IDF shoot blindfolded and handcuffed prisoner at close range with a rubber bullet.

[rachamim18]

Spymaster: I cannot of course speak for TP, and surely weould NOT WANT TO, but there was a group during the Intifadeh II who were aligned with the Peacenik group of Reservistts who refused to serve in either Gaza OR the so called "WB." I mentioned them in a current thread where there were about 600 men out of a pool of 2 million...

The pilots were I believe 2 dozen and I do not think any were even active in the IAF. Every army has its shirkers and malcontents and Israel being a citizen's army all the more so. Why should a citizens' army not represent the myriad of different demmographics and outlooks with a society?

Again though, sheer precentages who them for what they are.

Panda: Kitson was not writing about any dynamic having to do with Israel and so called "Palestinians." The entire thesis would be out of place in that situation.

"Ambulances being interdicted at Checkpoints, etc. and causing problems for the patients they are carrying.": I guess YOU missed the expose showing THAT WHO Report to be chock full of wholes. Lot of guessing.


Spy: "Ambulances being used to transport fighters and weaponry hence their being stopped at Checkpoints.": Heck, we get fake and real pregnant women carrying bomb belts strapped around their swollen bellies so ambulances are certainly checked out. NOTHING is scared there. People should merely look to the disfigured burn victim being treated for free at a Be'ersheva Hospital after Gazan MDs almost killed her with thier shoddy medical care.

How did the young lady seek to repay her Israeli caregivers? By smuggling a huge bomb belt in from Gaza with the aim of blowing up those same caregivers along with everyone waiting in the outpatient waiting area!!!

Anyone who wonders why Israelmust search ambulances needs a reality check.

TP: "Missiles striking apartment blocks and not missile factories...": Where do you think factories are located? Do you imagine there is an industrial park with a sign saying "Only Weapons Made Here, Stay Away"? They make AND launch them from civilian residences! International Law allows their neutralisation. When circumstances permit Israel even makes phone calls to residences to wanr non-combatants even knowing that guilty parties will also be able to evacuate but as we saw in Lebanon at least 2 times people decide to stay inside. I remember it also happened in Gaza once with the man surviving and when asked why he did not vacate he replied that he thought it ia crank call.

Sadly the terrorists hide behind civlians.


"TP lived under 'regular terrorism' in Spain.": Sorry
TP but Spain is nothing at all like Israel and the ETA is nothing at all like any of the 27 "PAlestinian' terrorist organisations. The ETA does not concetrate its attacks, it does not use the same tactics, nor the same weaponry. Completely different. Tell me though, when in Spain, would you prefer the Spanish authorities to have done nothing to try to protect you and yours?

As for the comment, "I am not 'Palestinian.' cute. You obviously hope to imply that "Palestinians" are living under daily Israeli terrorism. As if. Since Israel was founded there have been a grand total of 2 cases of terrorism against Arabs by Jews...TWO TIMES IN 60 years, Wish to compare that to the number of Arab attacks against Jews? Both by the way were the work of lone actors, not organisations. 27 Arab groups exist. Hmmm...


"Living under it though should not matter because it does not qualify or disqualify a person from talking about their views.": Absolutely but it would allow for a more clear opnion. See, from the safety of your PC, perusing photos of crying women and children, it can present a much different feeling than say, kissing your baby goodbye each morning on your way to work and seriously not knowing if and when you will ever see them again...EVERY SINGLE DAY. Hearing on the news that a bomb has gone off on the baby's route to daycare...Not being able to ring your missus on her mobile...Ryushing home and seeking a pram blowen to bits and infant clothes stren about...Following me?

THIS IS EVERY DAY FOR ISRAELIS. Everyday we live with the knowledge that our loves can be torn apart because of another's misplaced anger. that they refuse statehood and then tell gullible foreigners that they fight for statehood makes it all the more sickening. That this homeland would be built on one's own ancestral lands is nother sickening point.

Big, big difference from some Basques in the Pyrenees. By the way I am all for the Basques and other valid national movements but abhor ALL terrorism. There is nor eason for it, EVER. To then fault a legal armed force for taking proactive action(s) against it is another horrid thing.

