Israel - Palestine Conflict. Mod note in OP - updated 1st August

Nodin · 10-08-2014 02:55PM

A Primal Nut wrote: »

Well if Hamas wanted to protect the Palestinian people they wouldn't have up a command bunker in Shifa Hospital; knowing that Israel would inevitably target it.

Obviously protecting their own people is not their priority.

And how do we know they had one?

bumper234 · 10-08-2014 02:56PM

A Primal Nut wrote: »

Well if Hamas wanted to protect the Palestinian people they wouldn't have up a command bunker in one; knowing that Israel would inevitably target it.

Obviously protecting their own people is not their priority.

It's been pointed out that the IDF have their HQ in Tel Aviv, does this not (by your logic) make the citizens of that city legitimate targets?

A Primal Nut · 10-08-2014 02:59PM

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Are there any numbers from either side as to how many Hamas soldiers are actually being killed? We could average the Hamas/IDF published number...

IDF say 900.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/10/observer-editorial-gaza-israels-international-reputation

Dan_Solo · 10-08-2014 02:59PM

Nodin wrote: »

And how do we know they had one?

IDF said so. Therefore true.

Dan_Solo · 10-08-2014 03:01PM

A Primal Nut wrote: »

IDF say 900.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/10/observer-editorial-gaza-israels-international-reputation

I wonder how many new recruits Hamas have had in the last month from friends and relatives of the 2000 dead civilians?

TommyKnocker · 10-08-2014 03:07PM

There were numerous "Resistance" movements during WW2. They used tunnels, hid in peoples houses and used guerrilla tactics to engage the enemy. However they were on the same side as the US and UK et all, fighting the occupying Greman army, so they are to this day considered the Good Guys and there exploits are celebrated. Does anybody think for one minute the the resistance in WW2 did not use their tunnels to move weapons around or did not hide weapons and personnel in civilians houses? From what I heard/read on the topic, civilians were only too happy to help the resistance, even though doing so put their lives and those of their families at risk.

Today in Palestine we have another resistance movement. Some of their tactics like indiscriminately firing rockets into Israel which could injure civilians are reprehensible. However these days, post 9/11 which was a shameful attack on civilians, the US uses this attack to target anybody they do not agree with as Terrorists, much like the Israeli government and it supporters say anybody who speaks against Israel is anti semitic and most of the western leaders follow suit. After all, the US and its "Friend" Israel wouldn't lie, would they? :rolleyes:

The undeniable fact is that Israel is an occupying force in Palestine, who have stolen and continue to steal land from the indigenous people of the region. They are imposing an illegal blockade of the Palestinian people in gaza, down to regulating how many calories of food, what type of food, how much fresh water etc gets to the Palestinian people in Gaza. This I can only imagine makes for a pretty miserable existence in Gaza. And the light at the end of the tunnel is just Israeli flares preceding another round of attacks.

As is the right of any occupied country, Palestine/Gaza have a resistance movement and again their tactic of firing rockets into Israel cannot be condoned. But they do have a right to exist the occupation of their land and I for one am not surprised that some the people of Gaza would show support for what they see as their resistance fighters and what the US label "Terrorists"

Terrorists are not defined by ethnicity, skin colour, religious beliefs, where they live or the fact that the US or somebody else labels them as such. Terrorists are defined by their actions. And IMHO Israel by it actions over the last decades, pretty much since it came into being, has show by its actions that it is indeed a Terrorist state.

A Primal Nut · 10-08-2014 03:09PM

Nodin wrote: »

And how do we know they had one?

.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/while-israel-held-its-fire-the-militant-group-hamas-did-not/2014/07/15/116fd3d7-3c0f-4413-94a9-2ab16af1445d_story.html

"At the Shifa Hospital in Gaza City, crowds gathered to throw shoes and eggs at the Palestinian Authority’s health minister, who represents the crumbling “unity government” in the West Bank city of Ramallah. The minister was turned away before he reached the hospital, which has become a de facto headquarters for Hamas leaders, who can be seen in the hallways and offices".

bumper234 wrote: »

It's been pointed out that the IDF have their HQ in Tel Aviv, does this not (by your logic) make the citizens of that city legitimate targets?

