It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Two Iranian ships to sail to Gaza

page: 9
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in


posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 05:31 AM
reply to post by dragnet53

Regardless, the point that this member is trying to make is the correct one I think. Why is it that when Israel does anything at all, that everyone jumps up in opposition to them, and yet when the Palestinians go and blow themselves up, there's not one murmur about it?

To me, and many others I'm seeing, there seems to be a huge disparity in the actions of both sides. Quite frankly, I have "no dog in the fight" so to speak, but I have watched this conflict go on and on for as long as I've been alive, and it's gotten so clouded with rhetoric and political squabbling that it's practically impossible to establish who is at fault for what anymore.

The only solution, from my perspective, is to have both sides take time to sit down with the rest of the world, set their requests on the table, and compromise their way to a solution. Once that compromise is resolved, the international community should set up an organization, whose job it would be to supervise both sides to insure that they are both following the laws that were set forward at the peace talks. If this could happen, and be allowed for an extended period of time, then maybe a lasting peace between the two groups of people could be realized.

As it stands now though, it appears to me that both just want to kill each other, and they revel in that thought so much that they will go to any lengths to make sure that that system is perpetuated. Until the hatred can stop long enough for rationality to settle in, the killing and conflict will continue I believe.

Peace can be had between them both, but it will require an honest effort from both sides.


posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 05:40 AM

Originally posted by TheBorg
To me, and many others I'm seeing, there seems to be a huge disparity in the actions of both sides. Quite frankly, I have "no dog in the fight" so to speak, but I have watched this conflict go on and on for as long as I've been alive, and it's gotten so clouded with rhetoric and political squabbling that it's practically impossible to establish who is at fault for what anymore.

I agree. And just because these guys have also spent a lifetime growing up with their own versions of the same propaganda we've all grown up with doesn't mean they're actually any less extreme as the other side. It's all rhetoric and we've all gotten a very large dose of it over our lifetimes. The ones that buy into it are at fault.

Neither side is right. Neither side is more special than the other. It is a lot like watching dogs fight. And we should turn the hose on them.

Deny ignorance.

posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 06:04 AM
reply to post by belial259

But until the hatred goes away, no sure solutions will present themselves. It's that simple really. With people calling "Death to Israel" and "Death to Palestine", there stands no hope of peace. The destruction of either state is NOT the answer! Diplomacy can work, if both sides want it to.

However, if both just want to fight, then they should just get it over with. Cordon off the area, allow NO interference from anyone outside, and then let them duke it out. "To the victor go the spoils", as they say.

This whole situation of outside resources being funneled into Gaza from other countries is merely testament to the level of support that Palestine has in the area.

It would do Iran well to remember that Israel has won against everyone attacking them at once, and in six days no less! No other nation has ever pulled that feat off. Their threats to send ships over to escort aid vessels through to Gaza is nothing more than a veiled declaration of war, in my humble opinion. I think they just want to expedite a war, so that they can try out their new weapons.

A few more questions, if I may... Why is it that these aid vessels don't stop in the Israeli ports to be screened by them? Do they think that the aid won't get to the Palestinians? I mean, it's not like Israel hasn't offered or anything.


posted on Jun, 9 2010 @ 06:53 AM
reply to post by TheBorg

Not to come out fighting for either side, but I find the recent events remarkably simlar to those that surrounded the creation of Israel, married in with similar levels of outside interference and international condemnation

the events surround the SS Exodus being a prime case in piont.
(I know it is a wiki link, but there are many links to articles on the subject for those that wish to investigate further)

The landscape at the time was marred with similar low levels of freedom fighting/terrorism (depending on which side you sit) and the same levels of low level tech weaponry being used against a more powerful/profesional army.

The same arguments applies then as now, regarding allowing unfetted access to certain parts of the land, Palestine then, Israel now..

My personal opinion is that these ships are being used in a similar political move that marries into those historic events.. aid being a side issue to the creation of a nation state, from which will follow the unfettered access to that nation state.

At no point do these ships have to need to contain weapons, or munitions as that is not the aim, the aim is to break the blockade which in turn will break the Isreali control over the region.

Again, depending on which side you take is how you perceive the events unfolding.. But, in my eyes the events unfolding at the moment bare a remarkable similarity to said events that led up to the creation of Israel.

What I find remarkable is those arguing this topic are in fact arguing both sides.