 

[rachamim18]

TP :"What does it have to do with killing civlians?": EVERYTHING. Does the IDF aim for civilians? Does it act negligent as in free and loose with its operations? I offer that the IDF is one of the most conscientous militaries in the world. Hands down we have the highest percentage of operational expereince and yet the amount of collateral damage is what? Do the math.

Furthermore, operating in the world's literally most densely populated spots on the planet ...taking Gaza City just as an example...A population of 1.3 million people in a tiny area and we are not seeing 10s of thousnads of dead are we? To you that seems flippant but you have never seen Gaza City. Just negligence alone would produce horrific body counts.


"Israel is engaging in State Terrorism and War Crimes...": OK, then why has it NEVER been charged? Explain. You attempted to explain it by saying, simply, "USA." However, the USA could only POSSIBLY have bearing at the Security Council. It has nothing at all to do with the Hague. Again, explain why there has never even been a charge.The Security Council does not handle charges or indictments, only Sanctions.

You need to think a bit before answering next. You imagine that aiming for INFRASTRUCTURE equals "aiming for civlians." It does not. They are two very distinct objectives and Israel, to date, has NEVER aimed for a single civilian. S. Lebanon was Hezbollah's (still is) operational center and stronghold.


"Obliterating entire civlian neighbourhoods...":First, Israel did not obliterate entire neighbourhoods. It DID obliterate particular buildings and rightly so although there were natually, as with every armed conflict, errant shells. Secondly, IF a neighbourhood was innunadated with militant positions it can certainly be obliterated . It helps to provide an out for civlians, i.e. warning and in fact Israel did just that in every area it hit. Leaflets, phone calls, and media was used to throughly wanr non-combatants to get out.

S. Lebanon is a great example. The IAF made sorties dropping Arabic leaflets telling people to vacate areas used by Hezbollah,etc. Only after an interim time period were targets hit.

It is completely valid and legal.

Grandma: "When engaging Lebanon great care should be taken to ensure minimal civlian casualties.": Do you feel leaflets were such a sign of care? Phone calls to individual addresses? Media such as radio and TV? ALL were utilised by Israel BEFORE hitting ANY area.

I also ask, what are your feelings about the 5 months of incessant cross border shelling by Hezbollah that terrorised ALL of northern Israel, especially Galilee?

What about blowing up 2 Border Barriers, the first of which is 100 meters into the Israeli side of the border?


Aiming and firing an RPG at an IDF Hummer and killing 5 men, taking 2 back across the border with them? Did Israel have a right to cross into LEbanon in attempt to stop this kidnapping?

The Prime Objective of THAT war was to push Hezbollah missile batteries back at least 15 milometers but if possible back past the Alawi River. Do you find this an unreasonable objective?

To do so Israel had to move through areas innundated with Hezbollah forces. These forces constantly engaged Israeli forces. Was Israel then justified in protecting itself while travelling through those areas?

I realise you obviously have no military background but in any corss border incursion the Job One is to neutralise infrastructure for a couple of extremely important reasons. Infrastructure includes electricity, bridges, hiways, phones, and airports. You do not want a mobile opposition OR a non-combatant population mixing it up with an already difficult to identify opposition.

You also want to control movement so as to push opposition to the theater you choose. You do nto want them laying in wait or going to where they have the upper hand, real or not. All these things combine to produce a certain strategy, and this is why Israel did what it did.

You will notiece that Israel was not charged with anything despite the best efforts and dollars of Arabs and Muslims. Israel was correct in its actions even if people such as yourself are unable to understand it. Please study basic military doctrine.

CIA: You see a soldier aiming at a leg? I sure did not. Not to mentioin all the other things I mentioned which clearly prove the assertion is incorrect.

 

[Grandma Death]

TP :"What does it have to do with killing civlians?": EVERYTHING. Does the IDF aim for civilians? Does it act negligent as in free and loose with its operations? I offer that the IDF is one of the most conscientous militaries in the world. Hands down we have the highest percentage of operational expereince and yet the amount of collateral damage is what? Do the math.

