That's a poor analogy. If I break your window, you hand me over to the police. In your course of action, you end up doing the harsher crime. I broke a window, you are breaking limbs.Quote:
Originally Posted by allonons
Printable View
That's a poor analogy. If I break your window, you hand me over to the police. In your course of action, you end up doing the harsher crime. I broke a window, you are breaking limbs.Quote:
Originally Posted by allonons
Yeah but there is no police to settle disputes between Isreal and Hamas. So f*ck Hamas, go Israel go. Let's not forget how much Germans suffered in World War II thanks to Hitler. Noone felt sorry for the Germans during war, why are so many people feeling sorry for the Palastines. Israel suffers everyday, like never ending 911. We dont see anyone protesting against suffering of Jews. People are just Anti-Semitic that's why they never learn.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemo
So all these people trying to get a peace process going, don't exist? The Arab League offered normal relations in return for Israeli withdrawal to the 1949 armistice lines in 2002. If that had been taken, maybe the Arab league could've acted as the police and Hamas and Hizbullah wouldn't have so much in the way of funds. The Europeans and the UN and the US have been trying to settle something. Even Hamas offered a 30 year truce in exchange for 1967 borders. True, it's no official recognition. But hot young blood may have cooled. Things might have taken a turn towards improvement.Quote:
Yeah but there is no police to settle disputes between Isreal and Hamas. So f*ck Hamas, go Israel go. Let's not forget how much Germans suffered in World War II thanks to Hitler. Noone felt sorry for the Germans during war, why are so many people feeling sorry for the Palastines. Israel suffers everyday, like never ending 911. We dont see anyone protesting against suffering of Jews. People are just Anti-Semitic that's why they never learn.
It's really sort of ironic how both Israel and US got screwed by organisations they helped create in the first place. And how both think that they can kill the monsters, when in reality, they are feeding it.
People sympathize with Palestinians because in this case Israel is Hitler...Quote:
Let's not forget how much Germans suffered in World War II thanks to Hitler. Noone felt sorry for the Germans during war, why are so many people feeling sorry for the Palastines. Israel suffers everyday, like never ending 911. We dont see anyone protesting against suffering of Jews. People are just Anti-Semitic that's why they never learn.
Calling people anti-semitic for disagreeing with Israel's refusal to follow the UN resolution, breach of international rules of war and continued killing of Hamas members and civilians alike is really quite weak.
Are you serious? Article 28 says nothing about placing blame on anyone. Furthermore the article does not state that it is OK to attack a site where there are "protected persons" it simply states that doing so is not always illegal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mourhelm
The difference between "not always illegal" and legal is quite big.
It says that the protected persons can't be immune to war operations if they are there. In conclusion they will have to face the consequences.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
Also
Makes clear that building a weapons deposit under a school or civilian place is not right.Quote:
(b) Avoid locating military objectives within or near densely populated areas;
Let's not wash clean Hamas... There is not enough soap in the world to clean up that situation on either side.
You're starting to sound like stoffi.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
What international rules of war are you referring to exactly?Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
Firing at military targets is legitimate as I've shown in the quotes above, it is Hamas responsibility to protect the civilians. It is sad that they die, but if Hamas didn't use them as human shields there would have been a lot less civilian casualties.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
This means that when Hamas fires, Israel may return fire. The fact that there are civilians there doesn't make Hamas immune from attacks.Quote:
Art. 28. The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations.
This means that if Hamas want's to fire from anywhere, they are responsible to remove the civilian population from the area. Clearly, they don't even try.Quote:
...endeavour to remove the civilian population, individual civilians and civilian objects under their control from the vicinity of military objectives;
Lets say that Hamas must fire from a densely populated area (although it's not true - there are plenty of empty spaces to fire from, like former settlements that were removed by Israel). Hamas can and must go to the least densely populated area.Quote:
(b) Avoid locating military objectives within or near densely populated areas;
Hamas is doing the exact opposite! One example is the firing from the UN school.
Other necessary precautions include, for example, building shelters for the civilian population. Israel built shelters for its population, and that's why there are a lot less civilian casualties on the Israeli side.Quote:
(c) Take the other necessary precautions to protect the civilian population, individual civilians and civilian objects under their control against the dangers resulting from military operations.
International law clearly states that Hamas is responsible for the Palestinian civilian population. If Hamas cared for civilian lives, it would have attacked Israeli military targets and put its own people in shelters or at the very least would not fire from within civilian population.
No. That would be true if article 28 was the only article dealing with this issue, it is not (see article 3). Article 28 is obviously supplementary, an exception from the general rule; which is that "protected persons" must not be killed. The correct interpretation would thus be that civilians can not be killed, unless in extreme circumstances.Quote:
Originally Posted by WolfDGrey
Agreed, I've always stated that there are two sides that are equally responsible for the deaths of the uninvolved civilians.Quote:
Makes clear that building a weapons deposit under a school or civilian place is not right.
Let's not wash clean Hamas... There is not enough soap in the world to clean up that situation on either side.
I am merely following along with the poor analogy that kwwww used in an attempt to show him that his logic is flawed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mourhelm
Quote:
What international rules of war are you referring to exactly?
Firing at military targets is legitimate as I've shown in the quotes above, it is Hamas responsibility to protect the civilians. It is sad that they die, but if Hamas didn't use them as human shields there would have been a lot less civilian casualties.
First of all you have not shown anything other than that it sometimes isn't illegal to kill civilians while firing at military targets.
Secondly, Israel is not firing at just military targets there have been reports that several mobile hospitals have been hit, as has one (to my knowledge) UN shelter in addition to that a multitude of facilities are hit just because they are associated with Hamas without having any military importance. Then there is of course the destruction of civilian property which is disallowed in article 53 in Geneva 4.
Other than that I believe that the use of white phosphor against houses is a clear breach as well.
Edit: I just saw that there were another bunch of illegitimate attacks. The headquarters of the UN Relief and Works Agency (with white phosphor shells). The al-Quds hospital, where over 500 patients were being treated. The building that houses the offices of Reuters and other media organizations was also attacked.
This could be good reading for you:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...1500809&s_pos=
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle5521925.ece
I don't understand why you keep going on about hamas' responsibility when nobody is arguing about that? It is obvious that Hamas should be doing a lot of things that aren't being done, but Israel has a responsibility not to kill civilians. When 50% of the people killed are civilians that responsibility is not taken seriously.Quote:
This means that when Hamas fires, Israel may return fire. The fact that there are civilians there doesn't make Hamas immune from attacks.
This means that if Hamas want's to fire from anywhere, they are responsible to remove the civilian population from the area. Clearly, they don't even try.
Lets say that Hamas must fire from a densely populated area (although it's not true - there are plenty of empty spaces to fire from, like former settlements that were removed by Israel). Hamas can and must go to the least densely populated area.
That would be the Israeli version... I am more inclined to believe an impartial organization than the ones who were firing at them.Quote:
Hamas is doing the exact opposite! One example is the firing from the UN school.
