News Israel PM: State Protection for War Crimes in Gaza

  • Thread starter Thread starter rootX
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
Israeli Prime Minister has announced that soldiers accused of war crimes in Gaza will receive state protection from overseas prosecution. This statement raises concerns about Israel's commitment to accountability for potential war crimes, as it implies a refusal to extradite soldiers for trial. Discussions highlight the complexities of international law and extradition, suggesting that Israel may leverage diplomatic pressure to shield its soldiers. While Israel is conducting some internal investigations, skepticism remains about the likelihood of genuine accountability. The broader implications of this stance reflect ongoing debates about the legality and morality of military actions in conflict zones.
  • #31
I am guessing he exploits the technicality of not recognizing Palestine as a country to avoid that.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
peace upon u all

i'll express my own view about war ... there is a need of war only when there is a need of killing people and destroying live ... no excuse is enough to establish a project of killing so called "WAR" ..but u have the full right to defend your self when someone come intending to kill u

i think that war crimes in Gaza are not the subject .. it seems to me just like discussing "is sun in the sky in the midday ?"
the intrinsic point is how to reach justice and let criminals into courts ??

http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2009/01/20091229274380583.htmlbest wishes
 
  • #33
tiny-tim said:
Pretending you have weapons is just as threatening as actually having them. :frown:
In poker it's called a bluff. In an airport it's called stupid.
but, after they are determined to be 'mostly harmless', Should they be kicked some more to make sure they never ever pretend again?
Should the pretenders be occupied to ensure the pretense never becomes reality?

This gets to be a silly time war. You might be a future enemy, so We'll occupy you now.
 
  • #34
Yeah, falling for a bluff isn't preemption, it is precognition.
 
  • #35
I think the interesting part of all this is that most of us here in the West see either a 'civilised' country putting down a rebellion, or an uncivilised country applying overwhelming military force to punish a rebellion, possible war-crimes, or since it's a civilised country and the rebels are all barbarian savages, no war-crimes; anyway, I don't think Western perceptions are important, regardless of the spin or what we (that is, the US) believe about it, the Arabs have all the time in the world.

Israel doesn't - it wants to effect something that simply will not survive history - South Africe, Germany, Romania, ...

All the Arabs/Palestinians need to do is wait it out; incidentally, is the US in its current near-bankrupt condition going to increase Israel's welfare payments? Is the rationale for the US, its workers (the ones who can find work), its commerce and industry, to support Israel economically and militarily?
This is why the US exists?
 
  • #36
Following the alleged (sic) illegal application of military force by Israel, Amnesty International has called for the UN to impose a weapons embargo. It will be interesting to see the new US administration's response.

Amnesty International urges Barack Obama to suspend military aid to Israel

Amnesty called for the UN Security Council to enact an arms embargo until mechanisms were put in place to ensure that equipment was not used to commit violations of international law.

"Israeli forces used white phosphorus and other weapons supplied by the USA to carry out serious violations of international humanitarian law, including war crimes," said Donatella Rovera, who headed an Amnesty fact-finding mission to southern Israel and Gaza.

"Their attacks resulted in the death of hundreds of children and other civilians, and massive destruction of homes and infrastructure."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-Obama-to-suspend-military-aid-to-Israel.html

It seems the pressure for Israel to be held to account for it's murder of Gazan civilians is growing. There appears to be a major shift taking place in world opinion of just who the 'bad' guys are in this conflict and the appointment of the right wing Netanyahu as Israel's new PM reliant on the support of the racist, ultra rightwing, Avigdor Lieberman and his Beiteinu Party can only accelerate this process.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #37
Appointing hardliners and becoming fanatical supporters of nationalism and its causes, are usually the beginning of the end for an effectively fascist ideology; the nationalist population tends to get tired of being called fascists, racists, war-criminals, etc, after a while.
 
  • #38
Art said:
It seems the pressure for Israel to be held to account for it's murder of Gazan civilians is growing.
Stop the misinformation.

There appears to be a major shift taking place in world opinion of just who the 'bad' guys are in this conflict.
I don't see any such shift in opinion.

Fifty-five percent (55%) of adults, however, believe the Palestinians are to blame for the current situation in Gaza, while 13% point the finger at the Israelis. Nearly one-third (32%) aren’t sure.

Sixty-seven percent (67%) of those who say they are following news out of Gaza Very Closely support Israel's military action, while 30% favor diplomacy.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/americans_closely_divided_over_israel_s_gaza_attacks
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #39
Evo said:
Stop the misinformation.

