(and of course I see a connection between oppression and effects. but to pretend that violent Arab opposition to Israel started with the Six Day War is ridiculous.)
I'm not pretending this. I'm sure the violent oppostion started the moment people were forcibly evicted from their homes. One party in this has all the power though, and for that, fairly or unfairly, they are judged more harshly. Unfair that Israel could be accused of war crimes when Hamas are firing rockets indescriminately? Recognise Palestine as a nation, Hamas as a real political party, and you can try them for theirs. Forced outside of the law, and it's more difficult to hold them accountable.
violent opposition to the idea of a Jewish state started before a single person was evicted from their home. it started when Jews decided to stand up and no longer be 2nd class citizens of the world, legally bought land in Israel/Palestine and began farming. that's the day they began having to defend themselves. long before the UN partition vote, long before the war, etc.
Also, the idea that non-state actors cannot be held to international law standards is nonsense. See the current ICC proceedings. Whether the political WILL exists to prosecute Hamas for war crimes (and EVERY rocket they fire is a war crime ) is another question. Still, you and the international community are nonetheless free to hold them accountable, something people seem unwilling to do.
[And that's because there's a double standard at play: the world community expects Israel to act like Sweden when it's up against Syria. the twisted reality of this whole thing is that as brutal as Israel may appear to you, it's a pussy compared to its enemies/neighbors. never would Israel pull a Hama or a Black September.
I'm not saying Israel should act like these states/parties and target civilians and flout international law, but its up against enemies that have no compunction about doing so. something to consider when discussing the asymmetry of the conflict.
Hamas loves when Israel is held to a standard no one would dream of holding them to. It's how they win.]
Whether the political WILL exists to prosecute Hamas for war crimes (and EVERY rocket they fire is a war crime ) is another question.
Please explain to me the difference between a Hamas rocket killing innocent people, and a Israeli bomb killing innocent people?
Correct me if I'm wrong, under the Geneva Convention (part IV?) aren't those entities that place military targets (etc.) among civilians responsible for any civilian casualties? i.e. Hamas is responsible for civilian casualties incurred if the IDF is targeting Hamas fighters hiding in an apartment building
Rootless? I know you have an answer, otherwise you wouldn't have said so vehemently that it was a war crime. (something I wouldn't necessarily disagree with)
Whether the political WILL exists to prosecute Hamas for war crimes (and EVERY rocket they fire is a war crime ) is another question.
Please explain to me the difference between a Hamas rocket killing innocent people, and a Israeli bomb killing innocent people?
Correct me if I'm wrong, under the Geneva Convention (part IV?) aren't those entities that place military targets (etc.) among civilians responsible for any civilian casualties? i.e. Hamas is responsible for civilian casualties incurred if the IDF is targeting Hamas fighters hiding in an apartment building
And you have proof that every target hit by the IDF, where innocent people have died, has been under these circumstances do you?
Whether the political WILL exists to prosecute Hamas for war crimes (and EVERY rocket they fire is a war crime ) is another question.
Please explain to me the difference between a Hamas rocket killing innocent people, and a Israeli bomb killing innocent people?
Correct me if I'm wrong, under the Geneva Convention (part IV?) aren't those entities that place military targets (etc.) among civilians responsible for any civilian casualties? i.e. Hamas is responsible for civilian casualties incurred if the IDF is targeting Hamas fighters hiding in an apartment building
And you have proof that every target hit by the IDF, where innocent people have died, has been under these circumstances do you?
Do you have any proof that the IDF is intentionally targeting Palestinian noncombatants? In this case, I would think that the burden of proof would lie with those making claims that they are.
Whether the political WILL exists to prosecute Hamas for war crimes (and EVERY rocket they fire is a war crime ) is another question.
Please explain to me the difference between a Hamas rocket killing innocent people, and a Israeli bomb killing innocent people?
Correct me if I'm wrong, under the Geneva Convention (part IV?) aren't those entities that place military targets (etc.) among civilians responsible for any civilian casualties? i.e. Hamas is responsible for civilian casualties incurred if the IDF is targeting Hamas fighters hiding in an apartment building
And you have proof that every target hit by the IDF, where innocent people have died, has been under these circumstances do you?
Do you have any proof that the IDF is intentionally targeting Palestinian noncombatants? In this case, I would think that the burden of proof would lie with those making claims that they are.
Why?
If you're going to 'lawfully' fire missiles into one of the most densely populated areas on the planet, don't you think, to do so 'lawfully', the responsibility lies with those firing the missiles? Just as the responsibility not to hide behind non-combatants lies with Hamas.
The United Nations' most senior human rights official says what Israel is doing "appears to have all the elements of war crimes", so I'll leave the "proof" to those who actually know.