There are less Israeli casualties because Hamas is fighting with the equivalent of sticks and stones.Quote:
Other necessary precautions include, for example, building shelters for the civilian population. Israel built shelters for its population, and that's why there are a lot less civilian casualties on the Israeli side.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mourhelm
So during the Siege of Leningrad, when the Germans bombed the city, it was the Soviets fault for defending the city and thus leading to the deaths of millions of civilians, right? It was the Russians fault that they decided to set up defenses around the gateways of the city. Also, it was Churchill and his cabinet members fault that they lived in London and caused all the civilians to die during the Blitzkrieg bombings? According to you, that'd be using human shields too, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mourhelm
If you are expecting Hamas to set up huts in the desert with big signs saying "bomb me, I'm here", that's not gonna happen.
Agree with AFKain on this one. UN maybe useless and, in my views, partly responsible for this mess, but they don't generally lie.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mourhelm
While you are at reading, might as well take a look at this:
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion...k-1230046.html
Looking at the actions of the state of Israel, it is significantly hard to retain a neutral view towards the governing body and armed forces of the country.
Given the abundence of information available from trustworthy sources, there is no plausible doubt that Israel has a deliberate policy of targetting the civilian populations of the palestinian areas.
Such targetting does not always take the form of guns and bombs, though we have seen far far too much direct murder of civilians by the armed forces - as has been pointed out, actions that would be deemed to be war crimes, were they not perpetrated by a "friend of the west". The palestinians are also targetted by economic weapons, the theft of high grade land, the disruption of transport, deliberate perpetuation of states of poverty and deprvation of the essential s for sustinence of life.
It is unsurprising that enforcing such conditions on a population breeds resentment, breeds anger, breeds the potential for violence. I wonder if there were any area in the world that would not react similarly under such restrictions. My belief is that there is not.
Peace is a word often bandied about, and often sought by leaders and representatives of nations not directly involved, but no peace is presently possible. Peace requires that those involved desire, at some level, an end to violence. Israel most certainly does not desire an end to violence. They benefit greatly from the illusion of conflict.
I sao illusion of conflict, because there is absolutely no way for the palestinian state to challenge Israel in any meaningful way militarially. While Israel is quite content to kill a few hundred or thousand civilians periodically to provoke retaliations that they can "relatiate" to.
Were Israel truely interested in peace, they would be better served ensuring that the palestinian state is a viable, cohesive entity, that has the infrastructure to sustain itself. Showering the area with aid, would have a far more deliterious effect on opposition to Israeli neighbourhood than any number of bullets and white phosphorous shells.
That's the case here.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
Striking the head of the organization is legitimate just as it will be legitimate to attack the Israeli prime minister or IDF's chief of staff. These targets have military importance since they command the military.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
If a shelter has tons of weapons in it, it is a weapon depot and is a legitimate military target.
That is a breach. I don't believe that Israel is using this kind of weaponry, but if it does, it is illegal.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
I didn't check the news in the last couple of days so I can comment on this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
Most of the time when you say something was hit you neglect some vital information (like the fact that it was a weapon depot or that Hamas was firing from that location).
If what you are saying is 100% correct, I condemn those attacks. Remember that even the best accuracy weapon misses sometimes and that on the field of battle humans make mistakes. That is regrettable but doesn't not show intent.
I disagree. Israel takes that responsibility seriously (proof for that is the ground assault - it's a lot safer just bombing Gaza to dust). The responsibility not to kill civilians doesn't mean that we will sit quietly while Hamas is killing our civilians just because they are shielded by theirs.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
What you are doing is legitimising the use of human shields.
You've seen the video that they did that at least once before. It is not in Israel's interest to attack civilians or the UN.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
But as I said in my first post, at the end, every one will believe what they want regardless of the truth (we only have bits and pieces of it in a pile of lies anyway)
Here's a partial list of "sticks and stones":Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
- long-range 122mm rockets (Grad)
- Qassam rockets
- Sagger missiles
- RPG rockets
- Konkurs missiles
- Mortars
- SA-7 shoulder missiles
- various antiaircraft machineguns
- IEDs (Improvised Explosive Device)
- Machine guns and rifles
So by your logic, Israel is just using more accurate sticks and stones.
---------
For some reason you seem to think that the military presence in a city makes the whole city a legitimate target. That conception is wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemo
The fact that Churchill and his cabinet members lived in London didn't make the entire city a legitimate target.
Same thing with the Russians. The fact that they set up defences around the gateways doesn't make the entire city a legitimate target. If they had civilians at these gateways (which they probably didn't, unless these conscripted them) they are responsible for them.
Hamas, on the other hand, does not set up defences around the gateways. It sets up defences within civilian population and uses it as a shield.
I'm not expecting that. Why would I?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemo
If they want to fire from someone's house, they should at the very least evacuate the neighborhood (especially when they know that secondary explosions from their own ammo can cause even greater collateral damage).
See my reply to him (above).Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemo
Quote:
Originally Posted by allonons
Lol, and who wrote that, Menachem Begin? :) Show me the source. It's certainly not wiki(which isn't a good source), because they also list the massacres Irgun performed. On wiki, Irgun was first posted as a terrorist group btw, but then suddenly changed to underground group.... Which is very wrong. They did everything a terrorist group does, targetted civilians, killing all they can.
If targetting civilians on purpose is not terrorism, then what is?
Irgun was not labelled as a terrorist group only by the british, but as Hamas now is labelled terrorists, by the world.
I will look up some Irgun massacres for you afterwards, bus bombings, cafe bombings, village slaughters, the time they butchered most of the workers on a plant, etc etc. They were the jewish Hamas you can say, religious fanatics who use every weapon they could to win their cause.
But there was a huge difference. Hamas fights against occupation, Irgun fought to STEAL land and drive off a people. Irgun was part of an occupant fraction, not freedom fighters.
Irgun has NEVER been looked upon as something else than a terrorist group.
You're trying to glorify a group who targetted civilians, MASSACRED civilians, even jews that were against them. You're spitting on history by posting this.
And it's no telling who started the terror, palestinian groups or jewish groups. I would very much like to see your source btw, like I already said.
How can you be sure they are there? Remember US and WMDs? I don't doubt Hamas has rockets. But intelligence can be faulty.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mourhelm
A little late, isn't it? If you had sent them in earlier, lots of civilian deaths may have been avoided. And it could also have countered faulty intelligence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mourhelm
They seem to be missing an awful lot. This could have been avoided if a ground attack had been launched. But of course, that would hurt the Israeli governments standing with it's own people and mess up the upcoming elections, which the ruling party seems set to win since this operation is going so well. There are people inside Israel who believe this is a PR scam by the ruling politicians.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mourhelm
No, I don't think the city becomes a legitimate target. But your logic makes it seem so. Tell me, what does a city contain? Apartments, residential areas, schools, universities, hospitals, temples/churches/mosques, commercial area, markets, etc. Which one of the above have you not bombed yet?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mourhelm
http://www.worldbulletin.net/news_detail.php?id=19325Quote:
Originally Posted by Mourhelm
Check the fifth cartoon from the top, the one with two Israeli soldiers and shoes.
