Today in gaza israeli troops

[MSI]

today in gaza israeli troops tried to kill one of "HAMAS" polticians (3abed al-3azeez al-rantisis) but they killed a small child and his mother and one of 3abed al-3azeez guards ... and today 3 citizens were killed in west bank by israeli troops ..
(one of the american politician) said that what happened today will less israel protection but he didn't say that it is a terrorism work,... on the other hand if a palestinian killed an israeli solider they will call him a terrorist

going back to what you read can you define "terrorism"?

 

[drag]

An act aimed at innocent civilians' lives and/or property.

 

[MSI]

Originally posted by drag
An act aimed at innocent civilians' lives and/or property.

but not in israel ...
you see israel is killing inoccents and destroying their houses they are destroying their life...

and they don't call what israel do terrorism
but when israel kill someone friends, family, destroy his house and he got nothing to do in his life so he go and kill what destroyed his life ... they call him terrorist ...
why?

 

[drag]

Originally posted by MSI
but not in israel ...
you see israel is killing inoccents and destroying their houses they are destroying their life...

No. Israel's acts are not aimed at innocents and when
these do get hurt it is not intentional - thus
not terrorism according to the definition.

Peace and long life.

 

[FZ+]

Originally posted by drag
An act aimed at innocent civilians' lives and/or property.

How do you define innocent? Aren't the family of suicide bombers, who are not charged or tried for any offense, innocent?

 

[drag]

Originally posted by FZ+
How do you define innocent? Aren't the family of suicide bombers, who are not charged or tried for any offense, innocent?

Of course not, they do not prevent murder of innocents.

 

[FZ+]

Hmm... I wouldn't be so hasty to say that failure to prevent a crime is equivalent to a crime itself. In that case, Sharon certainly deserves to die for failing to stop the violence. Bush is a prime target for failing to stop 9/11. The Israeli civilians are valid targets for failing to prevent various particular cases of murder. The list is endless... It's a wonder why we don't simply blow up Texas for failing to prevent the execution of innocent men. Hell, the whole Earth could have stopped them. Let's just kill everyone, right?

 

[MSI]

damn i got 6 posts now but what ever...
drag:

No. Israel's acts are not aimed at innocents

he is a leader of politician group not military group he is like any other innocent and they wanted to kill him
onther thing ... when an israeli vichle enter a city and destroy some houses .. is that for terrorist?
no, it is for creating terrorists ... israel is creating palestinian terrorists every day ...

 

[Raven]

The definition of "terrorism" has always been a subjective point of view hence the saying, "one country's terrorist is another country's hero."

I personally do not approve of either the Palestinians' nor the Israelis' violent acts against each other. In my mind they are both guilty of terrorism and the act feeds on itself.

I personally would like peace to be possible in this region, but unfortunately factions in both countries have strong feelings and are consciously or unconsciously subotaging the possibilities for peace. I for one tend to empathize with the Palestinians who have had their land taken away from them, and who have had their freedom taken away from them as well. When cornered by an untrustworthy neighbor, you may find yourself fighting for your rights as well. The Palestinians see this battle as a war but they have no army (not a conventional one anyway) and they have no conventional weapons. Their rogue and unconventional use of violence is seen as terrorism and a response by an organized army such as the Israelis is seen as self-defense. In reality, both are simply defending their own rights to live freely. In one sense, the conventional methods are seen as okay and unconventional methods are seen as terrorist acts. But in my mind they are simply at war and war is a form of terrorism by both parties in my own subjective view.

 

[maximus]

Originally posted by MSI

going back to what you read can you define "terrorism"?

the term 'terrorism' is a propigandic tool to inflate a sense of fear and evil for your people. if terrorism is, as some in here have posted, the taking of an innocent civillian's life than america has been a very active terrorist. we have (in a single bomb) destroyed the lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent civillians. we did that twice, actually. and if one does a little more research, they'll find many more acts of the same sort.

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by MSI
he is a leader of politician group not military group he is like any other innocent and they wanted to kill him

Wrong on several levels. He is a leader of Hamas, which is strictly a terrorist organization, not a political group. And if he WERE a member of a political group (like Abaas's defense minister) then he WOULD be a legitimate military target.