If you're going to 'lawfully' fire missiles into one of the most densely populated areas on the planet, don't you think, to do so 'lawfully', the responsibility lies with those firing the missiles?
Just as the responsibility not to hide behind non-combatants lies with Hamas.
I would say that the responsibility lies with those who are placing their forces such that civilian casualties are virtually guaranteed are responsible for the loss of life. Is Hamas deliberately placing their forces in densely populated areas in order to ensure that civilian casualties result from the IDF engaging them? If yes, I would say civilian casualties are the fault of Hamas. And, as I said, as far as I recall I think that Geneva Convention IV agrees with me. Do we at least agree that that would settle the "lawfulness" of the issue?
The United Nations' most senior human rights official says what Israel is doing "appears to have all the elements of war crimes", so I'll leave the "proof" to those who actually know.
"Appears to" is a rather vague assertion and doesn't strike me as terribly convincing. I'll wait until everything is finished.
I remember reading in Gwynne Dyer's War that the anti-tank rockets deployed on the NATO/Warsaw Pact border during the Cold War were only considered 100% effective if used by someone with an IQ greater than 100, but the average infantryman has an IQ between 85-90. I'm curious what the average infantryman's IQ is today and how that could hypothetically affect culpability. Not really directed at anyone in particular, just idle thoughts.
Whether the political WILL exists to prosecute Hamas for war crimes (and EVERY rocket they fire is a war crime ) is another question.
Please explain to me the difference between a Hamas rocket killing innocent people, and a Israeli bomb killing innocent people?
well it depends on the war crime we're talking about. but most of those in question have an element of intent, just as domestic criminal statutes usually do.
Hamas is intentionally targeting civilians. Israel is not. Like it or not international law allows for some unintentional civilian casualties. It doesn't however allow for unlimited civilian casualties, and requires that parties targeting military targets do their utmost to minimize civilian casualties.
for Israel that means leafletting and making warning calls to evacuate civilians before they bomb. (it also means, on a more basic level, selecting targets rather than just carpet bombing Gaza, which, lets face it, would be the proper course of action if they wanted merely to destroy Hamas and had NO regard for civilian casualties).
but they're also dealing with an enemy that has deliberately positioned itself among civilians and non-military targets. Hamas is trying to make it impossible for Israel to attack without killing civilians. in other words Hamas is trying to make it impossible for Israel to respond to its rocket attacks while comporting with international law.
so to answer your question: according to international law the intentional targeting of civilians is in all cases a war crime. the unintentional killing of civilians resulting form the targeting of military sites is less clear-cut; it's a balancing act.
either way civilians are being killed in large numbers. the armchair jurists on Soulstrut have determined on the basis of some graphic photos that Israel is guilty of war crimes. They've been largely silent on Hamas war crimes.
I do find it ironic that when I posted a photo of Tookie Williams murder victim I was chastised by many people here that it was "bad taste" and a moderhatter removed it.
The dead Palestinian baby photo on the other hand has become some sort of acceptable trump card.
And while I don't believe that anyone can know with certainty whether the targets of Israeli bombs have been purposely targeted because there are children there or if Hamas has placed children in harms way, why doesn't Hamas just paint giant bullseyes on the roofs of the targets that don't have any innocent civilians inside and that will take care of the problem once and for all.[eye-rolling sarcasm/]
If you're going to 'lawfully' fire missiles into one of the most densely populated areas on the planet, don't you think, to do so 'lawfully', the responsibility lies with those firing the missiles?
Just as the responsibility not to hide behind non-combatants lies with Hamas.
I would say that the responsibility lies with those who are placing their forces such that civilian casualties are virtually guaranteed are responsible for the loss of life. Is Hamas deliberately placing their forces in densely populated areas in order to ensure that civilian casualties result from the IDF engaging them? If yes, I would say civilian casualties are the fault of Hamas. And, as I said, as far as I recall I think that Geneva Convention IV agrees with me. Do we at least agree that that would settle the "lawfulness" of the issue?
The United Nations' most senior human rights official says what Israel is doing "appears to have all the elements of war crimes", so I'll leave the "proof" to those who actually know.
"Appears to" is a rather vague assertion and doesn't strike me as terribly convincing. I'll wait until everything is finished.
So, with no real proof, we agree Hamas is legally guilty, but give Israel the benefit of the doubt. Even though one of the most qualified people to speak on the subject says otherwise.
Like I said I'd rather leave the legality of it to people who really know. If my family were killed by a bomb I don't think, the legality of it, would make a lot of difference to how I felt.
I just don't understand how someone can so vehemently oppose the murder of innocent people on one side, yet condone it for the other.
