Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

Israeli-Palastine Death Count

  • 01-06-2010 11:51AM
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,591 ✭✭✭


    Heard from a friend that since the troubles began there has been 9 Palastinians killed for every Israeli killed in the conflict so far.

    Can anyone point me in the direction of a reliable death count on this conflict ?

    And if it is the case that the death toll is 9-1 then surely it is obvious Israel are consistently using excessive force, no?


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    If Israel didn't kill the 9, would Hamas not kill the 1 and if Hamas didn't kill the 1 would Israel not kill the 9? Who knows. And how at this stage can you tell who is doing the retaliating? Also the death imbalance is due to a firepower imbalance in part. What would the ratio look like if Hamas had the superior firepower? Would israel still exist? It's far more complex than presenting statistics.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 6,391 Mod ✭✭✭✭Macha


    Perhaps not the most reliable of sources but Wikipedia:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_conflict#Casualties

    Oh wait, the source is UN figures. Reasonably reliable.

    The figures simply serve to emphasis and underline the disproportionate response by Israel. It seems 1 Israeli life is worth 9 Palestinian lives. As a Guardian reader wrote:
    I threw my socks at the TV when the Netanyahu press conference was broadcast. I fully expect and deserve the ensuing helicopter gunship assault for my act of aggression.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,591 ✭✭✭RATM


    No not really. Because if there are some stats about on the death tolls for both sides then at least it paints a picture. Of course there are other variables at play such as weapons, etc. But if we assume that both sides will shoot to kill (which is a fair assumption) then we have a relatively level playing field.

    Plus the fact that any such stats would be longitudinal going back as far as 1967 and beyond. It's hard to argue with stats taken from such a long period of time- anomalies tend to iron themselves out over decades but may still be present when only years are looked at.

    Israel claims that Palastine wants it 'wiped off the face of the map'. Now if its the case that there are 9 Palastinians dead for every Israeli then that really shows us who is killing who.

    What I'm trying to get at is weather or not Israel is using excessive force and a death toll of 9/1 would indicate that they are indeed guilty of this. But can anyone link to a relaible source on this?


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 6,391 Mod ✭✭✭✭Macha


    RATM wrote: »
    Israel claims that Palastine wants it 'wiped off the face of the map'. Now if its the case that there are 9 Palastinians dead for every Israeli then that really shows us who is killing who.
    As the saying goes, actions speak louder than words.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    RATM you are confounding capability and desire with the 9:1 stat. I have little doubt that both sides have the desire to kill each other or as you say shoot to kill but they have different capabilities. Without the need for stats it is obvious to anyone with eyes that Israel use excessive force


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,164 ✭✭✭cavedave


    Did anyone else see this argument on frontline last night? Where the Israeli and Palestinian representatives kept citing figures on how many of their children the other had killed.

    We live in a country where our minister for children thinks it would be a 'mammoth task' to figure out how many of the children in its care have been killed. At least the Israeli/Palestinian fight has some good statistics. Attributed to Stalin "The death of one man is a tragedy, the death of millions is a statistic" except in Ireland where we would not have the figures.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,591 ✭✭✭RATM


    RATM you are confounding capability and desire with the 9:1 stat. I have little doubt that both sides have the desire to kill each other or as you say shoot to kill but they have different capabilities. Without the need for stats it is obvious to anyone with eyes that Israel use excessive force

    For sure yesterdays actions show they use excessive force but Im just trying to place it in context of the conflict as a whole. After all the Palastinians are not innocent in this conflict either.

    Anyway that link to the UN's stats on the death toll are varied.

    (numbers in parentheses represent casualties under age 18)
    Year Deaths
    Palestinians Israelis
    2004 828 (179) 108 (8)
    2003 588 (119) 185 (21)
    2002 1032 (157) 421 (37)
    2001 467 (82) 191 (36)
    2000 279 (83) 41 (0)


    Total 3194 (620) 946 (112)

    So the ratios of Palistinians to Israels dead are:-

    2000- 7.6/1
    2001- 2.44/1
    2002- 2.45/1
    2003- 3.17/1
    2004- 7.66/1

    Over those 5 years the total is 3.37/1.