Either way you slice it, he's a legitimate target.

onther thing ... when an israeli vichle enter a city and destroy some houses .. is that for terrorist?

Non sequitor - you can't justify one act of terrorism by claiming others are comitting acts of terrorism.

Also, you picked an interesting time to bring this up. I'm sure you know that Abaas has renounced terrorism and in response, Sharon has started to dismantle Jewish settlements in disputed territories (and other concessions). BOTH of these men are making a good-faith effort to negotiate and work out a peace. The terrorist organizations cannot survive if peace breaks out and as such they took the unprecidented step of working together for the purpose of sabbotaging the peace process. That Hamaas leader (understandably upset) restated the Hamaas goal of the complete annihilation of Israel when he said (among other things) "I swear we will not leave one Jew in Palestine."

Be clear here: the enemy of Hamaas isn't just Israel - its peace itself. Abaas should fear for his life. He is an enemy to Hamaas.

This all being said, the attack by Israel was poor judgement because it could further fuel the terrorists.

Originally posted by maximus
the term 'terrorism' is a propigandic tool to inflate a sense of fear and evil for your people. if terrorism is, as some in here have posted, the taking of an innocent civillian's life than america has been a very active terrorist. we have (in a single bomb) destroyed the lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent civillians. we did that twice, actually. and if one does a little more research, they'll find many more acts of the same sort.

You misread drag's definition. He said an attack AIMED at innocent civilians. Under that definition, Hiroshima and Nagasaki could certainly be considered terrorism. But its important to note that the international treaties that govern warfare (yes, there are laws of war - this isn't propaganda) added the targeting of civilians AFTER WWII. Since WWII, the US has bent over backwards to avoid civilian casualties, often causing MORE American soldiers to die to protect other countries civilians.

 

[MSI]

Originally posted by russ_watters
Wrong on several levels. He is a leader of Hamas, which is strictly a terrorist organization, not a political group. And if he WERE a member of a political group (like Abaas's defense minister) then he WOULD be a legitimate military target.

ohhhh not at allll!
hamas is not the terrorist org. QASSAM is the "terrorist" org and they are a part of hammas and that makes a big difference

Also, you picked an interesting time to bring this up. I'm sure you know that Abaas has renounced terrorism

israel did that not abaas...
before what happened hammas was going to seise fire and there were no any innocencts killing but when israel knew that she tried to make hammas continue terrorism by what it did and also to show that palestinians doesn't want peace they also killed 6 palestinians today... why today ?
isn't that to creat more terrorism ?

and in response, Sharon has started to dismantle Jewish settlements in disputed territories (and other concessions).

did you see the settelment that sharoon removed??
i think you should see it it is just some carvans that jew lives in and i know that caravans 'cause my grand father live in a simmiler one and they can move with it every where ...
sharoon destroyed it ... the jew take it and go onther place to settle it

the Hamaas goal of the complete annihilation of Israel when he said (among other things) "I swear we will not leave one Jew in Palestine."

thats not hammas goal it is all palestinians goal they want their land back and that is them right..





if someone come and took your house and get you out of it and when you went to the law-court they said we can't do any thing and after a a long time they gave you 1 room from the house and the man who took your house still bothers you all the time and the court is on his side what will you do?
if you do nothing palestinians will not they will kill him ...
and that what is really happening now

 

[Dissident Dan]

Originally posted by russ_watters
Wrong on several levels. He is a leader of Hamas, which is strictly a terrorist organization, not a political group. And if he WERE a member of a political group (like Abaas's defense minister) then he WOULD be a legitimate military target.

Either way you slice it, he's a legitimate target.
Non sequitor - you can't justify one act of terrorism by claiming others are comitting acts of terrorism.

How is Abbas's defense minister a legitimate target? Is Israel at war with the Palestinian Authority (that is the name of the Palestinian Gov.'t, right?)? Isn't there some kind of international accord against assassinating leaders?