Whether the political WILL exists to prosecute Hamas for war crimes (and EVERY rocket they fire is a war crime ) is another question.
Please explain to me the difference between a Hamas rocket killing innocent people, and a Israeli bomb killing innocent people?
well it depends on the war crime we're talking about. but most of those in question have an element of intent, just as domestic criminal statutes usually do.
Hamas is intentionally targeting civilians. Israel is not. Like it or not international law allows for some unintentional civilian casualties. It doesn't however allow for unlimited civilian casualties, and requires that parties targeting military targets do their utmost to minimize civilian casualties.
for Israel that means leafletting and making warning calls to evacuate civilians before they bomb. (it also means, on a more basic level, selecting targets rather than just carpet bombing Gaza, which, lets face it, would be the proper course of action if they wanted merely to destroy Hamas and had NO regard for civilian casualties).
but they're also dealing with an enemy that has deliberately positioned itself among civilians and non-military targets. Hamas is trying to make it impossible for Israel to attack without killing civilians. in other words Hamas is trying to make it impossible for Israel to respond to its rocket attacks while comporting with international law.
so to answer your question: according to international law the intentional targeting of civilians is in all cases a war crime. the unintentional killing of civilians resulting form the targeting of military sites is less clear-cut; it's a balancing act.
either way civilians are being killed in large numbers. the armchair jurists on Soulstrut have determined on the basis of some graphic photos that Israel is guilty of war crimes. They've been largely silent on Hamas war crimes.
I don't think you'd find many here who think what Hamas is doing, has done is forgiveable.
The problem is that it's such an imbalanced fight. The Israelis have all the power in the situation, and unfortunately with that comes a greater responsibility.
So, with no real proof, we agree Hamas is legally guilty, but give Israel the benefit of the doubt. Even though one of the most qualified people to speak on the subject says otherwise.
You yourself said that Gaza is "one of the most densely populated areas on the planet." I don't think it's terribly controversial to say that Hamas has been placing their forces in said densely populated area.
And, yes, I do think that the claim that Israeli troops are intentionally targeting civilians is more contentious than that. Intention is also something that strikes me as being harder to prove.
I just don't understand how someone can so vehemently oppose the murder of innocent people on one side, yet condone it for the other.
believe me I ask myself the EXACT same thing when I read these threads.
But why then could you be accused of the exact same thing.
You praised Cos and J P for being able to relate to both sides of the argument, but from my point of view, in what you've written I see little proof that you have done the same. I'm sure you are very well read on the topic, but it's not the same thing.
So, with no real proof, we agree Hamas is legally guilty, but give Israel the benefit of the doubt. Even though one of the most qualified people to speak on the subject says otherwise.
You yourself said that Gaza is "one of the most densely populated areas on the planet." I don't think it's terribly controversial to say that Hamas has been placing their forces in said densely populated area.
And, yes, I do think that the claim that Israeli troops are intentionally targeting civilians is more contentious than that. Intention is also something that strikes me as being harder to prove.
As I tried to explain to you already, to me, it's about more than the semantics of the law.
So why couldn't Israel & Egypt set up refugee camps on their borders with Gaza BEFORE they started bombing the shit out of the place. If Hamas is half as evil as the Israeli Zionist claim, then what they are doing is purposely allowing Hamas to hold the WHOLE population prisoners. End of the day dudes can argue about the right to exist, who started the beef and which side were the worst terrorist etc but its near impossible to justify the continous bombing of a small enclosed and over populated area (which already is lacking in key infrastructure) and no form of escape, with no regard to the casualties.
Very easy to say Hamas hides amongst them, when you are not giving people a choice. Its like bank robbers taking a bunch of hostages and shooting at the cops from inside the bank, and the cops blowing up the whole building. Or are ALL palestinians guilty of the crimes Hamas has committed? If that so, then wouldnt the WHOLE of Israel be responsible for the crimes committed by the IDF/Israeli Govt? So therefore the next time hamas blows up a disoc full of innocent Israelis, we can say they were guilty and deserved it?
Or in a more brutal and controversial analogy, I guess it would have been acceptable if the Allies bombed the concentration camps in Germany, killing any Jewish prisoners still inside, in order to get rid of any Nazi's that might have been hiding in there?
If your an average Palestinian family and Hamas miltants set up shop next to your house, what option do you have? Where are they suppose to go? Who are they supposed to complain to? Even going to UN building, which notified the IDF where they are located, offers no guarantees, so what do you Pro Israel supporters suggest?
I also believe Egypt shares equal balme in this mess, but by cheerleading for Israel when they are basically shooting at ducks in crowded barrel, with no attempt to look at the actions objectively is a disgusting attempt to politicise a devestating injustice...
