When a person(s) enters onto sovereign property without the consent of the owner, that constitutes force. If you, when driving in your car, watch some teenager open your passenger door, GET IN, and brandish a firearm, you have a right to defend yourself and property. The point, which you missed, is the preceding ships refusal to exercise their right to self-defense in the face of a hostile boarding party did not diminish the last ships right to exercise self-defense in the face of the same hostile, boarding party. If the ship had been in Israeli territorial waters, then there's no argument. But since it's international waters, Israel has no jurisdiction, which constitutes an illegal act, which is why it's considered hostile, besides the obvious.
When a person(s) enters onto sovereign property without the consent of the owner, that constitutes force. If you, when driving in your car, watch some teenager open your passenger door, GET IN, and brandish a firearm, you have a right to defend yourself and property. The point, which you missed, is the preceding ships refusal to exercise their right to self-defense in the face of a hostile boarding party did not diminish the last ships right to exercise self-defense in the face of the same hostile, boarding party.
Boarding a sovereign ship in international waters, without the permission of that ship, is a hostile act. If, when driving your car, at a stop light, a black man decides to open your car door, GETS IN the passenger seat, and brandishes a firearm, that constitutes force. Even though you weren't physically touched. Is that rational enough for you, Haroki? There was nothing stupid about it. You insinuated since the other 6 ships never exercised their right to self-defense, the 7th ship had no right to self-defense. That's totally illogical and dumb. Rational observes the rule of law with the expectation of repercussion if it acts outside it. If I walk up to a man on the street, take out my firearm, and point it at his face, should I also expect him to just "take it"? People retain a right to defend themselves from unauthorized force, be it military, state-sponsored, or otherwise. Israel fucked up in this case by intercepting the ship in international waters.
There was no legitimate threat. Nor were weapons found. That's the first problem. Second, even a sovereign vessel boarded by the US military in international waters has a right to defend itself from the US military. Yes, that probably means everyone dies and the ship gets sunk. But they still retain that lawful right to self defense. That's maritime law. Two wrongs don't make a right, here. The US (or Israel) could sink a ship repelling their unlawful boarding party, but that would still be an illegal act (sinking the ship) preceded by another illegal act (boarding the ship without permission). Of course, who holds Israel or America to account? Nobody. So they win. But it's still illegal and totally hypocritical when Israel holds up the victims as the aggressors, when it was the Israelis who basically hijacked the ship first and passengers, acted in self-defense, after.
No dumbass, that would be the Oslo accords. Also international maritime law. Both support Israel's action, and that does count. Sorry. LOL!!!!
I'm curious. Suppose Israel decided to kill every palestinian tomorrow? They wake up and say "screw this, let's mow them down and get this over with." There's no question they could if they wanted to. They have the ability. What would be next? A strongly worded memo from the UN? Maybe two? Sanctions? Of course, the MSM would be screaming from the rooftops and colleges would have plenty of demonstrations, but then what? We already know that the moose limbs would do it if the sandal were on the other foot. Most clear headed folks already know this, anyway. Perhaps it's just a matter of time until this: <p><a href="http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/"> <img border="0" alt="Thousands of Deadly Islamic Terror Attacks Since 9/11" src="http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/TROP.jpg"> </a></p> gets stopped.
Good point. The Israelis would defend themselves and claim the sovereign right to do so. Again, Phenomena is being a total hypocrite on the issue.
Israel did have the right, according to international maritime law and the Oslo accords. The ships were also warned multiple times to redirect to an alternative port.