News Hundreds die in Israel raid on Gaza

[Abdelrahman]

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2008/12/200812279451509662.html"

No Comment!

 

[Evo]

In retaliation for unprovoked Hamas rocket attacks on Israel.

US urges Hamas to cease rocket attacks on Israel

The U.S. on Saturday blamed the militant group Hamas for breaking a cease-fire and attacking Israel, which retaliated with strikes of its own during what became the single bloodiest day of fighting in years.

The White House called for the cease-fire to be restored, yet there were few indications that the violence, which has left more than 200 people dead and nearly another 400 wounded, was waning. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak warned that the operation in Gaza would widen if necessary.

It was "completely unacceptable" for Hamas, which controls Gaza, to launch attacks on Israel after a truce lasting several months, said Gordon Johndroe, a spokesman for the National Security Council.

"These people are nothing but thugs, so Israel is going to defend its people against terrorists like Hamas that indiscriminately kill their own people," Johndroe said . "They need to stop. We have said in the past that they have a choice to make. You can't have one foot in politics and one foot in terror."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081228/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_mideast

 

[berkeman]

That would seem to be the key point:

It was "completely unacceptable" for Hamas, which controls Gaza, to launch attacks on Israel after a truce lasting several months, said Gordon Johndroe, a spokesman for the National Security Council.

"Cease fire" is supposed to mean something.

 

[Abdelrahman]

Hamas rockets killed 1 israeli
Israeli rockets killed 220 and COUNTING!

Some of the Israeli missiles struck in densely populated areas as children were leaving school, and women rushed into the streets frantically looking for their children.

 

[berkeman]

Hamas rockets killed 1 israeli
Israeli rockets killed 220 and COUNTING!

So you acknowledge there was a violation of the cease fire? Why would you decide to test the cease fire?

 

[Abdelrahman]

That would seem to be the key point:


"Cease fire" is supposed to mean something.

I can't even begin to comprehend how this argument could be made now, it's the same as saying that the Jews in a holocaust camp killed a Nazi officer.

 

[Evo]

Because Hamas broke the truce. They have no one to blame but themselves in this. They know Israel is not going to sit idly by and be attacked, so they should not act surprised that Israel struck back.

 

[Vanadium 50]

So you acknowledge there was a violation of the cease fire? Why would you decide to test the cease fire?

To be fair to Hamas, they did announce an end to the cease fire, so it's not exactly a violation.

Of course, I'm sure that they were shocked...shocked...to discover that after announcing that they would go back to killing as many Israelis as they could and then resuming rocket attacks that Israel would retaliate.

 

[Abdelrahman]

I don't know how you could take that angle when 200 (mostly civilians) were just slaughtered, this is by any means an unfair war, israel with it's (US Funded) war machine versus a couple of men with rockets.

Could someone please tell me the difference between what Israel is doing now and what Germany did to the jews in WWII.

 

[waht]

This is clearly an unproportional response by the Isreal, that serves no practical purpose other than to invite the hearts and minds of every Palestinian citizen to take up arms and fight. And at the expense of 200 dead (mostly civilian), and US military aid. Genius!

But if you look at what US has done in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Israeli counter offensive pales in comparison.

I think it will take another Jesus, Gandhi, or Martin Luther King type of person to resist peacefully and start another movement over there. Otherwise this war will continue ad infinitum.

 

[Evo]

I don't know how you could take that angle when 200 (mostly civilians) were just slaughtered, this is by any means an unfair war, israel with it's (US Funded) war machine versus a couple of men with rockets.

The targets were not civilian, and the civilian casualties are obviously sad, but if you wish to engage in war, what do you expect?

Could someone please tell me the difference between what Israel is doing now and what Germany did to the jews in WWII.

Oh please, you will lose any argument that starts with such a ridiculous comparison.

 

[OAQfirst]

I don't know how you could take that angle when 200 (mostly civilians) were just slaughtered, this is by any means an unfair war, israel with it's (US Funded) war machine versus a couple of men with rockets.

Could someone please tell me the difference between what Israel is doing now and what Germany did to the jews in WWII.

Could you tell me why a comparison between those two conflicts should be made?

But let's look at the alternative. Israel does not launch military strikes. Instead, Hamas fires a rocket or two, kills an Israeli or two (and an occasional Palestinian), and then what? Should Israel sit around looking at the sky, ducking when the next Qassam is lobbed at them? This is not a matter of some isolated attack. Hamas has made it clear that it would continue violence against its neighbor without provocation.