    But perhaps more interesting is the death toll of children

    2000 83/0
    2001 2.27/1
    2002 4.24/1
    2003 5.66/1
    2004 22.3/1

    The total over 5 years is that there have been 5.5 Palastinian children killed for every Israeli child killed.

    Now we all know Hamas deals in randomly fired rockets. But Israel on the other hand is supposed to be a nation state and therefore liable to the rules of engagement and UN Declaration on Human Rights/Children.

    But these figures indicate that children are either targeted or that the IDF just fire indiscriminantly with no consideration whatsoever for children being about. Guerilla warfare or not those stats are sickening.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    RATM wrote: »
    But these figures indicate that children are either targeted or that the IDF just fire indiscriminantly with no consideration whatsoever for children being about. Guerilla warfare or not those stats are sickening.

    I think you'll agree the bit in bold is the sickening part and unfortunately this is being displayed on both sides whether by israels retaliation or by Hamas's freedom fighters/terrorists use of children as human shields firing from schools and hospitals. Do Hamas place more Palestinian children in danger? Hence the distorted ratio?

    I just cannot take sides in this conflict


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,745 ✭✭✭Eliot Rosewater


    I just cannot take sides in this conflict

    Agreed. As you said in another thread (that was subsequently deleted), it would be great if a protest march advocating neither side, but just peace, was held. While the protest marches against Israel at the moment provide a justified means of portraying the anger people feel over the flotilla incident, those protesting run the risk of alienating Israeli people from themselves. I think that history has demonstrated that peoples' communal values and cultural sensibilities are only intensified when they are put under pressure. This can be seen in places such as Northern Ireland, where the sense of Irishness amongst the nationalist population is arguably greater than that in the Republic, where the Irish culture is not under threat.

    A solution to the Israeli-Palestine conflict will require concessions from both sides, and jumping to one side is only to overly simplify a very complex international situation. The Palestine death toll being higher does not go anywhere near to making it a black and white scenario, whatsoever.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    I think you'll agree the bit in bold is the sickening part and unfortunately this is being displayed on both sides whether by israels retaliation or by Hamas's freedom fighters/terrorists use of children as human shields firing from schools and hospitals. Do Hamas place more Palestinian children in danger? Hence the distorted ratio?

    I just cannot take sides in this conflict

    ...yet you cite the cliche of Hamas using human shields, and ignore the fact it was official documnented IDF policy to use human shields for 35 or so years.....your neutrality would appear to be a bit 'Irish' in nature.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 483 ✭✭Selkies


    Nodin wrote: »
    ...yet you cite the cliche of Hamas using human shields, and ignore the fact it was official documnented IDF policy to use human shields for 35 or so years.....your neutrality would appear to be a bit 'Irish' in nature.

    What's interesting about what hamas do is they use their own schools as human shields, where as Israel used Palestinian adults as human shields, (harder to rest a gun on the shoulder of a child and walk at the same time).

    I think it's fairly well established that if Israel truly gave a **** about the Palestinians Hamas would blow up Palestinians rather than the far less effective in terms of headcount rockets.
    Thankfully for the Palestinians they don't, so they just tend to hide military targets in densely populated areas, while Israel still with the not really caring about Palestinian lives, blows the **** out of the bomb factory or whatever killing many innocent civilians along the way.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,078 ✭✭✭conorhal


    Nodin wrote: »
    ...yet you cite the cliché of Hamas using human shields, and ignore the fact it was official documented IDF policy to use human shields for 35 or so years.....your neutrality would appear to be a bit 'Irish' in nature.


    The deliberate use of human shields argument aside.
    Hamas may fire a wildly inaccurate rocket into Israel and possibly kill somebody. The IDF may fire a missile back at a Hamas rocket team's firing position from a helicopter, which will typically be located in a built up area (but then where in Gaza isn't?) and kill several people. And thus you have an endless cycle of provocation and response.
    Israel will argue that they have every right to strike back, and their history is one that applies a zero tolerence policy to any agression, whill Hamas lwill beat their chests and and point to the dammage done (ignoring the fact that they invited it) because they like to capitalize on such figures which are useful to their cause.
    At the end of the day neither side wins and some redundant 'kill ratio' is helpful only to ideologues that enjoy keeping such scores.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Selkies wrote: »
    What's interesting about what hamas do is they use their own schools as human shields, where as Israel used Palestinian adults as human shields, (harder to rest a gun on the shoulder of a child and walk at the same time).