Stoffi the bottom line is they were considered paramilitary ...every source you look at you will see those who consider them as terrorist were the British and
(others) who were the others?I know why the British considered then terrorist (because they faught back) but who are the others you se listed all the time?
As soon as Israel became a state they were intergrated into what is now the IDF...
So with your reasoning every fledgling army were terrorist throughout history lol ....I posted specifically thier missions all of which was in response to attacks on Jews or mandates on Jews by the British that would have taken away thier push for statehood.
Now lets say I agree with you for aurgumnts sake....(all fledging armies are terrorist)so in terms all armies who now stand our terrorist....ok fine.
I can't wait to see the Israeli terrorist straff and bomb Hamas and Hezbullah parades ,wonder why they have not done that yet????
You know dam well the Israelis could wipe out Gaza and any other area in the middle east with a push of a button ....so why have not the Isralei terrorist not done so?
As Patton once said I'd rather kill for my country than die for it!
Your a bleeding heart Stoffi ...just make sure you do not draw any funny cartoons of the terrorist religious leaders or they will hunt you down...lol
A country brought to it's politically correct knees by a cartoon ...now thats funny.
If that was true, there would be a lot more civilian deaths. Israel targets Hamas. Hamas uses human shields which raise their civilian casualties count.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMistressOfBaal
There is no war crime in targeting military targets. It is Hamas's responsibility to take the civilians away from its military operations. Israel tries to minimize the civilian casualties, but it can't guarantee 0 civilian losses.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMistressOfBaal
Israel left the Gaza strip a long time ago. What high grade land are you talking about?Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMistressOfBaal
Again, what exactly are you talking about?Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMistressOfBaal
That's Hamas's doing, not Israel's. They are the ones choosing to buy weapons instead of providing essentials for their people.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMistressOfBaal
You might be right on that one. Only problem is that you're putting blame at the wrong place.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMistressOfBaal
Hamas likes the Palestinian in poverty because that makes it easier for them to control the population.
Israel does want an end to the violence. That's why it retaliates the attack on its civilians. If we did nothing, they had just kept on firing and you know that.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMistressOfBaal
What exactly is the benefit?Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMistressOfBaal
Reality proves otherwise. The fact that Hamas has small achievements doesn't mean they are not a threat.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMistressOfBaal
Over the years the area has been showered with aid from practically everywhere in the world (Israel included).Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMistressOfBaal
These are old, but they show you what happens to the aid you think will solve the situation.
http://www.tlaxcala.es/pp.asp?reference=3608&lg=en
http://articles.latimes.com/1998/aug/10/local/me-11860
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...=&pagewanted=1
Hamas might be less corrupt. But, as I said before, instead of using funds to provide essentials to their people, they chose to buy weapons and go to war.
Stoffi you go cantact your terroist buddies and tell them to put on a uniform and stand opposed just like other armies.
If they choose not to adhere with the laws and customs of war as stated in the Geneva Convention /Hague Conventions /Geneva Protocol ,then so be it let them and all those around them die due to thier actions.
Article 3 states that even where there is not a conflict of international character the parties must as a minimum adhere to minimal protections described as: noncombatants, members of armed forces who have laid down their arms, and combatants who are hors de combat (out of the fight) due to wounds, detention, or any other cause shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, with the following prohibitions:
(a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
(b) taking of hostages;
(c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment
(d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.
Article 4 defines who is a Protected person: Persons protected by the Convention are those who, at a given moment and in any manner whatsoever, find themselves, in case of a conflict or occupation, in the hands of a Party to the conflict or Occupying Power of which they are not nationals. But it explicitly excludes Nationals of a State which is not bound by the Convention.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0wJX...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_OGhj43GAE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmO3w...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yCQz...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zg3-m...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAWm_...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrHif...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prIiG...eature=related
Have fun watching the wonderful world of Hamas in action against thier so called own people........
Quote:
Originally Posted by allonons
I would like to see this "every source will say the same". You have yet to provide a source. For all I know, this is from www.Iloveisrael.com or www.killpalestinians.org.
Every source does NOT say what you say, that is very untrue.
Irgun was a terror organization who targetted civilians.
Quote:
Some of the better-known attacks by Irgun were the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem on 22 July 1946 and the Deir Yassin massacre (accomplished together with the Stern Gang) on 9 April 1948. In the West, Irgun was described as a terrorist organization by The New York Times newspaper,[2][3], The Times (of London) [4][5], the British Broadcasting Corporation [6], the Anglo-American Committee of Enquiry[7], and prominent world and Jewish figures, such as Winston Churchill[8], Hannah Arendt, Albert Einstein, and many others.[9] Irgun attacks prompted a formal declaration from the World Zionist Congress in 1946, which strongly condemned "the shedding of innocent blood as a means of political warfare".[10]
Irgun was a political predecessor to Israel's right-wing Herut (or "Freedom") party, which led to today's Likud party. Likud has led or been part of most Israeli governments since 1977.
Here are some of the terror actions Irgun performed:Quote:
The Deir Yassin massacre refers to the killing of between 107 and 120 Palestinian villagers
Quote:
Date Casualties Comments
March, 1937 2 Arabs killed on Bat-Yam beach[citation needed] -
April 12, 1938 2 Arabs and 2 British policemen were killed by a bomb in a train in Haifa. -
April 17, 1938 An Arab was killed by a bomb detonated in a cafe in Haifa -
May 17, 1938 An Arab policeman was killed in an attack on a bus in the Jerusalem-Hebron road. -
May 24, 1938 3 Arabs were shot and killed in Haifa. -
June 23, 1938 2 Arabs were killed near Tel-Aviv. -
June 26, 1938 7 Arabs were killed by a bomb in Jaffa. -
June 27, 1938 An Arab was killed in the yard of a hospital in Haifa. -
Late June, 1938 Unspecified number of Arabs killed by a bomb that was thrown into a crowded Arab market place in Jerusalem. [10] -
July 5, 1938 7 Arabs were killed in several shooting attacks in Tel-Aviv. -
On the same day 3 Arabs were killed by a bomb detonated in a bus in Jerusalem. -
On the same day an Arab was killed in another attack in Jerusalem. -
July 6 1938 18 Arabs and 5 Jews were killed by two simultaneous bombs in the Arab Melon market in Haifa. -
July 8, 1938 4 Arabs were killed by a bomb in Jerusalem. -
July 16, 1938 10 Arabs were killed by a bomb at a marketplace in Jerusalem. -
July 25, 1938 53 Arabs were killed by a bomb at a marketplace in Haifa. -
August 26, 1938 24 Arabs were killed by a bomb at a marketplace in Jaffa. -
February 27, 1939 33 Arabs were killed in multiple attacks, incl. 24 by bomb in Arab market in Suk Quarter of Haifa
and 4 by bomb in Arab vegetable market in Jerusalem. -
May 29, 1939 5 Arabs were killed by a mine detonated at the Rex cinema in Jerusalem. -
On the same day 5 Arabs were shot and killed during a raid on the village of Biyar 'Adas. -
June 2, 1939 5 Arabs were killed by a bomb at the Jaffa Gate in Jerusalem -
June 12, 1939 A post office in Jerusalem was bombed, killing a British bomb expert trying to defuse the bombs. -
June 16, 1939 6 Arabs were killed in several attacks in Jerusalem. -
June 19, 1939 20 Arabs were killed by explosives mounted on a donkey at a marketplace in Haifa. -
June 29, 1939 13 Arabs were killed in multiple shootings during one-hour period. -
June 30, 1939 An Arab was killed at a marketplace in Jerusalem. -
On the same day 2 Arabs were shot and killed in Lifta. -
July 3, 1939 An Arab was killed by a bomb at a marketplace in Haifa. -
July 4, 1939 2 Arabs were killed in two attacks in Jerusalem. -
July 20, 1939 An Arab was killed at a train station in Jaffa. -
On the same day 6 Arabs were killed in several attacks in Tel-Aviv. -
On the same day 3 Arabs were killed in Rehovot. -
August 27, 1939 2 British officers were killed by a mine in Jerusalem. -
September 27, 1944 ~150 Irgun members attacked four British police stations; unknown number of casualties [11] -
September 29, 1944 senior British police officer of the Criminal Intelligence Department assassinated in Jerusalem [11] -
July 22, 1946 King David Hotel Bombing; 91 fatalities, most civilians -- 41 Arabs, 17 Jews, and 15 British [12]
Irgun seems to be the first to use donkey suicide bombers....