Hamas brought this to themselves and those around them. Fire rockets at one's neighbor for years, and call a truce, and fire again... What can you expect?

 

[Phrak]

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2008/12/200812279451509662.html"

No Comment!

Did you really think that this would gain any sympathy in the world of war, where the nature of Islam has at last been comprehended in some visceral fashion?

 

[Cyrus]

Hamas rockets killed 1 israeli
Israeli rockets killed 220 and COUNTING!

L.O.L so just because Hamas is incompetant, suddenly its O.K!

I mean, Hamas only tried to kill as many people as it could. They never actually suceeded though. How dare they attack us back!


Sorry Abdelrahman, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

Hamas rockets killed 1 israeli
Israeli rockets killed 220 and COUNTING!

Were Israel to have fired first with minimal casualties with Hamas returning fire killing hundreds would you still object?

 

[Art]

Were Israel to have fired first with minimal casualties with Hamas returning fire killing hundreds would you still object?

Just a couple of points. The 1 Israeli civilian was killed AFTER Israel launched it's attacks and Israel broke the ceasefire weeks ago first by not lifting the blockade as they had agreed to do under the ceasefire terms and then with targeted assassinations of Hamas officials. In fact for Israel the ceasefire was simply business as usual. But to take up your point. If Israel had killed 1 Palestinian civilan and Hamas responded by killing 271 Israelis I wonder how many on here would be falling over themselves to justify such a response from Palestinians?

This has absolutely nothing to do with ceasefire violations and everything to do with the forthcoming elections in Israel with the candidates each trying to outdo each other on how tough they are.

Israel is a terrorist state whose leaders should be tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Gaza is a prison camp whose inhabitants are being slowly starved to death through Israel's blockade and yet when the victims protest or rebel they are vilified. This seems to turn logic on it's head. I find it amazing that so many on here are happy to try and justify mass murder. Many Nazis were executed after WW2 for just such actions.

My opinion of Israel's culpability is echoed by the UN. This from Dec 10th

UN official slams Israel 'crimes'

The UN special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories has said Israel's policies there amount to a crime against humanity.
snip
He said the International Criminal Court should also investigate whether the Israeli civilian leaders and military commanders for the Gaza siege should be indicted and prosecuted for violations of international criminal law.

The last time there had been "such a flurry of denunciations by normally cautious UN officials" it was during the heyday of the apartheid government in South Africa, Mr Falk said.

"And still Israel maintains its Gaza siege in its full fury, allowing only barely enough food and fuel to enter to stave off mass famine and disease," Mr Falk said.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7774988.stm

 

[Art]

The targets were not civilian, and the civilian casualties are obviously sad, but if you wish to engage in war, what do you expect?

The targets were very definitely civilian. They went after the police force including dozens killed at a graduating ceremony and the chief of police.

 

[tchitt]

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. Of course Hamas would lose but something's got to give. This is idiotic.

Do both sides just lack the stones or what?

I don't know a lot about this but it seems like enough is enough. Is Hamas not a terrorist organization? Why haven't they been crushed yet?

 

[tiny-tim]

holocaust

I can't even begin to comprehend how this argument could be made now, it's the same as saying that the Jews in a holocaust camp killed a Nazi officer.

Hi Abdelrahman!

You obviously don't understand what a holocaust camp was.

There were two types … death camps and "ordinary" camps.

In the death camps, such as Auschwitz II and Sobibor, a thousand or so Jews (or occasionally Gypsies) would arrive by train, hundreds of miles from their homes, and would within an hour or so be taken into "shower-rooms" where they would be killed by gas.

In the "ordinary" camps, Jews and others would be gradually worked to death.

Look it up on the internet, or in books … you'll see that there's no comparison between the holocaust and Gaza at all. ​

Could someone please tell me the difference between what Israel is doing now and what Germany did to the jews in WWII.

Germany's aim was to exterminate the Jews (and the inter-marrying tribes of Gypsies).

Israel's aim is to live at peace with its Arab neighbours.

I don't know how you could take that angle when 200 (mostly civilians) were just slaughtered, this is by any means an unfair war, israel with it's (US Funded) war machine versus a couple of men with rockets.

War isn't supposed to be fair … it isn't a sport, like boxing, where you don't fight someone who's much smaller than you.