If you believe it is okay to murder 1000 innocent people to stop a small number of militants then you are a terrorist because that is exactly the same mind set a terrorist would have. Whats the difference? You are willing to sacrifice lives that you do not own for a cause that only you believe in...
The worse thing is Israel and the Jewish people have a great history of struggle and striving for human rights, social justice and equality...with every drop of blood the Zionist shed in the name of their convictions they stain the whole diaspora, just as the fundamentalist muslims have done to the religion of Islam....
And the govt of Eurpoe, Russia, USA and Australia are a bunch of soft cocks for not standing up and stating the obvious injustice this is, the middle eastern nations are a bunch of dogs that pimp the palestinian people when it suits them, while Israel moves more and more to becoming a nation similar to the one many of its founders escaped from....
Hamas is intentionally targeting civilians. Israel is not.
Unfortunately, if news like this turn out to be true, that is debatable.
Israeli forces shelled a house in the Gaza Strip which they had moved around 110 Palestinians into 24 hours earlier, the UN quotes witnesses as saying.
The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) called it "one of the gravest incidents" since the beginning of the offensive.
The shelling at Zeitoun, a south-east suburb of Gaza City, on 5 January killed some 30 people, the report said.
Israel says it has looked into the allegations and they are unfounded.
Israeli foreign ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor said no Israeli soldiers had been in the area on the day the incident was supposed to have happened.
The OCHA report said: "According to several testimonies, on 4 January Israeli foot soldiers evacuated approximately 110 Palestinians into a single-residence house in Zeitoun (half of whom were children) warning them to stay indoors.
"Twenty-four hours later, Israeli forces shelled the home repeatedly, killing approximately 30."
The UN said those who survived and were able walked 2km to the main north-south road to be transported to hospital in civilian vehicles.
"Three children, the youngest of whom was five months old, died upon arrival at the hospital," the report said.
'No safe haven'
Allegra Pacheco, of OCHA in Jerusalem, said they were not accusing the Israelis of a deliberate act, but said the incident needed to be investigated.
She also said they were concerned at claims by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) that ambulances were only allowed access to the neighbourhood on Thursday - four days after the alleged incident.
The ICRC on Thursday accused Israel of failing to fulfil its duty to help wounded civilians in Gaza.
"In Gaza, there is a severe protection of civilians crisis. There is no safe haven, no safe space, for all the civilians, particularly children," Ms Pacheco told the BBC.
"Since the ground operation, the number of children killed has risen by 250%."
An estimated 770 Palestinians and 14 Israelis have died in nearly two weeks of Israel's air and ground offensive against the Palestinian militant group Hamas.
The UN Security Council has called for an immediate ceasefire and the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza.
preschool argument shit. you're talmout ONE Israeli military operation vs.an entire movement (Hamas) dedicated to killing women and kids. peep the charter.
shit even the "moderates" on the Pali side are muhfuskin Holocaust deniers (Mahmud Abbas).
preschool argument shit. you're talmout ONE Israeli military operation vs.an entire movement (Hamas) dedicated to killing women and kids. peep the charter.
shit even the "moderates" on the Pali side are muhfuskin Holocaust deniers (Mahmud Abbas).
fusk y'all.
IDF Soldier trying to shoot children throwing rocks (Hamas combatants?) while a girl stands in the soldier's way and pleads with him to stop firing as they're only kids. No camera there, and you could say that in all probability the girl would be dead. While "probably's" don't mean sh*t, the video is evidence that with no girl in the way of the soldier, you would have dead kids shot by an Israeli soldier 'returning fire' against rocks... it is further evidence of IDF soldiers targetting civilians.
Rootless, you mention Egypt as being the second largest receiver of US aid... but you know who one of the biggest is, don't you? The biggest maybe? Why bring them up?
"The U.S. aid relationship with Israel is unlike any other in the world," said Stephen Zunes during a January 26 CPAP presentation. "In sheer volume, the amount is the most generous foreign aid program ever between any two countries," added Zunes, associate professor of Politics and chair of the Peace and Justice Studies Program at the University of San Francisco.
He explored the strategic reasoning behind the aid, asserting that it parallels the "needs of American arms exporters" and the role "Israel could play in advancing U.S. strategic interests in the region."
Although Israel is an "advanced, industrialized, technologically sophisticated country," it "receives more U.S. aid per capita annually than the total annual [Gross Domestic Product] per capita of several Arab states." Approximately a third of the entire U.S. foreign aid budget goes to Israel, "even though Israel comprises just???one-thousandth of the world's total population, and already has one of the world's higher per capita incomes."
.....
