Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Frazzled wrote:
Interestingly, I'd bet putting rocket lanchers in schools and hospitals is also a war crime...

Indeed.

The war crime here is that Hamas set up a firing position in a facility that was housing civilian refugees. (See Article 8.2 (b) of the Rome Statute.)
The Hamas war crime is only compounded by the fact that UNRWA says it notified the IDF at least 17 times that it was using the school to shelter refugees.

 dæl wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

First of all, Hamas fights from those hospitals and humanitarian centers, so it's not really accurate to say that Israel targets them improperly. They are legal targets when used for war, which they are.

There are very specific laws which cover when hospitals may be targetted, Israel do not comply with those laws. Therefore they are not "legal" targets.

I can dig up examples of rape and murder committed by armies of every country. No other country has ever, in the face of daily rocket and mortar attacks on its civilians, exercised as much restraint as Israel. It's a simple fact.

Have you even looked at things like Breaking the Silence? Or the article I posted about Camp 1391? Besides the fact that daily rocket attacks that do absolutely no damage are not a justification for anything, they are irrelevant when it comes to the behaviour of the IDF. If you have to qualify your statement that they are the most moral army in the world considering the rockets, then they aren't the most moral army in the world.

Have you ever looked into things like the Vietnam War?

I'm not arguing that the IDF is perfect. I'm arguing that they show the greatest restraint of any Western military, and I challenge you to find a military that shows greater restraint. So far you have not done this. You only point out cases where the IDF is doing things wrong, when the fact of the matter is that EVERY military does these things.

The claims that the US military is morally superior and shows greater restraint are ludicrous. Even in GW1, over 3,000 Iraqi civilians died, and that was a conventional military engagement, not a guerilla conflict. I'm not badmouthing the US' performance in these conflicts, only stating that casualties are an unavoidable consequence of war.

Just want to point out since your bringing up Geneva Convention

ART. 4. — Hospital and safety zones shall fulfil the following conditions:
a) They shall comprise only a small part of the territory governed by the Power
which has established them.
b) They shall be thinly populated in relation to the possibilities of
accommodation.
c) They shall be far removed and free from all military objectives, or large
industrial or administrative establishments.
d) They shall not be situated in areas which, according to every probability,may
become important for the conduct of the war.
ART. 5.— Hospital and safety zones shall be subject to the following obligations:
a) The lines of communication and means of transport which they possess shall
not be used for the transport of military personnel or material, even in
transit.
b) They shall in no case be defended by military means.
ART. 6. — Hospital and safety zones shall be marked by means of oblique red
bands on a white ground, placed on the buildings and outer precincts.

Hams has to agree to

Zones reserved exclusively for the wounded and sick may be marked by means
of the Red Cross (Red Crescent, Red Lion and Sun) emblem on a white ground.
They may be similarly marked at night by means of appropriate illumination.
ART. 7. — The Powers shall communicate to all the High Contracting Parties in
peacetime or on the outbreak of hostilities, a list of the hospital and safety zones in
the territories governed by them. They shall also give notice of any new zones set
up during hostilities.
As soon as the adverse Party has received the above-mentioned notification, the
zone shall be regularly established.
If, however, the adverse Party considers that the conditions of the present
agreement have not been fulfilled, it may refuse to recognize the zone by giving
immediate notice thereof to the Party responsible for the said zone, or may make
its recognition of such zone dependent upon the institution of the control provided
for in Article 8.
ART. 8. — Any Power having recognized one or several hospital and safety zones
instituted by the adverse Party shall be entitled to demand control by one or more
Special Commissions, for the purpose of ascertaining if the zones fulfil the
conditions and obligations stipulated in the present agreement.
For this purpose, members of the Special Commissions shall at all times have
free access to the various zones and may even reside there permanently. They shall
be given all facilities for their duties of inspection.
ART. 9. — Should the Special Commissions note any facts which they consider
contrary to the stipulations of the present agreement, they shall at once draw the
attention of the Power governing the said zone to these facts, and shall fix a time
limit of five days within which the matter should be rectified.They shall duly notify
the Power who has recognized the zone.
If, when the time limit has expired, the Power governing the zone has not
complied with the warning, the adverse Party may declare that it is no longer bound
by the present agreement in respect of the said zone.
ART. 10. — Any Power setting up one or more hospital and safety zones, and the
adverse Parties to whom their existence has been notified, shall nominate or have
nominated by the Protecting Powers or by other neutral Powers, persons eligible to
be members of the Special Commissions mentioned in Articles 8 and 9.
ART. 11. — In no circumstances may hospital and safety zones be the object of
attack. They shall be protected and respected at all times by the Parties to the
conflict.
ART. 12. — In the case of occupation of a territory, the hospital and safety zones
therein shall continue to be respected and utilized as such.

Yet the protected status is lost when an enemy combatant fires on or near the location of the hospital

 Jihadin wrote:

Spoiler:

Just want to point out since your bringing up Geneva Convention

ART. 4. — Hospital and safety zones shall fulfil the following conditions:
a) They shall comprise only a small part of the territory governed by the Power
which has established them.
b) They shall be thinly populated in relation to the possibilities of
accommodation.
c) They shall be far removed and free from all military objectives, or large
industrial or administrative establishments.
d) They shall not be situated in areas which, according to every probability,may
become important for the conduct of the war.
ART. 5.— Hospital and safety zones shall be subject to the following obligations:
a) The lines of communication and means of transport which they possess shall
not be used for the transport of military personnel or material, even in
transit.
b) They shall in no case be defended by military means.
ART. 6. — Hospital and safety zones shall be marked by means of oblique red
bands on a white ground, placed on the buildings and outer precincts.

