Israel bombs 160 sites in Gaza overnight. Mod Warnings in First Post.

NIMAN

old_aussie wrote: »

They are not targeting children, israel notified them to clear the area.

hamas tell them to stay, so hamas can hide behind them.

They were playing on a beach ffs. Children playing on a beach, thats what they do.

They were told to get out of their homes, so you'd think that kids playing on a beach might not be considered a target?

Have you seen the video clip? After the 1st explosion at the shack on the pier, in which they probably witnessed a friend blown to pieces, they ran for safety up the beach, only to be targeted again by a gunner on the ship. To me this is nothing but cold blooded murder.

Manic Moran

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Deterrent? I'm sorry but don't get to set moral equivalence between a burglar alarm and butchering defenseless people for a crime they haven't committed. The idea alone is vulgar.

That's OK, it's not what they're talking about anyway. It's more along the lines of fitting the burglar alarm to notify ED-209 to deal with the problem.

Let's take an example. Do you think that the 10 year old who has had his entire family murdered this week will be "deterred" from resisting the Israeli brutal occupation and siege of his homeland?

Nope, but I strongly doubt the Israelis think that the ten year old in question had much input on the matter anyway, so I don't think deterring him was particularly on their list of goals. Since I'm not entirely familiar with the circumstances in question, and I doubt anyone in the internet is, I'm not going to presume as to whether or not the "murdering" was a legitimate attempt to hit Hamas.

Has the abject failure of the American "war on terror" not taught anyone anything? Insurgent math and American misadventures has turned a rabble swinging on monkey bars in the desert into a cohesive army capable of holding cities and declaring their caliphate.

I suspect that must of that blame should be left at the feet of the (elected) Iraqi government who, despite three years if relative peace and being left to their own devices without any notable Americans around still managed to utterly alienate and misnanage the nation. There are very few similarities between the two. For starters, America isn't occupying any land.

Pedantry.

Not at all. The state's monopoly on the use of force is a fundamental principle which is accepted worldwide. The counter to that is that the state is held to a standard of conduct. It is this which distinguishes a legitimate act from an illegal one.

Whether you like it or not, a military is entitled to engage any military target of the opposition, disproportionate or not. (They are not allowed do so with disproportionate methods, however, so no fuel/air explosive bombs to hit a single rocket launcher in a town). Whether or not it is -wise- to do so is another matter, which is why you don't see South Korea launching a full out invasion of the North after Cheonan was sunk or their island shelled.

So there's how the doctrine isn't terrorism. It's a legitimate, legal principal. The acts carried out pursuant to following that doctrine may or may not be legal. I'd love to be a fly on the wall for the investigation as to the recent beach incident, for example.

Basically, what I'm saying is that you are focusing on the wrong thing. Israel certainly stands on some very dodgy moral grounds, due to the settlements outside its borders. That is a separate issue from the conduct of its armed forces, which isn't necessarily illegal per se, even if the family of a ten year old is killed.

Black Swan

Scofflaw wrote: »

Conas, your posts have begin to fall into a pretty standard anti-Semitic pattern, and this one looks like the cherry on top. Don't post further, thanks.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Conas wrote: »

How? Lazar Kaganovich was a Jew that was found guilty a few years ago, of the Holodomor genocide in Ukraine during the 1930s. All documented, and are all proven facts.

MOD: Conas you had been instructed by Scofflaw not to further post in this thread, which you ignored. Further, you are here arguing with that mod instruction in-thread, which is not allowed in our forum or most forums within boards.ie. Banned 2-weeks.

Nodin

old_aussie wrote: »

They are not targeting children, israel notified them to clear the area.

hamas tell them to stay, so hamas can hide behind them.

You've evidence that Hamas told these four children to play football near the harbour where their fathers work in order to "hide behind them"?

cert2009

Everyone is outraged at video of those 4 innocent children, but they arent the only ones, the Israelis have killed so far almost 150 innocent women and children

Just this time the IDF was unfortunate there were so many journalists around this time, even worse is the absolute lack of criticism from the international community for the genocide happening in palestine

bumper234

old_aussie wrote: »

They are not targeting children, israel notified them to clear the area.

hamas tell them to stay, so hamas can hide behind them.

These were kids playing football on a beach, Attacked by a gunship that could SEE them!!!!

walshb

shedweller wrote: »

Because it is anti semitic to criticise them of anything. I see rhianna tweeted free palestine the other day but took it down straight away. She values her career it would seem!

