Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SARMAN who wrote (275097)	6/1/2010 7:50:16 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

would you invade Israel if NATO decides to? After all Turkey is a NATO member and its ships were attacked. It was not an unprovoked attack. They were clearly heading for Israeli/Gazan waters and had publicly stated their intent to violate the blockade. They should have just let the Israelis board, captured it all on film, and then played up their outrage in the public media. But no... they had to violently provoke and seek to harm the Israeli commandos. Here's a better example. If I know some ships are attempting to bring drugs into my country, I have the right to intercept that ship IN INTERNATIONAL WATERS. We do it ALL THE TIME!! Thus, clearly there is a precedent for boarding private ships in international waters. informationdissemination.net What you're confusing is the right to board a ship owned by the GOVERNMENT of a foreign power. That's where you're talking about a hostile action against the sovereign state. Now.. if Turkish ships were providing convoy protection for that "humanitarian" flotilla, then we'd be talking about a whole other action. Turkey would then be legally construed by the Israelis as providing aid and comfort to their enemies, therefore taking sides. Thus, Turkey would be taking sides with one of the belligerents and opening up their ships to military confrontation, and/or boarding/capture. Hawk