"Since 1992, the U.S. has offered Israel an additional $2 billion annually in loan guarantees. Congressional researchers have disclosed that between 1974 and 1989, $16.4 billion in U.S. military loans were converted to grants and that this was the understanding from the beginning. Indeed, all past U.S. loans to Israel have eventually been forgiven by Congress, which has undoubtedly helped Israel's often-touted claim that they have never defaulted on a U.S. government loan. U.S. policy since 1984 has been that economic assistance to Israel must equal or exceed Israel's annual debt repayment to the United States. Unlike other countries, which receive aid in quarterly installments, aid to Israel since 1982 has been given in a lump sum at the beginning of the fiscal year, leaving the U.S. government to borrow from future revenues. Israel even lends some of this money back through U.S. treasury bills and collects the additional interest."
Apache helicopters and phosporous bombs aren't cheap, are they?
European plans to turn Israel into a "privileged" partner enjoying special political, diplomatic and trade links were frozen by Brussels today in protest at the Israeli onslaught in Gaza.
Senior officials and diplomats in Brussels also said Czech pressure to stage a Europe-Israel summit to launch a new "special relationship" was facing stiff resistance and would probably not take place.
Senior figures in Brussels said the European move was ordered by Benita Ferrero-Waldner, the commissioner for external relations, who instructed various departments of the European commission to suspend implementation of a policy decided last year "to upgrade" relations between Israel and the EU.
"Senior people are saying there should be a pause in close ties between Israel and the union," said a European diplomat.
"The commission has frozen contacts with the Israelis on practical aspects of the upgrade," another diplomat said.
Commission officials denied that the decision amounted to sanctions against Israel. "There's been no talk of sanctions. We're very focused on the Egyptian [ceasefire] plan," said a senior official.
The EU and the Israeli government agreed last summer on the new policy giving Tel Aviv a privileged partnership with Europe, entailing greater integration into Europe's single market.
Ramiro Cibrian-Uzal, the EU commission's ambassador to Israel, told reporters in Jerusalem today that the war in Gaza meant bilateral relations between Israel and the 27-nation bloc "cannot proceed business as usual".
He said: "In a war situation, in a situation in which Israel is at war, using its war means in a very dramatic way, in a powerful way in Gaza, everybody realises that it is not the appropriate time to upgrade bilateral relations."
The decision to suspend implementation comes as a blow to the Israeli foreign minister, Tzipi Livni, a month before she faces the rightwing hawk Benjamin Netanyahu in a general election.
The new European policy was in part designed to help Livni win the election and late last year she had two "tempestuous" meetings with Bernard Kouchner, the French foreign minister, demanding quicker European action to boost her poll chances. EU foreign ministers responded with a decision to push ahead with the policy.[/b]
While the practical impact of the freeze may be minimal, officials said, the political and symbolic signals are strong, controversial and unusual.
"It wouldn't surprise me if people like Fererro-Waldner were working not on an upgrade, but on a downgrade," said a third diplomat in Brussels.
The protest move has been orchestrated by the commission which, at a meeting in Strasbourg yesterday, agreed that "people should stay away from Israel", said another source.
The decision is likely to run into strong criticism among governments of the 27 member states. The Czech Republic assumed the EU presidency at the beginning of the year with a robust pro-Israeli campaign in mind. "The Czech presidency is seen to be very keen to take an American line on this," said the source.
The Czechs have been seeking to organise a European summit with Israel in May or June in Prague to mark the launch of the new deal.
"They want a highly symbolic summit to demonstrate the EU's partnership with Israel as particularly privileged," said one of the diplomats. "It's all off for the moment; particularly inappropriate. It would be tremendously divisive."
Why does this huge loss of civilian life look like a political tool? Israel is in the news because it looks like they're scoring a lot of points for the sake of an election. I have nothing but respect for your convictions, and this 'debate' has been informative... but how should the world's media view this?
preschool argument shit. you're talmout ONE Israeli military operation vs.an entire movement (Hamas) dedicated to killing women and kids. peep the charter.
shit even the "moderates" on the Pali side are muhfuskin Holocaust deniers (Mahmud Abbas).
fusk y'all.
Yes, but I'm afraid that operation is not the only one, during this new conflict or in earlier times. Tragedies like Deir Yassin are unfortunately true. My point: BOTH sides are playing dirty, but for Hamas it seems to be a philosophy, which is of course totally unacceptable.
I'm not familiar with Abbas's views on the Holocaust, but he's also said this: "I wrote in detail about the Holocaust and said I did not want to discuss numbers. I quoted an argument between historians in which various numbers of casualties were mentioned. One wrote there were 12 million victims and another wrote there were 800,000. I have no desire to argue with the figures. The Holocaust was a terrible, unforgivable crime against the Jewish nation, a crime against humanity that cannot be accepted by humankind. The Holocaust was a terrible thing and nobody can claim I denied it[/b]."
