News Israel PM: State Protection for War Crimes in Gaza

[Art]

Let us consider some facts.

Radical muslims have *have* used women and children in their suicide attacks. Sometimes they pretend to be aid workers, sometimes they have carried white flags, sometimes they drive ambulances.

.

Please provide a source to support your 'facts'.

Here's a genuine fact for you

Soldiers fires “rubber” bullet at handcuffed, blindfolded Palestinian, July 2008

On 20 July 2008, B'Tselem was given a video cassette a Palestinian youngster filmed through the window of her home, in Ni’lin. The footage, filmed on 7 July, shows a soldier firing a rubber-coated bullet at a handcuffed, blindfolded Palestinian from almost point-blank range. Several security forces were present, among them a lieutenant-colonel who was holding the Palestinian’s arm when the shot was fired.

http://www.btselem.org/English/Video/20080721_Nilin_Shooting.asp There's even a video of the incident at the link referenced.

another fact supported by video

Soldier fires rubber-coated metal bullet from short range at demonstrator in Bil’in, March 2008
On 14 March, during a demonstration in Bil’in against the Separation Barrier, an IDF officer fired a rubber-coated metal bullet from very short range at one of the demonstrators. The victim was not armed, was not throwing stones, and did not endanger the security forces. He was taken to Asaf Harofe Hospital, where he underwent surgery to remove the bullet, which had struck him in the thigh. The incident was filmed on video. The footage shows that the shooter was no more than a few meters from the demonstrator when he fired.

http://www.btselem.org/English/Video/20080513_Shooting_at_Demonstrators_in_Bilin.asp

Care to rethink this opinion?

Yes mistakes have been made and innocents are killed. It is a terrible tragedy. To claim that Israeli soldiers know that their targets are innocent and intentionally kill them is a ridiculous assertion.

If you look at the footage in this next video you will see how children in Israel become brutalised from an early age and learn to hate Palestinians. You can imagine what these children will be like when they are older, serving with the IDF and carrying highly lethal weapons supplied by the USA tax payer.http://www.btselem.org/English/Video/CDP_Hebron.asp

 

[tiny-tim]

War Crimes with ambulances

Sometimes they pretend to be aid workers, sometimes they have carried white flags, sometimes they drive ambulances.

Really

Let us consider some facts.

Radical muslims have *have* used women and children in their suicide attacks. Sometimes they pretend to be aid workers, sometimes they have carried white flags, sometimes they drive ambulances.

Please provide a source to support your 'facts'.

For example, the first woman Palestinian suicide bomber, Wafa Idris, was ferried to Jerusalem in a Red Crescent ambulance.
http://www.jewishmediaresources.com/article/405/

More generally, googling "ambulances +terrorists +israel" will give you plenty of sources, for example …
http://www.israelnewsagency.com/palestinianambulancesterrorism1009.html

a video (near the end, showing armed men getting into a clearly-marked UN ambulance for transport)
http://www.ujc.org/page.aspx?id=54765

and, international use of ambulances … http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article4232333.ece

 

[russ_watters]

Really

Not sure about the white flag thing, but sure, a google for "suicide bomber ambulance" turns up several attacks carried out that way, though only one I see at a quick glance by Palestinian terrorists - but several by other musliim terrorists.

Hamas also smuggles weapons in ambulances.

So one of the primary complaints of aid workers during the little war - that Israel was wrong for hampering aid movement - is clearly wrong.

There is also a youtube video (linked in another thread) of militants launching mortars from the shadow of a UN school a while back that got a lot of press for being bombed a few weeks ago.

Aid workers can be forgiven for being irrational. They know only what they see with their eyes and what they see is traumatic for them. When you have a bleeding person who needs your help in front of you, all other concerns go out the window. But we here need to see and understand that to properly interpret what they say: Most of the limited scope facts are correct. Most of the broader conclusions are wrong or at least unsupportable.

 

[russ_watters]

Even the Israeli spokepersons were saying that they knew "innocent" ppl were in those buildings when they fired at it, but their excuse was that they were fired at by Hamas first (who continually use civilians as "human shields") and their actions were self-defence.

You are twisting the wording. There is a difference between the target being civilian and civilians being at the target. Targeting civilians is murder, killing civilians because they are surrounding a military target is not.

ok then, the question is not whether they knew or not, it is just whether they intentionally put civilians in danger (well, there is no need to discuss Hamas, as they clearly put civilians in danger...)...

You just answered your own question.

The way I see it is that to fire towards areas where civilians are congregating for whatever reasons, would endanger the lives of these ppl,.. that's a fact. Was these firing justified should Hamas been hiding there?

Again, you answered your own question.

...but I would the ask the question: Would the Israeli soldiers be THAT careless with their guns and missiles, should those civilians are Israelis (eg. hostages)?

Careless is the wrong word. What you really mean is would they make the same targeting decisions if it was Israeli hostages surrounding a terrorist. Probably not and I'm sure you would agree. But were you planning on making an argument for what that implies...?