I wouldn't take too much notice of the wave of people (and celebs) jumping on the bandwagon of support for Palestine. Most wouldn't even be able to point out Israel/Palestine on a map. Twitter and FB and instant news has made a lot of people 'politicians' lately.

FTA69

old_aussie wrote: »

Is palestine not their state/country?

Or

Do they want some other place.

I'm sorry but this is just a stupid question. There is no independent state of Palestine as the country is either under occupation or siege.

FTA69

BuilderPlumber wrote: »

Neither side here are good. Israel's hardliners feed off each other and it also allows the hardliners in Hamas to suffocate the moderates in Hamas. It also allowed Islamic Jihad (al Qaeda) to thrive and cement their aim to overtake Hamas. Islamic Jihad (al Qaeda in Palestine) is the worst Palestinian entity out there and Netanyahu is the worst Israeli PM to have.

Islamic Jihad have nothing to do with Al Qaeda. Also there are far worse organisations in Gaza knocking about than them.

FTA69

Manic Moran wrote: »

Not at all. The state's monopoly on the use of force is a fundamental principle which is accepted worldwide. The counter to that is that the state is held to a standard of conduct. It is this which distinguishes a legitimate act from an illegal one.


So there's how the doctrine isn't terrorism. It's a legitimate, legal principal. The acts carried out pursuant to following that doctrine may or may not be legal. I'd love to be a fly on the wall for the investigation as to the recent beach incident, for example.

I'm sorry but it's far from universally accepted that states don't have the capacity to commit terrorist acts. To follow on your rationale; state bodies such as the Black and Tans and the South African secret police were inherently more "legitimate" than the popular non-state resistance movements that opposed them.

bumper234

Manic Moran wrote: »

Not at all. The state's monopoly on the use of force is a fundamental principle which is accepted worldwide. The counter to that is that the state is held to a standard of conduct. It is this which distinguishes a legitimate act from an illegal one.

And under which standard of conduct would you say the deliberate targeting of a groups of children playing football on a near deserted beach falls under? Would that be considered a legiimate act or an ilegal one?

Manic Moran wrote: »

Whether you like it or not, a military is entitled to engage any military target of the opposition, disproportionate or not. (They are not allowed do so with disproportionate methods, however, so no fuel/air explosive bombs to hit a single rocket launcher in a town). Whether or not it is -wise- to do so is another matter, which is why you don't see South Korea launching a full out invasion of the North after Cheonan was sunk or their island shelled.

So there's how the doctrine isn't terrorism. It's a legitimate, legal principal. The acts carried out pursuant to following that doctrine may or may not be legal. I'd love to be a fly on the wall for the investigation as to the recent beach incident, for example.

So was the killing of these kids disproportionate or not. I'd prefer to see the person who ordered the targeting and murder of these children bought up on war crime charges myself.

wes

old_aussie wrote: »

They are not targeting children, israel notified them to clear the area.

No, they didn't thats a damn lie. The reporters who were there clearly stated there was no warning:

Gaza: 4 Dead Boys on the Beach & Israel’s Precision War

old_aussie wrote: »

hamas tell them to stay, so hamas can hide behind them.

Another damn lie, again there were reporters there, and they would have noticed Hamas militants being there.

Disgusting justification for the murder of 4 young boys, but then considering this earlier post, where you justified attacks on civilians, its not surprise:

old_aussie wrote: »

Are these the same civillians that elected hamas to power with a majority of seats in parliment in 2006?

The same civillians that elected hamas knowing the agenda of hamas was to wipe out Israel?

Cause I really don't give a feck about them!

Or, or is there another group of civillians in there that I'm not aware of?

Israel at least lets them know that bombs are on the way to the given address.

Luv ya Garth, hope to see you in Oz again

walshb

Difficult to know what side to believe. I find it very difficult to believe that the Israelis are knowingly and deliberately firing into areas where they know children are.

bumper234

walshb wrote: »

Difficult to know what side to believe. I find it very difficult to believe that the Israelis are knowingly and deliberately firing into areas where they know children are.

I think i'll believe the reporters who witnessed a group of children being deliberately targeted while playing football on a near deserted beach.

FTA69

walshb wrote: »

Difficult to know what side to believe. I find it very difficult to believe that the Israelis are knowingly and deliberately firing into areas where they know children are.

