1 Israeli = 155 Palestinians

A Dub in Glasgo

concussion wrote: »

It would, however, matter to the court.
If a civilian is in an area of fighting and is accidentally hit and killed by a bullet fired at a military barracks - it's tragic but not a crime
If a civilian is in an area of fighting and is accidentally hit and killed by shrapnel from a bomb dropped on a military barracks - it's tragic but not a crime.

Ah, the old collateral damage excuse again

Does it work in reverse? Hamas rocket fired on a military target in Israel but misses and slaughters civilians - it that tragic but not a crime?

PeakOutput

uprising wrote: »

your a death cheerer

would you give it up, death cheerer? show me were i have said that this loss of civilian life is anything but tragic? its just as tragic as the millions starving every day. the difference is im a realist i dont think i live in this utopian world, that we all live in peace and harmony and that the world is so black and white that israeli deaths < palestinian deaths therefore israel are the devil.

in fact it would probably result in the biggest war in history to reach this idilic(sp) society you want to live in were there is no suffering and pain

i believe that war has terrible consequences i also believe it is sometimes necessary

your great at explaining emotional views and such nonsense, are you void of compassion, intelligence and understanding to take the view you do, your like a programmed robot who's afraid to think that a government can actually murder intentionally and get away with it, which they do and because of too many people thinking like you

so because i have a different view to you i am a programmed robot?great argument. me having a different opinion to you does not make me unintelligent nor does it mean i have misunderstood anything, would you grow up. what it means is that i have looked at the situation and the facts and come to my own conclusion(different to yours) which could be changed at any moment if new facts come to light.

i am well aware that governments can be evil incarnate however israel is not. hamas on the other hand? i wouldnt let them look after my dog not to mind a country?

edit; and if the anti israeli side can bring up the geneva convention then collateral damage is fair ground for the 'pro' israeli side

uprising

concussion wrote: »

However, if a civilian is in an area and is hit and killed by an expanding bullet, that would be a crime.


Like I said above -

What military experience do you have?, last time I checked your previous you were trying to explain how to cycle round a roundabout, now your a military war mastermind.

And whats an expanding bullet?, civilians have been hit and killed with bullets in Gaza, in Iraq, in Ireland, in England, its a crime, its called murder.

Matt Holck

Well that's one of the reasons it's used against trained soldiers, I'd imagine it would do the same to civilians....

However, like has been said so many times here, use it against militants to get them moving and then hit them with explosives. There don't neccessarily have to be IDF troops in the vicinity for the arty to be in action

tactically sound
but smoke screens would increase the confusion
over who the targets are

Flee where exactly???

Good point with even the UN being attacked, there seems no safe place to go
UN BOMBED BY ISRAEL WITH WHITE PHOSPHORUS ! youtube

Offy

dublincelt wrote: »

That is the craziest excuse I have EVER heard for the justification of using WP in a built up area. :rolleyes:

Flee where exactly???

John Ging has said that there is NOWHERE safe for residents anywhere in Gaza.

I dont think they want them to flee but I do think they are trying to install terror. By installing terror they lessen the chance of an uprising, break the people if you like to look at it that way.

concussion

uprising wrote: »

What military experience do you have?, last time I checked your previous you were trying to explain how to cycle round a roundabout, now your a military war mastermind.

And whats an expanding bullet?, civilians have been hit and killed with bullets in Gaza, in Iraq, in Ireland, in England, its a crime, its called murder.

Well, I hope you learned something from my post. As a child, besides learning how to ride a bike I also learned how to read. Many years later I used this skill to read the Hague Convention of 1899 which says you can't use expanding bullets in warfare. Hollow point bullets would be an example of these - you can't use them in war but you can in law enforcement.

Serenity Now!

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Hamas rocket fired on a military target in Israel but misses and slaughters civilians - it that tragic but not a crime?

What military target exactly?

uprising

concussion wrote: »

Hollow point bullets would be an example of these - you can't use them in war but you can in law enforcement.

Yea thats a great law, as is you cant bring your pig to market on the 2nd tueday of the month in mississippie, as I said earlier, its inside us to decide right from wrong, not some crackpot law.

TOMASJ

PeakOutput wrote: »

one can be very accurate (thus limiting the casualties) and one can be very inaccurate and is more suited to blanket bombing(and therefore far more likely to kill the children you are talking about)

So are you saying Palestinian children should be grateful that only 340 or so have been murdered by the Israelis

people make the argument about war crimes and then when proved wrong they change to 'what difference does it make if its illegal its a crime .....blah blah uninformed blah'

war crimes are only proved wrong if the outcome of any case is a sham and slanted to favour a certain side.
just look at the U.N. resolutions pasted against Israel over the years all ignored.

its not illegal its not a crime but it is a tragedy the only thing that needs to be argued is the cause of the tragedy and in my opinion the cause is the terrorist organisation in control of 1.5million people in gaza

Its a disgrace from bullies that should know better from what happened to their co religionist in the past.

the cause is not israels hate of palestine. why arent the troops in west bank indescriminately killing civilians there? i because the west bank were not lobbing rockets at them and continue to try and reach their goals threw diplomatic means

i because the west bank were not lobbing rockets at them and continue to try and reach their goals threw diplomatic means

indiscriminately killing civillians in Palestine?
where are you coming from the Israelis have been murdering from land sea and air from day one.