Hams has to agree to

Zones reserved exclusively for the wounded and sick may be marked by means
of the Red Cross (Red Crescent, Red Lion and Sun) emblem on a white ground.
They may be similarly marked at night by means of appropriate illumination.
ART. 7. — The Powers shall communicate to all the High Contracting Parties in
peacetime or on the outbreak of hostilities, a list of the hospital and safety zones in
the territories governed by them. They shall also give notice of any new zones set
up during hostilities.
As soon as the adverse Party has received the above-mentioned notification, the
zone shall be regularly established.
If, however, the adverse Party considers that the conditions of the present
agreement have not been fulfilled, it may refuse to recognize the zone by giving
immediate notice thereof to the Party responsible for the said zone, or may make
its recognition of such zone dependent upon the institution of the control provided
for in Article 8.
ART. 8. — Any Power having recognized one or several hospital and safety zones
instituted by the adverse Party shall be entitled to demand control by one or more
Special Commissions, for the purpose of ascertaining if the zones fulfil the
conditions and obligations stipulated in the present agreement.
For this purpose, members of the Special Commissions shall at all times have
free access to the various zones and may even reside there permanently. They shall
be given all facilities for their duties of inspection.
ART. 9. — Should the Special Commissions note any facts which they consider
contrary to the stipulations of the present agreement, they shall at once draw the
attention of the Power governing the said zone to these facts, and shall fix a time
limit of five days within which the matter should be rectified.They shall duly notify
the Power who has recognized the zone.
If, when the time limit has expired, the Power governing the zone has not
complied with the warning, the adverse Party may declare that it is no longer bound
by the present agreement in respect of the said zone.
ART. 10. — Any Power setting up one or more hospital and safety zones, and the
adverse Parties to whom their existence has been notified, shall nominate or have
nominated by the Protecting Powers or by other neutral Powers, persons eligible to
be members of the Special Commissions mentioned in Articles 8 and 9.
ART. 11. — In no circumstances may hospital and safety zones be the object of
attack. They shall be protected and respected at all times by the Parties to the
conflict.
ART. 12. — In the case of occupation of a territory, the hospital and safety zones
therein shall continue to be respected and utilized as such.

Yet the protected status is lost when an enemy combatant fires on or near the location of the hospital

Simply put, no one has a right to protection at a Hamas firing position. There is no international law or convention that mandates such protection. That’s what makes it a war crime to wage combat from behind protected persons or sites.

Litcheur wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Think we need Israel to go nail the crap out of ISIS

Would the arab people hate the US so much if it weren't from the blind and unconditionnal support of Israel?

Israel does some of our dirty job, but at times, it really looks like a serious liability more than a precious ally.

One of Bin Ladin's chief complaints about the US was its bases in Saudi Arabia. Support of Israel wasn't even very high up on his list.

Its called Perfidy.

 Frazzled wrote:
Agreed, but we need to quit giving money to the PA as well.

Supporting either side is just a waste of time, energy, and money.

Just think. We could take these billions and put it into domestic Rum production research, with the goal of pummelling South America and dominating in the quality fine rums market.

I call it, the Frazzled Project. Make this dream happen people!

 Frazzled wrote:
Just think. We could take these billions and put it into domestic Rum production research, with the goal of pummelling South America and dominating in the quality fine rums market.

I call it, the Frazzled Project. Make this dream happen people!

I'm Lobbying for some of that money to go into much better brass poles. I am going to petition Bromsy, your Minister of Stripper Bars, to garner that money

 Jihadin wrote:
Its called Perfidy.

So's when you call a cease fire, and then shell a market full of civvies. Considering the amount of Perfidy going on, I can't say that I can blame either side for not taking any called cease fires seriously.


Here's something, and I'm curious, do we have any proof that these firing positions existed? If so I've missed it. On the second school shelling it was supposedly based on the fact that three Islamic Jihad men were seen nearby on a motorcycle, which doesn't sound like much of a firing position.

 reds8n wrote:

I fail to see how stories about holiday camps that occur outside of the ME/area of conflict actually disprove his argument that there's been a trend of rascist/discriminatory legislation over the past few years that -- and this in his opinion -- "has" fanned the flames of hatred amongst the local inhabitants , most of whom never or rarely get to meet anyone from the opposition and certainly don't get invited to summer camps in North America.

Perhaps I'm not being clear. Essentially, what I'm saying is that a narrative has been constructed here, namely 'Young Israelis hate Palestinians', and so there are no articles/evidence mentioned or suggested that indicate 'Young Israelis and Palestinians can actually get along quite well together'. Hence my use of the term 'cherrypicking'. The camps in North America is an example of young people getting along together.

Having said that, no doubt as a journalist, it's a lot harder to construct a narrative of 'People get along'. There's always plenty of stuff in the media with regards to violence and protest rallies, but a lot fewer involving topics like, 'Young Israeli boy helps older Palestinian Lady carry her shopping', or 'Palestinian man feeds old male Israeli neighbours cat whilst on holiday'. I think that often the world is a far nicer place than the media actually portrays, and most people just want to get on with their lives.

The difference being of course Dakka isn't a news site -- toy soldiers/geekery aside of course -- and isn't publishing articles on situations in the ME. Given that the topic is obviously a little bit ... firey ... with regards to inflammatory rhetoric and calls for mass murder of Z/X/Y with monotonous regularity it's beyond a joke that this was permissible from a serious site.

If this had been an equally -- if not more -- hate filled rant from a Muslim site or publication I think it fair to say it would have been bandied about all over the place as "proof" of blah blah blah.

And this piece is being bandied about in exactly the same way. But ultimately, it was an unreviewed, uncritiqued commentary piece posted on the internet. I'm not really sure anyone can draw any kind of conclusion from that. It would be like commenting on the intellectual capacities of the American youth based on what you heard a 13 year old screaming down the microphone on Xbox Live.

I did click through to the original article and again -- even with talk of "resettlement packages" -- still think it's a horrific piece that does indeed invoke concentration camps and the spectre of genocide and actually makes what he said worse.

Especially

Subsequent to the elimination of terror from Gaza, it will become part of sovereign Israel and will be populated by Jews. This will also serve to ease the housing crisis in Israel.

.

which is pretty much a call for Lebensraum.


Take your word for it with regards to the hebrew version.

