- Joined
- Oct 17, 2007
- Messages
- 11,862
- Reaction score
- 10,300
- Location
- New York
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
In a case that highlights the need for maintaining a maritime blockade so as to reduce the flow of weapons into the Gaza Strip, terrorists from that area fired shells containing phosphorous into Israel. The Jerusalem Post reported:
At least 2 of the 9 mortar shells fired during the day contained phosphorus, police confirm; regional council head intends to inform UN of Geneva Convention violation...
Israel Police said it was not the first time that phosphorous shells had been fired at Israel from Gaza.
Yet another warcrime out of Hamas that will be ignored by the international community, which will also be completely ignored by the anti-Israel crowd in claiming each and every step Israel takes to defend itself is "illegal".
nope. What Israel did was fire phasphorous artillery shells desgiend to illuminate an area. That they had done so in breach of procedure too close to populated areas was recognized as an error and corrected.
What Hamas has done, yet again, was used illegal weapns (a war crime) to indicriminately target Israeli civilians (also a war crime), as another attack in its continual war to destroy Israel by "liberating historic Palestine (which is actually genocide, if you read the convention).
But like I said, nothing done against Israel matters. The issue is always what Israel does to defend itself and how drastically and totally evil that is, and never about the continuous assault against Israeli civilians by the Palestinians.
We get it.
:shock:
LOL okay, no double standard there none at all..:doh
Sorry, you want to explain that to me.
The key issue here is intent. What was the purpose of launching incendiaries that explode in the air to illuminate a battlefield in which soldiers are fighting house to hosue and door to door? What was the purpose of lobbing mortar shells into agricultural areas to explode on the fields where civilians work?
You don't want to think about that a teency bit, do you?
But again, I get it. Clear war crimes by Hamas are met not even with blank indifference, but with open and full propaganda support from the anti-Israel crowd.
You want to pretend to care about the Palestinians, go ahead. Think about wehat happens to the Palestinians in gaza if one of these things finds its way into an Israeli school (which are often the targets of these attacks).
Then maybe think it might be in the people you pretend to care about's interest that this not happen.
How can it be a war crime if it was not a war crime when Israel did it during the Gaza attack? Or are there now two standards on what is a "war crime"?
:shock:
LOL okay, no double standard there none at all..:doh
Israel was at war at the time and Israel was not targeting civilians. Hamas WAS targeting civilians. You sir ... should be ashamed of yourself.
No, there is not one. Israel wasn't targeting civilians ... Hamas was. I am sorry you are incapable of understanding this.
How do you know that the rocket firer wasn't targetting a military installation or an industrial area that supports the military?
You don't even know that Hamas was firing the rockets.
Under international law it is the right of an occupied people to resist the occupation. Hamas having renounced suicide bombs in 2006 coinciding with their entry into politics, opted for the largely symbolic and fairly pathetic form of resistance that is rocket fire.
So I'm genuinly wondering how they are supposed to resist occupation? How would the people on these boards resist the occupation? Throw spoons, maybe? Pray for snow and lob some snow-balls?
It almost feels like people want Hamas to revert back to suicide bombings...
Under international law it is the right of an occupied people to resist the occupation...
I have to add my voice to the people who find condemnation of this act somewhat hypocritical.
As has been pointed out, the IDF fired white phosphorous shells into populated areas in clear violation of international law and this has been acknowledged by the United Nations and, to my knowledge, not denied by the IDF.
The only problem with that line of argument is that Israel used the shells for the specific and lawful purpose of illuminating an area. It did not use the shells as weapons of combat. The former practice is legal under the Laws of War. The latter is not. The shells fired from the Gaza Strip were used for the latter purpose. Even if no phosphorous were involved, the shells were fired in an indiscriminate fashion and indiscriminate bombardment is also prohibited under the Laws of War.
The Goldstone Report blows your first sentence out of the water.
The attacks came from Gaza; therefore, Hamas is responsible. Also .. the areas targeted had no military infrastructure in them. It was a cowardly ape attack on unarmed civilians.
The use of white phosphorous shells in a populated area for ANY reason is prohibited. Article 1 of Protocol III of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons defines an incendiary weapon as 'any weapon or munition which is primarily designed to set fire to objects or to cause burn injury to persons through the action of flame, heat, or combination thereof, produced by a chemical reaction of a substance delivered on the target'. The same protocol also prohibits the use of incendiary weapons against civilians (already forbidden by the Geneva Conventions) or in civilian areas.The only problem with that line of argument is that Israel used the shells for the specific and lawful purpose of illuminating an area. It did not use the shells as weapons of combat. The former practice is legal under the Laws of War. The latter is not. The shells fired from the Gaza Strip were used for the latter purpose. Even if no phosphorous were involved, the shells were fired in an indiscriminate fashion and indiscriminate bombardment is also prohibited under the Laws of War.
The Goldstone report is not an International Court of Justice judgment. It is not a binding ruling.
Furthermore, it is deeply flawed. For example, it attempts to define Hamas security personnel as having civilian status when no reasonable application of the Geneva Conventions or their Protocols would support such a position.
While the report makes good political fodder, it undermines international law with its novel interpretations.
With its politicized interpretations, it undermines the credibility of international law and the important principles of such law. The great tragedy is that even as the report purports to try to safeguard civilian protections, its overall impact is that it erodes protections that would otherwise be reinforced under a sound interpretation of international law.
Needless to say, I am not in any way suggesting that Israel committed no wrongful acts. Indeed, there were accidents. At the same time, Israel is also investigating a number of potential abuses. Those are serious matters that deserve review.
Member of one of Palestinian groups says bombs fired on Israel contained material collected from shells which hit Strip during Operation Cast Lead
The use of white phosphorous shells in a populated area for ANY reason is prohibited.
When the government of a territory launches rockets at another country's civilians from a certain area, this area becomes a military area and not a civilian area.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?