty of photographs which show rocket launchers as close to the border as possible

The aim is to hit Israel after all.

And seriously, with 20-40 soldiers commiting suicide every year and barely 2 people dying in Israel from rockets, you'd think they would use the money for psychological counselling rather than domes. Now Palestinians on the other hand, have expired in the range of thousands by the year and could do with a better defence system.

 

[spidergoat]

It's not acceptable for people in your country to be killed by rockets, no matter what the rate of success.

 

[S.A.M.]

Sure, but it is acceptable to defend yourself against a 60 year occupation based on race. And the Geneva conventions do not permit the removal of people of one race to be substituted by people of another race by the occupying power. I am not sure that civilians who move into occupied territories and replace the natives are actually covered since their very presence is a war crime.

 

[CheskiChips]

Luckily you're all fat nerds with no authority.

 

[quadraphonics]

Whats the evidence for this beside the deceitful Israelis?

It is manifold, coming both from independent human rights groups and sources within Hamas.

Not that rejecting out-of-hand anything Israel says impresses either - if you have some evidence that their claims are false, then by all means present it. As it is, you're just reasoning from bigotry, as is your usual course when it comes to this subject.

There are plenty of photographs which show rocket launchers as close to the border as possible

So what? In the first place, that is not exclusive of launching from civilian areas - there is no uninhabited civilian area on the border with Gaza. It's civilian infrastructure right up to the edge. Gaza is crowded like that.

And in the second place, even if it were, a few photos of launchers in such an area is not evidence that the preponderance of attacks aren't being launched from elsewhere.

 

[S.A.M.]

When the probability of Zionist deception after innumerable checks = 1, its not bigotry, its common sense to assume they are lying. It also saves a lot of time wasted in believing their fictional stories

there is no uninhabited civilian area on the border with Gaza. It's civilian infrastructure right up to the edge

No its not. This is Israel we're talking about. They like to have what they call "buffer zones" and of course they always have it on the territories they occupy.

Its a very flexible buffer zone that expands inwards towards Gaza

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSM1kv9gq8E&feature=player_embedded

It is also one more reason why its counterproductive for Hamas to fire rockets from civilian centers. The buffer zone would make the rockets even more inefficient.

UN: Israeli buffer zone eats up 30 percent of Gaza's arable land

Looking to increase security, Israel dropped leaflets last week warning residents to stay at least 1,000 feet from the border or risk being shot.
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2009/0601/p06s04-wome.html

 

[spidergoat]

Sure, but it is acceptable to defend yourself against a 60 year occupation based on race. And the Geneva conventions do not permit the removal of people of one race to be substituted by people of another race by the occupying power. I am not sure that civilians who move into occupied territories and replace the natives are actually covered since their very presence is a war crime.

Can you explain how terrorism is defensive?

 

[spidergoat]

Luckily you're all fat nerds with no authority.

I know, but do you have to rub it in?

 

[S.A.M.]

Can you explain how terrorism is defensive?

Thats an easy question. Its not

http://www.sfbayview.com/2008/dispatches-from-donna-in-gaza/