    I think it's fairly well established that if Israel truly gave a **** about the Palestinians Hamas would blow up Palestinians rather than the far less effective in terms of headcount rockets.
    Thankfully for the Palestinians they don't, so they just tend to hide military targets in densely populated areas, while Israel still with the not really caring about Palestinian lives, blows the **** out of the bomb factory or whatever killing many innocent civilians along the way.

    .....you'll find that a suprising number of casualties were caused - particularily during the occupation of Gaza and the Intifada - by rifle fire, often single shots. This is of course almost pre-Hamas, who are this decades 'excuse for everything'.

    Of course we on the pro-Palestinian side also have our 'excuse for everything' which is the occupation and settlements. As thats been there since 1967, we at least acheive consistency.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 483 ✭✭Selkies


    Nodin wrote: »
    .....you'll find that a suprising number of casualties were caused - particularily during the occupation of Gaza and the Intifada - by rifle fire, often single shots. This is of course almost pre-Hamas, who are this decades 'excuse for everything'.

    Of course we on the pro-Palestinian side also have our 'excuse for everything' which is the occupation and settlements. As thats been there since 1967, we at least acheive consistency.

    When you saying a surprising number of causalities are you comparing it to any other urban combat in particular?

    Yes, you have us there. Stupid elections. ;)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 483 ✭✭Selkies


    conorhal wrote: »


    The deliberate use of human shields argument aside.
    Hamas may fire a wildly inaccurate rocket into Israel and possibly kill somebody. The IDF may fire a missile back at a Hamas rocket team's firing position from a helicopter, which will typically be located in a built up area (but then where in Gaza isn't?) and kill several people. And thus you have an endless cycle of provocation and response.
    Israel will argue that they have every right to strike back, and their history is one that applies a zero tolerence policy to any agression, whill Hamas lwill beat their chests and and point to the dammage done (ignoring the fact that they invited it) because they like to capitalize on such figures which are useful to their cause.
    At the end of the day neither side wins and some redundant 'kill ratio' is helpful only to ideologues that enjoy keeping such scores.

    Actually the kill ratio does indicate the effectiveness of rocket attacks.
    It also illustrates the effectiveness of gun ships.

    It also indicates that having a low kill count of Palestinians doesn't seem to be an election issue in Israel.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Selkies wrote: »
    When you saying a surprising number of causalities are you comparing it to any other urban combat in particular?

    "suprising" compared to the idea that loss of life was collateral, caused mainly by rockets and bombs aimed at targets. A great deal of it was caused by aimed sniper and rifle fire.
    Selkies wrote: »
    Yes, you have us there. Stupid elections. ;)

    What?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    Nodin wrote: »
    .....you'll find that a suprising number of casualties were caused - particularily during the occupation of Gaza and the Intifada - by rifle fire, often single shots. This is of course almost pre-Hamas, who are this decades 'excuse for everything'.

    Of course we on the pro-Palestinian side also have our 'excuse for everything' which is the occupation and settlements. As thats been there since 1967, we at least acheive consistency.

    How can you be pro any side in this conflict? each has done atrocious things and indoctrinate the next generation with a mindset of hate for neighbouring culture and religion.
    Nodin wrote: »
    ...yet you cite the cliche of Hamas using human shields, and ignore the fact it was official documnented IDF policy to use human shields for 35 or so years.....your neutrality would appear to be a bit 'Irish' in nature.

    And please just listen to my message which is the promotion of and protest for PEACE and not try and undermine my playing devils advocate here. Please refrain from alluding to me being pro-israeli in this raging conflict, I cant list off the atrocities each side has committed in full, and I'm not arguing for Israel here, I agree with you that they also use human shields amongst other reactionary and provocational acts of violence - hence I'm not taking sides. There is no need to doubt my sincerity, in fact I find your aspersions quite insulting. You on the other hand proclaim yourself as pro-palestinian, and although I'm against the continuing occupation and blockade of Palestinian territory I can never bring myself to be pro palestinian when in large parts they teach hatred and shelter terrorists/freedom fighters. Likewise because of Israels actions I could never be pro-israeli, both sides have elements that I abhor.

