Israel PM: State Protection for War Crimes in Gaza

[Vals509]

if you expect israel to surrender its soldier well its most likely not to do so. as far as the whole world knows they are very firm on their stance in terrorism and will not comply to others. so what i intend to say is that there is no way in our dreams that israel will convict him unless he has something unbelievable or other countries have put enough pressure on them (very unlikely)

 

[Hans de Vries]

During eight years* of artillery bombardment of southern Israeli towns, all the Israelis killed were civilians. (that's why Israel applied economic sanctions and finally took the recent military action)

Around 30 people were killed during these eight years, an average
of 3.75 per year

The rocket shooting was intolerable for the people of the south. But let me remind you: In five out of the eight years, we were the occupiers of Gaza. So in eight years a couple of thousands of rockets, around 30 people were killed and many were traumatized. And you therefore kill a thousand and demolish a region? Where are the proportions?

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,609428,00.html

Such a disproportionality is seen as an extreme form of racism where,
because of maternal DNA, the life of one human being is worth much
more as another.

Israel's proposal to release hundreds of captured Palestinians for a single
abducted Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, is also seen as expression of this form
of racism. (In this case working in the advantage of the Palestinians)

Telling Hillary Clinton that refusing and obstructing humanitarian aid to
hundreds of thousands of Palestinians is necessary because of one man,
abducted Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, is yet again an example of this
bizarre form of racism.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1066821.html

Specially because this assault on Gaza is seen by many as a revenge
for the abduction of Gilad Shalit, just like the war with Hezbollah
was being justified by the abduction of a few Israeli soldiers.

There are many (peaceful) ways in which one can (and should)
express solidarity with the individual Gilad Shalit, but solidarity
should never be an excuse for racism and violence.

Maybe you desperately want Israel to be a civilized nation and you
put up an effort to portray it as such. Well, for me it's people like
Avraham Burg interviewed above who are more encouraging in this
respect. Regards, Hans.

 

[jostpuur]

There's no disagreement that Amnesty International accuses Israel for targeting civilians and committing war crime …

what makes you think there is??

where in this or any other thread do you claim anyone has said Amnesty International doesn't accuse Israel of that?

You criticized Art's post about Amnesty's accusations as misinformative. That gets close to denying the Amnesty's accusations.

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 …

...

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

 

[tiny-tim]

You criticized Art's post about Amnesty's accusations as misinformative. That gets close to denying the Amnesty's accusations.

uhh? I kept repeating Amnesty International's accusations …

in this six-page thread you've been selectively quoting from Amnesty International, and selectively accusing Israel of murder but not Hamas …

I repeat … throughout this thread (until your post #89, after my criticism) you have selectively specified Israel as war criminals and murderers (not just alleged murderers), …

I not only didn't deny that Amnesty International made those allegations, I repeated them

You said …

… in particular Amnesty accuses Israel for targeting civilians and committing war crime. There should not be disagreement about this simple logical fact.

There isn't.

I repeat … what makes you think there is??

where in this or any other thread do you claim anyone has said Amnesty International doesn't accuse Israel of that?

 

[Office_Shredder]

Israel's proposal to release hundreds of captured Palestinians for a single
abducted Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, is also seen as expression of this form
of racism. (In this case working in the advantage of the Palestinians)

Racism... by Israel? Hamas asks for hundreds of prisoners to be released, and if Israel complies it's because they're racist... do you see the flaw there?

 

[drizzle]

http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/crisisingaza/2009/02/20092209730904880.html"

Testimony from eyewitnesses, friends, neighbours and human rights experts about the incident tell the story of how a woman carrying a baby and white flag was shot in broad daylight by an Israeli soldier.

It’s way complicated, I just wish you all to read and understand both views before judging, to those who have no idea this conflict has such a long history, you need to do a lot of reading. by the way Evo, thanks for deleting my posts

 

[seycyrus]

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.

Whose fault is it that what has previously been regarded as a non-threat must now be reevaluated? It's a simple answer folks. This determination of threat level is often times made under the extreme circumstances of war.

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.

It is much more likely and probably that the thousand of rockets, barrage after barrage, fired into the Israeli cities *are* a deliberate attempt to intentionally kill innocent civilians. Name the legitimate military target.

That Amnsesty International does not publicly and loudly decry EVERY SINGLE rocket directed towards Israel is proof of their bias. Their conclusions and reports must be taken with a grain of salt.

Hamas (and Hezbollah) have a history of making false claims and blatantly exagerating the facts in effort to sway public opinion. The fact that AI and other groups are eager to gobble up these facets of misinformation is a disgrace.

 

[seycyrus]

In the past Israel has released 100s of prisoners for the remains of their dead soldiers. The implication being that even a dead Israeli is worth hundreds of live Arabs.

By your logic, since the *Arabs* agreed to such a swap, and the swap took place, the *Arabs* must believe that as well!

No! The implication is that the Israelis are willing to negotiate and pacify.