You should not use your moderation power to force your personal political opinions as truths here.
 
  • #40
jostpuur said:
You should not use your moderation power to force your personal political opinions as truths here.
He's stating that Israel "murdered" Palestinians. That's misinformation.
 
  • #41
Amnesty International: "War Crimes by Hamas"

Art said:
Following the alleged (sic) illegal application of military force by Israel, Amnesty International has called for the UN to impose a weapons embargo. It will be interesting to see the new US administration's response.

That (with the four-paragraph quotation which follows it) is a carefully deliberate one-sided summary of the Amnesty International report and news item …

both the report and the news item criticize both Israel and Hamas, and call for weapons embargos on both Israel and Hamas …
The human rights group said it found evidence that Israel and Hamas had both used weapons supplied from overseas to carry out attacks on civilians, accusing both sides of committing war crimes during the three-week conflict at the start of the year.
The report also said Hamas and other Palestinian groups should be subject to the embargo because they had committed war crimes by attacking Israeli towns with rockets.
… yet you select quotations, and write your own summary, leaving Hamas out completely :mad:

One-sided selectivity like this, giving a report a completely different slant, is yet another example of misinformation.

To be fair, of course, Amnesty International knows perfectly well that a weapons embargo on Hamas is unlikely to stop the very war crimes that Amnesty International is charging Hamas with. :rolleyes:
 
  • #42
Re: War Crimes in Gaza
Originally Posted by Art View Post

It seems the pressure for Israel to be held to account for it's murder of Gazan civilians is growing.

Stop the misinformation.

There appears to be a major shift taking place in world opinion of just who the 'bad' guys are in this conflict.

I don't see any such shift in opinion.

Fifty-five percent (55%) of adults, however, believe the Palestinians are to blame for the current situation in Gaza, while 13% point the finger at the Israelis. Nearly one-third (32%) aren’t sure.

Sixty-seven percent (67%) of those who say they are following news out of Gaza Very Closely support Israel's military action, while 30% favor diplomacy.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...s_gaza_attacks

Actually, He's correct. There is a shift in positions. When I started reading about this whole topic I was fairly neutral in that I think both sides are wrong. That use of violence is not the best solution to any problem.
After reading and following questions and links, I can be counted as one of the undecided that is starting to point my finger more and more at Israel and it's American money connections.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #43
Alfi said:
Actually, He's correct. There is a shift in positions. When I started reading about this whole topic I was fairly neutral in that I think both sides are wrong. That use of violence is not the best solution to any problem.
After reading and following questions and links, I can be counted as one of the undecided that is starting to point my finger more and more at Israel and it's American money connections.
And others have shifted to Israel's side. Art made the claim that
There appears to be a major shift taking place in world opinion of just who the 'bad' guys are in this conflict.
I have seen no evidence of this.

More polls.

Sixty percent of Americans in the nationwide survey said they were sympathetic toward the Israelis, compared with 17 percent who supported the Palestinians, CNN reported today on its Web site. A recent European poll showed that 23 percent of French people said the Palestinian Hamas group was primarily responsible for the war while 18 percent mainly blamed Israel.

The CNN poll showed that 63 percent of Americans felt Israel was justified in taking military action, compared with 30 percent who disagreed. The poll of 1,245 adults was conducted Jan. 12-15, before the Israeli military campaign ended in a cease-fire on Jan. 17. Conducted by Opinion Research Corp., it had a sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

Sympathy for Israel exceeded that for the Palestinians by a margin of 49 percent to 11 percent, according to the Pew poll. The results narrowed when respondents were questioned on Israel’s military action in Gaza, with 40 percent approving and 33 percent disapproving.

The Pew poll surveyed 1,503 adults Jan. 7-11, with a margin of error at plus or minus 3 percentage points.

The French poll, conducted by CSA, found that 28 percent of respondents blamed Israel and Hamas equally. That telephone survey questioned a representative nationwide sample of 958 people on Jan. 7-8. CSA didn’t report a margin of error on its Web site.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a2oCpwqqFTpw&refer=home

More polls, and some showing history.

http://www.pollingreport.com/israel.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #44
Evo said:
I have seen no evidence of this.
But you provide very interesting numbers :

Code:
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|    (1)      |  sympathetic toward the Israelis | supported the Palestinians |
|    (2)      |  Hamas was responsible for war   | mainly blamed Israel       |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  american   |              60%                 |             17%            |
|   french    |              23%                 |             18%            |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Can the discrepancy mostly be attributed to the different statements between ligne (1) and (2) , or to the misinformation of one of the two groups of people ? Or is it that american and french people feel differently when it comes to human life and war, given the same situation ? Can this be explained simply at all, or are those numbers only confusing ?

