1 Israeli = 155 Palestinians

Nick_oliveri

Poccington wrote: »

However, in conflicts like this you have military forces working out of civilian populated areas, which is where the use of WP starts to get complicated.

Compicated? Whats complicated about it? It'd be different craic if Hamas used this evil **** over Israeli skies.

Poccington

Nick_oliveri wrote: »

Compicated? Whats complicated about it? It'd be different craic if Hamas used this evil **** over Israeli skies.

It's quite complicated actually.

Since the Geneva Convention declares the deliberate attack of civilians or civilian areas to be illegal. However, military forces often occupy and fight out of civilian areas. However, it's considered completely legal to attack military forces in civilian areas as long as any civilian deaths aren't considered deliberate. The CWC in turn completely forbids the use of such munitions as WP in civilian areas... But if military forces are fighting out of said area, when does it stop becoming a civilian area? Even under the Geneva Convention which allows the targetting of military forces in civilian areas, if they use munitions in that area surely they realise that civilians would be hurt so could it be considered deliberate harm of civilians? Even though they've still to engage the military targets in that area? So yes, it's quite complicated and the laws really leave a lot to personal interpretation.

Although it should be noted that the CWC considers the use of WP as a smokescreen to be completely legal, so this whole post is quite pointless

sink

marty blane wrote: »

Erm, these ARE cluster bombs, incendery cluster bombs maybe but cluster bombs none the less

Because cluster bombs release many small bomblets over a wide area, unexploded bomblets can kill or maim civilians long after a conflict has ended. Unexploded submunitions are very costly to locate and remove.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub-munition
from wiki
Cluster munitions or cluster bombs are air-dropped or ground-launched munitions that eject smaller submunitions: a cluster of bomblets. The most common types are intended to kill enemy personnel and destroy vehicles. Submunition based weapons designed to destroy runways, electric power transmission lines, deliver chemical or biological weapons, or to scatter land mines have also been produced. Some submunition based weapons can disperse non-munition payloads, such as leaflets

They are not cluster bombs because they do not contain bomblets with secondary fuses on them. There is no danger of non detonation leaving behind unexploded ordinance dangerous to civilians.

Janes Ammunition Handbook wrote:

The 155 mm M825A1 smoke WP is a separate-loading base-ejection smoke-producing projectile. It uses a body virtually identical to that of the 155 mm M483A1 DPICM. The projectile has a 155 mm M483A1 DPICM aluminium ogive section and expulsion charge, a forged-steel modified M483A1 body and a threaded steel ring and aluminium body base. Inside the body is a hermetically sealed canister containing 116 WP saturated felt wedges, each 190 mm thick and separated into four quadrants of 29 wedges each. A 63.5 mm diameter burster charge containing approximately 45 g of Composition B runs the entire length of the canister's centre cavity.In operation, the nose-mounted time fuze is set to function at a selected point during the projectile's trajectory. When the fuze functions, it ignites a 51 g expulsion charge of M10 propellant which creates sufficient internal pressure within the ogive to push off the body base and eject the canister. The expulsion charge also ignites a 100 ms pyrotechnic delay, enabling the canister to be fully ejected from the carrier body before the burster charge (21.2 g of Composition A5) ignites to break open the canister and release the WP-saturated felt wedges. The total weight of WP in the wedges is 5.78 kg. A launch-activated safe-and-arm module from an M739 Point-Detonating (PD) fuze separates the forward end of the main burster charge from the heat-sensitive pyrotechnic-delay element.In less than 45 seconds from the moment they meet the air, the separated felt wedges start to burn and produce

http://www.janes.com/extracts/extract/jah/jah_0461.html

Manic Moran

Erm, these ARE cluster bombs, incendery cluster bombs maybe but cluster bombs none the less

Interesting point. The description seems to indicate that the payload is basically fragmented pieces of WP as opposed to submunitions, however. BTW, that so-called 'military expert' should be fired. They were pretty obvious as soon as you looked at the photos as to what they were.

WP may be used against equipment and personnel, as long as you're not relying in the noxious effects. It's one of those bizarre rules someone came up with which says it's far more humane to burn people to death instead of making them choke. The 'laws of war' are full of such stupidity.

Oh and by the way we here in Ireland are one of the signatories of this ban.

It's pretty easy to ban something you don't have, have no intention of needing, or when you don't have an air force capable of dropping the things. All three apply in the case of Ireland.

I'll ban Lambourghinis. They're too fast to be safe, and I'll never own one so it's no skin off my nose.

NTM

dublincelt

Mairt wrote: »

Pal (hehe) you wouldn't know a 'cluster bomb' from a 'cluster fuck'.


Your wild rants and accusations do nothing for the guys genuinely trying to debate this with each other.