Individually, none of it is necessarily that bad an idea. It's only when you begin to put it together, it turns into a catastrophe. If you work on the following facts:-

-Gaza is an economic and architectural quagmire that should seriously be rebuilt.
-A two state solution involving Gaza is extremely unlikely and implausible. West Bank possibly might make it, but Gaza will either need to go it alone as a separate state (which would be exceedingly difficult) or be absorbed by Israel.
-Hamas are nutters, and the world would be better off if they ceased to exist.

None of these are particularly objectionable to my mind. It's the methodology that becomes a problem. For example, the idea is that all Gazans will be evacuated to specialist built refugee camps temporarily whilst Gaza is razed, and rebuilt, and the Hamas fighters are sieved out. Sounds vaguely alright in principle. The article you linked to talks about 'concentration camps', but frankly I'd debate that such camps need necessarily be concentration camps in either the colloquial Nazi related sense, or even the more grim British South African sense. If such camps were genuinely temporary, had food, water, electricity, and heating, and were administered by international teams, then it frankly most likely be far nicer housing than I daresay most of them live in now.

But then you get to the crux. Do you believe Israel is capable or willing to set that up? Some would shout yes, others no. I'd say 'Perhaps'. But it would be a doubtful perhaps. I see too many things potentially going wrong, from people not being allowed back to land they own, to leaving those camps to become a newly impoverished class of worker/tenant for the Israeli landowners, to the camps simply not living up to expectations.

And even if (a big if), the camps were perfect models of sanitary lands of plenty, what about those who don't want to leave Gaza? The whole, 'Anyone who doesn't co-operate would be treated as a Hamas member and left to be buried in the rubble', is a ticket to mischief and civilian casualties on several levels to my mind. I think that if certain guarantees were given by the international community with regards to land ownership and the temporary nature of the camps, most people would be willing to give this a go. But you'll always have that one old geezer who's lived there for eighty years who'll be damned if he moves an inch. Does he really deserve to be shot for that?

Again, if international teams performed mediation, supervised the entire process, and dealt with things on a case by case basis, it might work. But how likely is that?

Now one has to consider the flip moral element to the equation, namely the old, 'if it causes 5,000 civilian casualties, but stabilises the place in preparation for a bright new future of unity between peoples, isn't it worth it?' Also known as 'ends justify the means'. But you start down shaky ground on that path. The final thing that bugs me is that yes, he does offer citizenship or plush immigration packages. But he pins the citizenship to a future committee decision. That stinks of things potentially going wrong to me.

So to summarise, I don't think the individual elements are all necessarily bad, or indeed the plan itself. I just highly doubt that it could be carried to fruition with things the way they are, and he seems a little too blase about Palestiniant casualties for my taste. It should be recognised though, that the plan isn't really quite, 'Let's bury all the Palestinians under mounds of their own dead in concentration camps', which is the impression the left wing articles tend to give off. It's a bit more detailed and complex than that.

 Medium of Death wrote:
Ketara, how is George Galloway even comparable to LePen or that Israeli nut job?

To be honest, I just picked two less than reputable politicians who've said some nasty things out of the air. I could could have said Griffins, or that Dutch nutjob (Geerts), or a plethora of other ones, he was just the first one that came to mind in association with the phrase 'slimy politicians I wouldn't touch with a ten foot bargepole who have a platform'.

[
Here's something, and I'm curious, do we have any proof that these firing positions existed? If so I've missed it. On the second school shelling it was supposedly based on the fact that three Islamic Jihad men were seen nearby on a motorcycle, which doesn't sound like much of a firing position.

To just flip that around for a minute, a lot of 'casualties' reported by Hamas actually aren't, or so I've heard. If an Israeli shell lands and someone gets a bit of shrapnel across the shoulder, it's a lot less effective than saying, 'Ten children with cancer were buried in the rubble!' Journalists tend to take the Hamas declarations of casualties at face value, which can make them somewhat easy to manipulate in that regard.

http://www.algemeiner.com/2014/07/15/hamas-uses-horror-movie-still-of-headless-girl-in-miniskirt-to-depict-gaza-casualties-on-social-media-warning-graphic-video/
http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/resurrected-hamas-casualty-list-has-33-duplicate-names/
http://www.israellycool.com/2014/07/24/caught-in-the-act-gaza-health-ministry-inflating-number-of-gazans-killed/

I figure I got as many civilians as I did insurgents in OIF 2.

The difference is every civilian lived and got some top notch medical care.

Only one insurgent lived to receive medical care.

Civilian casualties are a given when fighting in a built up area.

jamesk1973 wrote:

Civilian casualties are a given when fighting in a built up area.

Particularly when your weapon of choice is artillery or air strikes.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Its called Perfidy.

So's when you call a cease fire, and then shell a market full of civvies. Considering the amount of Perfidy going on, I can't say that I can blame either side for not taking any called cease fires seriously.


Here's something, and I'm curious, do we have any proof that these firing positions existed? If so I've missed it. On the second school shelling it was supposedly based on the fact that three Islamic Jihad men were seen nearby on a motorcycle, which doesn't sound like much of a firing position.

Baron. I'm not going to beat around the bush. Your a straight up Chuckle Head. You never heard of "Shoot and Scoot"? As for the "Cease Fire" either side could have have maintain the time duration to put the other side in a even worse moral position. As for your "motorcycle" incident I am under the impression those idiots did a "drive by" and got opted out in the process in front of a school. So either you were a Fobbit, CAB Chaser, or a TOCRoach...well you get the idea. Why I haven't really took part in the thread being I can relate to Israel situation in this round of combat

Mod
This is one Combat Vet to another (Baron)




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

jamesk1973 wrote:

Civilian casualties are a given when fighting in a built up area.

Particularly when your weapon of choice is artillery or air strikes.