I claim that american people and french people receive different information coverage. I do not intend to back up this claim, but it would certainly explain at least some of the discrepancy above. I further claim that misinformation can only be temporary when it comes to the history of war. Not that it will become perfectly accurate, but there will be something written someday in the books, that if everybody does not agree on, at least everybody knows the other's version. Assuming the hypothesis in this paragraph are correct, at some point, there will be a change which will take place, one way or another, to get back to a better agreement in the numbers above. Where am I going wrong in my understanding ?

edit
If given the number of people interviewed, one can not evaluate the uncertainty
CSA didn’t report a margin of error on its Web site.
then I'd be interested to know how the uncertainty can be evaluated otherwise !?
 
  • #45
humanino said:
But you provide very interesting numbers :

Code:
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|    (1)      |  sympathetic toward the Israelis | supported the Palestinians |
|    (2)      |  Hamas was responsible for war   | mainly blamed Israel       |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  american   |              60%                 |             17%            |
|   french    |              23%                 |             18%            |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Can the discrepancy mostly be attributed to the different statements between ligne (1) and (2) , or to the misinformation of one of the two groups of people ? Or is it that american and french people feel differently when it comes to human life and war, given the same situation ? Can this be explained simply at all, or are those numbers only confusing ?

American != French
as
Relationship between Americans and Israel != Relationship between French and Israel
Interests of Americans != French interests
American Involvement in the Middle East != http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7880453.stm"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #46
rootX said:
American != French
So for you the difference can mostly be explained by the fact that those groups of people feel differently. Please realize that when it comes it was and human life, it seems to me, this is a very strong statement.
 
  • #47
humanino said:
Can the discrepancy mostly be attributed to the different statements between ligne (1) and (2) , or to the misinformation of one of the two groups of people ? Or is it that american and french people feel differently when it comes to human life and war, given the same situation ? Can this be explained simply at all, or are those numbers only confusing ?
I'd say that it is a number of things, different media exposure, different attitudes, different population demographics, France may also be more likely to have more Palestinians and/or people sympathetic to Palestinians than the US? The last is just a guess. I guess you would know the answer to that humanino.

I believe there was some mention in my first article about the difference in opinions between Europeans and Americans.
 
Last edited:
  • #48
humanino said:
So for you the difference can mostly be explained by the fact that those groups of people feel differently. Please realize that when it comes it was and human life, it seems to me, this is a very strong statement.

Uhh no, actually there's a big difference between Palestinians and Israelis. Palestinians are Muslims while Israelis are Jews (or "not Muslims "). :rolleyes:

IMO, those numbers are meaningless. They are coming out of biased media or national interests. How many of those people actually understand the conflict?
 
  • #49
Evo said:
He's stating that Israel "murdered" Palestinians. That's misinformation.

"http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1066231.html" " is what Amiststy cites, how are you differentiating that from murder?

By the way, I'm still wondering how you came to perpetuate the misinformation I inquired about https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2085150&postcount=55".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #50
rootX said:
IMO, those numbers are meaningless.
I have been living in both countries, and discussing with similar people (in the same academic environments, not bars or night clubs) and I think thouse numbers, as unpleasant as they are, are quite meaningful.
 
  • #51
Evo said:
Stop the misinformation.
Stop talking nonsense. Amnesty International is highly influential in the field of human rights so when they accuse Israel of war crimes and breaches of international humanitarian law then it is perfectly appropriate to say the pressure on Israel to be held accountable is growing and the unlawful targeting and killing of civilians alleged by Amnesty is murder.

Evo said:
I don't see any such shift in opinion.
What can I say?? Read more and you will, especially if you read what the international press is saying rather than just your domestic media. For example the UK gov't which gave 100% backing to Israel during the Lebanese conflict were highly critical of Israel this time round with some members of parliament calling on the PM to break off diplomatic relations with Israel.

If you want a gross example of misinformation try this
Originally Posted by Evo View Post

Hamas first took over by force then "won" an election. Fair election? When people are in fear of their lives?
People have been banned for a lot less. In fact I was banned by you for reporting that the IRC and the UN were accusing Israel of war crimes, despite this being an irrefutable fact! Now I cite an Amnesty report also accusing Israel of war crimes you accuse me again of misinformation?? :smile:

BTW I'm still waiting for the PM, you publicly promised, to explain that banning and why in your public response you claimed I was also banned for subsequent posts which you know perfectly well to be untrue for having been banned I couldn't post.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #52
kyleb said:
"http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1066231.html" " is what Amiststy cites, how are you differentiating that from murder?
Easy, it's not murder.