As you see, Irgun executed terrorist actions and can therefore be classified as a terror group. Or do you feel it is legit to bomb hotels, as long as jews do it and not Hamas?
My source is Wikipedia, look up "irgun" and you'll find it all there.
And I'll repeat:
Quote:
Irgun was described as a terrorist organization by the New York Times[2][3], the Anglo-American Committee of Enquiry[4], and prominent world and Jewish figures, such as Winston Churchill[5], Hannah Arendt, Albert Einstein, and many others[6].
Today, the UN hq was bombed and all their supplies lost. A big red cross hospital was also bombed, and 500 patients are now trapped inside the ruins while the hospital is burning.
All supplies are destroyed.
The UN and the Red Cross condemn the bombings and says it is surely WAR CRIMES and clearly against international law.
This is terror, simple as that. You can't bomb civilian and humanitarian targets on purpose. This is the 4th hospital they bomb.
Edit: Btw, many of you claim Hamas is responsible for the civilian casualties because they hide among civilians, which is ofc bs.
But in these UN buildings/schools that now have been bombed, was alot of civilian refugees who AVOIDED being where Hamas was. Refugees were also gathered at the hospital. But Israel bombed anyways.
So where can civilians hide? Israel will find them and bomb them anyways.
The UN hq contained 700 civilians, 700!
You're right. Intelligence can be faulty. But when you see the secondary explosions you hit the right target.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemo
The fact that people make mistakes doesn't mean the intent is to kill civilians.
We talked about it already. It's a matter of cost and effect and risk assessment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemo
When looking at the contingencies, starting a ground assault without an aerial assault was a lot less cost effective. You don't have to be a genius to know that a lot more soldiers will die with an aerial assault ahead of them.
I don't see a reason to lose thousands of Israeli soldiers to save a few civilians.
Now that it's cost effective, we risk tens of ours soldiers to save a few civilians.
The ones that are missing are our ground forces... They are also the ones that killed some of our soldiers with friendly fire. Aerial attacks are much more precise. However, when you hit a weapon depot that has a lot of explosives in it, it causes a lot of collateral damage. That is the reason you think the air strikes are so much worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemo
Elections were not determined by the end date of the cease fire.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemo
When you put rockets and other weaponry in these places you make them military targets.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemo
When you fire from these places, you make them military targets.
If Israel would have shot it's artillery fire from a civilian location, would you said it wasn't the military shooting and that the target is protected?
I'll go with one vs one:Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemo
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/blo...ne_cartoon.gif
I don't agree with that, as I see it it is clear that article 28 is supposed to be an exception from the rule. More like "we will still attack your airbase even if you bring a civilian there" rather than "I heard that someone saw a rocket in/near that orphanage, where are my bombers?".Quote:
Originally Posted by Mourhelm
Did you read that Post article I linked you to? The one where "Israeli Military Officials" are quoted saying something to the effect that facilities with loose links to Hamas were chosen as targets not because it would have any military impact but because it would have a psychological impact?Quote:
Striking the head of the organization is legitimate just as it will be legitimate to attack the Israeli prime minister or IDF's chief of staff. These targets have military importance since they command the military.
I mean seriously, a bunch of newly graduated police officers? A university?
Many independent individuals of aid organizations have reported that this is being done, I think there were some reference to that in the links I posted earlier. Times claimed it had evidence of many people that had been exposed to the substance.Quote:
That is a breach. I don't believe that Israel is using this kind of weaponry, but if it does, it is illegal.
I am not aware of any information that makes the attacks I talk about allowed, if I were I wouldn't be bringing this up. About intent, indifference to the risk of misses or mistakes is a form of intent as well. I think there are far too many targets that should not have been hit for them all to be mistakes.Quote:
Most of the time when you say something was hit you neglect some vital information (like the fact that it was a weapon depot or that Hamas was firing from that location).
If what you are saying is 100% correct, I condemn those attacks. Remember that even the best accuracy weapon misses sometimes and that on the field of battle humans make mistakes. That is regrettable but doesn't not show intent.
Surely I can not be legitimizing anything when I keep repeating that it is illegal...Quote:
What you are doing is legitimising the use of human shields.
I'm not sure what video you're referring to, I've been without Internet for a while but I tried to read up in the thread. I can't recall any other video than that one about international law. I agree though, I don't think that it should be in Israel's interest either, but civilians are dying nonetheless.Quote:
You've seen the video that they did that at least once before. It is not in Israel's interest to attack civilians or the UN.
The point was that the Palestinian weapons are much inferior to the Israeli ones, which explains the big difference in casualties. War ships, airplanes, artillery and tanks in addition to the standard stick.Quote:
Here's a partial list of "sticks and stones":
- long-range 122mm rockets (Grad)
- Qassam rockets
- Sagger missiles
- RPG rockets
- Konkurs missiles
- Mortars
- SA-7 shoulder missiles
- various antiaircraft machineguns
- IEDs (Improvised Explosive Device)
- Machine guns and rifles
So by your logic, Israel is just using more accurate sticks and stones.
I read last week (Times) that those rockets that were the reason for this catastrophe killed 20 people in 8 years. At a 2.5 kills per year it'd mean that in order to catch up with the civilians Israel has killed in 3 weeks Hamas would have to send rockets for 200 years...