Most of the injuries Gilbert and Fosse dealt with were caused by shrapnel from exploding shells. But they were also confronted with more unusual ??? and just as devastating ??? wounds. "We have seen a number of very brutal amputations ??? without shrapnel injuries which we strongly suspect must have been caused by DIME weapons," said Gilbert.
A DIME, or dense inert metal explosive, is an experimental small explosive that detonates with extreme power. "If you are in the vicinity of a DIME weapon, it's like your legs get torn off. It is an enormous pressure wave," explains Fosse. It is so powerful that people close to the blast are torn to pieces, even though there is no shrapnel involved, he said.
"We are not soft-skinned when it comes to war injuries, but these amputations are really extremely nasty and for many of the patients not survivable," said Gilbert. "There's a very strong suspicion that Gaza is now being used as a test laboratory for new weapons."
One of the Norwegian ones, although he has since said he regrets what he said... so he might rerget saying DIME weapons are being used as I expect that would be much more difficult to prove than phosphorous burns.
Though right now I'm not really putting much past Israel. Sorry.
I enjoyed the speech.....no silly catch phrases....just serious and forthright messages.......emphasis on inclusion, traditional values and pride....I hope the rest of the world was listening.
"We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents[/b], we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you."
Comments
violent opposition to the idea of a Jewish state started before a single person was evicted from their home. it started when Jews decided to stand up and no longer be 2nd class citizens of the world, legally bought land in Israel/Palestine and began farming. that's the day they began having to defend themselves. long before the UN partition vote, long before the war, etc.
Also, the idea that non-state actors cannot be held to international law standards is nonsense. See the current ICC proceedings. Whether the political WILL exists to prosecute Hamas for war crimes (and EVERY rocket they fire is a war crime ) is another question. Still, you and the international community are nonetheless free to hold them accountable, something people seem unwilling to do.
[And that's because there's a double standard at play: the world community expects Israel to act like Sweden when it's up against Syria. the twisted reality of this whole thing is that as brutal as Israel may appear to you, it's a pussy compared to its enemies/neighbors. never would Israel pull a Hama or a Black September.
And the PLO, the successor to which currently rules the W Bank was admitted to the UN in 1974 and has been recognized by Israel since 1991.
(Even the 2nd largest recipient of US foreign aid is a serious human rights violator, though I never see threads on that topic.)
I'm not saying Israel should act like these states/parties and target civilians and flout international law, but its up against enemies that have no compunction about doing so. something to consider when discussing the asymmetry of the conflict.
Hamas loves when Israel is held to a standard no one would dream of holding them to. It's how they win.]
Please explain to me the difference between a Hamas rocket killing innocent people, and a Israeli bomb killing innocent people?
Correct me if I'm wrong, under the Geneva Convention (part IV?) aren't those entities that place military targets (etc.) among civilians responsible for any civilian casualties? i.e. Hamas is responsible for civilian casualties incurred if the IDF is targeting Hamas fighters hiding in an apartment building
Again, let me know if I'm wrong.
Rootless? I know you have an answer, otherwise you wouldn't have said so vehemently that it was a war crime. (something I wouldn't necessarily disagree with)
Plaese to explain the difference.
And you have proof that every target hit by the IDF, where innocent people have died, has been under these circumstances do you?
Do you have any proof that the IDF is intentionally targeting Palestinian noncombatants? In this case, I would think that the burden of proof would lie with those making claims that they are.
Why?
If you're going to 'lawfully' fire missiles into one of the most densely populated areas on the planet, don't you think, to do so 'lawfully', the responsibility lies with those firing the missiles?
Just as the responsibility not to hide behind non-combatants lies with Hamas.
The United Nations' most senior human rights official says what Israel is doing "appears to have all the elements of war crimes", so I'll leave the "proof" to those who actually know.
I would say that the responsibility lies with those who are placing their forces such that civilian casualties are virtually guaranteed are responsible for the loss of life. Is Hamas deliberately placing their forces in densely populated areas in order to ensure that civilian casualties result from the IDF engaging them? If yes, I would say civilian casualties are the fault of Hamas.
And, as I said, as far as I recall I think that Geneva Convention IV agrees with me. Do we at least agree that that would settle the "lawfulness" of the issue?
"Appears to" is a rather vague assertion and doesn't strike me as terribly convincing. I'll wait until everything is finished.