Notice I mention M109 Paladin. An Artillery system geared towards GPS coordinates. Basically in a ten meter strike hit zone. Notice its one shell instead of a typical Battery Strike? A Battery Fire Mission is spread over 100m blanket for four tubes. Notice the missiles and bombs are laser guided and not "dumb" ordinance

 whembly wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

Spoiler:

Just want to point out since your bringing up Geneva Convention

ART. 4. — Hospital and safety zones shall fulfil the following conditions:
a) They shall comprise only a small part of the territory governed by the Power
which has established them.
b) They shall be thinly populated in relation to the possibilities of
accommodation.
c) They shall be far removed and free from all military objectives, or large
industrial or administrative establishments.
d) They shall not be situated in areas which, according to every probability,may
become important for the conduct of the war.
ART. 5.— Hospital and safety zones shall be subject to the following obligations:
a) The lines of communication and means of transport which they possess shall
not be used for the transport of military personnel or material, even in
transit.
b) They shall in no case be defended by military means.
ART. 6. — Hospital and safety zones shall be marked by means of oblique red
bands on a white ground, placed on the buildings and outer precincts.

Hams has to agree to

Zones reserved exclusively for the wounded and sick may be marked by means
of the Red Cross (Red Crescent, Red Lion and Sun) emblem on a white ground.
They may be similarly marked at night by means of appropriate illumination.
ART. 7. — The Powers shall communicate to all the High Contracting Parties in
peacetime or on the outbreak of hostilities, a list of the hospital and safety zones in
the territories governed by them. They shall also give notice of any new zones set
up during hostilities.
As soon as the adverse Party has received the above-mentioned notification, the
zone shall be regularly established.
If, however, the adverse Party considers that the conditions of the present
agreement have not been fulfilled, it may refuse to recognize the zone by giving
immediate notice thereof to the Party responsible for the said zone, or may make
its recognition of such zone dependent upon the institution of the control provided
for in Article 8.
ART. 8. — Any Power having recognized one or several hospital and safety zones
instituted by the adverse Party shall be entitled to demand control by one or more
Special Commissions, for the purpose of ascertaining if the zones fulfil the
conditions and obligations stipulated in the present agreement.
For this purpose, members of the Special Commissions shall at all times have
free access to the various zones and may even reside there permanently. They shall
be given all facilities for their duties of inspection.
ART. 9. — Should the Special Commissions note any facts which they consider
contrary to the stipulations of the present agreement, they shall at once draw the
attention of the Power governing the said zone to these facts, and shall fix a time
limit of five days within which the matter should be rectified.They shall duly notify
the Power who has recognized the zone.
If, when the time limit has expired, the Power governing the zone has not
complied with the warning, the adverse Party may declare that it is no longer bound
by the present agreement in respect of the said zone.
ART. 10. — Any Power setting up one or more hospital and safety zones, and the
adverse Parties to whom their existence has been notified, shall nominate or have
nominated by the Protecting Powers or by other neutral Powers, persons eligible to
be members of the Special Commissions mentioned in Articles 8 and 9.
ART. 11. — In no circumstances may hospital and safety zones be the object of
attack. They shall be protected and respected at all times by the Parties to the
conflict.
ART. 12. — In the case of occupation of a territory, the hospital and safety zones
therein shall continue to be respected and utilized as such.

Yet the protected status is lost when an enemy combatant fires on or near the location of the hospital

Simply put, no one has a right to protection at a Hamas firing position. There is no international law or convention that mandates such protection. That’s what makes it a war crime to wage combat from behind protected persons or sites.

Is that why 7 UN refugee shelters have been bombed? Israel is clearly committing war crimes and clearly targeting innocent civilians. They attacked the UN, I'm guessing the UN is in the right to try and pass all the resolutions they do against Israel.

sirlynchmob wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

Spoiler:

Just want to point out since your bringing up Geneva Convention

ART. 4. — Hospital and safety zones shall fulfil the following conditions:
a) They shall comprise only a small part of the territory governed by the Power
which has established them.
b) They shall be thinly populated in relation to the possibilities of
accommodation.
c) They shall be far removed and free from all military objectives, or large
industrial or administrative establishments.
d) They shall not be situated in areas which, according to every probability,may
become important for the conduct of the war.
ART. 5.— Hospital and safety zones shall be subject to the following obligations:
a) The lines of communication and means of transport which they possess shall
not be used for the transport of military personnel or material, even in
transit.
b) They shall in no case be defended by military means.
ART. 6. — Hospital and safety zones shall be marked by means of oblique red
bands on a white ground, placed on the buildings and outer precincts.

Hams has to agree to

Zones reserved exclusively for the wounded and sick may be marked by means
of the Red Cross (Red Crescent, Red Lion and Sun) emblem on a white ground.
They may be similarly marked at night by means of appropriate illumination.
ART. 7. — The Powers shall communicate to all the High Contracting Parties in
peacetime or on the outbreak of hostilities, a list of the hospital and safety zones in
the territories governed by them. They shall also give notice of any new zones set
up during hostilities.
As soon as the adverse Party has received the above-mentioned notification, the
zone shall be regularly established.
If, however, the adverse Party considers that the conditions of the present
agreement have not been fulfilled, it may refuse to recognize the zone by giving
immediate notice thereof to the Party responsible for the said zone, or may make
its recognition of such zone dependent upon the institution of the control provided
for in Article 8.
ART. 8. — Any Power having recognized one or several hospital and safety zones
instituted by the adverse Party shall be entitled to demand control by one or more
Special Commissions, for the purpose of ascertaining if the zones fulfil the
conditions and obligations stipulated in the present agreement.
For this purpose, members of the Special Commissions shall at all times have
free access to the various zones and may even reside there permanently. They shall
be given all facilities for their duties of inspection.
ART. 9. — Should the Special Commissions note any facts which they consider
contrary to the stipulations of the present agreement, they shall at once draw the
attention of the Power governing the said zone to these facts, and shall fix a time
limit of five days within which the matter should be rectified.They shall duly notify
the Power who has recognized the zone.
If, when the time limit has expired, the Power governing the zone has not
complied with the warning, the adverse Party may declare that it is no longer bound
by the present agreement in respect of the said zone.
ART. 10. — Any Power setting up one or more hospital and safety zones, and the
adverse Parties to whom their existence has been notified, shall nominate or have
nominated by the Protecting Powers or by other neutral Powers, persons eligible to
be members of the Special Commissions mentioned in Articles 8 and 9.
ART. 11. — In no circumstances may hospital and safety zones be the object of
attack. They shall be protected and respected at all times by the Parties to the
conflict.
ART. 12. — In the case of occupation of a territory, the hospital and safety zones
therein shall continue to be respected and utilized as such.