Speaking of civilian deaths, is it any surprise that extremist organizations like Hamas get the support of people when Israeli military is dealing out death to all people alike? I don't see how this attack could have any long-term benefits from Israeli perspective, disregarding the increased political support for hawkish groups like hamas and the likely increase in their recruitment base this attack eliminates any chance of some kind of peaceful resolution in the foreseeable future.
Combined U.S. military and economic assistance to Israel has reached $100 billion since Israel's founding in 1948, according to the U.S. Embassy.
The Palestinians also have been recipients of large sums of international assistance in recent years. The Palestinians, who have suffered an economic meltdown during the past five years of violence, are getting roughly $1 billion a year, mostly for urgent needs such as food and housing for families who lost homes in the fighting.
The Palestinians say they will need much larger sums to help develop the impoverished Gaza Strip following the Israeli withdrawal.
At the Group of 8 summit meeting of industrialized nations last week in Scotland, the participants agreed in principle on the sum of $3 billion annually during each of the next three years for the Palestinians
Thats roughly 4 billion a year in aid per year ...twice that of the aid given to Israel over the span of its statehood on avarage ...and for what just so these people can by arms to terrorize Israel? Nope it's got to end ,I'm tired of given my taxes to peolpe who don't have the guts to pull themselves up by the bootstraps and sieze control from thier extermeist movements....
Any and all fledging states who rule by religious, extremeist and militaritstic doctrine will only find themselves isolated from the rest of the world or destroyed which ever comes first.
Wrong again Stoffi go back to the begining.
Organized Arab Terrorism Begins in 1920
March 1,1920: In an attack by large numbers of Arabs from the village of Halsa, 8 Jews were killed at Tel Hai, including Josef Trumpeldor.
April 25, 1920: Following the murder by Arabs of a Jewish settler, the whole settlement of Bnei Yehuda (east of the Sea of Galilee) was abandoned.
Other settlements attacked by Arab terrorists in March and April 1920: Ayelet Hashahar, Mishmar HaYarden, Mahanayim, Rosh Pina, Sharona, Kfar Tavor, Degania, and Menahemya.
As a result of repeated attacks by Arab terrorists in 1920, a number of other Jewish agricultural settlements were evacuated, including Metulla, Kfar Giladi, and Hamara.
Attacks Continue in May 1921:
May 1921: Arabs attack Jews in Rehovot, Jerusalem, Jaffa, Petah Tikva and Haifa.
May 1921: Arabs attack Jewish Quarter of the Old City
Widespread Arab Attacks August 23 - 26, 1929
On August 23, 1929, over a thousand Arabs in three main groups emerged from the old city of Jerusalem and attacked any Jew they could catch in several of the Jewish quarters of the city, and in its suburbs. Attacks on Jews quickly spread throughout Palestine. By nightfall of August 26, 133 Jews had been killed and 339 wounded, including:
In Hebron, 59 Jewish men, women and children were killed on August 24. In one house alone, 23 were killed and then dismembered; many others were tortured and maimed.
20 Jews killed in Safed — mostly children and old people. 32 wounded, several tortured.
7 Jews killed in Hadar Hacarmel.
In Motza, 6 Jews killed, including 2 children and a rabbi.
In Tel Aviv, 6 Jews killed. 2 Jews killed in Beer-Toviya. Settlement looted and then set on fire.
Settlement of Ekron looted and then destroyed.
Beit HaKerem attacked.
1 Jew killed in Hulda.
Onslaught of Arab Terror, 1936:
April 15, 1936: 2 Jews in Tulkarm killed by Arabs.
April 19: 9 Jews in Jaffa killed by Arabs.
April 20: 5 Jews in Jaffa killed by Arabs.
April 22: Jewish woman in Jaffa killed by Arabs.
April 26: Jewish houses in Nazareth and Beit Shean burned by Arabs.
April 26: An Arab mob beats up Jewish boy in Jerusalem.
April 28: 4 Jewish farm workers in Migdal injured by Arabs.
April 29: Arabs burn down a Jewish forest in Balfouriya.
April 29: Arab mob forms in Jerusalem, but British police break it up before Jews harmed.
May 1: 2 Jews in Haifa killed by Arabs.
May 3: Arab mob burns down Jewish timber yard in Haifa.
May 4: Jewish orchards in Mishmar Ha-Emek burned by Arabs.
May 4: Arabs destroy 200 acres of wheat in Ramat David.
May 5: 500 orange trees uprooted in Tel Mond by Arabs.
May 7: Arabs fire on Jewish bus in Beit Dagan.
May 10: Arabs burn crops and haystacks in Givat Ada.
May 10: Arabs uproot newly planted olive grove in Zikhron Yaakov.
May 11: Arabs burn Jewish crops in Ramat David.
May 12: Arabs burn threshing floor in Zikhron Yaakov.
May 13: 2 elderly Jews murdered by Arabs in Old City.
May 13: Jewish shops in Haifa stoned by Arabs.
May 13: More orchards burned in Mishmar Ha-Emek.
May 16: 3 Jews in Jerusalem shot dead by Arabs while coming out of a cinema.
May 19: Arabs kill a Jew in the Old City of Jerusalem.
May 20: 2 Jews wounded during Arab attack on bus.
May 24: Arabs severely wound a Jewish guard at Majd el Krum.
May 25: Arabs kill a Jew at Hebrew University.
From May 30 - June 13, 1936, in more than 11 attacks, the Arabs destroy over 15,000 trees planted by Jews, as well as many crops and barns.
May 31: Jew at Givat Shaul killed by Arabs.
June 1: Jewish bus passenger killed by Arab rifle fire.
June 5: 5 Jewish passengers injured when Arabs threw bomb at bus in Haifa.
June 6: Jewish girl severely injured by Arab fire while traveling on bus.
June 8: Arabs attack Jews on their way to the Dead Sea Potash works.
In the third month of terror (June 16 - July 17) campaign, 9 Jews were killed, mostly in Arab ambushes on buses, and 75,000 trees planted by Jews were destroyed.
From mid-July to Sept 22, attacks increased. In over 27 attacks, 33 Jews were killed, several hundred wounded, many in ambushes while driving unarmed. Other attacks include:
July 23: 9 Jewish children injured in Arab bomb attack on religious school in Jerusalem.
August 13: Jewish father and his 3 children killed by bomb thrown by Arabs through window of their home in Safed.
August 17: 2 Jewish nurses and young Jewish girl killed by Arabs in Tel Aviv.
September 19, 1936: Arab bomb kills 7 year old Jewish child in Tiberias
[Above data on Arab terrorism came from Martin Gilbert's Atlas of the Arab-Israeli Conflict.
We can go on throwing out these numbers for weeks on end but you still have not answered my question Stoffi.....?????
Why has not the Palestinians demanded thier land back from Jordan?
Your question is a red herring Allanons, but just once, I'll bite.
Jordan has not engaged in a systematic policy of killing palestinian civilians in sizable numbers for decades.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMistressOfBaal
Well, she probably talks about shelling the smuggling tunnels dug by the kids:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mourhelm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9IL86T6Nc8
Interesting that Egypt, a muslim country, keeps the borders with the Gaza strip closed.
