Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Turkey in Clear-Cut Violation of International Law
IsraPundit ^ | 6/1/10 | Bill Levinson

Posted on 06/01/2010 3:09:07 PM PDT by Winged Hussar

Jan Poller directed us to an impartial definition of international law that relates to blockades and contraband (San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, 12 June 1994 ). Turkey is guilty of a crime under international law as shown below, while Israel fulfilled its obligations under the same standards.

    67. Merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral States may not be attacked unless they:

    (a) are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture; (b) engage in belligerent acts on behalf of the enemy; (c) act as auxiliaries to the enemy s armed forces; (d) are incorporated into or assist the enemy s intelligence system; (e) sail under convoy of enemy warships or military aircraft; or (f) otherwise make an effective contribution to the enemy s military action, e.g., by carrying military materials, and it is not feasible for the attacking forces to first place passengers and crew in a place of safety. Unless circumstances do not permit, they are to be given a warning, so that they can re-route, off-load, or take other precautions.

    68. Any attack on these vessels is subject to the basic rules in paragraphs 38-46.

Israel fulfilled its obligations under paragraphs 38-46.

(Excerpt) Read more at israpundit.com ...


TOPICS: Israel; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: flotilla; israel; turkey

1 posted on 06/01/2010 3:09:07 PM PDT by Winged Hussar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Winged Hussar

Good find...thank you!


2 posted on 06/01/2010 3:14:29 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Winged Hussar

You rock!


3 posted on 06/01/2010 3:15:45 PM PDT by DCBryan1 (FORGET the lawyers...first kill the "journalists".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Winged Hussar

Good stuff.


4 posted on 06/01/2010 3:17:10 PM PDT by Pantera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Winged Hussar

SECTION I : BASIC RULES

38. In any armed conflict the right of the parties to the conflict to choose methods or means of warfare is not unlimited.

39. Parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between civilians or other protected persons and combatants and between civilian or exempt objects and military objectives.

40. In so far as objects are concerned, military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage.

41. Attacks shall be limited strictly to military objectives. Merchant vessels and civil aircraft are civilian objects unless they are military objectives in accordance with the principles and rules set forth in this document.

42. In addition to any specific prohibitions binding upon the parties to a conflict, it is forbidden to employ methods or means of warfare which:

(a) are of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering; or
(b) are indiscriminate, in that:
(i) they are not, or cannot be, directed against a specific military objective; or
(ii) their effects cannot be limited as required by international law as reflected in this document.

43. It is prohibited to order that there shall be no survivors, to threaten an adversary therewith or to conduct hostilities on this basis.

44. Methods and means of warfare should be employed with due regard for the natural environment taking into account the relevant rules of international law. Damage to or destruction of the natural environment not justified by military necessity and carried out wantonly is prohibited.

45. Surface ships, submarines and aircraft are bound by the same principles and rules.


5 posted on 06/01/2010 3:17:38 PM PDT by DCBryan1 (FORGET the lawyers...first kill the "journalists".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Winged Hussar

Definitely a provocation, Turkey is culpable.


6 posted on 06/01/2010 3:18:03 PM PDT by DCmarcher-976453 (SARAH PALIN 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: agooga; aNYCguy; MestaMachine; SunkenCiv; Nachum

*ping*


7 posted on 06/01/2010 3:19:08 PM PDT by hennie pennie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Winged Hussar
If Israel keeps up its infatuation with international "law", that "law" will eventually be used to destroy the State.

The only laws that matter for Israel are the laws of God and the laws of war.

Israel has a right only to what she can take, and keep.

All the foolish bleating about "Resolution 242, Resolution 171" will accomplish is to cause the UN to pass another phony resolution abolishing the State of Israel once and for all.

8 posted on 06/01/2010 3:22:54 PM PDT by Jim Noble (If the answer is "Republican", it must be a stupid question)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Winged Hussar
Hmmm....looks like Turkey and the islamo-facists stopped reading before this (they thought they were exempt from stopping/being searched):

Conditions of exemption
48. Vessels listed in paragraph 47 are exempt from attack only if they:

(a) are innocently employed in their normal role;
(b) submit to identification and inspection when required; and
(c) do not intentionally hamper the movement of combatants and obey orders to stop or move out of the way when required.

Looks like the islamo-facists lost their exemption of "humanitarian assistance" when it intentionally hampred the movements of combatants and to obey orders to stop or move when required (entering a blockade area for inspection).

Good job IDF...piss be upon Mohammad and his followers!

9 posted on 06/01/2010 3:25:57 PM PDT by DCBryan1 (FORGET the lawyers...first kill the "journalists".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Winged Hussar

great job winged.


10 posted on 06/01/2010 3:33:21 PM PDT by bobby.223
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Winged Hussar

***


11 posted on 06/01/2010 3:42:40 PM PDT by VirginiaMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hennie pennie; AdmSmith; Berosus; bigheadfred; Convert from ECUSA; dervish; Ernest_at_the_Beach; ...
Thanks hennie pennie for both pings: Turkey is at war with Israel. Related topics:
12 posted on 06/01/2010 3:56:01 PM PDT by SunkenCiv ("Fools learn from experience. I prefer to learn from the experience of others." -- Otto von Bismarck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
The only laws that matter for Israel are the laws of God and the laws of war.

Those are the Laws of War.

13 posted on 06/01/2010 3:56:17 PM PDT by El Gato ("The second amendment is the reset button of the US constitution"-Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Winged Hussar
The forces currently on the move in this country and abroad could care less about right & wrong, unfortunately.

In fact, with them it seems the more wrong, the better.

14 posted on 06/01/2010 3:58:46 PM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Winged Hussar

An Israeli private organization should file a claim at that oh-so-famous international court in the Hague over this. Sure it’ll be tossed out, but it’ll generate press, force Turkey on the defensive... and make the Euro-peons squirm so much that they could conceiveably re-write the court’s mission to eliminate the possibility of private organizations filing claims with them for a political agenda (read: Islamic jihadists bent on destroying Israel).


15 posted on 06/01/2010 4:10:58 PM PDT by gogogodzilla (Live free or die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gogogodzilla

It is suicidal for Israel to recognize, even indirectly, the authority of any phony “court” or any phony “international law”.


16 posted on 06/01/2010 4:22:35 PM PDT by Jim Noble (If the answer is "Republican", it must be a stupid question)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson