Hundreds die in Israel raid on Gaza

Hurkyl

The PLO is irrelevant at the moment....

russ_watters

Even if you could find and quote some international law about police forces that applies to the Middle East, it still wouldn't be relevant: The Hamas police force is not a civilian police force. It is a paramilitary force. It participates in Hamas's paramilitary activities. Example: http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jan...g-palestinian7

Heck, you can even get this for alJazeera: http://english.aljazeera.net/news/mi...614111868.html

These article is an example of how the various security/police forces are being used as paramilitary fighters in their warlord infighting. They can't have it both ways.

tiny-tim

Actually, the UK is a Christian state … the Church of England is the "established church", with the Queen as its head.

More to the point, there are plenty of Islamic states …

do you "imagine members of minority religions would feel rather threatened" in those existing Islamic states?

Since there are existing Christian and Islamic states, isn't it rather racist to suggest there's something intrinsically wrong with a Jewish state?
No mainstream Israeli politician ever suggests resettlement of Arabs …

Israeli Arabs are integrated Israeli citizens, with full legal rights, their own MKs, etc …

being a Jewish state makes no difference to that …

the closest an Israeli politician has got to suggesting reducing the Arab population is suggestions of redrawing the Israeli border.

Art

Perhaps you should work on your reading comprehension skills. It mentions law enforcement agencies, fyi this means police

They are considered civilian unless they are specifically nominated as part of the military forces by their commanding party.

http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/93.htm

To my knowledge no such communication has been made by Hamas therefore under the Geneva Conventions the Gaza police have the legal status of civilians.

Hurkyl

Huh? The clause you quoted says nothing about whether a police force counts as civilian or not. The clause merely compels a party to announce when they incorporate the police into their armed forces -- not making such an announcement would constitute a violation of the convention.

Phrak

I'd have to disagree with you on a couple points.

War doesn't have a purpose in and of itself. Warring parties have purposes.

An entitlement is a legal instrument. When someone comes to kill or your family, do you first consult a law book to see if the UN will let you protect yourself?

Israel's reluctance in protecting itself as it is militarily capable has been the direct result of international sanctions laid down explicitly in UN resolutions.

Tchitt asks the right quesion "I don't understand this "war"... why are they just lobbing explosives back and forth at each other? It would seem to me that someone should just invade and occupy someone else and be done with it."

Historically the UN establishs uneasy peace. Korea, Sierra Leon, Bosnia, Isreal...

Art

Actually the UK is not a Christian state in any legal sense whatsoever.

Yes I do so imagine.

Still waiting for an example of a Christian state enshrined in law as Israel wishes to do with it's Jewish state. As for Islamic states, no I don't agree with them either. I'm against all forms of religious bigotry.


Really? If everyone is so equal why are there issues such as this, or articles like this in the Israeli press http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/857766.html Maybe you should take the blinkers off

tiny-tim

What document are you quoting from?
oh i see … that's Part III, Article 43, of the Protocol I of 1979 to the Geneva Conventions


… but let's have a look anyway …
Well, this clearly says that an armed law enforcement agency can be "armed forces" (and therefore not civilians)!
erm … oh, Hurkyl has beaten me to it!

Art

If you don't understand the clause and it's ramifications maybe you could ask a patient friend to explain it to you. Though if you try really hard you might be able to think it through for yourself. As a hint start by looking at the heading - Armed Forces and then the subsections; what constitutes armed forces, and by omission what doesn't. See it yet?? What doesn't constitute armed forces equals civilian. See it's simple really.

tiny-tim

uhh? I'm a UK citizen, resident in the UK, and …

uhh? How does that contradict what I said …
these issues are reported in a free press, and (as the first quote specifies) show that the Israeli Arabs do have full access to the courts when their rights are in issue!

(btw, no country is perfect …

but Israel is probably less racist than the UK or USA (despite having been at war for 60 years) …)

You originally completely misquoted Livni (about wanting to resettle Israeli Arabs), and instead of admitting it, you're now trying to steer discussion away from the point.

Art

Still struggling with the reading comprehension I see

Err, try the one I linked to


Ah the penny drops, finally

Sigh, back to the reading comprehension problem again

Art

therefore you should know a lot more about the constitutional nature of your own country. Shame on you that you don't. To kick start your education you should know the UK doesn't even have an established religion. England does but Scotland, Wales and N. Ireland do not and even England is multi-faith as you may notice as you walk past the odd Hindu temple or mosque here and there.

What reasons??? You have not provided any reasons other than your own woefully ill-informed opinions.


If Arabs weren't being discriminated against then these cases wouldn't have arisen in the first place, Doh!

Misquoted? I cut and pasted what she actually said.

tiny-tim

No … even after you edited it, you still misquoted her …
your two misquotations are the two parts I've emphasised, which are simply not borne out by your cut-and-paste.

devil-fire

I find it hard to believe that Israel is firmly pressed into these decisions to attack Gaza when the ratio of people killed is 200:1. I can't imagine how the death of an Israeli citizen calls for an entire campaign of military action by Israel and the deaths of hundreds of people, including the head of police and democratically elected politicians.

It seems to me like Israel would be perfectly happy if Gaza disappeared one morning by Divine intervention and they could get on with their business.

Cyrus

You can't see why indescriminate attacks on the civilian population would necessitate the need for a show of force to stop said actions? I find that hard to believe.

Phrak

Who needs Devine intervention. A large team of bull dozers, and demolition units could work there way from one side to the Gaza Strip to the Egyptian boarder in fairly good time. This should take care of, what some see, as an unfair state of attrition.

mheslep

No, Richard Falk is not 'the UN'. He was appointed by the misnamed UN Human Rights Council, which includes Arab states Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Jordan, Pakistan, Qatar, Indonesia, and other human rights luminaries such as China, Cuba. The UN HRC has passed 60% of its resolutions on Israel and none on, say, Zimbabwe or Saudia Arabia. Its an abomination.
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2008/s2301643.htm