So elaborate then Rach. You are admitting there is collateral damage-what would you say is the greatest single cause of civilian deaths then?

Grandma: "When engaging Lebanon great care should be taken to ensure minimal civlian casualties.": Do you feel leaflets were such a sign of care? Phone calls to individual addresses? Media such as radio and TV? ALL were utilised by Israel BEFORE hitting ANY area.

Usual misquotes aside-do you think its acceptable for any country to obliterate whole towns/neighborhoods as long as they give advance warning? Does that somehow make it acceptable for you? What of the civilians who cannot leave or choose to not leave-I'm guessing they brought it all on themselves then?

 

[frogwoman]

"Living under it though should not matter because it does not qualify or disqualify a person from talking about their views.": Absolutely but it would allow for a more clear opnion. See, from the safety of your PC, perusing photos of crying women and children, it can present a much different feeling than say, kissing your baby goodbye each morning on your way to work and seriously not knowing if and when you will ever see them again...EVERY SINGLE DAY. Hearing on the news that a bomb has gone off on the baby's route to daycare...Not being able to ring your missus on her mobile...Ryushing home and seeking a pram blowen to bits and infant clothes stren about...Following me?

THIS IS EVERY DAY FOR ISRAELIS. Everyday we live with the knowledge that our loves can be torn apart because of another's misplaced anger. that they refuse statehood and then tell gullible foreigners that they fight for statehood makes it all the more sickening. That this homeland would be built on one's own ancestral lands is nother sickening point.

Which makes the IDFs actions even more sickening.

 

[Spymaster]

Despicable.

Even given what Rachamim's just posted about this above?

Would you honestly not search ambulances in that situation? You'd be fucking stupid.

 

[nino_savatte]

Even given what Rachamim's just posted about this above?

Would you honestly not search ambulances in that situation? You'd be fucking stupid.

Nah, you're the one who's being stupid.

 

[Spymaster]

Wow you're lightening today aren't you?

Please go away Nino or at least put me back on ignore. It looks like there could actually be some worthwhile discussion here and that's not your forte is it?

 

[Spymaster]

Which makes the IDFs actions even more sickening.

Which actions are you referring to specifically? Stopping and searching ambulances? Bombing buildings in Hezbollah areas?

Again, how would you combat the threats if not this way?

 

[T & P]

TP: "Missiles striking apartment blocks and not missile factories...": Where do you think factories are located? Do you imagine there is an industrial park with a sign saying "Only Weapons Made Here, Stay Away"? They make AND launch them from civilian residences!

Bollocks.

When circumstances permit Israel even makes phone calls to residences to wanr non-combatants even knowing that guilty parties will also be able to evacuate

Yeah of course they do.

ed under 'regular terrorism' in Spain.": Sorry
TP but Spain is nothing at all like Israel and the ETA is nothing at all like any of the 27 "PAlestinian' terrorist organisations. The ETA does not concetrate its attacks, it does not use the same tactics, nor the same weaponry. Completely different. Tell me though, when in Spain, would you prefer the Spanish authorities to have done nothing to try to protect you and yours?

What I would not have preferred is for the Spanish police to take a leaf of the Israeli book and respond to terrorist attacks with a catalogue of human rights abuses, murders, opression, land appropriation and other atrocities, which of course makes the perpetrator less safe, not more.

Pity the penny hasn't dropped yet on that respect.

As for the comment, "I am not 'Palestinian.' cute. You obviously hope to imply that "Palestinians" are living under daily Israeli terrorism. As if. Since Israel was founded there have been a grand total of 2 cases of terrorism against Arabs by Jews...TWO TIMES IN 60 years, Wish to compare that to the number of Arab attacks against Jews? Both by the way were the work of lone actors, not organisations. 27 Arab groups exist. Hmmm...

Two times? You're having a laugh, right? Oh I forgot... you don't count the murders, killings, collective punishments or beatings as acts of Terrorism because the thugs in question wear army uniforms.