The whole city no; the IDF HQ yes.

Anyway I'm not saying Israel were right to hit hospitals regardless of Hamas leaders being there; and I don't think it helps their cause.

But it's difficult to sympathise with Hamas because of their tactics.

"Israel won't target civilians, therefore we should be safe in a hospital. And if they do target it; it will help us in the propaganda war; double benefit".

Nodin · 10-08-2014 03:11PM

A Primal Nut wrote: »

.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/while-israel-held-its-fire-the-militant-group-hamas-did-not/2014/07/15/116fd3d7-3c0f-4413-94a9-2ab16af1445d_story.html

"At the Shifa Hospital in Gaza City, crowds gathered to throw shoes and eggs at the Palestinian Authority’s health minister, who represents the crumbling “unity government” in the West Bank city of Ramallah. The minister was turned away before he reached the hospital, which has become a de facto headquarters for Hamas leaders, who can be seen in the hallways and offices".".

Sounds like the civilian Hamas administration. You do know they've a separate military wing?

TommyKnocker · 10-08-2014 03:13PM

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Are there any numbers from either side as to how many Hamas soldiers are actually being killed? We could average the Hamas/IDF published number...

Last figures I have seen, which was a few days ago during the 3 day truce, from Amnesty I think it was was 1984 killed, of which 84% were civilians. Leaving 16% of the dead as Hamas fighters.

So 1984 X .16 = 317.44 Hamas fighters killed. The .44 was probably one of the 10 month old babies :rolleyes:

bumper234 · 10-08-2014 03:16PM

A Primal Nut wrote: »

.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/while-israel-held-its-fire-the-militant-group-hamas-did-not/2014/07/15/116fd3d7-3c0f-4413-94a9-2ab16af1445d_story.html

"At the Shifa Hospital in Gaza City, crowds gathered to throw shoes and eggs at the Palestinian Authority’s health minister, who represents the crumbling “unity government” in the West Bank city of Ramallah. The minister was turned away before he reached the hospital, which has become a de facto headquarters for Hamas leaders, who can be seen in the hallways and offices".

The whole city no; the IDF HQ yes.

Anyway I'm not saying Israel were right to hit hospitals regardless of Hamas leaders being there; and I don't think it helps their cause.

But it's difficult to sympathise with Hamas because of their tactics.

"Israel won't target civilians, therefore we should be safe in a hospital. And if they do target it; it will help us in the propaganda war; double benefit".

IDF HQ is in a civilian area therefore it's a legitimate target right? And if civilians get killed (by your logic) then it is the fault of the Israeli government for building the their HQ in a residential.area (even though it's there since the formation of the state). Why is it ok for the IDF to bomb the whole of Gaza city and kill thousands of innocent civilians? If Hamas fired rockets at IDF HQ and killed 4 kids do you think that would be ok because the rocmet was aimed at IDF HQ?

Robroy36 · 10-08-2014 03:17PM

The Palestinians should rise up against Hamas and show the world the peace loving people they really are.

TommyKnocker · 10-08-2014 03:23PM

Robroy36 wrote: »

The Palestinians should rise up against Hamas and show the world the peace loving people they really are.

Exactly. Just like all the people of Europe rose up against against the different resistance movements during WW2....

.... oh, wait a minute :rolleyes::rolleyes:

If there is no Hamas, who else is going to stand against Israels continued policy of forcibly removing Palestinians from their homes and lands to create more illegal settlements? You? The rest of the world?

Manic Moran · 10-08-2014 03:25PM

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Do you ever apportion blame to the person or entity doing the action rather than the victim?

I'm not apportioning blame, just stating the simple fact that the Israelis are destroying targets, and if Wafa hospital was taken over by Israel's enemy for combat purposes, then it became a legitimate target. The fact that it was a hospital became irrelevant.