I remember reading in Gwynne Dyer's War that the anti-tank rockets deployed on the NATO/Warsaw Pact border during the Cold War were only considered 100% effective if used by someone with an IQ greater than 100, but the average infantryman has an IQ between 85-90. I'm curious what the average infantryman's IQ is today and how that could hypothetically affect culpability. Not really directed at anyone in particular, just idle thoughts.
well it depends on the war crime we're talking about. but most of those in question have an element of intent, just as domestic criminal statutes usually do.
Hamas is intentionally targeting civilians. Israel is not. Like it or not international law allows for some unintentional civilian casualties. It doesn't however allow for unlimited civilian casualties, and requires that parties targeting military targets do their utmost to minimize civilian casualties.
for Israel that means leafletting and making warning calls to evacuate civilians before they bomb. (it also means, on a more basic level, selecting targets rather than just carpet bombing Gaza, which, lets face it, would be the proper course of action if they wanted merely to destroy Hamas and had NO regard for civilian casualties).
but they're also dealing with an enemy that has deliberately positioned itself among civilians and non-military targets. Hamas is trying to make it impossible for Israel to attack without killing civilians. in other words Hamas is trying to make it impossible for Israel to respond to its rocket attacks while comporting with international law.
so to answer your question: according to international law the intentional targeting of civilians is in all cases a war crime. the unintentional killing of civilians resulting form the targeting of military sites is less clear-cut; it's a balancing act.
either way civilians are being killed in large numbers. the armchair jurists on Soulstrut have determined on the basis of some graphic photos that Israel is guilty of war crimes. They've been largely silent on Hamas war crimes.
The dead Palestinian baby photo on the other hand has become some sort of acceptable trump card.
And while I don't believe that anyone can know with certainty whether the targets of Israeli bombs have been purposely targeted because there are children there or if Hamas has placed children in harms way, why doesn't Hamas just paint giant bullseyes on the roofs of the targets that don't have any innocent civilians inside and that will take care of the problem once and for all.[eye-rolling sarcasm/]
So, with no real proof, we agree Hamas is legally guilty, but give Israel the benefit of the doubt. Even though one of the most qualified people to speak on the subject says otherwise.
Like I said I'd rather leave the legality of it to people who really know. If my family were killed by a bomb I don't think, the legality of it, would make a lot of difference to how I felt.
I just don't understand how someone can so vehemently oppose the murder of innocent people on one side, yet condone it for the other.
believe me I ask myself the EXACT same thing when I read these threads.
I don't think you'd find many here who think what Hamas is doing, has done is forgiveable.
The problem is that it's such an imbalanced fight. The Israelis have all the power in the situation, and unfortunately with that comes a greater responsibility.
You yourself said that Gaza is "one of the most densely populated areas on the planet." I don't think it's terribly controversial to say that Hamas has been placing their forces in said densely populated area.
And, yes, I do think that the claim that Israeli troops are intentionally targeting civilians is more contentious than that. Intention is also something that strikes me as being harder to prove.
But why then could you be accused of the exact same thing.
You praised Cos and J P for being able to relate to both sides of the argument, but from my point of view, in what you've written I see little proof that you have done the same. I'm sure you are very well read on the topic, but it's not the same thing.
As I tried to explain to you already, to me, it's about more than the semantics of the law.
Very easy to say Hamas hides amongst them, when you are not giving people a choice. Its like bank robbers taking a bunch of hostages and shooting at the cops from inside the bank, and the cops blowing up the whole building. Or are ALL palestinians guilty of the crimes Hamas has committed? If that so, then wouldnt the WHOLE of Israel be responsible for the crimes committed by the IDF/Israeli Govt? So therefore the next time hamas blows up a disoc full of innocent Israelis, we can say they were guilty and deserved it?
Or in a more brutal and controversial analogy, I guess it would have been acceptable if the Allies bombed the concentration camps in Germany, killing any Jewish prisoners still inside, in order to get rid of any Nazi's that might have been hiding in there?
If your an average Palestinian family and Hamas miltants set up shop next to your house, what option do you have? Where are they suppose to go? Who are they supposed to complain to? Even going to UN building, which notified the IDF where they are located, offers no guarantees, so what do you Pro Israel supporters suggest?
I also believe Egypt shares equal balme in this mess, but by cheerleading for Israel when they are basically shooting at ducks in crowded barrel, with no attempt to look at the actions objectively is a disgusting attempt to politicise a devestating injustice...
If you believe it is okay to murder 1000 innocent people to stop a small number of militants then you are a terrorist because that is exactly the same mind set a terrorist would have. Whats the difference? You are willing to sacrifice lives that you do not own for a cause that only you believe in...