"Living under it though should not matter because it does not qualify or disqualify a person from talking about their views.": Absolutely but it would allow for a more clear opnion. See, from the safety of your PC, perusing photos of crying women and children, it can present a much different feeling than say, kissing your baby goodbye each morning on your way to work and seriously not knowing if and when you will ever see them again...EVERY SINGLE DAY. Hearing on the news that a bomb has gone off on the baby's route to daycare...Not being able to ring your missus on her mobile...Ryushing home and seeking a pram blowen to bits and infant clothes stren about...Following me?

Indeed I am. So why don't try to accept what is causing all that grief so it can be ended, rather than continue doing the very things that are causing such acts in the first place?

THIS IS EVERY DAY FOR ISRAELIS. Everyday we live with the knowledge that our loves can be torn apart because of another's misplaced anger. that they refuse statehood and then tell gullible foreigners that they fight for statehood makes it all the more sickening.

No more sickening that the attempts to 'give' the Palestinians a fragmented series of isolated patches of land and pretend that's good enough. Have you tried demolishing the tumour-like settlements plaguing Palestinian land and offering to return all the land taken in 1967 in return for full and permanent peace? No, you haven't. Not once in the 41 years since you took it. Why should the Palestinians settle for the miserable parody of a 'State' Israel offers?

That this homeland would be built on one's own ancestral lands is nother sickening point.

Yeah well, I'm sure it's tough for modern day Romans that they don't own the rest of Europe any more either. Quasi-religious outdated tenous claims aside...

Big, big difference from some Basques in the Pyrenees. By the way I am all for the Basques and other valid national movements but abhor ALL terrorism. There is nor eason for it, EVER. To then fault a legal armed force for taking proactive action(s) against it is another horrid thing.

Not nearly as horrid as failing to justify the thousands upon thousands of crimes, murders and human rights abuses those forces have carried out. And please do not give me any garbage about not counting because nobody has been convicted. Last I checked Mugabe hasn't been convicted of the thousands of murders and cases of torture he's carried out over the years. Presumably that means he's done nothing wrong at all either, right?

 

[Big Vern]

Fuck me.. i'll bet that hurt!

 

[T & P]

"Israel is engaging in State Terrorism and War Crimes...": OK, then why has it NEVER been charged? Explain. You attempted to explain it by saying, simply, "USA." However, the USA could only POSSIBLY have bearing at the Security Council. It has nothing at all to do with the Hague. Again, explain why there has never even been a charge.The Security Council does not handle charges or indictments, only Sanctions.

Er... for the same reason countless brutal regimes and their leaders haven't been charged with anything over the years. As I said above, presumably Mugabe hasn't done any wrong ever, has he? Pinochet did not really have women raped by specially raped dogs, since he was not convicted of anything, right?

 

[Spymaster]

Bollocks.

Are you saying T&P that you do not believe that ordnance is prepared and fired at Israel from civilian properties?

Where DO you think the Palestinian terrorists operate from, barracks?

Yeah of course they do.

You don't believe this either?

It's a well documented tactic. Hamas condemn the calls as "terror calls" but then they would wouldn't they?

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1153292011238&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

* waits for someone to moan about the source

 

[Grandma Death]

Looks like the rubber bullet soldier in question has failed a polygraph test twice and has been sent home from duty.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7531109.stm

If that's not enough for the thomas doubters amongst us a 12 year old got popped in the head by an IDF soldier a few days ago:

Palestinian officials say 12-year-old Ahmed Musa was killed by a live bullet fired by an Israeli border policeman.

Ahmed Moussa died during a protest against Israel's barrier in the occupied West Bank.

Regional Governor Said Abu Ali said an autopsy showed Ahmed Moussa had been struck by a single bullet from an M16 assault rifle which entered his forehead and exited the back of his head.

Israeli police spokesman Micky Rosenfled said Palestinian protesters had been throwing stones and "the unfortunate incident that led to the death" of Ahmed Moussa was being investigated.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7533858.stm



Throwing stones.....always a crime worthy of a bullet in the head eh

 

[Spymaster]

Throwing stones.....always a crime worthy of a bullet in the head eh

Or in the toe, but I take your point. As I said it certainly looks indefensible.

What about that ambulance thing Granny, in light of Rach's last posts don't you think the IDF have to stop them?