Why? Because Israel threathened to abandon it's "responsabilities" to supply Gaza "with electricity, water and medication and turning that responsability over to Cairo" (Al-Arabia TV 2008ian25).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdIy3XuWP6M
So in fact Palestinians are "our muslim brothers", but just until Israel takes care of them, as we don't want anything to do except when we can have some benefits over the propaganda.
Quote:
Originally Posted by allonons
The West Bank was owned by Jordan, now it is not. They got it back.
Day by day, Israel steals more and more land.
TheMistressOfBaal answers it well. Jordan treats palestinians far, far better than ISrael, and Jordan does not steal palestinian land every day that goes by.
And you have STILL not given me a source for your propaganda. Please don't throw out propaganda unless you can back it up with a valid source.
As I've shown, Irgun and Levi WERE terror groups and were known as a terror groups back then, and still is.
Well, unless you think blowing up hotels and busses are okay. And you don't think that's okay, do you? If you think it's okay, don't ever claim Hamas has done any kind of terror whatsoever.
And as shown, Israel was built on these terror groups, and they glorify these terrorists as national heroes. Why do they praise bus bombings one day, then condemn bus bombings the other day when the wrong race does it?
Explain that, please.
So I'll ask you the same question I asked Nemo: If Israel would have shot it's artillery fire from a civilian location, would you say it is protected?Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
If I would put a sign over a weapon depot, saying it's a temple, and bring civilians to pray there, would it be any less a weapon depot?
I'll assume it was really an Israeli military official. Attacking the heads of the organization may get it into a state of disarray and may bring the conflict to an end sooner.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
Well, where is the evidence, why don't they present it at court? It could bring the current action to an end if they prove that Israel does use illegal weaponry.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
There are few misses. If there were many, the less accurate weapons would not be used.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
You say it's illegal, but on the same breath say that Israel should not attack targets that have human shields in them.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
You make it legitimate to use an illegal action to prevent retaliation on the terms that the first illegal action will lead to another illegal action.
International law doesn't agree with you. It states that protected persons can't make a military operation immune to attacks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ht2B9KaDAEwQuote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
There is no denying civilians die. It does not mean Israel aims to kill civilians.
I'll ask a question I asked before: "If someone comes to stab you and you only have a gun, would you just let him kill you or use your gun to protect yourself?"Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
They attack us with a knife knowing we have a gun. They are not naive - they know we will use our gun. They just count on people like you to cry "war crime".
What's your point? Are you saying that because they kill few people they should be allowed to terrorize us?Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
Would you be willing to be afraid every day for eight years?
I'm sure that if these 20 people were members of your family you wouldn't dismiss them so easily.
We waited for eight years before resorting to a full scale attack. We even tried the peaceful solution of removing all Israeli citizens from the Gaza strip. It didn't stop the attacks.
You sound like stoffi again, saying that Hamas should catch up with the kills instead of catching up with the lives. Israel protects its civilians. If Hamas did that too, there would be a lot fewer casualties at the Palestinian side.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
If Hamas was really smart, it would try to make peace with Israel and not fight it nor terrorize it.
You should read the previous posts again. Hamas's charter say explicitly that the only solution is jihad.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
This military action reduces the threat of Hamas by reducing the amount of weapons available to them, the amount of trained soldiers they have and shows the Palestinians that there is a limit to how much we can stand (eight years is a lot more than any other country would take).
You assume Hamas will have more support from its people, but that's not certain. The people in Gaza are not stupid. They know who uses them as human shields, who hides weapons under their mosques, hospitals and schools.
You have it the other way around... The Palestinians have not engaged in a systematic policy of killing Jordanians in sizeable numbers for decades.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMistressOfBaal
Allanons asks why?
A civilian location is always protected except in very extreme cases.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mourhelm
It is a weapon depot. If you put weapons in a temple where civilians go to pray it is still a temple.Quote:
If I would put a sign over a weapon depot, saying it's a temple, and bring civilians to pray there, would it be any less a weapon depot?
This is not about the heads of Hamas it is about Palestinian facilities that have no military value. So you're claiming that the reporter that wrote the Times piece is lying about the quote?Quote:
I'll assume it was really an Israeli military official. Attacking the heads of the organization may get it into a state of disarray and may bring the conflict to an end sooner.
At what court? And how would a newspaper be able to present a case there?Quote:
Well, where is the evidence, why don't they present it at court? It could bring the current action to an end if they prove that Israel does use illegal weaponry.
In Israeli media the misses might be few but I read about attacks every day that I really hope are misses and not intended targets.Quote:
There are few misses. If there were many, the less accurate weapons would not be used.
"Human shields" are still civilians. I thought we had already agreed that it is wrong to kill civilians... If the newly started Palestinian movement "Whateva" bombed a house where there lived 50% Israeli civilians and 50% conscripts killing all of them you would say they are terrorists. Which of course is true. Israel does the same thing basically.Quote:
You say it's illegal, but on the same breath say that Israel should not attack targets that have human shields in them.
You make it legitimate to use an illegal action to prevent retaliation on the terms that the first illegal action will lead to another illegal action.
International law doesn't agree with you. It states that protected persons can't make a military operation immune to attacks.
Ever heard the phrase "two wrongs don't make one right"? International law states that 1. Civilians must not be killed and 2. sites cannot be made immune by the presence of a protected person. See how those articles work together? The primary rule is that civilians must not be hurt the second rule is an exception from the primary rule (the second rule doesn't even mention the killing of civilians it just says that the presence of a protected person doesn't give immunity to the site itself). This in no way removes Israel's responsibility not to kill civilians.
Of course not, but when Israel kills as many of those that it aims to kill as of the innocent bystanders it shows that Israel is doing something wrong. In the comments to that video they say it is a year old... Anyway, I have no way to identify what kind of building it is much less where it is located.Quote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ht2B9KaDAEw
There is no denying civilians die. It does not mean Israel aims to kill civilians.
The analogy is a bit flawed since it indicates that the difference in strength would be the same as that between a gun and a knife (doesn't have to be that big depending on the circumstances) and because it indicates that the Israeli arsenal is limited to one weapon.Quote:
I'll ask a question I asked before: "If someone comes to stab you and you only have a gun, would you just let him kill you or use your gun to protect yourself?"
They attack us with a knife knowing we have a gun. They are not naive - they know we will use our gun. They just count on people like you to cry "war crime".
Furthermore it is flawed since it does not reflect the different proportions of the actions of both sides. What you have described is a struggle between two persons where the outcome is the death of one of them. The real situation is a struggle between a para-military terror organization and a state's military forces. I don't object to the killing of Hamas soldiers, I object to the killing of the civilian bystanders, and of that Israel is doing the big part.
Not at all, I'm showing that Israel's response is disproportionate. The amount of civilians that Israel kills is much greater than what is caused by the acts of terror which you claim are the reasons for the response. The terror inflicted by Israel is far greater.Quote:
What's your point? Are you saying that because they kill few people they should be allowed to terrorize us?