Yet the protected status is lost when an enemy combatant fires on or near the location of the hospital

Simply put, no one has a right to protection at a Hamas firing position. There is no international law or convention that mandates such protection. That’s what makes it a war crime to wage combat from behind protected persons or sites.

Is that why 7 UN refugee shelters have been bombed? Israel is clearly committing war crimes and clearly targeting innocent civilians. They attacked the UN, I'm guessing the UN is in the right to try and pass all the resolutions they do against Israel.

You're not reading... Hamas were firing at those locations. In war, when that happens, it becomes a legit target.

 whembly wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

Spoiler:

Just want to point out since your bringing up Geneva Convention

ART. 4. — Hospital and safety zones shall fulfil the following conditions:
a) They shall comprise only a small part of the territory governed by the Power
which has established them.
b) They shall be thinly populated in relation to the possibilities of
accommodation.
c) They shall be far removed and free from all military objectives, or large
industrial or administrative establishments.
d) They shall not be situated in areas which, according to every probability,may
become important for the conduct of the war.
ART. 5.— Hospital and safety zones shall be subject to the following obligations:
a) The lines of communication and means of transport which they possess shall
not be used for the transport of military personnel or material, even in
transit.
b) They shall in no case be defended by military means.
ART. 6. — Hospital and safety zones shall be marked by means of oblique red
bands on a white ground, placed on the buildings and outer precincts.

Hams has to agree to

Zones reserved exclusively for the wounded and sick may be marked by means
of the Red Cross (Red Crescent, Red Lion and Sun) emblem on a white ground.
They may be similarly marked at night by means of appropriate illumination.
ART. 7. — The Powers shall communicate to all the High Contracting Parties in
peacetime or on the outbreak of hostilities, a list of the hospital and safety zones in
the territories governed by them. They shall also give notice of any new zones set
up during hostilities.
As soon as the adverse Party has received the above-mentioned notification, the
zone shall be regularly established.
If, however, the adverse Party considers that the conditions of the present
agreement have not been fulfilled, it may refuse to recognize the zone by giving
immediate notice thereof to the Party responsible for the said zone, or may make
its recognition of such zone dependent upon the institution of the control provided
for in Article 8.
ART. 8. — Any Power having recognized one or several hospital and safety zones
instituted by the adverse Party shall be entitled to demand control by one or more
Special Commissions, for the purpose of ascertaining if the zones fulfil the
conditions and obligations stipulated in the present agreement.
For this purpose, members of the Special Commissions shall at all times have
free access to the various zones and may even reside there permanently. They shall
be given all facilities for their duties of inspection.
ART. 9. — Should the Special Commissions note any facts which they consider
contrary to the stipulations of the present agreement, they shall at once draw the
attention of the Power governing the said zone to these facts, and shall fix a time
limit of five days within which the matter should be rectified.They shall duly notify
the Power who has recognized the zone.
If, when the time limit has expired, the Power governing the zone has not
complied with the warning, the adverse Party may declare that it is no longer bound
by the present agreement in respect of the said zone.
ART. 10. — Any Power setting up one or more hospital and safety zones, and the
adverse Parties to whom their existence has been notified, shall nominate or have
nominated by the Protecting Powers or by other neutral Powers, persons eligible to
be members of the Special Commissions mentioned in Articles 8 and 9.
ART. 11. — In no circumstances may hospital and safety zones be the object of
attack. They shall be protected and respected at all times by the Parties to the
conflict.
ART. 12. — In the case of occupation of a territory, the hospital and safety zones
therein shall continue to be respected and utilized as such.

Yet the protected status is lost when an enemy combatant fires on or near the location of the hospital

Simply put, no one has a right to protection at a Hamas firing position. There is no international law or convention that mandates such protection. That’s what makes it a war crime to wage combat from behind protected persons or sites.

Is that why 7 UN refugee shelters have been bombed? Israel is clearly committing war crimes and clearly targeting innocent civilians. They attacked the UN, I'm guessing the UN is in the right to try and pass all the resolutions they do against Israel.

You're not reading... Hamas were firing at those locations. In war, when that happens, it becomes a legit target.

You're not right, Hamas was not at those locations, rockets were not fired from those locations. They were UNITED NATIONS REFUGEE CAMPS! SEVEN refugee camps run by the UN.

or is your definition of these locations, rockets came from the gaza strip, so carpet bomb the entire gaza strip? It's all the gaza strip so close enough?

sirlynchmob wrote:

 whembly wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

Spoiler:

Just want to point out since your bringing up Geneva Convention

ART. 4. — Hospital and safety zones shall fulfil the following conditions:
a) They shall comprise only a small part of the territory governed by the Power
which has established them.
b) They shall be thinly populated in relation to the possibilities of
accommodation.
c) They shall be far removed and free from all military objectives, or large
industrial or administrative establishments.
d) They shall not be situated in areas which, according to every probability,may
become important for the conduct of the war.
ART. 5.— Hospital and safety zones shall be subject to the following obligations:
a) The lines of communication and means of transport which they possess shall
not be used for the transport of military personnel or material, even in
transit.
b) They shall in no case be defended by military means.
ART. 6. — Hospital and safety zones shall be marked by means of oblique red
bands on a white ground, placed on the buildings and outer precincts.