How would you target terrorists in densely populated ares?

 

[T & P]

Are you saying T&P that you do not believe that ordnance is prepared and fired at Israel from civilian properties?

Where DO you think the Palestinian terrorists operate from, barracks?

Rockets do not get shot from inside blocks of flats any more than F16 fighter jets do. Think about it ffs!

At the most an RPG might ocassionally be fired from a block of flats, just like assault rifle fire might. The rockets that travel up to several miles to land on Israeli cities are not fired from ordinary blocks of flats.

You don't believe this either?

It's a well documented tactic.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1153292011238&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

* waits for someone to moan about the source

Oh, it might have happened on ocassion. And for every one of those ocassions there are, as an educated guess, 100 more times when the IDF has just fired a hellfire missile to a block of flats "because a Hamas militant lives there", and to hell with the tens of innocent residents killed as a result.

Not to mention the many times the IDF has opened fire on congregations of protesters on the street because 'terrorists' might have been 'hiding' amongst them- even though at the time of the attack nobody was attacking anyone.

Who are we trying to kid anyway? I suspect even R18 knows deep down very well that the IDF regularly engages in revenge killings. The whole vague excuse about "but rockets were being built (or even fired- LOL!) there" is as pathetic as is unproven anyway. Given the IDF's rather curious spin on events, I find it rather curious how their apologists are so willing to take any claim made by it as final proof that they were justified and right in their bombing of a block of flats or shooting of teenage protesters.

Quite pathetic, really.

 

[Spymaster]

Rockets do not get shot from inside blocks of flats any more than F16 fighter jets do. Think about it ffs!

Maybe not from windows of the apartments themselves but they're certainly launched from residential areas. Where do you think they're fired from, missile cruisers in the Med'?

At the most an RPG might ocassionally be fired from a block of flats, just like assault rifle fire might.

But that's wrong isn't it?

Anyone shooting RPG's or bullets from blocks of flats is endangering the safety of the civilians within those flats, since an armed response is likely.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Please quote it here VP. There are one or two posters that I genuinely "can't be arsed" with, but you are not one of them, so I'd happily clear up any perceived shortcomings from previous threads here.

Post number 154 on the "Racist jamboree..." thread.

Does it? Nice line. Means nothing unless you care to explain it's significance in this context.

There's this little thing called the "chain of command" which allows those in authority to have a "cut-off" from the actions of those "on the ground".
An example of this could be drawn from the fact that while the British army brass and the MOD claimed there was no "shoot to kill" policy in NI (and indeed there was no written policy document), it was well understood by the troops that one had to act within the rules of engagement, and that to (putatively) preserve the lives of your comrades you shot to kill. So you have an implicit "shoot to kill policy" rather than an explicit one, your "shoot to kill" policy is plausibly deniable because it is "understood" rather than written, implicit rather than explicit.

With respect VP, this is just waffly shit. "Arbitray targetting" would mean that ambulances were targetted randomly, yes. But also as a matter of course.

"Random" and "matter of course" are hardly synonymous, are they?

If that were the case, and the IDF were the monsters that you believe...

I don't believe that the IDF are monstrous. I've never voiced or held that opinion. Please don't project your imaginings onto me.
I believe that some of the orders the IDF are required to follow are monstrous, in much the same way that some of the orders the British army were required to follow were/are monstrous.

...that "random" pattern and the soldiers knowledge that they could attack them as such, would account for many more of the vehicles than have actually been hit.

That assumption is predicated on the soldiers being ignorant, stupid and murderous. Thankfully most of them aren't any of the above.

That's a no brainer.

Or do you believe that every now and then an IDF soldier gets bored and shoots up the next ambulance that appears ?

You need to get over your habit of making assumptions.

Again. If ambulances are known to be a favoured method of transporting weapons (and they are) they should be stopped at checkpoints. Medical problems that occur as a result are the fault of the terrorists who militarise the vehicles, not those that stop them, FFS!

The problem with such an assumption is that you can base it on a rather small sample and then extrapolate forward, i.e. a donkey was used to carry small-arms ammunition from point a to point b, so let's search all donkeys. Where does rational behaviour end and stupidity and persecution take over? I'm fucked if I know.

