Will this increase or decrease the likelihood of terrorist actions in America, Europe and the rest of the world?

If you were a member of a family murdered in this conflict, would you be seeking revenge?

Should Tzipi Livni and Ehud Olmert, be tried for war crimes if or when this conflict comes to an end?

What will the price of oil be in 4 weeks time?

Haystack - those links tell the worrying and undisputed tale of the economic hardship that is the lot of Gaza whilst the rockets continue and the blockade is in force. But they also clearly demonstrate that food is not in short supply in Gaza.

Extracts from your link above:

"Most families in Gaza are afflicted by unemployment and poverty. Food is available in shops and markets, but many families cannot afford a nutritious diet. Bakeries frequently have to shut down for lack of fuel." - ie plenty of food available, distribution and welfare by Gaza government (ie Hamas) needs to be improved.

Safety is also a matter of great concern for farmers who own land near the fence separating Gaza from Israel. Some farmers can work freely within 350 metres of the fence, while others risk being shot at if they come within 1,200 metres. In some areas, such as east of the town of Jabalia, they cannot reach their farms at all. As farmers are still not allowed to export their produce through Israel, their harvest is sold locally, which provides little income. As long as the crossing points into Israel remain closed, agriculture is likely to decline further. - ie Gaza has a net exportable surplus of food, but blockade prevents exports and so the food must be consumed locally (!!).

The families are in poverty and unemployed due to Israel destroying much of the infrastructure and the fact that many Gaza residents used to work across the border which is now closed. That in turn means that they cannot afford to buy food as is stated.

"but many families cannot afford a nutritious diet."

The unemployment, poor diet, lack of medical care and poverty have all increased since the blockade.

that is all down to hamas who benefit by keeping people in poverty

Fred1new,
You do not have to appologies, and would like to thank you for your advise, point taken. :)

Haystack - many families cannot afford a nutritious diet.

This is purely an economic issue. There are many people in every country all over the world who cannot afford a nutritious diet. It is for the local administration to manage food distribution/redistribution and economic welfare payments. Or to choose differently between conflict development and economic development.

I agree that the blockade contributes to contribute to Gaza's economic failure - the West Bank is successfully developing its economy with Israel's help, but then the West Bank doesn't fire missiles into Israel and is run by politicians who discharge their civic duties, rather than what we see in Gaza: an organisation that hates its neighbours more than it loves its citizens.

Cynic,

If "the leaders of hamas and hezbollah are neck and neck for the next nobel peace prize", what prize so think suitable for the Israeli's present administrators, or even yourself.

Hamas is never going to stop hating Israel. They don't recognised the legitimacy of Israel and never will. On that basis the blockade will exist forever, but of course it won't. therefore Israel might as well stop the blockade sooner then later.

There is one point that is worth raising concerning the stopping of the flotilla that I have not seen mentioned. The purpose of stopping ships attempting to run a blockade or that are suspected of carrying guns or prohibited items is to stop and search these vessels. Having found that they do not contain anything untoward they could then be allowed to dock in Gaza. Israel might insist that one of the ships in particular was resistant to that idea and want to escort that ship to an Israeli port.

The remaining ships did not resist and could easily have been search and allowed to go on their way, especially as some of them were fairly small.

Why were they detained and taken to an Israeli port?

Cos it's a blockade, block'ead!

fred u arsehole .... try reading the whole and not just selective bits! .... and you wonder why this thread is so blinkered and partisan????????????????

The blockade is illegal by most measures. Stopping ships with suspicions of ... may not be illegal. Stopping the ship and then taking them to a place they don't want to go to is almost certainly illegal. But then again Israel don't usually expect laws to apply to them otherwise they would not commit war crimes.

blockade + moving ships to an "unwanted" location = war crimes??????????
now there's a curious bit of logic; most 12 year-olds are capable of better thought process than that

most of you lot are too risible for words and you aren't even directly involved ..... what chance of the lunatics sorting their pathetic differences!???? ..... and i say pathetic intentionally, for people who allowed common sense to rule instead of greed, dogma and blind prejudice and hatred could sort things relatively easily

cynic
No the war crimes refer to the Israeli soldiers behaviour during incursions into Gaza. You seem to be jumping to unwarranted conclusions.

yeah yeah .... are you a paid-up member of the lunatics?

They will be best of friends in the fullness of time
Just like the europeans

lol

Haystack - 04 Jun 2010 20:17 - 2578 of 2584
Hamas is never going to stop hating Israel.

Yaaaaaaaaaawn

cynic

These war crimes!

From the Independent last September

UN says Israel should face war-crimes trial over Gaza

Israel targeted "the people of Gaza as a whole" in the three-week military operation which is estimated to have killed more than 1,300 Palestinians at the beginning of this year, according to a UN-commissioned report published yesterday.