In war, if you have overwhelming force, then you're perfectly entitled to start using it, and the other side, if it's really interested in peace, will stop.

War is an unfortunate means of protecting your legal rights … in this case, Israelis' right to live.

Hamas has for many months been killing as many Israeli civilians as it can … under international law, that is undoubtedly an act of war.

Israel, under international law, is entitled to retaliate, first by economic sanctions, and then militarily.

Israel's reluctance is clear from the long time that it has waited before military retaliation.

 

[Art]

Hamas has for many months been killing as many Israeli civilians as it can … under international law, that is undoubtedly an act of war.

Hamas had killed a grand total of exactly zero Israelis in the months preceding this attack whilst Israel has killed dozens of Palestinians in the same time frame. But eh, Palestinians are all terrorists so that's okay right?

Meanwhile the war warmongering, evil witch, Tzipi Livni, who recently suggested all Arabs living in Israel should be removed is really a peace loving humanitarian I suppose.

"Among other things I will also be able to approach the Palestinian residents of Israel... and tell them: 'Your national aspirations lie elsewhere.'"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7779087.stm Then again she is by no means the only leading politician in Israel to promote a little ethnic cleansing but it seems such policies are only illegal if pursued by non-zionists.

 

[mjsd]

Oh mine... I have been away from this forum for 6 months due to study commitments... but it seems that nothing has changed... we are still arguing whether Israel/Palestine's actions are legit or not.

It amazes, as well as saddens me that both sides are still playing the same only game which perpetuate the situation despite that it is obviously unworkable.

Recently, we had an exchange student from Israel (by the way, he is not Jewish, he is originally from Russia but studied physics in Israel) joining our department. The first thing I asked him was on the topic of "the threat of rocket attacks" and whether "he fears everyday about the possibility of an attack". I must say that I was surprised to hear his response which went somehting like:
"... it is all a bit of an exaggeration... we, in the capital city, don't get any rockets at all.. it is only the small regions of the border towns are affected...", he then added,
"... seriously, I didn't feel threaten at all.. and most ppl (at least the ppl I knew).. simply go by their daily business without any concerns... the TV stations do make a big fuss about the rockets though..."

No doubt, whether it is just border towns or the entire map of Israel is threaten by rockets, it should not in any way change our perspective of right and wrong... whether it is just 1 or 229 civilians killed, it is equally bad. However, time and again the impression I've got from the media is that Israel is responding in the current way because "they have no other choices available, and that their entire population cannot live a normal life"

seriously? have we, the western ppl, run of new ideas already? Well, I guess the "terrorists" have and can only resort to barbaric means of retaliation, but surely, we can do better than just perpetuating the situation?

 

[tiny-tim]

Hamas had killed a grand total of exactly zero Israelis in the months preceding this attack whilst Israel has killed dozens of Palestinians in the same time frame.

I just googled "sderot + ceasefire", and came up with http://www.jewlicious.com/2008/12/worst-rocket-attack-on-sderot-since-ceasefire/" …

A Palestinian rocket exploded right outside a Sderot supermarket on Wednesday evening, December 17, in one of the worst Qassam attacks on Sderot since the ceasefire began. Rocket shrapnel lightly wounded three people, with one man suffering a light head wound, according to a MADA spokesperson on scene.
…
Since the ceasefire began on June 21, over 400 Qassam rockets have been fired at Sderot and the western Negev, making the number of rockets fired at Israel during this ceasefire significantly more than the number fired in the previous Hamas-Israel ceasefire in 2007. To date, over 10,000 Palestinian rockets have been fired at southern Israel since 2001.

As I said, Hamas has for many months been killing as many Israeli civilians as it can … under international law, that is undoubtedly an act of war.

The low number of deaths (as opposed to "mere" injuries) is not for Hamas' want of trying, and does not make it any less an act of war.

Meanwhile the war warmongering, evil witch, Tzipi Livni, who recently suggested all Arabs living in Israel should be removed is really a peace loving humanitarian I suppose. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7779087.stm

erm … "removed"? … the actual quote from Livni in that report is:

"There is no question of carrying out a transfer or forcing them [Israeli Arabs] to leave," she told public radio.
"I am willing to give up a part of the country over which I believe we have rights so that Israel will remain a Jewish and democratic state in which citizens have equal rights, whatever their religion," she added.