I would be rather secure in the knowledge that I am far more likely to be killed in a car crash or something similar.Quote:
Would you be willing to be afraid every day for eight years?
Right back at you, just this time it happens recently departed 500 new family members.Quote:
I'm sure that if these 20 people were members of your family you wouldn't dismiss them so easily.
I don't mean that, I meant that Israel has done far more killing.Quote:
You sound like stoffi again, saying that Hamas should catch up with the kills instead of catching up with the lives. Israel protects its civilians. If Hamas did that too, there would be a lot fewer casualties at the Palestinian side.
Hamas was ready to sign a cease fire yesterday...Quote:
If Hamas was really smart, it would try to make peace with Israel and not fight it nor terrorize it.
This might not be reported in Israel but from what I'm hearing there is increasing support for Hamas in the West Bank and around the Arabic nations. I think it would be foolish to expect the situation to be different in gaza.Quote:
You assume Hamas will have more support from its people, but that's not certain. The people in Gaza are not stupid. They know who uses them as human shields, who hides weapons under their mosques, hospitals and schools.
weird how you apply moral laws only on one side of your toast.
It's not ok for israel to kill hamas militants using human shields but it's ok for hamas to aim for israeli civilians?
There's no such thing as 'disproportionate' response.
The 'proportionate' response would have been to fire missiles only at civilian targets and not aim specifically for hamas at all, no? that would be the mirror response.
What Israel is doing is the responsible thing of breaking a terrorist organization.
Here are some vids for you to be going with:
Hamas in their own voice, their agenda and perspective:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0fjP9zfRsA
A little palestinian girl who's been hit by an israeli attack knows very well why there's a war, who started it and who is responsible:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLIdxF-GHWw
The wonderful work hamas has been doing with children ---
Remember, this did not exist before hamas, and is just one more example of how a iran/syria 'axis of evil' terrorist organization operates when it has nothing good intented for the actual people around it, using them most cynically as tools.
How evil can you get, when you take a child and teach him to shoot, then when he gets shot back, cry that israel has killed a child? how evil?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LaAv...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gi-c6...eature=related
And now just for a quick nightcap, all this glory and rulership that radical islam wants, how will it affect YOU?
How has Israel affected YOU?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saeky9I5T9c
Weird how your mind seems to conjure up stuff that isn't there. I encourage you to find one post where I say that it is OK for hamas to kill Israeli civilians. On this topic I have always stated that killing civilians is wrong, no matter who does it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightzy
I will begin by assuming that you have some sort of sense of proportions despite your initial statements. Let us say that Israel wanted to save the lives of their 10 soldiers or whatever it is and instead of this military action chose to nuke Gaza. Could you agree that this response would be disproportionate? (if so apply the reasons why the nuke is disproportionate to the current situation and you see that "molten lead" is also disproportionate, if not I doubt I can convince you of anything).Quote:
There's no such thing as 'disproportionate' response.
The 'proportionate' response would have been to fire missiles only at civilian targets and not aim specifically for hamas at all, no? that would be the mirror response.
What Israel is doing is the responsible thing of breaking a terrorist organization.
Responding with the same kind of attacks as Hamas uses would actually in a way be better since you'd kill far less civilians, but it is terrorism and of course it is wrong. For any kind of credibility the response needs to be directed at the culprits and not civilians. A proportionate response would be something that does not kill 200 times the civilians that the rockets that are the reason for the war do. Doesn't it bother you that Israel's military is responsible for so much more terror than the internationally recognized terror group?
Movies: Yes Hamas is bad. I don't support Hamas. What's the point?
Will get back to you on the last one when I have more time, assuming it is of any relevance other than being a bit funny.
Why does Israel embrace terror groups like Irgun and Levi?
Why does Israel bomb 4 hospitals, market places, UN buildings/schools filled with refugees who tried to NOT be "human shields"?
And why did they bomb the food/medicine stores of Gaza?
I thought bombing cafe's and busses were wrong(Irgun/Levi did this), and I thought Israel wasn't supposed to bomb civilian/humanitarian targets... But yet they do it...
Those questions still stand unanswered. All are questions pro-Israel people don't wanna see at all, because they are hard to explain.
But I ask them anyways.
Why?
Israel has no terror groups like irgun and levi.
Those were back in the british mandate years and as once said "everyone except jesus christ was born in sin", including nations. If you want you can go back to the norman conquest of the british islands and say it was wrong, but that's just how it was.
All terrorism and intent targetting of civilians is wrong. Israelis did have terrorist organizations, but they don't now.
Now it has a lot of leftist organizations, human rights advocates, etc.
Where are the leftists or peace seekers of the palestinians?
I'll tell you where, they're all in the west bank.
Why are they not in gaza?
Because iranian hamas threw them off of roofs and executed them publically.
And what of lebanon? where are the peace loving clear headed people of lebanon?
Well, they're in the north of lebanon, because iranian hezbollah EVICTED lebanese rule in southern lebannon and controls the area through military means.
That happened quickly after syria was forced to stop militarily occupying the WHOLE of lebannon and making it a proxy state.
With such barbarians are you even surprised of the 'human shield' concept (which was thought up and 'mainstreamified' by a radical hamas operative which israel has recently eliminated) ?
Is it not surprising that gaza lives in complete and utter poverty and yet yasser arafat became a multi billionaire, or that hamas has money to spend on thousands and thousands of rockets, explosives, guns and ammunition? Could they have built gaza and modernized it in the last years?
Yes, they most definitely could have, but people still stuck in the mindset of legalized slavery (most muslim countries), no vote for women and covering them up with towels, and throwing their political opposition off of rooftops and publically executing them are simply NOT GOOD NEIGHBOURS.
That's why hamas has to be destroyed and removed, and that's only from the palestinian side, not even considering israeli security.
Israel can't always rely on UN law... the entire 'arab nation' broke UN law time and time again right when israel came to be (by UN decision) by attacking and waging in war.
AFKAIN:
Enough bull**** for a moment, you can discuss proportionism all day but if you steal money you're not only forced by law to give the money back, but also pay extra or go to jail.
Proportionism is not about end result, it's about intention.
And israels response is clearly disproportional, since hamas is targetting civilians while israel is targetting militants, who put weapons in peoples houses and shoot rockets from schools.
Guerilla warfare is considered illegal by the world court for this reason exacly, but hamas could not care less.
With this in mind, namely that your enemy has nothing but contempt for world law, proportionism, or any other big concepts you would readily apply to israel, what would you do if for 8 years rockets rained on your house?
You got it very correct there. If YOU steal money YOU are going to pay back the money and go to jail. Not your neighbor, not your neighbor's cat and not some kid on the other side of town. In that second part I disagree with you though, proportionality has a lot to do with the end result. But anyway, indifference for the end result is a form of intention. If Israel did all these attacks without knowing that civilians would be killed and if these civilians were not considered "acceptable losses" the attacks would have ended a long time ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightzy
Planning to kill 5 people but not being able to kill anyone is a lesser crime than planning to kill 1 and instead killing 2.