I think I saw earlier where someone said that the UN should investigate war crimes and people here seem to wonder why they don't. The answer is simple: the opinions displayed here about what is and isn't war crimes is not shared by the international community. A war crimes investigation into the situation would necessarily involve the arrest of most of Hamas and the banning of the organization and that just isn't a reasonable possibility.

 

[Art]

Not sure about the white flag thing, but sure, a google for "suicide bomber ambulance" turns up several attacks carried out that way, though only one I see at a quick glance by Palestinian terrorists - but several by other musliim terrorists.

Hamas also smuggles weapons in ambulances.

No, I'd never heard of the 'white flag' thing either or the 'suicide bombers posing as aid workers thing' which is why, per the forum rules, I want a source from Seycyrus to support his allegations.

So one of the primary complaints of aid workers during the little war - that Israel was wrong for hampering aid movement - is clearly wrong.

You are incorrect here. Because of previous incidents involving Palestinian ambulances the Red Cross are supposed to accompany each ambulance as their personal guarantee that the ambulances are not being misused by militants. The Red Cross had to withdraw this service after being fired on by Israeli forces per the Israeli newspaper Haaretz. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1054492.html

There is also a youtube video (linked in another thread) of militants launching mortars from the shadow of a UN school a while back that got a lot of press for being bombed a few weeks ago.

You've said this before and you are wrong. Whether deliberately or by mistake I don't know but first the school is a different school and secondly the video was from 2 years ago when the UN said the school became part of the battle ground following an incursion by Israel. Your reference to this incident without supplying the timing or context is misinformation.

Aid workers can be forgiven for being irrational. They know only what they see with their eyes and what they see is traumatic for them. When you have a bleeding person who needs your help in front of you, all other concerns go out the window. But we here need to see and understand that to properly interpret what they say: Most of the limited scope facts are correct. Most of the broader conclusions are wrong or at least unsupportable.

What constitutes a war crime is enshrined in law. Experts in the field have said actions by Israel and Hamas constitute war crimes. Although everybody here has no problem acceding the point Hamas has committed war crimes some folk continue to defend Israel as in their OPINION Israel's actions are not war crimes. Their Opinions however fly in the face of international law and the reasoned judgement of experts.

The ICRC in particular are the guardians of the Geneva Conventions. They are THE authorities on humanitarian laws. When they accuse Israel of being in breach of these laws there is no more authoritative source possible. To try to dismiss their allegations as the rants of traumatised aid workers is gross misinformation.

for example http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1053877.html

The only thing saving Israel from an international War Crimes investigation is the likely veto of the US and possibly the UK. This doesn't however prevent individual countries issuing warrants to arrest suspected war criminals when they visit their country as happened in the UK a couple of years ago when an Israeli general who oversaw the demolition of Palestinian houses tried to visit. I think a lot of Israelis will be staying at home for their holidays for the next few years

Fearful that Israeli commanders could be targeted for arrest while traveling abroad as private citizens on business or vacation, Attorney General Menachem Mazuz on Tuesday ordered the Israeli media to refrain from revealing the names of any military personnel who took part in the 22-day offensive. Officers involved in the operation who want to travel abroad are now required to first check in with the office of the Judge Advocate, which will determine if the soldier is on a foreign watch list that might lead to his arrest.
...
What worries authorities in Jerusalem is that many European countries are signatories to a Geneva Convention that allows their courts to arrest and prosecute individuals accused of committing war crimes in other countries.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1873496,00.html

 

[mjsd]

You are twisting the wording. There is a difference between the target being civilian and civilians being at the target. Targeting civilians is murder, killing civilians because they are surrounding a military target is not.

There is no need to go into technicalities. The situation was clear (to some extend): Israeli soldiers fired at the school etc with civilians in it. The issue for me was really whether Israeli soldiers should knowingly fire at (what you may call) civilians at the target (now, there could even be a dispute whether this definition was indeed correct but let's not go into that)... and knowing quite well the possible outcry that may follow. The very fact that they risk to tarnish their own "good guy" image in order to achieve their objectives (whatever they were), gives me the impression that they either don't care about Palestinian civilians casualties or they knew they would get away with it anyway, so it wouldn't have mattered. I mean, one shouldn't go around and tell ppl how fair and considerate one is and then go on acting the opposite.

You just answered your own question.

so, you think eh?... I was pointing out that we don't need to discuss Hamas because there is such a strong "consesus" on their actions. My interest is whether Israel was also in the wrong (hence, the war crimes discussion of this thread), which is clearly not settled. And these constant re-brandings, re-naming and re-definitions of what is what serve no good purpose other than distracting us from the real issue --- civilian deaths. I have no doubt that those who were caught in the crossfire, Palestinians or Israelis, don't care about your petit definitions. You may argue all night that these definitions are useful to determine what is justified and what is not, but that's just your point of view.
At the end of the day, it can never be justified in the eyes of those who suffered. Civilians caught in the crossfire is perhaps the most unfortunate situation... and sooner we realize that the better, and more should be done at the international level to further discourage such actions. Or when the chickens come home to roast (and we become the victims ourselves), no one will sympathize wth us...

 

[Evo]

Thread closed pending moderation.