 

[damgo]

I don't want to get into this debate really, but I will say this seems like a counterproductive move from the Israelis. Abbas's Defense Minister -- who russ is ready to declare a military target -- was just a couple days ago threatening military action (by the PA!) on Hamas if they didn't back off their anti-ceasefire position. I wouldn't be surprised if elements in the Israeli government who oppose this roadmap -- and there are many -- were behind this ill-timed and ill-fated assassination attempt. Just as the radicals in Hamas et al will do their best to hinder it...

Since WWII, the US has bent over backwards to avoid civilian casualties, often causing MORE American soldiers to die to protect other countries civilians.

Korea? Vietnam? Cambodia? Laos? After the end of the Cold War, is more like it. But given that those wars were all US invasions of small countries, I think it's "bending over backwards" to prevent civilian casualties is damn well America's responsibility, not something we should get extra points for.

 

[schwarzchildradius]

There are definitely deep problems with Israel, they don't seem to be able to control their military! RW has a point that military action allegedly against terrorists is in principle different than terrorism itself, however, the Israeli military never shows enough restraint to put that principle into practice.
You got to understand that the propaganda about this situation is quite different than reality. The reason for the attack is just our reason for invading Iraq- we can, and it scares people. Scared people are more obedient.

 

[Zero]

One point to think about: In America, you can be convicted of murder if you cause the death of another while showing 'depraved indifference'...and according to Kat's statistics, Israeli troops kill 4 civilians for every 6 combatants.

 

[kat]

Originally posted by Zero
One point to think about: In America, you can be convicted of murder if you cause the death of another while showing 'depraved indifference'...and according to Kat's statistics, Israeli troops kill 4 civilians for every 6 combatants.

There's several problems with MSI's statements, and well Russ's as well (number 1 being that Hama's is part of the Palestinian government, to the tune of 33% I believe, don't quote me though ). I'm not going to get into that now, as I am in the midst of a deadline but..I did want to point out that using America as a comparision might not be helpful to your argument as the civilian casuality during American conflicts hovers around 70% in the last century.

 

[MSI]

Originally posted by Zero
and according to Kat's statistics, Israeli troops kill 4 civilians for every 6 combatants. [/B]

i don't know what you really mean here but if it was that every 10 israel kill is (4 civillians and 6 combatants)
thats mean that every child throw a rock on the jew troops is a combatants
in intifada there was 800 (under 18) killed and all are considerd civilians

kat,
i hope you write the problems in my statements



number 8

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by kat
There's several problems with MSI's statements, and well Russ's as well (number 1 being that Hama's is part of the Palestinian government, to the tune of 33% I believe, don't quote me though ). I'm not going to get into that now, as I am in the midst of a deadline but..I did want to point out that using America as a comparision might not be helpful to your argument as the civilian casuality during American conflicts hovers around 70% in the last century.

Well, that includes Hiroshima, right? And the carpet bombing in Vietnam? What is the US civilian casualty rate during an after-war police action?


And, of course, America has commited enough war crimes, true enough.

 

[russ_watters]

who russ is ready to declare a military target

Originally posted by Dissident Dan
How is Abbas's defense minister a legitimate target? Is Israel at war with the Palestinian Authority (that is the name of the Palestinian Gov.'t, right?)? Isn't there some kind of international accord against assassinating leaders?

That was a hypothetical example - probably a bad choice. I'm not suggesting they SHOULD kill the defense minister, but the defense minister IS a part of the military command structure as is a large majority of *ANY* government. Our efforts in Baghdad were focused largely on government command structure. And yes, I think PA is what it is currently called. Also, no, there isn't an international treaty on assasinating heads of state, but there IS an executive (presidential) order (it only covers heads of state). However, since a presidential order is written by any president about anything, it is essentially meaningless to a new president. Bush isn't bound by it and doesn't even have to recind it if he doesn't want to.

hamas is not the terrorist org. QASSAM is the "terrorist" org and they are a part of hammas and that makes a big difference

Hamaas claims responsibility for terrorist acts. If it is meant as a political organization, they shouldn't taking part in these attacks.

israel did that not abaas...