By doing these kinds of attacks on civilians Israel shows a contempt similar to Hamas's. I fail to see why two acts of terror are better than one.Quote:
Guerilla warfare is considered illegal by the world court for this reason exacly, but hamas could not care less.
With this in mind, namely that your enemy has nothing but contempt for world law, proportionism, or any other big concepts you would readily apply to israel, what would you do if for 8 years rockets rained on your house?
When you have tons of rockets under a mosque/school/house it is an extreme case.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
So what you're saying is that the name of the place is what counts, not the essence.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
If a building has a military purpose (like a weapon depot) it is a military installation.
The fact that you don't recognize the military value of a target, does not mean it doesn't have a military value.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
I said I assume he's telling the truth. But if he doesn't even say who is his source, how can we be sure it is anyone qualified to say such a thing?Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
There is an international court and there is the supreme court in Israel.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
They can also show their evidence over TV and not just claim they have evidence.
I doubt you'll find a house with 50% conscripts for the sole reason that conscripts live in military bases. When they go home on vacation they are not in active duty.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
Assuming "Whatever" organization found intelligence that there is such a house and aimed at the conscripts because of their military value, they wouldn't be called terrorists (as long as they won't claim later that they targeted the civilians - like they often do).
International law states that the responsibility for the civilians at the location is on the operating side. So when Hamas fires from within civilian population and disregards international law it does not make it immune to attacks.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
Civilians who die because Israel legally returns fire are Hamas's responsibility. Why don't you tell them they are the war criminals because they disregard international law, putting their people at risk.
You should be telling them to stop firing (at least from within civilian population) because they cause civilian casualties.
If you think you can do a better job at disabling Hamas, you are to share your plan and take action.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
You might also want to check first hand what Hamas is doing wrong.
I never said it was a recent video (I didn't even post that video at the first place). I just showed it to you to prove that Hamas fired from a school at least once before.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
I don't get your point.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
Hamas knows what Israel has to retaliate with. They use their arsenal and we use ours. It is legitimate.
Israel tries to minimize the civilian casualties. Hamas tries to maximize them to get people like you to say it is illegal but legitimate to use human shields.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
proportionality in the Law of War has nothing to do with the relative number of casualties on the two sides.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
According to Article 51 of Protocol 1 Additional to the Geneva Conventions
This means that If the target has high military value it can be attacked even if it seems there will be some civilian casualties in doing so. What has to be proportional is the military value of the target versus the risk to civilians.Quote:
5(b) An attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.
There is no requirement that Israel place the lives of its own citizens in danger to protect the lives of Palestinian civilians.
Destroying missiles before they can be fired at Israeli civilians and potentially kill many of them justifies the risk to Palestinian civilian, who should be removed from the area by Hamas anyways.
When it comes to less valuable targets, Israel uses ground forces in order to minimize the civilian casualties.
Do you feel terrorized when you get into a car?Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
I don't. The reason is that when I get into the car I'm aware of the risk and take it willingly.
When you get attacked by rockets, you don't take the risk willingly and you can't anticipate it.
Also, the reason that there are few casualties is that Israel takes action to protect its civilians. If it didn't take any action, the number of rockets being fired would have been higher and the chance of getting hit by one would have increased.
I don't dismiss the death of the Palestinian civilians. I'm just saying that Israel's action is justifiable and legal.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
Any past illegal action made by Israeli forces ended up at court and the responsible punished.
I think that Hamas is responsible for the Palestinian casualties. The Palestinians are victims of Hamas who doesn't care about anything but jihad and the destruction of Israel.
When a weapon depot explodes and the human shield dies of secondary explosions, who is the one to blame?Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
I'm not saying that Israel didn't cause Palestinian casualties. I'm just saying that the high casualty count is because Hamas sacrifices its own people to try and get targets immune and to get sympathy from the world for the high death count.
First, I was talking about in general, not about the current action. If Hamas wanted peace it wouldn't have put the destruction of Israel in its charter.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
Second, do you know the exact terms of the cease fire?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uoi0TGyx_uAQuote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
As I said, nothing is certain.
I think the Palestinians get support - which is good. It will help them rebuild.
I don't think Hamas gets as much support as you hear.
Extremist know to do a lot of noise. It does not make them the majority.
Mourhelm, you say there were rockets in the schools that were bombed? That is simply not correct. There were refugees in those schools, civilians, not rockets, not hamas members.
So how on earth can you defend bombing UN schools, hospitals, food storages, market places, etc?
And even if there was a rocket in a school with hundreds of children, YOU DON'T ****ING BOMB THE SCHOOL when it's filled with children.
I really dont understand how you can defend bombing schools, inventing reasons for why Israel did it, trying to defend it. I see you talk about Israeli schools all the time, why is it okay to bomb palestinian schools and not Israeli schools?
Also, you say Hamas is responsible for these casualties. Hamas does not bomb Gaza, Hamas do not force Israel to bomb schools and homes, Israel CHOSE this out of free will and they are the ones doing it.
On the other hand, Hamas tries to bomb Israel which they are responsible for. But they are certainly not responsible for Israel's actions in Gaza, no one forced Israel to commit this horrific act of terror against the palestinian people.
I might also add that Israel has kidnapped most of the democratically elected representatives in Gaza. This is a war crime.
The last time an Israeli kidnapped someone, a war started. Hamas have many good reasons to fight back and retaliate.
Too bad international law doesn't agree with you. The military value of a target determines the proportionality.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
Israel is not indifferent. If it was, it would just destroy the entire Gaza strip over night and be done with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
Acceptable losses are determined by international law. The higher the military value of a target the more it is acceptable to hit it, despite the risk to civilians. Remember you can't guarantee 0 civilian casualties in a war.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
Israel doesn't attack civilians. It attacks Hamas. Civilians regrettably die in the process because Hamas ignores international laws and keeps them around as human shields.Quote:
Originally Posted by AFKain
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mourhelm
But that's a lie. The UN says it's a lie, Red Cross says it's a lie. And as I've shown, Israel targets non-Hamas targets on purpose, and Israel was created by targetting civilians.(Irgun, Levi, Haganah, ++)
You try to elude my difficult questions, they won't go away. You act as Israelis usually do, avoid the tough questions.
Wouldn't it be time to stand up and take it like a man?
Why do you target civilians? Saying you don't, is simply not an answer because as we've seen, you do target civilians.
NONE of the UN buildings or the 4 hospitals contained Hamas members, which makes it impossible to claim you fired at Hamas.
Did you know that Israel currently holds the world record in breaking international laws and un conventions?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mourhelm
Lucky palestinians....
Quick death is the easy way, slowly tortured like now is the worst.
Why are you such an extremist? I can see both Israel AND Hamas doing something they shouldn't. I condemn both for doing what they are doing.
Why do you deny the obvious? Are you a fanatic?