To me, that looks like exchanging land for peace.

 

[Art]

I just googled "sderot + ceasefire", and came up with http://www.jewlicious.com/2008/12/worst-rocket-attack-on-sderot-since-ceasefire/" …


As I said, Hamas has for many months been killing as many Israeli civilians as it can … under international law, that is undoubtedly an act of war. The low number of deaths (as opposed to "mere" injuries) is not for Hamas' want of trying, and does not make it any less an act of war.

The low number of deaths you keep referring to is, as I said previously, precisely ZERO! Whereas the Israelis have been far more successful in their attempts to kill Palestinians with dozens of 'successes' prior to Saturdays murderous assault.

erm … "removed"? … the actual quote from Livni in that report is:


To me, that looks like exchanging land for peace.

I suggest you have another look then. She was referring to the 1 million Arabs living in the state of Israel, unless you are suggesting she intends handing over lumps of Israel to them. Somewhat unlikely don't you think Her qualifying remarks came AFTER there was an international outcry about her first statement.

In remarks to school children broadcast on Israeli radio, Ms Livni's said her solution for maintaining a Jewish and democratic state of Israel was "to have two distinct national entities".

"Among other things I will also be able to approach the Palestinian residents of Israel... and tell them: 'Your national aspirations lie elsewhere.'"

Arab MP Ahmed Tibi demanded that Ms Livni be absolutely open about what she meant, as befits a candidate for Israel's prime ministership.

"She must decide whether she means to leave 1m Arabs without political rights or a national identity, or whether she really intends to transfer 1m Arab citizens to the Palestinian state that will be established," he told Israeli army radio.

Seems pretty unambiguous to me.

 

[russ_watters]

Hamas rockets killed 1 israeli
Israeli rockets killed 220 and COUNTING!

So Hamas is not very good at killing Jews. We know. But they really should know by now that if you mess with the bull too long, eventually you'll get the horns. Hamas had been poking that hornets nest with a stick for weeks before it swarmed them.

 

[russ_watters]

To be fair to Hamas, they did announce an end to the cease fire, so it's not exactly a violation.

Perhaps - but either way, if it is a violation of the cease fire or just a unilateral resumption of hostilities by Hamas after it ended, it's still on Hamas.

 

[russ_watters]

I don't know how you could take that angle when 200 (mostly civilians) were just slaughtered, this is by any means an unfair war, israel with it's (US Funded) war machine versus a couple of men with rockets.

Who said war was supposed to be fair? But hey, I'm a fair guy - I'll trade you those 400 Hamas rockets (from a quote above) for 400 Israeli laser guided bombs. Sound good to you?

Could someone please tell me the difference between what Israel is doing now and what Germany did to the jews in WWII.

You should really look up Goodwin's law.

You could also try arguing your own case instead of dropping an open-ended, intentionally leading question. Our standards are higher here than you are probably used to and we don't fall for such tactics here.

 

[russ_watters]

This is clearly an unproportional response by the Isreal, that serves no practical purpose other than to invite the hearts and minds of every Palestinian citizen to take up arms and fight. And at the expense of 200 dead (mostly civilian), and US military aid. Genius!

By what logic should a response be proportional? (Hint: there is no such school of thought on warfare.)

It's not exactly rocket science:

"The art of using troops is this:
...When ten to the enemy's one, surround him;
...When five times his strength, attack him;
...If double his strength, divide him;
...If equally matched you may engage him;
...If weaker numerically, be capable of withdrawing;
...And if in all respects unequal, be capable of eluding him,
...for a small force is but booty for one more powerful."
- Sun Tzu, the Art Of War

http://www.military-quotes.com/Sun-Tzu.htm

 

[russ_watters]

If Israel had killed 1 Palestinian civilan and Hamas responded by killing 271 Israelis I wonder how many on here would be falling over themselves to justify such a response from Palestinians?

Since that bears no resemblance to what happened, the response is obvious: the intentional killing of civilians by Hamas is a crime against humanity. It's the same in your fictional scenario as it is in real life.

Or, alternately, if Hamas began to confine it's attacks to strictly military targets, perhaps they could shake the "terrorist" label. Their attacks are, by definition, indiscriminate attacks on civilians - they use unguided rockets.

Israel is a terrorist state whose leaders should be tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

For defending itself? Please.

This seems to turn logic on it's head. I find it amazing that so many on here are happy to try and justify mass murder.