Abaas has made a number of public statements renouncing terrorism and has made efforts to bring the terrorists to the negotiating table. He risks his life for peace and that makes him an honorable man.

before what happened hammas was going to seise fire and there were no any innocencts killing but when israel knew that she tried to make hammas continue terrorism by what it

Before WHAT happened? I think you are confused about the chronology of events these past two weeks. Hamaas REFUSED to enter cease fire talks and refused to stop their terrorism. Then as a joint act, Hamaas and two other terrorist organizations conducted an attack. Both of these were done while Israel was releasing prisoners and dismantling settlements and Abaas was helping set up peace talks. The joint terrorist act was done by the terrorists specifically to sabbotage efforts at peace by both sides.

AFTER Hamaas conducted their attack, Israel retaliated by attacking the a Hamaas leader responsible. Though justified, it was not politically a smart thing to do.

thats not hammas goal it is all palestinians goal they want their land back and that is them right..

I'm glad you admit that. So you would agree with Hamaas that negotiation is pointless and that the only acceptable solution is forceably driving the Israelis from Israel? Guess what: its not going to happen. So you'd be better off negotiating a compromise. The blood of all killed in this conflict is on the hands of those who refuse to compromise: YOU.

I wouldn't be surprised if elements in the Israeli government who oppose this roadmap -- and there are many -- were behind this ill-timed and ill-fated assassination attempt. Just as the radicals in Hamas et al will do their best to hinder it...

damgo, it sounds like the Israeli attack came from Sharon himself. A bad decision - unless of course he is tyring to sabbotage his own peace talks, which is not out of the realm of possibility.

Korea? Vietnam? Cambodia? Laos? After the end of the Cold War, is more like it. But given that those wars were all US invasions of small countries, I think it's "bending over backwards" to prevent civilian casualties is damn well America's responsibility, not something we should get extra points for.

It is certainly the responsibility of America as well as EVERY country to minimize civilian casualties. But the US has gone far beyond that responsibility in putting its own soldiers at risk to protect civilians. And currently only westernized nations are even making an effort. Saddam made a serious effort to MAXIMIZE his own civilian casualties in the war we just fought. You must also understand that TECHNOLOGY plays an important role in what determines what reasonable action to avoid civilian casualties consists of. In Iraq this spring, EVERY bomb dropped on Baghdad was guided. That was simply not an option in Vietnam.

Also, your examples are bad ones: Korea and Vietnam were just like Kuait - the US coming to the defense of a country that was invaded by a greedy neighbor. Cambodia and Laos were part of Vietnam, but they are really a different issue from civilian casualties.

I did want to point out that using America as a comparision might not be helpful to your argument as the civilian casuality during American conflicts hovers around 70% in the last century.

Kat, I realize that, but timeframe is important and comparisons to others are important. During WWII EVERYONE attacked civilians (no, that does not make it right). Today, only SOME countries or groups specifically target civilians.

number 1 being that Hama's is part of the Palestinian government, to the tune of 33% I believe

That may be true, but when they claim responsibility for a terrorist act and the focus of their efforts is terrorism, that makes them a terrorist organization.

One point to think about: In America, you can be convicted of murder if you cause the death of another while showing 'depraved indifference'...

I would certainly agree with that Zero, and as I pointed out, the US takes POSITIVE steps to avoid civilian casualties.

 

[MSI]

Hamaas claims responsibility for terrorist acts. If it is meant as a political organization, they shouldn't taking part in these attacks. Abaas has made a number of public statements renouncing terrorism and has made efforts to bring the terrorists to the negotiating table. He risks his life for peace and that makes him an honorable man.

hamas never renouncing terrorism except israel did something wrong ...
and they did't reannounce terrorism because of what happened to "abd el-3azeez" it was because of the killed citizens ... (there was a mother and her son and a man killed) and in the westbank there was onther three killed persons and "abd al-3azeez" son was seriously injured ...
((do you want to keep negotiat with who kill you ? i don't think soooo... )) that is what palestinians always say ,,,, more than 95% of palestinians doesn't agree with what abaas said in "aqaba" so hamas is just a groub that shows what the palestinians really want ...