They ARE a form of cluster munition as has been pointed out on a previous post. And believe me the Palestinians in the firing line certainly know what they are.

And dont call me pal. Does all this violence give you a Hard On? Il bet it does ya weirdo!

youcrazyjesus!

Manic Moran wrote: »

It's pretty easy to ban something you don't have, have no intention of needing, or when you don't have an air force capable of dropping the things. All three apply in the case of Ireland.

I'll ban Lambourghinis. They're too fast to be safe, and I'll never own one so it's no skin off my nose.

Who determines who "needs" them? Are there no munitions you can use instead? Surely, if you ever faced a grave threat (an actual threat, not a coward's war run by sadists who get their thrills from murder, ie not picking off fleeing Arabs from 10,000ft and calling it a war), you would be well within your rights to resume production? I'm sure even the UN would throw you a bone on that one.

Many countries who "need" them have banned them. It takes a small leap of faith. Of course if you believe the rules don't and shouldn't apply to you, then that's different obviously.

Nick_oliveri

Oh lawdy.

Manic Moran

Who determines who "needs" them? Are there no munitions you can use instead?

Not that don't have their own problems.

Cluster bombs work great against area targets. Interestingly, only three munitions currently meet the requirements of the Dublin treaty, and two of them have been invented by a non-signatory: The things are expensive. Unfortunately, they only work well against a certain type of target: Vehicles in the open. Sensors don't do anything for area targets such as anti-aircraft artillery batteries, SAMs, or even just troops in open spaces, or against groups of vehicles in buildings.

The personnel issue can be dealt with by the use of Fuel-Air Explosive bombs. Sometimes considered a bit of a mini-nuke, they spray fuel/gas all over an area, then detonate it. Kindof like letting a house fill up with gas before striking a match. Massive overpressure. However, they are of limited effect against armoured vehicles. If you want to go after vehicle formations like a battalion staging area, and if you can't afford the rather pricey cost of SADARM, BAT or the Swedish thing whose name eludes me offhand, cluster bombs are the only way to go. I would submit that since most of the signatories, as far as I know, either have no intention of facing massed targets (eg Ireland), or have enemies with more cluster bombs/better delivery systems than they do, (eg former Soviet states), the ban is either a feelgood measure for the former, or a way of trying to reduce a military disadvantage for the latter.

My main issue with the Dublin treaty, however, is the seven-submunition-limit. It's a stupid, arbitrary number which makes no sense as you just need to fire more rounds to make up the difference, whilst adding a host of other problems.

NTM

ionix5891

little update,according to the latest count on several newspapers


palestinians @ 454 dead ~2300 injured

israelis @ 5 dead ~9 injured

youcrazyjesus!

ionix5891 wrote: »

little update,according to the latest count on several newspapers


palestinians @ 454 dead ~2300 injured

israelis @ 5 dead ~9 injured

Israel's infrastructure is also largely intact too I imagine.

youcrazyjesus!

Manic Moran wrote: »

Not that don't have their own problems.

Invading defenceless countries 8,000 miles away is only a problem for the victim.

Cluster bombs work great against area targets.

And kids, livestock...anything that has the temerity to exist basically. Nuclear bombs also work well against area targets. What's more if those kids do actually make it past the invasion, through the economic recovery period and fight back against a superpower by crowing corn or having children, you'll get them then. Good work. The mindlessness of the military mind is breathtaking.

dublincelt

Israel never wanted peace with Hamas. They never wanted a ceasfire, the attack in November (link below) certainly put paid to that,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/05/israelandthepalestinians

arybvtcw0eolkf

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

Invading defenceless countries 8,000 miles away is only a problem for the victim.



And kids, livestock...anything that has the temerity to exist basically. Nuclear bombs also work well against area targets. What's more if those kids do actually make it past the invasion, through the economic recovery period and fight back against a superpower by crowing corn or having children, you'll get them then. Good work. The mindlessness of the military mind is breathtaking.

Is it beyond the capabilties of the pro-Hamas side to stick to reasoned debate and not resort to vailed personal attacks, wild accusations and rants?.

Even if I wasn't pro-IDF I'd still enjoy reading MM's posts on the subject.

He's informed, level headed and comes with a wealth of knowledge and experience on military matters.

Only time I've been exposed to this kind of hardware is when I've been oversea's, other than that we don't get his sort of experience here.

And something else, I applaud him for ignoring the petty snips taken against him in the last few days.

oscarBravo

youcrazyjesus!, keep it on-topic please.

Poccington

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

Invading defenceless countries 8,000 miles away is only a problem for the victim.



And kids, livestock...anything that has the temerity to exist basically. Nuclear bombs also work well against area targets. What's more if those kids do actually make it past the invasion, through the economic recovery period and fight back against a superpower by crowing corn or having children, you'll get them then. Good work. The mindlessness of the military mind is breathtaking.