Well try actually applying some logic then, instead of just making open-ended pronouncements. No one's going to do your work for you.

 

[tiny-tim]

… unless you are suggesting she intends handing over lumps of Israel to them

Well, yes I am …

because that's what she said! ​

"to have two distinct national entities".

"Among other things I will also be able to approach the Palestinian residents of Israel... and tell them: 'Your national aspirations lie elsewhere.'"

Seems pretty unambiguous to me.

Yes, she's unambiguously saying that she wants two national states.

And that, just as if Jews living in the UK or US want "national aspirations" as Jews, they have to look to Israel (but if they want national aspirations as Britons or Americans, they look to Britain or America) …

so if Palestinians living in Israel want "national aspirations" as Palestinians, they have to look to Palestine (but if they want national aspirations as Israelis, as many apparently do, they look to Israel).

What does that have to do with removing them? ​

Her qualifying remarks came AFTER there was an international outcry about her first statement.

What "international outcry"?

The BBC report you linked to only mentions …

Politicians from the minority Arab community have demanded she clarify if it means that Arabs citizens will face loss of rights in Israel or expulsion.

… Israeli Arab MKs asking (perfectly reasonable ) awkward pre-election questions.

 

[russ_watters]

By the way, we have standards of intellectual honesty here and some assertions and implications about the nature of the attacks by Israle have been made that are factually untrue. In particular:

-Most of the dead in Gaza are not civilians, they are Hamas security personnel. Hamas is a paramilitary organization and their police force most definitely are combatants.
-Israel is targeting military/government installations, not civilians.

These facts can be gained from any responsible news source. Here are two:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/12/28/gaza.israel.strikes/index.html
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-12-27-israel-palestine_N.htm

[edit] Note also that as Al Jazeera articles go, that one in the OP isn't too bad and it does not make the claim that Israel is targeting anything but Hamas and it does not make the claim that more civilians than Hamas personnel were killed (though it does include a quote from Hamas that implies it).

 

[OAQfirst]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7801662.stm

But the Egyptian foreign minister has accused Hamas of not allowing injured Palestinians to leave Gaza to seek treatment, even though much-needed medical supplies are waiting at the nearby El-Arish airport.

...

Israel said it initially began easing the blockade, but this was halted when Hamas failed to fulfil what Israel says were agreed conditions, including ending all rocket fire and halting weapons smuggling.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ioi_0jtO9RjMwPNRoXNCndRPRq3gD958NJFO0

Israel said three militants were spotted planting explosives in northern Gaza along the border fence. Soldiers crossed a few yards into Gaza and engaged the Palestinians, who threw grenades. The military said soldiers returned fire, hitting the three. Israeli media said they were killed, the first to die since the truce ended.

Should Israel concede and open the border, would the violence stop? Would Hamas be satisfied? I'm not seeing it.

 

[Art]

By the way, we have standards of intellectual honesty here and some assertions and implications about the nature of the attacks by Israle have been made that are factually untrue. In particular:

-Most of the dead in Gaza are not civilians, they are Hamas security personnel. Hamas is a paramilitary organization and their police force most definitely are combatants.
-Israel is targeting military/government installations, not civilians.

.

Spot the irony . Under the Geneva Convention, Paragraph 3 Article 43, police forces are categorised as civilians and their civilian status is further underlined in UN Resolution 690 (1979). but hey don't let a few facts stand in the way of your intellectual dishonesty.

C. War and other emergency situations- occupation by a foreign power[3]

1. A police officer shall continue to perform his tasks of protecting persons and property during war and enemy occupation in the interests of the civilian population. For that reason he shall not have the status of "combatant", and the provisions of the Third Geneva Convention of 12 August 1949, relative to the treatment of prisoners of war, shall not apply.

2. The provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 12 August 1949, relative to the protection of civilian persons in time of war, apply to the civilian police.

http://assembly.coe.int/Documents/AdoptedText/ta79/ERES690.htm

Next time some gangbangers in LA kills some rich white person perhaps the US military should wipe out the LA police force and the local neighbourhood for not forestalling the attack. Afterall if it is good enough for Palestinians it should be good enough for Americans.