Robroy36 · 10-08-2014 03:27PM

TommyKnocker wrote: »

If there is no Hamas, who else is going to stand against Israels continued policy of forcibly removing Palestinians from their homes and lands to create more illegal settlements? You? The rest of the world?

The only thing Hamas is achieving is the slaughter of Palestinians.

Manic Moran · 10-08-2014 03:28PM

Zebra3 wrote: »

So Israel's Ministry of Defence offices in the centre of Tel Aviv makes the civilian population of TA fair game?

It's an interesting legal question as the MoD is usually technically a civilian agency, however, I personally believe that yes, the MoD building would be fair game given its use. If I have time later I'll see what I can discover. No, it doesn't make the civilian population fair game.

A Primal Nut · 10-08-2014 03:29PM

Nodin wrote: »

Sounds like the civilian Hamas administration. You do know they've a separate military wing?

Possibly; more details here suggest otherwise; don't know about the reliability of the sources:

http://www.wnd.com/2014/07/hamas-leaders-believed-hunkered-underneath-gaza-hospital/
http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/180730/top-secret-hamas-command-bunker-in-gaza-revealed

But why would the civilian Hamas administration set themselves up inside a hospital?

Either way, I don't think the IDF distinguish between Hamas civil and militray wings; as both support the rocket attacks; they see both as legitimate targets and Hamas know that.

Anyway, in Ireland the political wing of Sinn Fein was the legitimate way for the most part for IRA members to enter politics without admitting to a crime (being a member of the IRA). Not saying it's a bad thing - it's understandable that they would do that to avoid arrest. Just assumed it was a common thing around the world.

bumper234 · 10-08-2014 03:29PM

Manic Moran wrote: »

I'm not apportioning blame, just stating the simple fact that the Israelis are destroying targets, and if Wafa hospital was taken over by Israel's enemy for combat purposes, then it became a legitimate target. The fact that it was a hospital became irrelevant.

So is it ok for Hamas to fire rockets at Tel Aviv to target the IDF HQ?

hatrickpatrick · 10-08-2014 03:33PM

Manic Moran wrote: »

It's an interesting legal question as the MoD is usually technically a civilian agency, however, I personally believe that yes, the MoD building would be fair game given its use. If I have time later I'll see what I can discover. No, it doesn't make the civilian population fair game.

At least you're trying to be consistent I guess. My own position is that if your attack is 100% guaranteed to kill even one innocent person, your target is irrelevant and you're in the wrong. Or to put it in a court case context, it's better that a hundred thieves go free than one falsely accused be imprisoned. By that rationale, all unguided militant rocket attacks are wrong and any action directed at any hospital is also wrong.

TommyKnocker · 10-08-2014 03:34PM

Robroy36 wrote: »

The only thing Hamas is achieving is the slaughter of Palestinians.

And victim blaming is back on the table.

The ONLY people responsible for the "Slaughter" of Palestinian civilians are those firing the guns/rockets and dropping the bombs on the Palestinian civilians and that is the Israeli military on the orders from their government.

TommyKnocker · 10-08-2014 03:35PM

Not too sure how reputable or impartial the Ma'an News Angency is but http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=719498

jackboy · 10-08-2014 03:37PM

TommyKnocker wrote: »

And victim blaming is back on the table.

The ONLY people responsible for the "Slaughter" of Palestinian civilians are those firing the guns/rockets and dropping the bombs on the Palestinian civilians and that is the Israeli military on the orders from their government.

The Palestinian people are victims but Hamas are not.

bumper234 · 10-08-2014 03:37PM

TommyKnocker wrote: »

Not too sure how reputable or impartial the Ma'an News Angency is but http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=719498

I read this earlier on twitter from a different source but some on here will claim it's all lies unless fox news reports it

http://www.imemc.org/article/68809?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PalestineNews+%28Palestine+News%29

A Primal Nut · 10-08-2014 03:42PM

bumper234 wrote: »

IDF HQ is in a civilian area therefore it's a legitimate target right? And if civilians get killed (by your logic) then it is the fault of the Israeli government for building the their HQ in a residential.area (even though it's there since the formation of the state). Why is it ok for the IDF to bomb the whole of Gaza city and kill thousands of innocent civilians? If Hamas fired rockets at IDF HQ and killed 4 kids do you think that would be ok because the rocmet was aimed at IDF HQ?