Before WHAT happened? I think you are confused about the chronology of events these past two weeks. Hamaas REFUSED to enter cease fire talks and refused to stop their terrorism. Then as a joint act, Hamaas and two other terrorist organizations conducted an attack. Both of these were done while Israel was releasing prisoners and dismantling settlements and Abaas was helping set up peace talks. The joint terrorist act was done by the terrorists specifically to sabbotage efforts at peace by both sides.

yeah before tow days of what happened hammas agreed to talk to abaas to cease fire but when israel knew that it immidiatly tried to destroy that by killing some palestinians ...
israel released presoners...
you make me laugh ... did you hear in the news how much? ,,, let's say 100 prisoners ...
do you know how many does israel got? they got more than 8000 prisoners

i said before that the settlement that israel "dismantle" was just a groub of moving carvans they can easly rebuild it any where...

abaas doesn't represent the palestinians because america choosed him not the palestinians and he do what ever america want ...
but after all hammas agreed to speak with him to cease fire but israel destroyed that ..

AFTER Hamaas conducted their attack, Israel retaliated by attacking the a Hamaas leader responsible. Though justified, it was not politically a smart thing to do. I'm glad you admit that.

you are may be right but when you get your family killed do you will stay and do nothing and continue talking to whom killed them?
if so then you doesn't deserve to live ...
israel killed palestinians that day so the oprations was just a reaction for what israel did

So you would agree with Hamaas that negotiation is pointless and that the only acceptable solution is forceably driving the Israelis from Israel? Guess what: its not going to happen.

if it didn't happen now (and it will not happen now) it will happen after 100 year or more or less ..

palestinians now want a peace that gives them a country and build them self and believe me they will fight israel after that so israel always trying to stop peace and prevent palestinians from making and building their country

 

[drag]

Greetings !

Originally posted by FZ+
Hmm... I wouldn't be so hasty to say that failure to prevent a crime is equivalent to a crime itself. In that case, Sharon certainly deserves to die for failing to stop the violence. Bush is a prime target for failing to stop 9/11. The Israeli civilians are valid targets for failing to prevent various particular cases of murder. The list is endless... It's a wonder why we don't simply blow up Texas for failing to prevent the execution of innocent men. Hell, the whole Earth could have stopped them. Let's just kill everyone, right?

What are you talking about ?!
No offense, but I think you should seek help, man.

Originally posted by MSI
he is a leader of politician group not military group he
is like any other innocent and they wanted to kill him
onther thing ...

Yeah, and Hitler was a ballet dancer...
Do you have any idea of what you're talking about ?

Also, nobody took their land. Some left and some stayed.
If they left then they left (btw, hoping that the
armies of many arab countries outnumbering the newly
formed Israel a hundred to one would kill the jews and
give them everything, tough luck I guess ).

Of course 95% of Palestinians do not agree with Abaas.
Since they were born they were taught to hate. To change
what the Palestinians have become and indeed what all the
Muslim world has become will take a lot of educational effort for many years to come. The Muslim cultures were once amongst
the most advanced in the world until the west emerged as
the main power, for various reasons they just failed to
cope with it. (Don't take my word for it , I recommend the book
"What Went Wrong ?" by Bernard Lewis a proffesor that is
the leading expert on the history of Islam and Muslim nations.)


Maximus, purhaps you failed to notice the word "aimed"
as in "intentional" damage. The definition's quite
precise, really.

Peace and long life.

 

[MSI]

Originally posted by drag

Yeah, and Hitler was a ballet dancer...
Do you have any idea of what you're talking about ?

why when palestinian killed one of israeli minsters in 2001 isrrael occupyed all the west bank and killed a lot of people ...
and hamas did less than what israel did

Also, nobody took their land. Some left and some stayed.
If they left then they left (btw, hoping that the
armies of many arab countries outnumbering the newly
formed Israel a hundred to one would kill the jews and
give them everything, tough luck I guess ).

i think you need to read some history books ,...
didn't you hear abotu the mascars that israel did in palestine ., in kofor qasem "as example" israel killed 172 at the same day in 1947 and destroyed a lot of houses and devorse palestinians to leave it and that what happened in most of the other villiges and cities...