    You tried to question my anti-conflict stance in another thread and this is how I replied, and I'll still stand by it.
    Look here is where I stand. I'm anti the conflict and all countries involved. I'm anti the lack of international involvement - this includes both Americas hampering of sanctions against israel and military support as well as Arab nations military support of Palestine and open hateful protests burning israels flag and effigies. I'm anti this attack and all previous ones on both sides. But I'm not anti Israeli nor am I anti Palestine and the behaviour of both sides means I cannot be pro either side also. So rather than question my impartiality if I were you I'd examine my own bias first.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,401 ✭✭✭Royal Irish


    The death ratio in the winter conflict about 2 years ago was 110/1 with most of the victims being children. In that two week conflict IDF used overwhelming force and chemical weapons on a densely populated civilian area with a complete disregard for human life.

    In the month leading up to that conflict Israel claimed 6500 rockets were fired into Israel by Hamas. But an Irish soldier Desmond Travers who was on a fact finding mission for the UN in the Gaza Strip said only 2 rockets were fired in the lead up to that conflict.

    All this is just the tip of the iceberg regarding Israel. You have the Israel government giving controversial birth control drugs to black jews to get the black population numbers down. You have the longterm effects of them using chemical weapons on civilians with a huge amount of birth defects reported in Gaza. The list goes on and on of Israels breaches of basic human rights.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    The death ratio in the winter conflict about 2 years ago was 110/1 with most of the victims being children. In that two week conflict IDF used overwhelming force and chemical weapons on a densely populated civilian area with a complete disregard for human life.

    I think you'll find that both sides have a complete disregard for human life. There are no good guys in this conflict.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,401 ✭✭✭Royal Irish


    I would agree that the people most involved, ie Hamas, the IDF and the Israeli government would not be good guys in this never ending conflict. But most of the victims of this are Palastinian children.

    I have seen alot of photos of some of the birth defects from the IDF using chemical weapons, and not only are children being killed by Israeli airstrikes, but they are being killed before they are even born.

    I also believe that if Hamas through down their weapons and become peace loving hippies, the Israeli aparthied will continue as the Israelis are just simply racist fascists.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,441 ✭✭✭planetX


    I think you'll find that both sides have a complete disregard for human life. There are no good guys in this conflict.

    It's refreshing to see this opinion, and I agree with you wholeheartedly. Both sides have committed such disgusting atrocities, I would never support either. I don't think death ratios mean anything, it doesn't make the 'smaller' death any less tragic, especially if it's your friend or relative.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    I also believe that if Hamas through down their weapons and become peace loving hippies, the Israeli aparthied will continue as the Israelis are just simply racist fascists.

    Opinion drizzled with a nice smattering of anti-Israeli sentiment. Nice. Thats a roadmap to peace if ever I saw one


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,082 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    In that two week conflict IDF used overwhelming force and chemical weapons

    <sigh>

    Name a chemical weapon that the IDF used.

    Please note, neither white phosphorous nor depleted uranium are categorised as chemical weapons, so I presume you are not referring to either of those. That said, tear gas is categorised as one, but then most every country on the planet is guilty of using that at some point.

    Hyperbole never helps anyone's case.

    NTM


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    <sigh>

    Name a chemical weapon that the IDF used.

    Please note, neither white phosphorous nor depleted uranium are categorised as chemical weapons, so I presume you are not referring to either of those.

    Hyperbole never helps anyone's case.

    NTM

    That doesnt make their use of those weapons acceptable (not that you were saying it does). Like I said, atrocities have been committed on both sides, for people to be pro-palestine they need to adopt some pretty serious blinkers to ignore all the horrible stuff that has gone on. The same applies to pro-israel advocates, defending their right to protect themselves only goes so far, they have also committed atrocities. Calling arabs terrorists or calling israelis racist fascists is not going to move this conflict towards a resolutions. The middle eastern 'incompatibility' is the epitomy of mans inhumanity to man.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,401 ✭✭✭Royal Irish


    I have been to Tel Aviv and I have dated a jewish girl in the past. I have some good friends who are Jewish and one who was actually in the IDF and later in Mossad and they all share the same opinions as myself.