Hams has to agree to

Zones reserved exclusively for the wounded and sick may be marked by means
of the Red Cross (Red Crescent, Red Lion and Sun) emblem on a white ground.
They may be similarly marked at night by means of appropriate illumination.
ART. 7. — The Powers shall communicate to all the High Contracting Parties in
peacetime or on the outbreak of hostilities, a list of the hospital and safety zones in
the territories governed by them. They shall also give notice of any new zones set
up during hostilities.
As soon as the adverse Party has received the above-mentioned notification, the
zone shall be regularly established.
If, however, the adverse Party considers that the conditions of the present
agreement have not been fulfilled, it may refuse to recognize the zone by giving
immediate notice thereof to the Party responsible for the said zone, or may make
its recognition of such zone dependent upon the institution of the control provided
for in Article 8.
ART. 8. — Any Power having recognized one or several hospital and safety zones
instituted by the adverse Party shall be entitled to demand control by one or more
Special Commissions, for the purpose of ascertaining if the zones fulfil the
conditions and obligations stipulated in the present agreement.
For this purpose, members of the Special Commissions shall at all times have
free access to the various zones and may even reside there permanently. They shall
be given all facilities for their duties of inspection.
ART. 9. — Should the Special Commissions note any facts which they consider
contrary to the stipulations of the present agreement, they shall at once draw the
attention of the Power governing the said zone to these facts, and shall fix a time
limit of five days within which the matter should be rectified.They shall duly notify
the Power who has recognized the zone.
If, when the time limit has expired, the Power governing the zone has not
complied with the warning, the adverse Party may declare that it is no longer bound
by the present agreement in respect of the said zone.
ART. 10. — Any Power setting up one or more hospital and safety zones, and the
adverse Parties to whom their existence has been notified, shall nominate or have
nominated by the Protecting Powers or by other neutral Powers, persons eligible to
be members of the Special Commissions mentioned in Articles 8 and 9.
ART. 11. — In no circumstances may hospital and safety zones be the object of
attack. They shall be protected and respected at all times by the Parties to the
conflict.
ART. 12. — In the case of occupation of a territory, the hospital and safety zones
therein shall continue to be respected and utilized as such.

Yet the protected status is lost when an enemy combatant fires on or near the location of the hospital

Simply put, no one has a right to protection at a Hamas firing position. There is no international law or convention that mandates such protection. That’s what makes it a war crime to wage combat from behind protected persons or sites.

Is that why 7 UN refugee shelters have been bombed? Israel is clearly committing war crimes and clearly targeting innocent civilians. They attacked the UN, I'm guessing the UN is in the right to try and pass all the resolutions they do against Israel.

You're not reading... Hamas were firing at those locations. In war, when that happens, it becomes a legit target.

You're not right, Hamas was not at those locations, rockets were not fired from those locations. They were UNITED NATIONS REFUGEE CAMPS! SEVEN refugee camps run by the UN.

or is your definition of these locations, rockets came from the gaza strip, so carpet bomb the entire gaza strip? It's all the gaza strip so close enough?

Hamas wears a uniform?

Edit

For all we know Hamas learned a trick or two from Insurgents from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Counter Battery Radar
Motar Tube with a block ice in it. Set up and go away. Ice melts enough for the round to drop and "foom"
or
Water container with a hole poke in the bottom for water to drain out. Drops enough to trigger the electrical surge to fire rockets. Just need a AA battery

sirlynchmob wrote:


You're not right, Hamas was not at those locations, rockets were not fired from those locations. They were UNITED NATIONS REFUGEE CAMPS! SEVEN refugee camps run by the UN.

or is your definition of these locations, rockets came from the gaza strip, so carpet bomb the entire gaza strip? It's all the gaza strip so close enough?

It's a good thing that you were there, so you can say with conviction that Hamas was in fact not firing rockets from those locations.

most of the wounded/casualty footage and images reported seem to be of civilians, younger people and children from Hamas, but military from israel. Odd that Hamas rockets don't hit civilian targets but Israeli mortars do...

regardless Israel is supported by other nations mainly because certain nations made the mistake of giving them land and bringing them to power so there is a strange obligation to support them, and Israels ruling body is insane so there is a blackmail obligation to support them.

http://wikispooks.com/wiki/Dahiya_Doctrine

Dahiya Doctrine- israel will specifically target civilians if they get the chance. All civilians of a nation are considered the extremist military of that said nation.

http://wikispooks.com/wiki/Samson_option

for anyone who doesn't want to bother to look at that, Israel has basically said that it has a final Nuclear option and has Nuclear weapons aimed at pretty much every country within 3k miles of it- that has Nuclear weapons so if they go down they trigger nuclear war with every country that is armed for nuclear war nearby, ie hello europe.

Based on the story of samson knocking the pillars down to kill as many phillistines as possible in his own death

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:


You're not right, Hamas was not at those locations, rockets were not fired from those locations. They were UNITED NATIONS REFUGEE CAMPS! SEVEN refugee camps run by the UN.

or is your definition of these locations, rockets came from the gaza strip, so carpet bomb the entire gaza strip? It's all the gaza strip so close enough?

It's a good thing that you were there, so you can say with conviction that Hamas was in fact not firing rockets from those locations.

Oh I see, all the messages sent to Israel by the UN saying they were refugee camps and there are no weapons present aren't good enough for you?

You're the proverbial ostrich with your head in the sand. I didn't see the crime, so no crime was committed.

sirlynchmob wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:


You're not right, Hamas was not at those locations, rockets were not fired from those locations. They were UNITED NATIONS REFUGEE CAMPS! SEVEN refugee camps run by the UN.

or is your definition of these locations, rockets came from the gaza strip, so carpet bomb the entire gaza strip? It's all the gaza strip so close enough?

It's a good thing that you were there, so you can say with conviction that Hamas was in fact not firing rockets from those locations.

Oh I see, all the messages sent to Israel by the UN saying they were refugee camps and there are no weapons present aren't good enough for you?

You're the proverbial ostrich with your head in the sand. I didn't see the crime, so no crime was committed.

The UN has no credibility. They've admitted that Hamas was storing rockets in their schools not once, but THREE TIMES now. When UNRWA found rockets in their schools, they gave them back to Palestinian police, AKA Hamas.

The UN is helping Hamas...I trust a UAV operator who can actually see the situation on the ground over some Canadian shill on a wargaming website. Killing civilians is counterproductive to Israel's strategy in this war. If the IDF wanted to kill civilians, they would be doing it with artillery barrages, not precision strikes.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:


You're not right, Hamas was not at those locations, rockets were not fired from those locations. They were UNITED NATIONS REFUGEE CAMPS! SEVEN refugee camps run by the UN.

or is your definition of these locations, rockets came from the gaza strip, so carpet bomb the entire gaza strip? It's all the gaza strip so close enough?