I would suggest that Israel should move their HQ further away; especially if have intelligence that it may be targeted.

Anyway I'm not really arguing about what is a legitimate target and what isn't; which is another question; and I'm not supporting Israel in that regard; in many of the decisions they've made over the last month.

What I would give Israel credit for is the length they go to protect their own civilians; I don't think Hamas have the same priority. And yes; I know you'll came back and say "well, Israel clearly don't care either because they set up the IDF HQ in Tel Aviv"; well; yeah it's it's own building and it's not like Israel put it there because they think it won't be targeted because there might be civilians close. Hamas' control centers are actually inside hospitals which is a big difference - not sure why you can't see that. There are reports that rockets are being fired from them (such as from a Finnish journalist).

http://www.jpost.com/Operation-Protective-Edge/Rockets-are-launched-from-Gazan-side-into-Israel-says-foreign-journalist-369804

Obviously reports are sketchy and ultimately everyone will believe what they want.

A Primal Nut · 10-08-2014 03:42PM

TommyKnocker wrote: »

And victim blaming is back on the table.

Hamas are not the victims. The Palestinian people are. Putting some blame on Hamas for not showing more regard for civilians in Gaza is not blaming the victims.

A Primal Nut · 10-08-2014 03:48PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

At least you're trying to be consistent I guess. My own position is that if your attack is 100% guaranteed to kill even one innocent person, your target is irrelevant and you're in the wrong. Or to put it in a court case context, it's better that a hundred thieves go free than one falsely accused be imprisoned. By that rationale, all unguided militant rocket attacks are wrong and any action directed at any hospital is also wrong.

It's a difficult moral question without an easy answer.

Allowing a precedent to be set where all violent organisations have to do is to set themselves up inside schools and hospitals in order to protect themselves and allow them to do as they please knowing they can't be targeted...well that's dangerous too.

Manic Moran · 10-08-2014 03:55PM

Dan_Solo wrote: »

No, you went off on an irrelevant tangent about oxygen itself not being an explosive, as if pressurized medical gas cylinders do not explode.

It's not irrelevant, and it's not inaccurate. Oxygen is not an explosive. Pressurized oxygen cylinders are not explosives. They are an explosion hazard. Your car tyre can explode, but the explosion resulting from your sidewall going is not going to look the same or have the same effect as a small block of C4 going off under the wheel well.

A bit like earlier when you talked about the Irish soldiers involved in the UN Congo mission while neglecting to mention the UN Lebanon mission where Irish soldiers were murdered both directly by the IDF and by IDF backed militia.

You -are- capable of linear thought, correct? My statement that UNOC was when Ireland first learned that being Irish was no particular protection does not preclude the concept that there have been multiple later incidents. I don't believe I should have to go through the list of all 86 KIA from all causes in order to make "the first" a valid statement of information. Or is something no longer "the first" because Israel had nothing to do with it?

And true colors are shown.
Did Hamas also decide clearly marked UN shelters with babies sleeping in them were also not needed?

Depends a bit on the point of view. They may well have thought that they were needed for propaganda purposes, after all, why else fire from near them except in the hopes of a propaganda coup? In any case I do not address them for two reasons. Firstly, because unlike the "gunsight video" of the destruction of the Wafa hospital, we have only generic evidence as to what happened, and secondly I was also making the point that not all such destruction is illegal.

Dan_Solo · 10-08-2014 04:05PM

Robroy36 wrote: »

The Palestinians should rise up against Hamas and show the world the peace loving people they really are.

Yes, because if they stopped fighting the Zionist invasion then Israel would just leave them alone.
Like in the, er, West Bank that they have annexed, filled with settlements and brutalized the Palestinian people there.
Oh, so that's what happens.