the arab army ... they are all the time [zz)] they are for just protecting the president and the american embasy

in 1967 the iraqi army was able to do a lot of things they freed jenin from israel "it was occupyed in 1948 but iraqis freed it" but after a week of waiting for orders they orderd them to withdraw they were treated ... and that why palestinians like iraqis

Of course 95% of Palestinians do not agree with Abaas.
Since they were born they were taught to hate. To change
what the Palestinians have become and indeed what all the
Muslim world has become will take a lot of educational effort for many years to come. The Muslim cultures were once amongst
the most advanced in the world until the west emerged as
the main power, for various reasons they just failed to
cope with it. (Don't take my word for it , I recommend the book
"What Went Wrong ?" by Bernard Lewis a proffesor that is
the leading expert on the history of Islam and Muslim nations.)

going back to 1995 95% of palestinians wanted peace but what happened in 1996 changed every thing and palestinians started their intifada after 5 years...
in 1996 israel started digging under the dom of the rock .. and that made palestinians so angry
see they were not born and raisd with hating ... what they were seeing made them hate israel
and you are 100% right about the muslims





btw, this is my last post here because i know that this thread will not change any thing and it will end by (**click**) this topic was closed by zero

 

[drag]

Greetings !

Originally posted by MSI
i think you need to read some history books ,...
didn't you hear abotu the mascars that israel did in palestine ., in kofor qasem "as example" israel killed 172 at the same day in 1947 and destroyed a lot of houses and devorse palestinians to leave it and that what happened in most of the other villiges and cities...

Hmm... Indeed ! This SINGLE major event which
happened as a result of a horrible misunderstanding
by the soldiers of the orders given by their supperiors -
to maintain a curfue, not to mention that they
weren't supposed to legaly do it since this is forbbiden
by law in the IDF - an illegal order (and it was a guiding
principle back then, as well), is reflective of what
happened to hundreds of phousands of Palestinians, right...

I don't know how much history you know but I think
you're interpretations of it are a BIT strange...

Originally posted by MSI
the arab army ... they are all the time [zz)] they are for just protecting the president and the american embasy

What are you talking about now (it's really hard to
follow your "reasoning" ) ?

Originally posted by MSI
and that why palestinians like iraqis

Oh... And I thought it was because Saddam gave money
to Palestinian terrorist organizations and to
families of suicide bombers. Silly me...

Originally posted by MSI
in 1996 israel started digging under the dom of the rock ..
and that made palestinians so angry
see they were not born and raised with hating ... what they were seeing made them hate israel

Oh... I see... They were saints before that...
Not to mention - you mean someone except the propoganda
brainwashed Palestinians and Muslim countries' populations
actually fell for that classical Araffat trick to turn
religeous propoganda into violence to add to his "weight"
in the nagotiations with Israel ?!
(btw, that approach never worked so far, but those
fools still keep using it. Won't they ever learn ?! )

Peace and long life.

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by MSI
hamas never renouncing terrorism except israel did something wrong ...
and they did't reannounce terrorism because of what happened to "abd el-3azeez" it was because of the killed citizens ... (there was a mother and her son and a man killed) and in the westbank there was onther three killed persons and "abd al-3azeez" son was seriously injured ...
((do you want to keep negotiat with who kill you ? i don't think soooo... )) that is what palestinians always say ,,,, more than 95% of palestinians doesn't agree with what abaas said in "aqaba" so hamas is just a groub that shows what the palestinians really want ...

Again, you have your timeline wrong. The Israeli chopper attack happened AFTER Hamaas rejected the peace talks and AFTER Hamaas conducted a joint attack with 2 other terrorist organizations. Cause and effet.

palestinians now want a peace that gives them a country and build them self and believe me they will fight israel after that so israel always trying to stop peace and prevent palestinians from making and building their country

Israel *IS* offering a peace that will give them a country - something I must remind you they have never had before - but could have had if they and the rest of the arabs had wanted it.

After WWII, the Palestinians were GIVEN a country and they and the neighboring Arab countries chose war instead. There has never been a country called Palestine. In fact the disputed territories were part of Egypt and Syria. Why didn't either country create a Palestine on that land rather than attack israel?

Of course 95% of Palestinians do not agree with Abaas.
Since they were born they were taught to hate. To change
what the Palestinians have become and indeed what all the
Muslim world has become will take a lot of educational effort for many years to come.