I'll give it a go. Thank you.


ETA> Can't find the book for less than £22 on Abe

Must be a run on it. I replaced my hardback last year off abe for £3 plus postage.
ETA: Ah, could be because he's recently published a book about Cromwell.

 

[ViolentPanda]

looks like the soldier is aiming right at the prisoners leg with a scoped rifle, i didnt know they made baton rounds for rifles? its a pretty blatant shot!

They don't, but some models of M16 (mostly A2 IIRC) that use the M203 under-barrel grenade launcher can be used to fire smoke, tear-gas and 40mm baton rounds as well as shrap and HE grenades.

 

[Spymaster]

Post number 154 on the "Racist jamboree..." thread.

That was more not wanting to start a game of "link, source, link .....". I'm happy to discuss these pov's with you.

There's this little thing called the "chain of command" which allows those in authority to have a "cut-off" from the actions of those "on the ground".
An example of this could be drawn from the fact that while the British army brass and the MOD claimed there was no "shoot to kill" policy in NI (and indeed there was no written policy document), it was well understood by the troops that one had to act within the rules of engagement, and that to (putatively) preserve the lives of your comrades you shot to kill. So you have an implicit "shoot to kill policy" rather than an explicit one, your "shoot to kill" policy is plausibly deniable because it is "understood" rather than written, implicit rather than explicit.

Ok, this is a response to my assertion that ambulances are not targetted "Arbitrarily". I'm not a soldier. The only ex-soldiers that I'm aware of posting on this thread are yourself and Rachamim. I'll be interested to see his response to this but my position remains that the very few ambulances that have actually been engaged (as opposed to searched) have probably been so for legitimate reasons. Otherwise the action would be criminal.

"Random" and "matter of course" are hardly synonymous, are they?

No. I'd not have used both terms if they were. I think that something "arbitrary" in nature would include charecteristics of both.

I don't believe that the IDF are monstrous. I've never voiced or held that opinion. Please don't project your imaginings onto me.

Quite so. Sometimes it's difficult to seperate the poster from the forum. My apologies.

That assumption is predicated on the soldiers being ignorant, stupid and murderous. Thankfully most of them aren't any of the above.

Good point.

You need to get over your habit of making assumptions.

It was a question.

The problem with such an assumption is that you can base it on a rather small sample and then extrapolate forward, i.e. a donkey was used to carry small-arms ammunition from point a to point b, so let's search all donkeys. Where does rational behaviour end and stupidity and persecution take over? I'm fucked if I know.

If I thought that there was one ambulance in London that contained weapons earmarked to be used to kill my family. Given the ability to do so, I'd search every ambulance every day.

 

[ViolentPanda]

If I thought that there was one ambulance in London that contained weapons earmarked to be used to kill my family. Given the ability to do so, I'd search every ambulance every day.

At what cost?
That, after all, is the crux of the matter. How many people are you prepared to inconvenience/cause injury to/kill through action or inaction to preserve your family? When does your behaviour morph from a sensible preventive tactic to a pathological reaction to an over-estimated threat?

 

[Spymaster]

At what cost?
That, after all, is the crux of the matter. How many people are you prepared to inconvenience/cause injury to/kill through action or inaction to preserve your family?

As many as it takes to minimise/remove the threat would be my answer. But to put the question into context you should ask it of someone who lives under the threat of terrorist attack 24/7/365.

When does your behaviour morph from a sensible preventive tactic to a pathological reaction to an over-estimated threat

When the threat no longer exists?

Searching ambulances is dangerous for the troops involved, inconvenient/dangerous for the patient (if there is one) and causes widespread resentment and condemnation. Now whilst many here would suggest it's a price the IDF are prepared to pay simply to subjugate the Palestinians, I don't believe that.

The IDF are doing what any sensible person would do in the same circumstances.

This isn't a minor problem.

http://jasonjeffrey.wordpress.com/2...hamas-smuggle-fighters-and-weapons-into-gaza/

http://www.standwithus.com/pdfs/flyers/UNAmbulance.pdf

Again a poor source but can one really deny that this goes on, probably routinely?