Manic Moran · 10-08-2014 04:05PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

At least you're trying to be consistent I guess. My own position is that if your attack is 100% guaranteed to kill even one innocent person, your target is irrelevant and you're in the wrong. Or to put it in a court case context, it's better that a hundred thieves go free than one falsely accused be imprisoned. By that rationale, all unguided militant rocket attacks are wrong and any action directed at any hospital is also wrong.

I'm not going to argue the morals with you, as who am I to say that your principles on the matter are wrong? The practical implications, however, are another kettle of fish and the structure in place does result in the occasional wrongful conviction, and the laws of war do not impose a requirement to avoid in all cases the known deaths of innocents. The laws as written are the framework in which we must operate.

The question on the Ministry of Defense is caveated by the issue that if Hamas points rockets at the building, there is no reasonable expectation that the rockets will land even close to the place, so lobbing rockets at Tel Aviv claiming 'we're aiming for IDF HQ' doesn't fly. If they're able to drive up with a large truck bomb, though, and in the process of trying to blow up the building also kill people walking on the footpath on the other side of the road, that one can't really be argued against.

Dan_Solo · 10-08-2014 04:18PM

Manic Moran wrote: »

It's not irrelevant, and it's not inaccurate. Oxygen is not an explosive. Pressurized oxygen cylinders are not explosives. They are an explosion hazard. Your car tyre can explode, but the explosion resulting from your sidewall going is not going to look the same or have the same effect as a small block of C4 going off under the wheel well.

It is entirely irrelevant whether oxygen is or isn't an explosive or pressurized oxygen cylinders are or are not explosives. Nobody has claimed that they are. What was clearly stated to you from the start is that hospitals have other explosive risks that would be secondary to a IDF strike therefore secondary explosions cannot be assumed to be munitions. Simple really.

Manic Moran wrote: »

You -are- capable of linear thought, correct? My statement that UNOC was when Ireland first learned that being Irish was no particular protection does not preclude the concept that there have been multiple later incidents. I don't believe I should have to go through the list of all 86 KIA from all causes in order to make "the first" a valid statement of information. Or is something no longer "the first" because Israel had nothing to do with it?

And yet our brave boys turned up for duty in Lebanon to be murdered by IDF and proxies regardless. So UNOC really made no difference either way to anything and is again utterly irrelevant to the current conflict or the likelihood of the IDF targetting civilian or peacekeeping or basically whoever the hell they want.

Manic Moran wrote: »

Depends a bit on the point of view. They may well have thought that they were needed for propaganda purposes, after all, why else fire from near them except in the hopes of a propaganda coup? In any case I do not address them for two reasons. Firstly, because unlike the "gunsight video" of the destruction of the Wafa hospital, we have only generic evidence as to what happened, and secondly I was also making the point that not all such destruction is illegal.

The only evidence we have is "IDF said so". Might be enough for some people to draw a conclusion, but not me I'm afraid.

smurgen · 10-08-2014 04:33PM

Manic Moran wrote: »

I'm not going to argue the morals with you, as who am I to say that your principles on the matter are wrong? The practical implications, however, are another kettle of fish and the structure in place does result in the occasional wrongful conviction, and the laws of war do not impose a requirement to avoid in all cases the known deaths of innocents. The laws as written are the framework in which we must operate.

The question on the Ministry of Defense is caveated by the issue that if Hamas points rockets at the building, there is no reasonable expectation that the rockets will land even close to the place, so lobbing rockets at Tel Aviv claiming 'we're aiming for IDF HQ' doesn't fly. If they're able to drive up with a large truck bomb, though, and in the process of trying to blow up the building also kill people walking on the footpath on the other side of the road, that one can't really be argued against.

Okay you seem to like discussing legal frameworks and laws of war and the discussions of such.tell me,the four palestinian kids that were shelled on the beach by an Israeli ship,was this in your opinion a lawful action and if not Do you think we are likely to see any military personnel facing time behind bars because of it?

Israel - Palestine Conflict. **Mod note in OP - updated 1st August**

Comments

Israel - Palestine Conflict. Mod note in OP - updated 1st August