Yeah, I do agree that Hamas is guilty of inflating civilian casualties in order to demonise Israel, where did I suggest anything even remotely otherwise?
Great we agree!
Quote:
The point is, Hamas and IDF are both completely unreliable if you're looking for accurate totals concerning civilian deaths. Hamas is going to over-report, IDF is going to under report. The real number will be somewhere in the middle, likely reported by an organisation that is not Gaza or Israel based.
Actually according to the article the IDF was pretty much bang on with their statistics and that was verified by a neutral third party and then by Hamas itself.
Equating Hamas actions to the IDF, even in statistics and reporting, is clearly incorrect.
Of course they do. If that wasn't painfully obvious from this war I'm not sure how much clearer Israel could make it. Israel was even condemned by their number one allie in the United States. I have no question in my mind they targeted civilians to put pressure on Hamas. Israel is a disgrace to democracy.
If that's the case why doesn't Israel just carpet bomb all of Gaza? Seems awfully strange to waste all those resources warning citizens about attacks just for theatre. Why not just proclaim that you want to wipe all the Palestinians off the map, like Hamas says about Israel?
AltaGuy has a magnetic personality and exudes positive energy, which is infectious to those around him. He has an unparalleled ability to communicate with people, whether he is speaking to a room of three or an arena of 30,000.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: At le pub...
Exp:
Well, it seems like another Gazan massacre has come to an end. Israel destroyed some tunnels, punished a disobedient captive population, and boosted Hamas' fading fortunes considerably.
Meanwhile, Abbas sits in the West Bank looking exactly like the lame duck he is, having played zero meaningful role while Hamas stole the show. Israel can now once again enjoy several years of peaceful settlement building while cynically proclaiming there is no partner for peace, having made the PA irrelevant and restoring Hamas' support. What a success!
Well, it seems like another Gazan massacre has come to an end. Israel destroyed some tunnels, punished a disobedient captive population, and boosted Hamas' fading fortunes considerably.
Meanwhile, Abbas sits in the West Bank looking exactly like the lame duck he is, having played zero meaningful role while Hamas stole the show. Israel can now once again enjoy several years of peaceful settlement building while cynically proclaiming there is no partner for peace, having made the PA irrelevant and restoring Hamas' support. What a success!
Well, it seems like another Gazan massacre has come to an end. Israel destroyed some tunnels, punished a disobedient captive population, and boosted Hamas' fading fortunes considerably.
Meanwhile, Abbas sits in the West Bank looking exactly like the lame duck he is, having played zero meaningful role while Hamas stole the show. Israel can now once again enjoy several years of peaceful settlement building while cynically proclaiming there is no partner for peace, having made the PA irrelevant and restoring Hamas' support. What a success!
Boy did they ever! They literally killed it out there.
AltaGuy has a magnetic personality and exudes positive energy, which is infectious to those around him. He has an unparalleled ability to communicate with people, whether he is speaking to a room of three or an arena of 30,000.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: At le pub...
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zevo
Boy did they ever! They literally killed it out there.
Amazing that their support among Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank increased, isn't it? And that Hamas has a more prominent role than the PA in the current talks in Cairo.
I detest Hamas; and I detest that Israel has figured out just what role it would like Hamas to play.
If that's the case why doesn't Israel just carpet bomb all of Gaza? Seems awfully strange to waste all those resources warning citizens about attacks just for theatre. Why not just proclaim that you want to wipe all the Palestinians off the map, like Hamas says about Israel?
:-(
Quote:
He says that the supply of electricity and water to the Gaza would be disconnected before being 'shelled with maximum fire power.'
Source. Hopefully this is not true. Seems both sides now have "legitimate" government voices calling for the eradication of the other.
France24 has more videos of rocket launch pads built right into civilians back yards. At this point I'm not really sure these these are active Hamas supporters, or just civilians who had portable sites built into their backyard by Hamas against their will. Either way, these civilians will just end up being cannon fodder when Israel attacks.
Geneva convention rules governing civilian sites converted to military use as hosted by the International Red Cross:
Quote:
“Where a civilian object is used for military purposes, it loses its protection as a civilian object and may become a legitimate target.”
The manual further states: “Civilian vessels, aircraft, vehicles and buildings are military objectives if they contain combatants, military equipment or supplies
If that's the case why doesn't Israel just carpet bomb all of Gaza? Seems awfully strange to waste all those resources warning citizens about attacks just for theatre. Why not just proclaim that you want to wipe all the Palestinians off the map, like Hamas says about Israel?
Um because that's not how war works? This ridiculous argument doesn't even deserve a reply. Why doesn't the U.S just nuke all of Russia?
France24 has more videos of rocket launch pads built right into civilians back yards. At this point I'm not really sure these these are active Hamas supporters, or just civilians who had portable sites built into their backyard by Hamas against their will. Either way, these civilians will just end up being cannon fodder when Israel attacks.
ICRC
In an appeal issued in October 1973, the ICRC urged all the belligerents in the conflict in the Middle East (Egypt, Iraq, Israel and the Syrian Arab Republic) to observe forthwith, in particular, the provisions of, inter alia, Article 47(2) of the draft Additional Protocol I, which stated that “objects designed for civilian use, such as houses, dwellings, installations and means of transport, and all objects which are not military objectives, shall not be made the object of attack, except if they are used mainly in support of the military effort”. All governments concerned replied favourably.
Quote:
Institute of International Law
In a resolution adopted during its Edinburgh Session in 1969, the Institute of International Law stated:
Existing international law prohibits all armed attacks … on non-military objects, notably dwellings or other buildings sheltering the civilian population, so long as these are not used for military purposes to such an extent as to justify action against them under the rules regarding military objectives.
Quote:
Amnesty International
In 2001, in a report on Israel and the occupied territories, Amnesty International stated that civilian objects “may be attacked while they are being used for firing upon Israeli forces. But they revert to their status as civilian objects as soon as they are no longer being used for launching attacks.”
Which is where the issue comes in. Israel has fired on centers without confirmed weapons, centers not serving a military role primarily, and centers which were not being used to launch attacks.
It also doesn't address laws that state if you are aware of a high number of civilians casualties, you are to avoid them.
Regardless, Israel walked themselves into a public relations nightmare thanks to the human rights violations stemming from the latest offensive, and once again seems to have accomplished very little in terms of dealing with terrorism in Gaza. Worth it?
Um because that's not how war works? This ridiculous argument doesn't even deserve a reply. Why doesn't the U.S just nuke all of Russia?
A) Depends on the objectives of the war, war in itself isn't definable as one set thing?
B) I don't remember America and Russia ever officially being in a declared state of war, but NATO Doctrine in the 70's to early 80's was for America to use tactical battlefield nuclear weapons against the Russians because of the disparate military numbers, so the short answer is that chances are if there had been a shooting war between the Russians and American's at the height of the cold war that nuclear weapons release would have probably been a pretty sure thing.
Sent. I asked what you wanted to know and you wanted me to tell you every single story. It is clear you are baiting me and trolling so I will no longer reply to you. If you want to ask a specific question about the subject you initially replied to then go for it, but you are just trolling and baiting now. Cheers.