 

[tiny-tim]

making things up …

Under the Geneva Convention, Paragraph 3 Article 43, police forces are categorised as civilians and their civilian status is further underlined in UN Resolution 690 (1979). but hey don't let a few facts stand in the way of your intellectual dishonesty.

uhh?

this (from the http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/WebART/380-600049?OpenDocument") is Geneva Convention (IV), Part III Article 43 …

Part III : Status and treatment of protected persons #Section II : Aliens in the territory of a party to the conflict
ARTICLE 43
Any protected person who has been interned or placed in assigned residence shall be entitled to have such action reconsidered as soon as possible by an appropriate court or administrative board designated by the Detaining Power for that purpose. If the internment or placing in assigned residence is maintained, the court or administrative board shall periodically, and at least twice yearly, give consideration to his or her case, with a view to the favourable amendment of the initial decision, if circumstances permit.
Unless the protected persons concerned object, the Detaining Power shall, as rapidly as possible, give the Protecting Power the names of any protected persons who have been interned or subjected to assigned residence, or who have been released from internment or assigned residence. The decisions of the courts or boards mentioned in the first paragraph of the present Article shall also, subject to the same conditions, be notified as rapidly as possible to the Protecting Power.

It doesn't even mention police or civilians, …

and, so far as I know, nor does any part of the Geneva conventions.

Does "intellectual dishonesty" include making things up? ​

http://assembly.coe.int/Documents/AdoptedText/ta79/ERES690.htm
C. War and other emergency situations- occupation by a foreign power[3] …

This is a Council of Europe article …

It has no legal force, and no application whatever, to the Middle East.

Why are you mentioning it?

Hamas security personnel are not civilians.​

 

[Art]

just as if Jews living in the UK or US want "national aspirations" as Jews, they have to look to Israel (but if they want national aspirations as Britons or Americans, they look to Britain or America) …

There's a slight difference. If the UK or the US declared itself a Christian state for Christians then I imagine members of minority religions would feel rather threatened.

A major stumbling block in the recognition of Israel by the PLO is Israel's insistence that the Palestinians recognise Israel as a Jewish state. This is no mere semantics. By declaring the state Jewish the Zionists look to bolster their position in refusing re-entry to the displaced Palestinians and to allow for forced resettlement of non-Jews i.e. Arabs.

 

[Hurkyl]

A major stumbling block in the recognition of Israel by the PLO

The PLO is irrelevant at the moment...

 

[russ_watters]

Spot the irony . Under the Geneva Convention, Paragraph 3 Article 43, police forces are categorised as civilians and their civilian status is further underlined in UN Resolution 690 (1979). but hey don't let a few facts stand in the way of your intellectual dishonesty.

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:

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas on Saturday outlawed the Hamas-led Interior Ministry’s police force, the most powerful armed unit outside his control in factional fighting that has left 33 people dead in the last month...

Abbas claims authority over the various armed Palestinian forces created in the 1990s by Yasser Arafat, the late Fatah and Palestinian Authority leader. Today they include two police agencies with 15,000 members each in addition to the elite Presidential Guard, which is being enlarged from 4,000 to 6,000 members.

Hamas formed the Executive Force in March, saying the Fatah-led forces had become corrupt and ineffective.

http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jan/07/world/fg-palestinian7

Heck, you can even get this for alJazeera:

On Wednesday evening it was reported that Hamas had attacked the three main security force compounds in Gaza City - the headquarters of the Preventive Security, the Intelligence Service and the National Forces.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2007/06/2008525142614111868.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]

plenty of Islamic states …

There's a slight difference. If the UK or the US declared itself a Christian state for Christians then I imagine members of minority religions would feel rather threatened.

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?

By declaring the state Jewish the Zionists look to bolster their position in refusing re-entry to the displaced Palestinians and to allow for forced resettlement of non-Jews i.e. Arabs.

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]

uhh?

this (from the http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/WebART/380-600049?OpenDocument") is Geneva Convention (IV), Part III Article 43 …


It doesn't even mention police or civilians, …

and, so far as I know, nor does any part of the Geneva conventions.

Does "intellectual dishonesty" include making things up? ​

This is a Council of Europe article …

It has no legal force, and no application whatever, to the Middle East.

Why are you mentioning it?

Hamas security personnel are not civilians.​

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.

Article 43-Armed forces

3. Whenever a Party to a conflict incorporates a paramilitary or armed law enforcement agency into its armed forces it shall so notify the other Parties to the conflict.

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]

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.