To argue against the capture and boarding of these ships argues against the capture and boarding of the SS Exodus, and in turn the unfettered Jewish migration to the area

Where as arguing for the capture and boarding of these ships also agrues for the capture and boarding of the SS Exodus and the restricted Jewish migration to the area.

So the question that burns through my mind given that similarity is why Israel has embarked on a course of action similar to those the British took against the Jewish migrants, as it does not make sense to me, since they must be aware of the outcome.

I'm going to continue watching events unfold and see if I can find my answer..

posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 01:30 PM

Originally posted by lifttheveil
reply to post by Atomic Honey

That statement has been taken completely out of context IMO, the headline is incorrect and the whole article simply tries to fit in with the headline.

What he actually said was "The conditions we are experiencing today need planning for new orders in the world and cooperation and co-thinking for organizing the conditions,"

He did not say "We need New World Order"

[edit on 8-6-2010 by lifttheveil]

Beg to differ there. You see that is a later article than the one I originally posted on ATS that sank like a stone never to be seen again.

If you go to that topic and look at the source I gave you will see that he did just exactly state that Iran and Algeria would form a new world order.

Ahmadinejad further pointed out that the two countries enjoy the needed cultural capacities and background for defining a new world order and management.

Now I believe he said a New World, but as far as I am concerned that is the same thing.

I tell you that is not one I would want!!!

[edit on 10/6/2010 by PuterMan]

posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 01:48 PM
reply to post by Ezzedeen

You make an extremely interesting point, and yes there are quite a large number of Jews in Iran. With that I concur.

It will indeed be interesting to see if you are right.

To those saying what has Iran ever done? Please define what you mean exactly. As far as the Iranian people are concerned they are actually quite westernised and modern and of course Iran gave us chess for one thing. As has been said by several on this thread the problem with most of these countries is their governments, which includes UK and USA. Of course who ever you vote for the government gets in.

Taking these ships to Gaza, if it happens, actually does not involve Israel since the ships have no need to go into Gazan or Israeli waters.

The problems will begin when the goods enter Gaza.

posted on Jun, 12 2010 @ 12:10 PM
Does anyone know if they have arrived yet? I thought they were expected to reach their destination about now. Can't find anything about it on CNN.

posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 02:55 AM
Looks like this thread has died but posting an update I just found in case anyone is still interested!

posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 06:38 AM
reply to post by missvicky

Thanks for the update. I know there are some of us who are still following this thread.

Part of me is thinking there might be a chance that Iran isn't even going to send the ships at this point, though I understand the article says part of the shipment should be leaving Friday.

Given the timing of all this (coinciding with the Turkish flotilla incident, well, just after), I think Iran is trying to stir the pot. More importantly, the aid that they're sending will be going through Egypt, and I firmly believe Iran set this up as a test to see where Egypt is going to stand concerning Israel. So far, Egypt has been supportive, even of the blockade which they also enforce.

If Iran does indeed send the aid, I believe it will pass through without incident, which is good news for all.

However, the big picture is that the ME nations are organizing and measuring support for both sides. Given events of the last few days, I'd say Iran now has a good feel as to who's with them and who's against them. Iran will not be getting help from Egypt and Saudi Arabia for sure; so it looks as if Iran's going to form a strategy based primarily on Syria and Turkey. I can't remember where Jordan fits into this, but I know they are a "swing" nation as well.

I hate to say it, but I think we're going to see some sort of attack before summer's over. The main question to me is who's going to strike first: Israel or Iran? Iran would of course prefer that Israel strikes first because of the worldwide backlash, but if they are threatened enough they may feel as though they have no choice but to strike first. It's gonna be a hot summer, folks.

posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 06:50 AM
reply to post by Atomic Honey

Something else I forgot to mention is the fact that I'm hearing Israel is trying to broker a deal with Russia. If this is true, this is very smart on the part of Israel and could make the chess match more interesting. If Israel can broker a deal that's going to be more lucrative for Russia than what they have with Iran, Russia is likely to offer a measure of support--at the very least, non-condemnation of Israel for certain actions they may take in the not-too-distant future.

Russia will stay essentially neutral if anything erupts, because they'd like nothing better than to profit from both sides (and I can't blame them for that, really). Notice also that Russia fell short of an actual condemnation of Israel regarding the Turkish flotilla incident.

posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 12:17 PM
I've also noticed more pressure coming from Europe. I wonder if it's revenge for the US selling them all those phony hedgefund investments and knocking their economy.

new topics

top topics

<< 6  7  8   >>

log in