By the way, I'm still wondering how you came to perpetuate the misinformation I inquired about https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2085150&postcount=55".
I was wrong, I thought that after Hamas took over Gaza by force that the Palestinians had again legitimized them in a vote. Ok, so their takeover has not been legitimized by anyone, which is why they are still considered a terrorist group by the EU, the US, Canada, Israel and Japan, I stand corrected.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #53
Evo said:
Easy, it's not murder.
More disinformation
mur·der (mûrdr)
n.
1. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.
The accusations made by the IRC the UN, HRW and now Amnesty International that Israel deliberately and indiscriminately targeted civilians resulting in the deaths of those civilians then it is murder, plain and simple.
 
  • #54
Well, many sites that do have the temerity to discuss the situation, have moderators with various views about what is really happening, or what passes for discussion. This is true generally if the moderators are US citizens, perhaps more true for US citizens who have visited Israel, since they see Israel, not Palestine (the Israeli govt. does a quite good job of keeping Palestine and its gradual annexation out of the public eye. most Israelis never get to see any of it, for example).

Therefore uninformed and blinkered viewpoints are pretty much de rigeur, most people like to invent reasons when they don't actually know the facts. I wouldn't feel bad or anything (you're only human after all)
We like to think we understand things, even if we don't really.
 
  • #55
Art said:
In fact I was banned by you for reporting that the IRC and the UN were accusing Israel of war crimes, despite this being an irrefutable fact! Now I cite an Amnesty report also accusing Israel of war crimes you accuse me again of misinformation?? :smile:
Yes stating that Israel is intentionally "murdering" Palestinians is misinformation.

BTW I'm still waiting for the PM, you publicly promised, to explain that banning and why in your public response you claimed I was also banned for subsequent posts which you know perfectly well to be untrue for having been banned I couldn't post.
Those were posts that you made prior to being banned and after your warning on 12-28-08. You made 10 posts after that warning and the mentors decided a 10 day timeout was appropriate.
 
  • #56
Art said:
More disinformation The accusations made by the IRC the UN, HRW and now Amnesty International that Israel deliberately and indiscriminately targeted civilians resulting in the deaths of those civilians then it is murder, plain and simple.
No, it's not. That is simply one side's opinion.
 
  • #57
Evo said:
That is simply one side's opinion.
Yes that's true. It's one side's opinion. Quite an international group of quite important people in some people understanding of what international politics should be, or aim at being. Until an international court appointed by those international authorities issues a judgement about this, we can only choose our side, as to what the judgement will, and should eventually, be.
 
  • #58
humanino said:
Yes that's true. It's one side's opinion. Quite an international group of quite important people in some people understanding of what international politics should be, or aim at being. Until an international court appointed by those international authorities issues a judgement about this, we can only choose our side, as to what the judgement will, and should eventually, be.
Yes, that is correct.
 
  • #59
Evo said:
I was wrong, I thought that after Hamas took over Gaza by force that the Palestinians had again legitimized them in a vote.
This begs the question, what motivates you to present such misinformation in your ardent defense of Israel's conquest over Palestine?

Evo said:
Ok, so their takeover has not been legitimized by anyone, which is why they are still considered a terrorist group by the EU, the US, Canada, Israel and Japan, I stand corrected.
Surely you can't make any reasonable argument that their takeover was less legitimate than the coup attempt we persuaded the losers of that election to attempt against them?

Evo said:
Yes stating that Israel is intentionally "murdering" Palestinians is misinformation.
How can one classify "[d]irect attacks on civilians" as anything less than intentional murder?
 
  • #60
kyleb said:
This begs the question, what motivates you to present such misinformation in your ardent defense of Israel's conquest over Palestine?
That I thought Hamas had been legitimized after the violent takeover?

How can one classify "[d]irect attacks on civilians" as anything less than intentional murder?
Because there is no evidence that these were "direct attacks on civilians". To my knowledge they were attacks on Hamas, Hamas chooses to mix in with civilians. But this has only been pointed out dozens of times here already.
 

Similar threads

Replies
531
Views
71K
  • · Replies 128 ·
5
Replies
128
Views
21K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 79 ·
3
Replies
79
Views
12K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
5K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
10K
  • · Replies 71 ·
3
Replies
71
Views
9K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
7K