Completely agreed, Drag.

see they were not born and raisd with hating

MSI, have you SEEN the pictures of babies dressed as suicide bombers? How can you say they are NOT raised from birth to be terrorists?

 

[kat]

Originally posted by Zero
Well, that includes Hiroshima, right? And the carpet bombing in Vietnam? What is the US civilian casualty rate during an after-war police action?


And, of course, America has commited enough war crimes, true enough.

Yes, I think Hiroshima did occur in the last century, vietnam as well.. It's difficult to find any reports that cover armed conflicts with the United States in the last say, couple of decades that really cover non-combatant percentages. There is a number floating around with a rise in non-combatant death percentages floating above 90% worldwide. I dn't know US civilian casuality rate for an after war police action, but during peace time U.S. (the last year of the most recent study) showed that a comparision of armed conflicts IN the U.S. resulted in 59 police deaths and 368 civilian deaths.
I'm not sure why you would be interested in U.S. after war casuality rates to compare with Israeli casuality statistics as in order for it to be relevant Israel would have to be in a post conflict state.

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by kat
I'm not sure why you would be interested in U.S. after war casuality rates to compare with Israeli casuality statistics as in order for it to be relevant Israel would have to be in a post conflict state.

What I would be interested in seeing is a graph of civilian vs military casualty ratio over time for different countries. The US ratio has been quickly decreasing since WWII and is asymtotically (sp?) approaching zero today. I would expect that since WWII, the US ratios have been consistently among the lowest in the world. There is a lot of variability though depending on the type of conflict, Ie. Iraq in this war didn't have any American civilians to kill (though they did kill plenty of their own).

 

[kat]

Originally posted by russ_watters

Kat, I realize that, but timeframe is important and comparisons to others are important. During WWII EVERYONE attacked civilians (no, that does not make it right). Today, only SOME countries or groups specifically target civilians.

Russ-I believe it would be difficult to find any army that has less then a 40% noncombatant death rate for armed conflicts and if anyone can come up with dependable numbers that show otherwise I'd be grateful. The IDF goes to great lengths to avoid massive noncombatant deaths, beyond those of the U.S.. And before anyone starts spouting the sanctimonious smelly stuff, that doesn't make them perfect, but they can certainly be compared favorably with other western armed forces.

That may be true, but when they claim responsibility for a terrorist act and the focus of their efforts is terrorism, that makes them a terrorist organization. I would certainly agree with that Zero, and as I pointed out, the US takes POSITIVE steps to avoid civilian casualties.

Actully, when they claim not only responsibility for purposely murdering young children teens and old men and women and also claim that they will not give up their arms, that although they may give into a short term ceasefire..they will never stop fighting until ALL of Palestine (meaning isreal as well) AND hold 33% of the government positions within the PA..That Russ, Habibi, would make the PA government a terrorist organization.

Abbas 1st step as mandated by the road map is to DISARM Hamas and Co., temporary ceasefire is not disarment. So, I wonder if Abbas cannot disarm an entity that has openly and repeatedly declared that it will not quit killing jews until Israel is no longer existant., who will?

 

[Zero]

Let's get back to basics here...when a terrorist is a suicide bomber, how do you retaliate? How can you? HE IS DEAD, REMEMBER?!? How does Israel respond? Rocket attacks, of course, like in any police action. Remember, Israel is occupying Palestinian land, and at best should act as a policing force. Instead, they treat thios land of civilians, woman and children and old people included, in the same manner as they would treat a battlefield. Treating someone's home, their farms, their backyards as nothing but a battlefield, is to disregard human life.

 

[kat]

Originally posted by Zero
Let's get back to basics here...when a terrorist is a suicide bomber, how do you retaliate? How can you? HE IS DEAD, REMEMBER?!? How does Israel respond? Rocket attacks, of course, like in any police action. Remember, Israel is occupying Palestinian land, and at best should act as a policing force. Instead, they treat thios land of civilians, woman and children and old people included, in the same manner as they would treat a battlefield. Treating someone's home, their farms, their backyards as nothing but a battlefield, is to disregard human life.