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]

War isn't supposed to be fair … it isn't a sport, like boxing, where you don't fight someone who's much smaller than you.

In war, if you have overwhelming force, then you're perfectly entitled to start using it, and the other side, if it's really interested in peace, will stop.

War is an unfortunate means of protecting your legal rights … in this case, Israelis' right to live.

Hamas has for many months been killing as many Israeli civilians as it can … under international law, that is undoubtedly an act of war.

Israel, under international law, is entitled to retaliate, first by economic sanctions, and then militarily.
Israel's reluctance is clear from the long time that it has waited before military retaliation.

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

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

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?

Yes I do so imagine.

Since there are existing Christian and Islamic states, isn't it rather racist to suggest there's something intrinsically wrong with a Jewish state?

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.

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.

Really? If everyone is so equal why are there issues such as this,

Today, 23 September 2007, Adalah filed a petition to the Supreme Court of Israel demanding the cancellation of regional selection committees, which select their residents from among candidates who wish to live in ‘community towns’ in Israel. In practice these selection committees exclude certain groups, such as Arab citizens, Mizrahi Jews (Eastern Jews), single parents and gay people, from community towns as ‘socially unsuitable’.

or articles like this in the Israeli press

It smells like discrimination
By Muhammad Amara

The widening gap between Israel's Jewish majority and the Arab minority is worrying and poses many questions as to the country's Arab-Jewish coexistence. Nearly every day statements are heard from senior figures concerning the legitimacy of Arab citizens, and unbridled attacks have become routine: MK Israel Hasson of Yisrael Beiteinu is talking about a second War of Independence against the Arab citizens in Israel, MK Otniel Schneller of Kadima is talking about establishing task forces to examine the possibility of population exchanges and the head of the Shin Bet security service is talking about the Arabs as a strategic threat.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/857766.html Maybe you should take the blinkers off

 

[tiny-tim]

It mentions law enforcement agencies …

No it doesn't! ​

What document are you quoting from?

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

oh i see … that's Part III, Article 43, of the Protocol I of 1979 to the Geneva Conventions

which I don't think have been ratified by any Middle eastern country (including Israel), or even the USA​

… but let's have a look anyway …

Article 43.-Armed forces

1. The armed forces of a Party to a conflict consist of all organized armed forces, groups and units which are under a command responsible to that Party for the conduct of its subordinates, even if that Party is represented by a government or an authority not recognized by an adverse Party. Such armed forces shall be subject to an internal disciplinary system which, inter alia, shall enforce compliance with the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict.
2. Members of the armed forces of a Party to a conflict (other than medical personnel and chaplains covered by Article 33 of the Third Convention) are combatants, that is to say, they have the right to participate directly in hostilities.

3. Whenever a Party to a conflict incorporates a paramilitary or armed law enforcement agency into its armed forces it shall so notify the other Parties to the conflict.

Well, this clearly says that an armed law enforcement agency can be "armed forces" (and therefore not civilians)!

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.

erm … oh, Hurkyl has beaten me to it!

 

[Art]

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.

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]

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

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

yes it is! (for the reasons I've already given)​

Really? If everyone is so equal why are there issues such as this
…[]
or articles like this in the Israeli press

uhh? How does that contradict what I said …

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

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]

No it doesn't! ​

Still struggling with the reading comprehension I see

What document are you quoting from?

Err, try the one I linked to

oh i see … that's Part III, Article 43, of the Protocol I of 1979 to the Geneva Conventions

which I don't think have been ratified by any Middle eastern country (including Israel), or even the USA​

Ah the penny drops, finally

… 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!

Sigh, back to the reading comprehension problem again

 

[Art]

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

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.

yes it is! (for the reasons I've already given)​

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

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!

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

(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. ​

Misquoted? I cut and pasted what she actually said.

 

[tiny-tim]

Misquoted? I cut and pasted what she actually said.

No … even after you edited it, you still misquoted her …

Meanwhile the war warmongering, evil witch, Tzipi Livni, who recently suggested all Arabs living in Israel should be removed is really a peace loving humanitarian I suppose.

Among other things I will also be able to approach the Palestinian residents of Israel... and tell them: 'Your national aspirations lie elsewhere.'"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7779087.stm Then again she is by no means the only leading politician in Israel to promote a little ethnic cleansing but it seems such policies are only illegal if pursued by non-zionists.

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]

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.

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]

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.

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.