And the hysterical, often ridiculous response of some civvie's when discussing military matters is hilarious.

youcrazyjesus!

And the hysterical, often ridiculous response of some civvie's when discussing military matters is hilarious.

He's informed, level headed and comes with a wealth of knowledge and experience on military matters.

If I can be allowed to respond just to this, perhaps this sort of discussion is best suited to the military board as he is simply responding to reasoned points with irrelevant military minutae. This is the politics board btw. Manic doesn't seem to be involved in the subject at all really. This is a different subject completely and has moved OT from way, way back. Moving on.

Ciaran500

dublincelt wrote: »

Israel never wanted peace with Hamas. They never wanted a ceasfire, the attack in November (link below) certainly put paid to that,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/05/israelandthepalestinians

Hamas were digging a tunnrel into Israel territory...

youcrazyjesus!

Ciaran500 wrote: »

Hamas were digging a tunnrel into Israel territory...

Israel SAYS Hamas was building the tunnel. Israel lie about things routinely. As do Hamas. Determining who is correct is impossible. The facts are though, that Hamas rockets FOLLOWED the Israeli attack.

oscarBravo

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

If I can be allowed to respond just to this, perhaps this sort of discussion is best suited to the military board as he is simply responding to reasoned points with irrelevant military minutae. This is the politics board btw. Manic doesn't seem to be involved in the subject at all really. This is a different subject completely and has moved OT from way, way back. Moving on.

Military minutiae are somewhat on-topic, insofar as the topic is the current conflict between Israel and Palestine.

Criticism of the US because of its ongoing conflicts in the middle east is off-topic.

Manic Moran

This is the politics board btw. Manic doesn't seem to be involved in the subject at all really.

I've already made my opinion on the strategic/political side known. I'm getting into the military details because if you're going to go decrying something, particularly for political goal (i.e. Look at the evil Israelis, using blank), it's probably worth knowing something about what it is you're decrying, especially if the underlying logic is faulty such as "Evil WP rounds are banned." Since some are ignorant of the matter, I'm taking the opportunity to further educate.

And kids, livestock...anything that has the temerity to exist basically.

Most weapons tend to do that. It's sortof the point in having them in the first place.

NTM

munchester29

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

Israel SAYS Hamas was building the tunnel. Israel lie about things routinely. As do Hamas. Determining who is correct is impossible. The facts are though, that Hamas rockets FOLLOWED the Israeli attack.

Hamas lies, the Israelis lie, yet you KNOW that Hamas rockets followed the Israeli attacks...

I would love to have your sources man...

youcrazyjesus!

munchester29 wrote: »

Hamas lies, the Israelis lie, yet you KNOW that Hamas rockets followed the Israeli attacks...

I would love to have your sources man...

The source is a half screen up. I'm merely repeating what's in it. The journalist, God bless him, has somehow acquired the ability to distinguish between what is stated and what can be proved as fact.

Read the article.

"The Israeli military SAID the target of the raid was a tunnel that they said Hamas was planning to use to capture Israeli soldiers positioned on the border fence 250m away."

"One Hamas gunman was killed and Palestinians launched a volley of mortars at the Israeli military. An Israeli air strike then killed five more Hamas fighters. In response, Hamas launched 35 rockets into southern Israel, one reaching the city of Ashkelon."

tallaght01

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

The source is a half screen up. I'm merely repeating what's in it. The journalist, God bless him, has somehow acquired the ability to distinguish between what is stated and what can be proved as fact.

Read the article.

"The Israeli military SAID the target of the raid was a tunnel that they said Hamas was planning to use to capture Israeli soldiers positioned on the border fence 250m away."

"One Hamas gunman was killed and Palestinians launched a volley of mortars at the Israeli military. An Israeli air strike then killed five more Hamas fighters. In response, Hamas launched 35 rockets into southern Israel, one reaching the city of Ashkelon."

Out of curiosity, what's your opinion of Hamas?

youcrazyjesus!

tallaght01 wrote: »

Out of curiosity, what's your opinion of Hamas?

Good question. I think they are primarily a product of their environment and the feeling of Palestinians, they are no aliens beamed in from outer space to cause havoc. They are pretty stupid somtimes but also determined. Most of what they do with Israel is counter-productive. They are without a doubt terrorists in any sense of the word and will use any means at their disposal to "resist" Israel. But also they not without pragmatism. They will negotiate with Israel on any subject. They have offered Israel what is effectively a total solution to the whole conflict. The last 2 statements are a matter of public record. They also offer Palestinians something the deeply corrupt PLO will not, that's why they came to power in elections.

Nodin

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

They also offer Palestinians something the deeply corrupt PLO will not, that's why they came to power in elections.