If I can remember correctly the Israelis are not long after blowing the west bank to bits.

BlaasForRafa

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Ah, the old collateral damage excuse again

Does it work in reverse? Hamas rocket fired on a military target in Israel but misses and slaughters civilians - it that tragic but not a crime?

Hamas don't fire at military targets in Israel, they fire indiscriminately hoping to kill as many israelis as possible.

On another tack, what happened to the Hamas boast that they would turn Gaza into a Stalingrad for Israel? The idf has lost approx 10 soldiers so far, 3 of them from friendly fire, where are the "courageous" Hamas fighters? Still hiding behind their human shields I guess.

Its the lunacy of launching indiscriminate rockets into Israel added to the sheer cowardice of Hamas which is prolonging the suffering for the poor people of Gaza.

uprising

Serenity Now! wrote: »

What military target exactly?

Oh GOD, is that meant to imply that there are no military targets in Israel?, do they need to be named, he was reversing an argument.

Military targets:
army truck
tank
soldier
barracks
anything to do with the military really, which there is a lot of in Israel

Matt Holck

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Hamas don't fire at military targets in Israel, they fire indiscriminately hoping to kill as many israelis as possible.

I find that difficult to swallow
as many more rockets were launch than isreallis were slaughtered

BlaasForRafa

Matt Holck wrote: »

I find that difficult to swallow
as many more rockets were launch than isreallis were slaughtered

The rockets they fire have no guidance system, they point them in the direction of an Israeli town and if they hit something thats a bonus. Thats why the ratio of deaths to rockets fired is low, if they had better weapons they would kill more israelis.

The terror that they cause is another reason they fire them, they want to drive Israelis out of towns like Ashdod, Sderot, Beersheva etc. When the air raid siren goes off the fact that its a crappy Qassam rocket is not going to stop you from running for the shelter is it?

concussion

uprising wrote: »

Yea thats a great law, as is you cant bring your pig to market on the 2nd tueday of the month in mississippie, as I said earlier, its inside us to decide right from wrong, not some crackpot law.

It was proposed in order to reduce the numbers killed in war. Less non-fatal injuries means (besides less death) a greater burden on the enemies medical and logisics - doesn't seem crackpot to me, unless you like the idea of every rifle and machine-gun on the battlefield firing hollow-point, fragmenting or flattening bullets . 31 countries thought it was a good idea, you seem to know something they didn't....

As for the courts, they don't care when you take your pig to market, they care about what's written down as international law.

Serenity Now!

uprising wrote: »

Oh GOD, is that meant to imply that there are no military targets in Israel?, do they need to be named, he was reversing an argument.

Military targets:
army truck
tank
soldier
barracks
anything to do with the military really, which there is a lot of in Israel

Oh don't be silly. I never said that.
These military targets are where the rockets hit, are they? :rolleyes:

uprising

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Hamas don't fire at military targets in Israel, they fire indiscriminately hoping to kill as many israelis as possible.

Can I ask you your view, If Hamas fired a rocket at an Israeli tank inside Israeli borders and missed, the rocket continued on and hit a house with an Israeli mother, father and 3 children inside, would Hamas be murderers for committing such an act? I think they would, do you?

Believe me if it were the other way round, and the Israelis were being slaughtered by the Palestinians, the same people would be condemning it and marching against it.

Nodin

uprising wrote: »

Can I ask you your view, If Hamas fired a rocket at an Israeli tank inside Israeli borders and missed, the rocket continued on and hit a house with an Israeli mother, father and 3 children inside, would Hamas be murderers for committing such an act? I think they would, do you?

Believe me if it were the other way round, and the Israelis were being slaughtered by the Palestinians, the same people would be condemning it and marching against it.

On that sort of theme.....
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/jan/16/gaza-first-person-israel

Manic Moran

Yea thats a great law, as is you cant bring your pig to market on the 2nd tueday of the month in mississippie, as I said earlier, its inside us to decide right from wrong, not some crackpot law.

I think the law prohibiting pubs being open on Good Friday is a crackpot law, but it doesn't stop it being enforced and generally abided by.