They blew up a hospice for disabled women and have now killed 4 small children playing on an open beach in full sight of the media. Why do you have so much trouble believing they're capable of killing civilians?

walshb

I'd love to hear the Israelis side of the story!

brandon_flowers

I wouldn't think the Israelis are directly targeting children or disabled people, it hardly furthers their goal of wiping out Hamas. These kids are simply collateral damage in their eyes.

What is different is the absolute lack of flying ****s given by Israel that civilians are being randomly and carelessly killed in their pursuit of Hamas. Even when the US killed civilians in Iraq or Afghanistan they were pulled up on it and forced to apologise.

And by law of definition where 1 person is killed on one side while a few hundred are killed on the other side is more like a massacre or genocide than it is a conflict.

bumper234

walshb wrote: »

I'd love to hear the Israelis side of the story!

So would I, Am looking forward how they spin this into a legitimate strike against terrorism

Nodin

walshb wrote: »

Difficult to know what side to believe. I find it very difficult to believe that the Israelis are knowingly and deliberately firing into areas where they know children are.

It's not possible to occupy, colonise and suppress a people for forty years while maintaining a mentality that they are equal to yourself.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/nov/16/israel2

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/oct/06/israel

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12822493

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7269154.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6712485.stm

http://www.counterpunch.org/2002/11/23/i-was-shot-while-trying-to-protect-jenin-s-children/

The above is but a small sample of relatively recent events, and far from the worst.

Elmer Blooker

bumper234 wrote: »

I think i'll believe the reporters who witnessed a group of children being deliberately targeted while playing football on a near deserted beach.

I watched ABC news last night (shown on BBC News) and Obama described the children who were deliberately targeted as "caught in the cross fire"
This is what the people of America are being told on prime time television.

bumper234

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

I watched ABC news last night (shown on BBC News) and Obama described the children who were deliberately targeted as "caught in the cross fire"
This is what the people of America are being told on prime time television.

Pretty much what he says when his drones kill a bunch of civilians going to a wedding.

walshb

FTA69 wrote: »

They blew up a hospice for disabled women and have now killed 4 small children playing on an open beach in full sight of the media. Why do you have so much trouble believing they're capable of killing civilians?

Where did I imply that that I had trouble believing that they are capable of killing civilians?

FTA69

walshb wrote: »

Where did I imply that that I had trouble believing that they are capable of killing civilians?

You said you didn't believe they would deliberately kill civilians when plain as day they blew up a load of kids on an open beach in front of journalists. Look at the links in Nodin's post above and you'll see they have shot countless children for no reason at all.

walshb

FTA69 wrote: »

You said you didn't believe they would deliberately kill civilians when plain as day they blew up a load of kids on an open beach in front of journalists. Look at the links in Nodin's post above and you'll see they have shot countless children for no reason at all.

Oh, now you add in 'deliberately.' That's better. Changes the interpretation a bit. Not saying that they're not capable of deliberate killing of civilians.

walshb

Who do Hamas/Palestinians target with their strikes?

Meglamonia

walshb wrote: »

Who do Hamas/Palestinians target with their strikes?

Anyone they can hit.They don't care as long they hit people.

But no we'll just concentrate on Israels strikes.

comongethappy

Meglamonia wrote: »

Anyone they can hit.They don't care as long they hit people.

But no we'll just concentrate on Israels strikes.

It does seem odd that the concensus on Boards is that certain islamic terrorism is okey-dokey, depending on who is being attacked.

FTA69

Context is everything. Considering their land is occupied and blockaded and Israel are aggressively stealing and annexing large parts of it on a weekly basis how do you expect them to react? They have no army, no airforce and no navy. Even then, the rockets they do fire are pretty much ineffectual and can in no way be compared to a nuclear-equipped state hammering a captive population.

The Palestinians have little or no means to respond to their colonisation.

comongethappy

FTA69 wrote: »

The Palestinians have little or no means to respond to their colonisation.

Very true.

Does that make supporting its indiscriminate attacks on israeli citizens right though?

karma_

comongethappy wrote: »

Very true.

Does that make supporting its indiscriminate attacks on israeli citizens right though?

But no one here is supporting them. It's the innocent Palestinian victims that people are showing some compassion to. It's the disproportionate reaction by Israel that is the problem and a cursory glance at the figures killed would confirm that. The Hamas attacks have killed exactly one person which would indicate to me that having fired something like 1200 rockets they are pretty useless and Israel have the means to defend against them. That being the case why do they bomb such a densely populated place like Gaza?

So your argument is at best disingenuous and at worst sinister.