Well, that and the fact the reformist of the PLO faction was blocked from running against Abbas....because the US viewed him as an "extremist".

tallaght01

youcrazyjesus! wrote: »

Good question. I think they are primarily a product of their environment and the feeling of Palestinians, they are no aliens beamed in from outer space to cause havoc. They are pretty stupid somtimes but also determined. Most of what they do with Israel is counter-productive. They are without a doubt terrorists in any sense of the word and will use any means at their disposal to "resist" Israel. But also they not without pragmatism. They will negotiate with Israel on any subject. They have offered Israel what is effectively a total solution to the whole conflict. The last 2 statements are a matter of public record. They also offer Palestinians something the deeply corrupt PLO will not, that's why they came to power in elections.

I don't know you or anything about you. But you seem to hav a characteristic in common with many others in this debate, insofar as you can brand Hamas' violence as being a product of their environment.

I agree with you, actually. But I think the same can be said for Israel. I suspect you may not agree.

I saw the same murderous traits in Hamas when they were throwing Fatah members off buildings that you (and I) see with the Israelis.

I'm just always fascinated why one side gets treated with a little more forgiveness than the other.

ionix5891

tallaght01 wrote: »

I don't know you or anything about you. But you seem to hav a characteristic in common with many others in this debate, insofar as you can brand Hamas' violence as being a product of their environment.

I agree with you, actually. But I think the same can be said for Israel. I suspect you may not agree.

I saw the same murderous traits in Hamas when they were throwing Fatah members off buildings that you (and I) see with the Israelis.

I'm just always fascinated why one side gets treated with a little more forgiveness than the other.

one side has modern weapons and carved a country for themselves

the other side has rocks and homemade rockets and lives in a walled prison city

(hmm David and Goliath story springs to mind)

both Hamas and IDF are wrong to some degree, and while we argue about the finer points innocent people are dying

tallaght01

ionix5891 wrote: »

one side has modern weapons and carved a country for themselves

But we can all agree that if Hamas had the weapons they'd be humpin the proverbial hole off Israel?

ionix5891 wrote: »

Hamas and IDF are wrong to some degree, and while we argue about the finer points innocent people are dying

That would be my thinking on it

youcrazyjesus!

tallaght01 wrote: »

I don't know you or anything about you. But you seem to hav a characteristic in common with many others in this debate, insofar as you can brand Hamas' violence as being a product of their environment.

I agree with you, actually. But I think the same can be said for Israel. I suspect you may not agree.

Absolutely. But there comes a time when you need to say enough. The Israelis completely dominate the Palestinians. The time for Israel to say enough has long passed. Yet they continue to steal West Bank land and resources and refuse to help Palestinians out of the major jam they found themselves in 1948, having lost their land. This to my mind is the major stumbling block, not Hamas. There is also a question of proportion and scale. I could punch you in the nose and you could stab me to death in retaliation, your stabbing was a product of my punch but it doesn't mean either is right.

I saw the same murderous traits in Hamas when they were throwing Fatah members off buildings that you (and I) see with the Israelis.

Agreed. I just understand completely how Hamas came about. Look 60 miles from where we are now, I despise the IRA, but I understand completely the genesis of them and it doesn't stop me from making a rational analysis of the situation. I understand the anger of people who burned down the British Embassy in Dublin after Bloody Sunday. The Brits, the Unionists, their behaviour arguably was at the root cause of the conflict (no debate please, it's just an example). When they could have ended it peacefully, they chose not too. The situation in Gaza is 10,000 times more unjust, factor in extreme poverty and I think nobody should be surprised that you're dealing with a Hamas. It should aslo be pointed out that the PLO would be the established leaders of the Palestinians across the territories if they weren't so compromised and corrupt.

ionix5891

tallaght01 wrote: »

But we can all agree that if Hamas had the weapons they'd be humpin the proverbial hole off Israel?

i do agree, extremist nutjobs are just that nutjobs and Hamas are not doing any favors to the people who elected them

tho the way Israel is acting is crazy, they claim they were provoked but they did blockade the place and continue colonizing the West bank (who are not under Hamas control)

so as I said both sides are wrong but i would be leaning toward the Palestinian side as its obvious Israel doesn't want peace and deliberate killing of civilians is not excusable under any circumstances (and possible illegal under UN laws), speaking of the UN resolutions Israel always sticks a finger to them along with their US vetoing buddies, so that further signs that they want this mess for political and other reasons see ( http://www.parade.com/news/intelligence-report/archive/who-gets-us-foreign-aid.html )

1. Israel $2.4 billion Virtually all of this money is used to buy weapons (up to 75% made in the U.S.). Beginning in 2009, the U.S. plans to give $30 billion over 10 years.

Why dont they send a cheque of 30billion / population of Palestine (~4million) = $7500? to each citizen with a "Valid after peace is achieved" condition, that'll solve the problems