As it happens, I also think that the prohibition on expanding ammunition is a bit daft. Not least because it's the round of choice for police and private citizens around my parts: They work, and work well. However, it's not my place to say "The law is daft, I'll ignore it." That's for the highly-paid pundits who travel around and get elected to figure out and pass one way or the other. All I can do is choose to abide by them, or not abide by them. You don't like the rule, get your elected representatives to change it.

NTM

uprising

Manic Moran wrote: »

You don't like the rule, get your elected representatives to change it.

NTM

I use my intuition, i choose right from wrong which doesnt always go hand in hand with the law.

Get our elected representitives to change it?, are you crazy, the powers that be serve the powers that be, were the neophytes.

concussion

uprising wrote: »

Can I ask you your view, If Hamas fired a rocket at an Israeli tank inside Israeli borders and missed, the rocket continued on and hit a house with an Israeli mother, father and 3 children inside, would Hamas be murderers for committing such an act? I think they would, do you?.

If a soldier from army A shoots at a tank from army B but misses and accidentally kills civilians then its not murder. If Hamas followed the rules of war, restricted themselves to military targets (ie didn't behave like terrorists) then they wouldn't be murders either in that situation.

Manic Moran

You may not like the system, but it's the best we've got. Was it Churchill that said "Democracy is the worst possible form of government, except for all the other ones that have been tried"

At any rate, Israel says they've achieved what they were aiming for. Hamas is saying that they're not going to hold to a ceasefire just because Israel is stopping shooting unless they get their own demands.

I'm also curious to know what the agreements were that were made in Cairo and Washington to try to make this a little more lasting.

NTM

uprising

Nodin wrote: »

On that sort of theme.....
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/jan/16/gaza-first-person-israel

Good article, really people do want to live in peace, its easy to justify war far away, just nobody wants it on top of them.

uprising

Manic Moran wrote: »

You may not like the system, but it's the best we've got. Was it Churchill that said "Democracy is the worst possible form of government, except for all the other ones that have been tried"

At any rate, Israel says they've achieved what they were aiming for. Hamas is saying that they're not going to hold to a ceasefire just because Israel is stopping shooting unless they get their own demands.

I'm also curious to know what the agreements were that were made in Cairo and Washington to try to make this a little more lasting.

NTM

Really their not demands, just basic human rights.

A Dub in Glasgo

Serenity Now! wrote: »

What military target exactly?

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Hamas don't fire at military targets in Israel, they fire indiscriminately hoping to kill as many israelis as possible.

This is not what I asked

Edit: Actually change military to military, local & government agencies

TOMASJ

I am hearing on the news that Israel is to stop their aggression tonight at 12, what do people think they have achieved, other than the murder of 300 to 400 children a similar amount of women and innocent people and the destruction of Gazas infrastructure,
they went into Gaza on the pretext of stopping home made rockets being fired at Israel, but did not succeed, they can talk it up all the like but the only thing they have achieved is the strengthening of Hamas

What was it really all for?

Nodin

TOMASJ wrote: »

What was it really all for?

Feb elections and to make Olmert look less like a complete failure (corruption, Lebanon 2006) would be the main thrusts of it.

Mr.Micro

Nodin wrote: »

Feb elections and to make Olmert look less like a complete failure (corruption, Lebanon 2006) would be the main thrusts of it.

It is certainly food for thought that. Olmert has had major corruption allegations levelled at him during his tenure with the elections coming in 2009, the war would help? Cynical but perhaps true? Nothing like a good war to distract attention and focus people. It worked for M Thatcher if I recall correctly, after the Falklands war.

uprising

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told Israelis in a televised address from the national army headquarters in Tel Aviv: "The conditions have been created that our aims, as declared, were attained fully, and beyond."

I could pull that statement apart 100 different directions, they've achieved NOTHING but hatred.

uprising

Mr.Micro wrote: »

It is certainly food for thought that. Olmert has had major corruption allegations levelled at him during his tenure with the elections coming in 2009, the war would help? Cynical but perhaps true? Nothing like a good war to distract attention and focus people. It worked for M Thatcher if I recall correctly, after the Falklands war.

Its worked all through history, somali got it when bill was smoking juicy cigars, war and terror keep us all afraid of each other, divide and conquer, these governments do things in small steps to achieve bigger goals, maybe Gaza was a simple smokescreen or traininground for them for something bigger.?

Mr.Micro

uprising wrote: »

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told Israelis in a televised address from the national army headquarters in Tel Aviv: "The conditions have been created that our aims, as declared, were attained fully, and beyond."

I could pull that statement apart 100 different directions, they've achieved NOTHING but hatred.

Well it could be argued IMO that IDF have come out intact, cut a deal with the US without it appears having to agree terms with Hamas and the hate was always there anyway. I do agree though that it has set back any real peace process.