It's a good thing that you were there, so you can say with conviction that Hamas was in fact not firing rockets from those locations.

Oh I see, all the messages sent to Israel by the UN saying they were refugee camps and there are no weapons present aren't good enough for you?

You're the proverbial ostrich with your head in the sand. I didn't see the crime, so no crime was committed.

The UN has no credibility. They've admitted that Hamas was storing rockets in their schools not once, but THREE TIMES now. When UNRWA found rockets in their schools, they gave them back to Palestinian police, AKA Hamas.

The UN is helping Hamas...I trust a UAV operator who can actually see the situation on the ground over some Canadian shill on a wargaming website. Killing civilians is counterproductive to Israel's strategy in this war. If the IDF wanted to kill civilians, they would be doing it with artillery barrages, not precision strikes.

those precision strikes that destroy entire blocks?
Isn't the US a member of the UN?
killing civilians is all israel seems capable of doing, hence 75% of the casualties are civilians. It seems to be their only strategy.

You should pull your head out of your .... the sand and look at the damage being done. As you obviously didn't watch the video I posted which showed the devastation being done.

sirlynchmob wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

sirlynchmob wrote:


You're not right, Hamas was not at those locations, rockets were not fired from those locations. They were UNITED NATIONS REFUGEE CAMPS! SEVEN refugee camps run by the UN.

or is your definition of these locations, rockets came from the gaza strip, so carpet bomb the entire gaza strip? It's all the gaza strip so close enough?

It's a good thing that you were there, so you can say with conviction that Hamas was in fact not firing rockets from those locations.

Oh I see, all the messages sent to Israel by the UN saying they were refugee camps and there are no weapons present aren't good enough for you?

You're the proverbial ostrich with your head in the sand. I didn't see the crime, so no crime was committed.

The UN has no credibility. They've admitted that Hamas was storing rockets in their schools not once, but THREE TIMES now. When UNRWA found rockets in their schools, they gave them back to Palestinian police, AKA Hamas.

The UN is helping Hamas...I trust a UAV operator who can actually see the situation on the ground over some Canadian shill on a wargaming website. Killing civilians is counterproductive to Israel's strategy in this war. If the IDF wanted to kill civilians, they would be doing it with artillery barrages, not precision strikes.

those precision strikes that destroy entire blocks?
Isn't the US a member of the UN?
killing civilians is all israel seems capable of doing, hence 75% of the casualties are civilians. It seems to be their only strategy.

You should pull your head out of your .... the sand and look at the damage being done. As you obviously didn't watch the video I posted which showed the devastation being done.

How many were actual casualties and how many were willing participants in a human shield attempt? You are making it sound like the 1800+ civilians killed were deliberately gunned down by IDF.

 Jihadin wrote:


How many were actual casualties and how many were willing participants in a human shield attempt? You are making it sound like the 1800+ civilians killed were deliberately gunned down by IDF.

they were.

http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/charlotte-silver/israeli-army-summarily-executed-fleeing-civilians-southern-gaza

But still, the Red Crescent was unable to reach many families. Furthermore, as reported by the International Committee of the Red Cross, Israel attacked a volunteer with the Red Crescent while he was attempted to treat the wounded.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2701043/The-shocking-moment-Palestinian-civilian-shot-dead-Israeli-sniper-lying-defenceless-floor-earlier-hit.html

Watch the video, does that man looking for his family look like he's armed? does it look like he's a participating as a human shield?

This human shield nonsense, is so you can sleep at night. thinking all those women & children deserved to die in what more people are calling a massacre and genocide.

Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 reds8n wrote:
that the other, mainly Islamic, nations in that area are not exactly falling over to help their brethren. As per usual.

The great irony with this is, of course, that one of the main tenets of Islam is charity and taking care of others.... Which makes all those other Islamic nations "terrible Muslims" from the perspective of following their religious values

There are plenty of things any country genuinely concerned about the Palestinians could do, from setting aside/divesting a small chunk of land of their own for Palestinians(there's plenty of underoccupied space in the Middle-East), to offering free citizenship to Palestinians. Heck, a lot of these countries already HAVE substantial Palestinian immigrant populations, and take great pleasure in discriminating the hell out of them.

The Palestinian people are just a tool most of them use to batter Israel with in international settings, because on just about every other front Israel outdoes them. Economically, militarily, democratically...

The charter of Likud states -
"The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river."

In all fairness, Likud is a hodgepodge compromise of conflicting interests and factions, and that could well have changed by tomorrow.

Goliath wrote: I shall also endeavour to stop paying any attention to statements by organisations such as the UN, or by other countries, that Israel's actions amount to war-crimes, as for me to pay them any heed would also be anti-semitic.

Frankly, I wouldn't pay much attention to the UN at all if I were you. Considering their Human Rights Committee has such bastions of freedom as Algeria on it, and their Security Council Jordan and Chad, their very existence is the ultimate hypocrisy. There's so much bias against Israel swimming around there from tinpot dictators and supreme monarchs for life who commit genocide/illegal abductions/imprisonments/torture every week, they make Israel look like a shining beacon of freedom for the Palestinian people in comparison.

A good example of this is how it is interesting to note that took forever to get any kind condemnation of Assad out of them, but Israel? Twenty minutes, a cup of coffee and a five minute cigarette break. The UN is so vastly biased when it comes to this issue, that paying any attention whatsoever to them on it is pointless. So Israel doesn't.

sirlynchmob wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:


How many were actual casualties and how many were willing participants in a human shield attempt? You are making it sound like the 1800+ civilians killed were deliberately gunned down by IDF.

they were.

http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/charlotte-silver/israeli-army-summarily-executed-fleeing-civilians-southern-gaza

But still, the Red Crescent was unable to reach many families. Furthermore, as reported by the International Committee of the Red Cross, Israel attacked a volunteer with the Red Crescent while he was attempted to treat the wounded.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2701043/The-shocking-moment-Palestinian-civilian-shot-dead-Israeli-sniper-lying-defenceless-floor-earlier-hit.html

Watch the video, does that man looking for his family look like he's armed? does it look like he's a participating as a human shield?