The worse thing is Israel and the Jewish people have a great history of struggle and striving for human rights, social justice and equality...with every drop of blood the Zionist shed in the name of their convictions they stain the whole diaspora, just as the fundamentalist muslims have done to the religion of Islam....
And the govt of Eurpoe, Russia, USA and Australia are a bunch of soft cocks for not standing up and stating the obvious injustice this is, the middle eastern nations are a bunch of dogs that pimp the palestinian people when it suits them, while Israel moves more and more to becoming a nation similar to the one many of its founders escaped from....
Unfortunately, if news like this turn out to be true, that is debatable.
Israeli forces shelled a house in the Gaza Strip which they had moved around 110 Palestinians into 24 hours earlier, the UN quotes witnesses as saying.
The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) called it "one of the gravest incidents" since the beginning of the offensive.
The shelling at Zeitoun, a south-east suburb of Gaza City, on 5 January killed some 30 people, the report said.
Israel says it has looked into the allegations and they are unfounded.
Israeli foreign ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor said no Israeli soldiers had been in the area on the day the incident was supposed to have happened.
The OCHA report said: "According to several testimonies, on 4 January Israeli foot soldiers evacuated approximately 110 Palestinians into a single-residence house in Zeitoun (half of whom were children) warning them to stay indoors.
"Twenty-four hours later, Israeli forces shelled the home repeatedly, killing approximately 30."
The UN said those who survived and were able walked 2km to the main north-south road to be transported to hospital in civilian vehicles.
"Three children, the youngest of whom was five months old, died upon arrival at the hospital," the report said.
'No safe haven'
Allegra Pacheco, of OCHA in Jerusalem, said they were not accusing the Israelis of a deliberate act, but said the incident needed to be investigated.
She also said they were concerned at claims by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) that ambulances were only allowed access to the neighbourhood on Thursday - four days after the alleged incident.
The ICRC on Thursday accused Israel of failing to fulfil its duty to help wounded civilians in Gaza.
"In Gaza, there is a severe protection of civilians crisis. There is no safe haven, no safe space, for all the civilians, particularly children," Ms Pacheco told the BBC.
"Since the ground operation, the number of children killed has risen by 250%."
An estimated 770 Palestinians and 14 Israelis have died in nearly two weeks of Israel's air and ground offensive against the Palestinian militant group Hamas.
The UN Security Council has called for an immediate ceasefire and the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza.
shit even the "moderates" on the Pali side are muhfuskin Holocaust deniers (Mahmud Abbas).
fusk y'all.
IDF Soldier trying to shoot children throwing rocks (Hamas combatants?) while a girl stands in the soldier's way and pleads with him to stop firing as they're only kids.
No camera there, and you could say that in all probability the girl would be dead.
While "probably's" don't mean sh*t, the video is evidence that with no girl in the way of the soldier, you would have dead kids shot by an Israeli soldier 'returning fire' against rocks... it is further evidence of IDF soldiers targetting civilians.
Rootless, you mention Egypt as being the second largest receiver of US aid... but you know who one of the biggest is, don't you? The biggest maybe? Why bring them up?
Apache helicopters and phosporous bombs aren't cheap, are they?
Why does this huge loss of civilian life look like a political tool? Israel is in the news because it looks like they're scoring a lot of points for the sake of an election. I have nothing but respect for your convictions, and this 'debate' has been informative... but how should the world's media view this?
Yes, but I'm afraid that operation is not the only one, during this new conflict or in earlier times. Tragedies like Deir Yassin are unfortunately true. My point: BOTH sides are playing dirty, but for Hamas it seems to be a philosophy, which is of course totally unacceptable.
I'm not familiar with Abbas's views on the Holocaust, but he's also said this: "I wrote in detail about the Holocaust and said I did not want to discuss numbers. I quoted an argument between historians in which various numbers of casualties were mentioned. One wrote there were 12 million victims and another wrote there were 800,000. I have no desire to argue with the figures. The Holocaust was a terrible, unforgivable crime against the Jewish nation, a crime against humanity that cannot be accepted by humankind. The Holocaust was a terrible thing and nobody can claim I denied it[/b]."
U.N. Building in Gaza Strip Is Hit by Strike From Israel
Israeli forces shelled areas deep inside Gaza City on Thursday, hitting the headquarters of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency and injuring at least three people among the hundreds taking shelter in the compound, according to United Nations officials and witnesses.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/16/phosphorus-bombs-video-israel-gaza
Phosphorous bombs, and suspected use of DIME weapons...
... somebody tell me what the fuck.
Though right now I'm not really putting much past Israel. Sorry.
Israel withdrawal explained.
http://www.terrorismawareness.org/what-really-happened/
b/w "Really cute kids"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIBNRVgq59Y