Your basics have a funny way of glossing over the details and ignoring the israeli reality. But, yes, let's get to the basics. Maybe you can tell me what the acceptable number of Jews going about their day to day business and dying due to being directly targetted and purposely murdered should be before they should go into the territories, and if you don't see it as correct military protocal for the IDF to use the air to directly target the leadership of the organization that quite literally cultivates young men and women for suicide missions, exactly, in as much detail as possible do you see them "policing" the situation?

Considering abu mazen himself has stated that the PA is in no position to fight the terrorists, and given that abu mazen has also stated that he has no intention of fighting the terrorists, and given that rantissi has said that he was going to do everything he can to ruin any chance for the road map to work,indeed that he would not stop until Israel is no longer an entity, what is israel suppose to do? (and now for the sarcasm)
besides handing out tee-shirts with bullseyes and "sacrifice for peace" written on them?

Can you answer these basics?

 

[Zero]

I am not for a moment suggesting that Israel do nothing. Again, though...the guilty party is already dead, so who do you blame? And what is the appropriate response level to punish someone for a crime in which the criminal dies in the act?


You say that israel has the right to target terrorists. I say that bercause terrorists wear no uniform, have little centralized organization, and live among the civilian noncombatant population...I cannot support the concept that a 'targeted' strike can be made with a missile.

 

[kat]

Originally posted by Zero
I am not for a moment suggesting that Israel do nothing.

If you are not suggesting doing nothing, then maybe you will answer my previous questions...

Again, though...the guilty party is already dead, so who do you blame?

There is such a thing as complicity in a crime, particularly in military matters. Inducing young men and women from the early ages of childhood to become suicidal martyrs for Allah, seducing children by promises of glorification if they strap bombs upon themselves, but even more then this DIRECTLY coordinating attacks, training these children to carry out attacks, funding them and arranging for transportation and elaborate plans to enable them to carry out attacks is criminal, the crime is not singular when their is a multitude of participants in an organized manner.

And what is the appropriate response level to punish someone for a crime in which the criminal dies in the act?

This is for the PA to answer as it is their duty to police this area. A duty that as I have previously pointed out they have stated they were not willing, and/or able to carry out.

You say that israel has the right to target terrorists. I say that bercause terrorists wear no uniform, have little centralized organization, and live among the civilian noncombatant population...I cannot support the concept that a 'targeted' strike can be made with a missile.

actually, what I said is this "if you don't see it as correct military protocal for the IDF to use the air to directly target the leadership of the organization that quite literally cultivates young men and women for suicide missions, exactly, in as much detail as possible do you see them "policing" the situation?" A question you repeatedly refuse to answer.

 

[Zero]

I keep answering it in every thread we do this in...you treat the apprehension of criminals as a police matter...and police don't use missiles!

 

[Zero]

If you want more detail..you go into houses to pull out supposed terrorists, you arrest them, you try them publicly, and then you dole out punishment. You do not fire a missle into a building to get a suspected terrorist, especially if his family also lives in the building.

 

[kat]

Originally posted by Zero
I keep answering it in every thread we do this in...you treat the apprehension of criminals as a police matter...and police don't use missiles!

This is not an area that Israel is supposed to be policing, it has been turned over to the Palestinians to police. As I mentioned before, abu mazen has stated that the PA is in no position to fight the terrorists, and abu mazen has also stated that he has no intention of fighting or disarming the terrorists, and if this is not bad enough rantissi has said that he will not stop until every one of the zionists is dead and no longer occupying greater palestine, this of course as I said means Israel.

If you want more detail..you go into houses to pull out supposed terrorists, you arrest them, you try them publicly, and then you dole out punishment. You do not fire a missle into a building to get a suspected terrorist, especially if his family also lives in the building.

Actually, I am looking for even more detail then this. When you use words as "policing" "arresting" I envision a number of police cruisers incircling the criminals house and charging into remove him while the neighbors do not interfere and stand back out of the way watching. I don't see this as a reality in the midst of the HAMAS stronghold in enemy territory. So maybe, if you don't mind a bit more detail and we can end this portion of our debates once and for all.