A UN fact-finding mission led by the Jewish South African former Supreme Court Judge Richard Goldstone said Israel should face prosecution by the International Criminal Court, unless it opened fully independent investigations of what the report said were repeated violations of international law, "possible war crimes and crimes against humanity" during the operation.

Using by far the strongest language of any of the numerous reports criticising Operation Cast Lead, the UN mission, which interviewed victims, witnesses and others in Gaza and Geneva this summer, says that while Israel had portrayed the war as self-defence in response to Hamas rocket attacks, it "considers the plan to have been directed, at least in part, at a different target: the people of Gaza as a whole".

"In this respect the operations were in furtherance of an overall policy aimed at punishing the Gaza population for its resilience and for its apparent support for Hamas, and possibly with the intent of forcing a change in such support," the report said. It added that some Israelis should carry "individual criminal responsibility."

The UN report found that the statements of military and political leaders in Israel before and during the operation indicated the use of "disproportionate force", aimed not only at the enemy but also at the "supporting infrastructure". The mission adds: "In practice this appears to have meant the civilian population."

The report also says that vandalism of houses by some soldiers and "the graffiti on the walls, the obscenities and often racist slogans constituted an overall image of humiliation and dehumanisation of the Palestinian population". Hospitals and ambulances were "targeted by Israeli attacks."

* The first bombing attack on Day One of the operation when children were going home from school "appears to have been calculated to cause the greatest disruption and widespread panic".

* The deaths of 22 members of the Samouni family sheltering in a warehouse were among ones "owing to Israeli fire intentionally directed at them", in clear breach of the Geneva Convention.

* The firing of white phosphorus shells at the UN Relief and Works Agency compound was "compounded by reckless regard of the consequences", and the use of high explosive artillery at the al-Quds hospitals were violations of Articles 18 and 19 of the Geneva Convention. It says that warnings issued by Israel to the civilian population "cannot be considered as sufficiently effective" under the Convention.

* On the attack in the vicinity of the al-Fakhoura school, where at least 35 Palestinians were killed, Israeli forces launched an attack where a "reasonable commander" would have considered military advantage was outweighed by the risk to civilian life. The civilians had their right to life violated as under Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). And while some of the 99 policemen killed in incidents surveyed by the team may have been members of armed groups, others who were not also had their right to life violated.

* The inquiry team also says that a number of Palestinians were used as human shields - itself a violation of the ICCPR - including Majdi Abed Rabbo, whose complaints about being so used were first aired in The Independent. The report asserts that the use of human shields constitutes a "war crime under the Rome statute of the International Criminal Court."

the Prime Minister of Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, ratcheted up the pressure on Friday, saying he did not view Hamas, which runs Gaza, as a terrorist organisation.

In a televised speech Mr Erdogan described Hamas as "resistance fighters who are struggling to defend their land".

Turkey has warned it might reduce economic and defence ties with Israel following Monday's raid, which took place in international waters.

Deputy Prime Minister Bulent Arinc said Ankara was "assessing deals with Israel", until now a close ally.

Any idea how difficult it is to search a ship at sea haystack?

Stupid question really, of course not

So Turkey doesn't view Hamas as a terrorist organisation. Where does Turkey's treatment of the Kurds fit in all this? Another reason why Turkey, sadly, doesn't yet belong in the EU.

ptholden

In a statement, the White House reiterated its belief that the blockade of Gaza was "unsustainable".

Some of the ships involved were quite small and easy to search. Other countries have managed to stop and search.

In May 1948, during a military intervention, launched and maintained in defiance of Security Council resolutions for a cease-fire, Egypt established a general blockade against Israel and began to visit and search ships of all nations passing through the Suez Canal. The Egyptian Government established a long list of items including ships, important categories of goods, and particularly petroleum, as subject to seizure as "contraband" if found destined for Israel. Vessels transporting or suspected of transporting such goods were detained for visit and search.

The basic legislation under which the Egyptian authorities obstruct free navigation in the Suez Canal is to be found in the decree of 6 February 1950, the Arabic text of which was published in the Egyptian Official Journal (No. 36) dated 8 April 1950. Article I reads:

"The searching of ships for purposes of seizing war contraband shall take place in accordance with provisions hereunder."

Article III provides:

"Force may at all times be used against any ship attempting to avoid the search. Where necessary by firing so as to force it to stop and submit to the search. Where the search subsequently reveals that the ship is not carrying any contraband, it shall be permitted to continue its voyage. "

OR

The US Secretary of Defence, Mr Robert McNamara, said in Washington last night that armed boarding parties would be ready to search about 25 Russian cargo ships moving towards Cuba when the US partial blockade of Cuba comes into effect at 3pm (BST) today. The proclamation giving effect to the blockade was signed by President Kennedy last night.