 

[T & P]

Maybe not from windows of the apartments themselves but they're certainly launched from residential areas. Where do you think they're fired from, missile cruisers in the Med'?

So you are saying that if a rocket is believed to have been launched from a certain residential area, the IDF is quite within its right to destroy a block of flats, whether randomely or on purpose, as a suitable response?

But that's wrong isn't it?

Anyone shooting RPG's or bullets from blocks of flats is endangering the safety of the civilians within those flats, since an armed response is likely.

Sure. And it was me who mentioned RPGs or bullets, as a concession in fact. However we were talking, or R18 certainly was, about rockets. No rocket has ever been launched from a block of flats in Gaza. And indeed no rocket was ever launched from any block of flats in Beirut during the 2006 conflict. Yet Israel has been quite happily bombing residential blocks in both places and the WB.

That goes to prove beyond any doubt that:

a) Israel does specifically target civilians

b) it does so for revenge, intimidations or tic-for-tac reasons only, as there are no military or security issues related to the destruction of those targets and no relation to the threat posed by the rockets themselves


This should be clear to all. But incredibly R18 still pretends that Israel does not target civilians, that the destruction (as one example) of an entire civilian neighbourhood in Beirut was actually justified in any way, or that Israel does not break international law and conventions on human rights or the targeting of civilians. I have just been pointing this out to him.

For the record there are nasty cunts on both sides and any targeting of civilians is abhorrent. But it does get very tiring when one side is classed as terrorists and treated as such, while the other gets the full corteous diplomatic treatment by the international community without as much as a murmur of protest.

 

[nino_savatte]

Wow you're lightening today aren't you?

Please go away Nino or at least put me back on ignore. It looks like there could actually be some worthwhile discussion here and that's not your forte is it?

I like it, you make out like it's me who's hassling you when it's the other way around. Well done, school bully.

 

[editor]

I like it, you make out like it's me who's hassling you when it's the other way around. Well done, school bully.

Stop it please.

 

[nino_savatte]

Stop it please.

Please see my pm.

 

[Spymaster]

So you are saying that if a rocket is believed to have been launched from a certain residential area, the IDF is quite within its right to destroy a block of flats, whether randomely or on purpose, as a suitable response?

Not quite.

I'm saying that if rockets are being fired from a certain residential area, the IDF is quite within it's rights to target the threat. Any civilian casualties that occur as a result are the responsibility of the rocket shooters. Not the IDF.

 

[Spymaster]

Please see my pm.

Go away.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

nino, Spymaster: kindly from now on do not reply to, tangentially refer to or do anything whatsoever regarding the other person involved.

 

[T & P]

Not quite.

I'm saying that if rockets are being fired from a certain residential area, the IDF is quite within it's rights to target the threat. Any civilian casualties that occur as a result are the responsibility of the rocket shooters. Not the IDF.

I think just about everyone from the UN to various conventions would say otherwise.

But by the same reasoning, presumably there is nothing wrong with Hamas sending a suicide bomber into a mall or supermarket in the general vicinity of an army barracks for instance, or an air base. Right? Who knows, they might get a few of the soldiers/pilots as they do some shopping.

At least I presume you do agree the destruction of an entire neighbourhood in Beirut was completely wrong and unjustified? And that it amounted to the targeting of civilians for retaliation purposes?

 

[Spymaster]

But by the same reasoning, presumably there is nothing wrong with Hamas sending a suicide bomber into a mall or supermarket in the general vicinity of an army barracks for instance, or an air base. Right? Who knows, they might get a few of the soldiers/pilots as they do some shopping.

Well if one were to assume that such an attack could have any legitimacy at all, the equivalent would be the suicide bomber targetting an army barracks and catching some civilians. So the analogy doesn't really work but you're right in that the target of palestinian terrorists is far more likely to be the analogous "supermarket".

At least I presume you do agree the destruction of an entire neighbourhood in Beirut was completely wrong and unjustified? And that it amounted to the targeting of civilians for retaliation purposes

Well I haven't looked at it in any depth but am happy to hear your views and form an opinion.