Specific to prisoners; Hamas have 1 Israeli captive whilst Israel holds thousands of Palestinians. The taking of 2 prisoners by Hezbollah in Lebanon was used as justification by Israel for bombarding Lebanon killing 1000+ civilians whilst the taking of 1 prisoner by Hamas is currently being used by Israel as an excuse for continuing the blockade of Gaza..

The taking of prisoners is an indication that Hezbollah was at war with Israel. The taking of prisoners is an indication of intent. Israel responds to the intent.

If the Palestinians worked to Israel's scale of retaliation what do you believe would be a proportionate response to Israel's taking of 10,000 prisoners?

Get back to me when Hamas stops sending suicide bombers and rockets towards Israel.

You want to be treated as civilized, then act civilized. <- this is in reference to Hamas.

 

[rootX]

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

Really

 

[jreelawg]

During eight years* of artillery bombardment of southern Israeli towns, all the Israelis killed were civilians.

(that's why Israel applied economic sanctions and finally took the recent military action)

How do you make that 3/13?

I was obviously talking about the recent conflict. If you want to go back in time then I suppose Palastinian deaths would be a different number as well. Why are you selective in pointing out that 3/13 isn't the grand total over an eight year period. Why do you choose eight years?

It would be interesting to see the grand total number of people killed on each side going all the way back, but that would require more research than I have time for, and I have a feeling that it isn't going to make Israeli look like a night in shining armor.

 

[kyleb]

To claim that Israeli soldiers know that their targets are innocent and intentionally kill them is a ridiculous assertion.

Deluding one's self with rhetorical arguments to ignore the reports of international observers and investigators is absurd.

The taking of prisoners is an indication of intent. Israel responds to the intent.

And what intent would you suggest is indicated by keeping millions of people under martial law while colonizing their homeland out from under them and taking prisoner if not killing off anyone who gets in their way over the course of decades?

 

[mjsd]

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.

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.
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...)...
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?

Well, who should be the judge for that? 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)?

 

[mgb_phys]

And what intent would you suggest is indicated by keeping millions of people under martial law while colonizing their homeland out from under them and taking prisoner if not killing off anyone who gets in their way over the course of decades?

The American way?

Can't the palestinians just have casinos?

 

[rootX]

This (these) thread(s) is/are going nowhere but ..

 

[Art]

During eight years* of artillery bombardment of southern Israeli towns, all the Israelis killed were civilians.

(that's why Israel applied economic sanctions and finally took the recent military action)

Do you just sit there and make this stuff up off the top of your head??

Between 29.9.2000 and 26.12.2008

Palestinians killed by Israeli security forces - Gaza 3000 West Bank 1792 Israel 69
Tot = 4,861

Palestinians killed by Israeli civilians - Gaza 4 West Bank 41 Israel 2
Tot = 47

Israeli civilians killed by Palestinians Gaza 39 West Bank 198 Israel 490
Tot = 727

Israeli security force personnel killed by Palestinians Gaza 97 West Bank 148 Israel 90
Tot = 335

and a subset of the above

Palestinian minors killed by Israeli security forces - Gaza 635 West Bank 317 Israel 3
Tot = 995

Israeli minors killed by Palestinians - Gaza 4 West Bank 35 Israel 84
Tot = 123

Source http://www.btselem.org/english/Statistics/Casualties.asp

And so this idea some are trying to promote that Israel sat there and took a pounding from Hamas rockets for years before finally responding is seen to be a total myth.

Even before the recent bombardment of the Gaza Strip nearly as many Palestinian children alone have been killed as the total amount of Israeli casualties, including all civilians and military.

Much is made of the indiscriminate nature of the Palestinian's attacks on Israel and yet extraordinarily out of a total kill score of 4,861 the number of innocent civilians Israel admits killing is 2,222 with a further 828 they are not sure about. And bear in mind protesters killed for throwing stones are counted as militants whilst heavily armed militant Israeli 'settlers' are counted as civilians. (see videos of settler attacks on Palestinians here http://www.btselem.org/English/Video/CDP_Index.asp )

As noted in the data table referenced, Palestinian fatality figures do not include those who died due to medical conditions as a result of the restriction of movement imposed on the Palestinians in incidents such as these

Ahmad Ramadan Muhammad Wakhman

Under 1 year-old resident of Nablus, died on 12.11.2006 , Nablus district, following a delay in receiving medical care. Additional information: Week-old infant on his way to hospital in Nablus for treatment. The driver of the car was beaten by soldiers at the checkpoint when he went over to them to explain the infant's grave medical condition.

Na'el 'Abd a-Rahman Khamis al-Kurdi

21 year-old resident of Gaza city, died on 17.11.2007 in Gaza city, following a delay in receiving medical care. Additional information: a cancer patient, Israel refused to let him leave the Gaza Strip to obtain medical treatment

http://www.btselem.org/english/statistics/casualties_data.asp?Category=21&region=TER

 

[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.