This human shield nonsense, is so you can sleep at night. thinking all those women & children deserved to die in what more people are calling a massacre and genocide.

Really? The Human shield nonsense that Hamas leaders themselves have openly stated in interviews?

Guess what, Hamas is a terrible terrorist orginization that gives absolutely no regard for their own civilian lives. They are a means to an end.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

jamesk1973 wrote:

Civilian casualties are a given when fighting in a built up area.

Particularly when your weapon of choice is artillery or air strikes.

Thats what armies fight with. There hasn't been a good arrow storm in centuries.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

sirlynchmob wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

Spoiler:

Just want to point out since your bringing up Geneva Convention

ART. 4. — Hospital and safety zones shall fulfil the following conditions:
a) They shall comprise only a small part of the territory governed by the Power
which has established them.
b) They shall be thinly populated in relation to the possibilities of
accommodation.
c) They shall be far removed and free from all military objectives, or large
industrial or administrative establishments.
d) They shall not be situated in areas which, according to every probability,may
become important for the conduct of the war.
ART. 5.— Hospital and safety zones shall be subject to the following obligations:
a) The lines of communication and means of transport which they possess shall
not be used for the transport of military personnel or material, even in
transit.
b) They shall in no case be defended by military means.
ART. 6. — Hospital and safety zones shall be marked by means of oblique red
bands on a white ground, placed on the buildings and outer precincts.

Hams has to agree to

Zones reserved exclusively for the wounded and sick may be marked by means
of the Red Cross (Red Crescent, Red Lion and Sun) emblem on a white ground.
They may be similarly marked at night by means of appropriate illumination.
ART. 7. — The Powers shall communicate to all the High Contracting Parties in
peacetime or on the outbreak of hostilities, a list of the hospital and safety zones in
the territories governed by them. They shall also give notice of any new zones set
up during hostilities.
As soon as the adverse Party has received the above-mentioned notification, the
zone shall be regularly established.
If, however, the adverse Party considers that the conditions of the present
agreement have not been fulfilled, it may refuse to recognize the zone by giving
immediate notice thereof to the Party responsible for the said zone, or may make
its recognition of such zone dependent upon the institution of the control provided
for in Article 8.
ART. 8. — Any Power having recognized one or several hospital and safety zones
instituted by the adverse Party shall be entitled to demand control by one or more
Special Commissions, for the purpose of ascertaining if the zones fulfil the
conditions and obligations stipulated in the present agreement.
For this purpose, members of the Special Commissions shall at all times have
free access to the various zones and may even reside there permanently. They shall
be given all facilities for their duties of inspection.
ART. 9. — Should the Special Commissions note any facts which they consider
contrary to the stipulations of the present agreement, they shall at once draw the
attention of the Power governing the said zone to these facts, and shall fix a time
limit of five days within which the matter should be rectified.They shall duly notify
the Power who has recognized the zone.
If, when the time limit has expired, the Power governing the zone has not
complied with the warning, the adverse Party may declare that it is no longer bound
by the present agreement in respect of the said zone.
ART. 10. — Any Power setting up one or more hospital and safety zones, and the
adverse Parties to whom their existence has been notified, shall nominate or have
nominated by the Protecting Powers or by other neutral Powers, persons eligible to
be members of the Special Commissions mentioned in Articles 8 and 9.
ART. 11. — In no circumstances may hospital and safety zones be the object of
attack. They shall be protected and respected at all times by the Parties to the
conflict.
ART. 12. — In the case of occupation of a territory, the hospital and safety zones
therein shall continue to be respected and utilized as such.

Yet the protected status is lost when an enemy combatant fires on or near the location of the hospital

Simply put, no one has a right to protection at a Hamas firing position. There is no international law or convention that mandates such protection. That’s what makes it a war crime to wage combat from behind protected persons or sites.

Is that why 7 UN refugee shelters have been bombed? Israel is clearly committing war crimes and clearly targeting innocent civilians. They attacked the UN, I'm guessing the UN is in the right to try and pass all the resolutions they do against Israel.

Yes that is why. Its like you read the post, stuck your fingers in your...ears and went blah blah.

Just prior to the current cease-fire... this happened:
How Hamas Assembles and Fires Rockets

Gaza: In the minutes before the ceasefire kicked in at Gaza this morning, Hamas fired a flurry of rockets towards Israel - 30 according to some counts.

Israel has argued that that these rockets are fired from civilian areas, and this is why its retaliatory strikes can result in civilian casualties.

But this morning, NDTV witnessed one such rocket silo being created under a tent right next to the hotel where our team was staying. Minutes later, we saw the rocket being fired, just before the 72-hour ceasefire came into effect.

It began with a mysterious tent with a blue canopy that bobbed up yesterday (August 4) at 6:30 am in an open patch of land next to our window. We saw three men making a multitude of journeys in and out of the tent, sometimes with wires.

An hour later, they emerged, dismantled the tent, changed their clothes and walked away.

The next morning - today - we woke to news of the 72-hour ceasefire but just before it was to take effect, the rocket next to our hotel was fired. There was a loud explosion and a whooshing sound. The cloud of smoke that rose was captured by our cameraperson.

This report is being aired on NDTV and published on ndtv.com after our team left the Gaza strip - Hamas has not taken very kindly to any reporting of its rockets being fired. But just as we reported the devastating consequences of Israel's offensive on Gaza's civilians, it is equally important to report on how Hamas places those very civilians at risk by firing rockets deep from the heart of civilian zones.

Video at the link...

This shows a deliberate attempt to bait the IDF into a response to take out the rocket battery, which would necessarily put everyone in the neighborhood at risk. That has been Hamas’ strategy all along... This is a war crime, and it puts the responsibility of any civilian deaths on Hamas rather than the IDF.

However, with this "Shoot & Scoot" tactic, the only way to really end the rocket fire is to devastate Hamas’ ability to re-arm itself and deploy those weapons.

HAMAS are pretty much a disgusting organisation.