    Some of the biggest Critics of Israeli aparthied are jewish people themselves the most notable one being a 80 something year old survivor of Autswitz.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,401 ✭✭✭Royal Irish


    <sigh>

    Name a chemical weapon that the IDF used.

    Please note, neither white phosphorous nor depleted uranium are categorised as chemical weapons, so I presume you are not referring to either of those. That said, tear gas is categorised as one, but then most every country on the planet is guilty of using that at some point.

    Hyperbole never helps anyone's case.

    NTM

    International law prohibits the use of white phosphorus in heavily populated civilian areas. All of Gaza is heavily populated civilian area.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    I have been to Tel Aviv and I have dated a jewish girl in the past. I have some good friends who are Jewish and one who was actually in the IDF and later in Mossad and they all share the same opinions as myself.

    Some of the biggest Critics of Israeli aparthied are jewish people themselves the most notable one being a 80 something year old survivor of Autswitz.

    Thats why I accused you of anti-israeli sentiment and I didnt call you an anti-semite, because I doubt you are. I am also a critic of Israels actions, the occupation, aparthied and blockade but that does not automatically make me pro-palestinian. You rightly recognise one sides infractions but you support the other side that has acted equally heinously - and if not equally (as with the death ratio) this is probably a consequence of capability rather than desireability, so I wouldnt simply allign myself with the side that are 'killing less' when its obvious they just dont have the capability to be killing more. Neither side deserves blanket support.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,401 ✭✭✭Royal Irish


    Good post.

    I would be anti Israeli but its more to do with things outside of the Palastinian conflict.

    Like Israels blatant disregard for international law. Like take that killing of a Hamas leader in Dubai a few months back. I wouldnt rush to condone his killing, because I would consider him to be a terrorist. Its just the complete disregard for other countries sovereignty with using their passports and Israels comments afterwards stink of "we dont care. we can do what we want"


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    Good post.

    I would be anti Israeli but its more to do with things outside of the Palastinian conflict.

    Like Israels blatant disregard for international law. Like take that killing of a Hamas leader in Dubai a few months back. I wouldnt rush to condone his killing, because I would consider him to be a terrorist. Its just the complete disregard for other countries sovereignty with using their passports and Israels comments afterwards stink of "we dont care. we can do what we want"

    I'd agree, but this doesnt make me anti-Israeli although I may be anti much of their actions (especially of late), and being against their actions does not make me overlook palestinian incitement and involvement in all this and become pro-palestinian


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    220410_strangle.jpg

    This is how I see the conflict, with just this information you think its easy to label the victim and the attacker but there is so much history there that we cannot draw opinions based on just this strangle-hold.
    What if the strangler was actually the victim, protecting his family from an intruder? What if the intruder was responding to a previous act of violence? When the attacker claims to be the victim and there is evidence of attacks and mutual disrespect and hate on both sides, it is unhelpful to take sides, but it remains necessary to intervene.

    Israel are currently strangling Gaza.
    They argue that this is in response to attacks on Israelis and say if they ease up that Gaza will gain strength and pose a more serious threat to their security. The Palestinians argue that they were responding to Israeli aggression and continue to respond violently to the strangle-hold. It kinda makes sense to think that the longer you piss someone off strangling them to death, the greater they'll retaliate when you stop strangling.

    So what can be done?

    Agreement on a lifting of sanctions and return of occuppied territories with International policing of a peace accord. International aid, monitored by the UN allowed into Gaza and the promotion of international investment, all the while Israel being given the assurance that if it stops this insane strangling that the international policing bodies will guarantee the safety of its citizens. So in essence the internation community is posting bail or vouching for the palestinians to leverage their freedom. This can and should be done with the acknowledgement that both sides did horrible things and that peace in the region will promote stability in markets and improve growth and standards of living.

    Getting back to the strangling analogy, we need to step in and break it up, not worry about the blame game, and just see to those that need humanitarian help.



    EDIT: I'm aware that its not as easy to do as it is to say. All roadmaps to peace have failed so far, but taking sides and spouting bile about the other side is no way to progress these peoples towards peace.


Advertisement