We disagree on what a valid provocation is, I think.
Yes, generally, I would regard a valid provocation as requiring the target of the attack to have done something to provoke it, and not someone entirely unrelated.
I’m not saying they’re attacking the right ships, what I’m saying is that they have publicly declared their reasons and are harnessing support from a humanitarian catastrophe funded by the US. If Biden stops funding this genocide, they will have less and less global support for creating a shipping bottleneck.
What global support for creating a shipping bottleneck are they receiving now? What reduction of support will make them stop?
I checked the wiki page of those vessels and it seems that the majoity they attacked was affiliated with Israel. One example was one Norwegian ship that initially claimed no connection and later turned out to have made a deal to deliver to Israel in January (the attack was in December).
I would say, if they are putting economic pressure on Israel as a means of sanctioning them, I don’t see the problem. Better than all the other counties that signed documents that forbid them from supporting a genocide but have not sanctioned Israel.
Yes, generally, I would regard a valid provocation as requiring the target of the attack to have done something to provoke it, and not someone entirely unrelated.
What global support for creating a shipping bottleneck are they receiving now? What reduction of support will make them stop?
I checked the wiki page of those vessels and it seems that the majoity they attacked was affiliated with Israel. One example was one Norwegian ship that initially claimed no connection and later turned out to have made a deal to deliver to Israel in January (the attack was in December).
I would say, if they are putting economic pressure on Israel as a means of sanctioning them, I don’t see the problem. Better than all the other counties that signed documents that forbid them from supporting a genocide but have not sanctioned Israel.