• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Hamas admits 600-700 of its men were killed in Cast Lead

donsutherland1

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
11,691
Reaction score
9,981
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Today, Haaretz reported:

Hamas admitted last week that between 600 and 700 of its militants were killed during Operation Cast Lead – a figure consistent with that reported by the Israel Defense Forces...

Hamas’ military wing had previously claimed that only 49 of its militants were killed during the three-week operation that the IDF launched in December 2008. Israel had put the figure at 709.


This latest information shatters the Goldstone Report's efforts to debunk the casualty figures reported by Israel. That flawed report had claimed:

The Israeli armed forces claim that 1,166 Palestinians were killed during the military operations “according to the data gathered by the Research Department of the Israel Defense Intelligence”. They allege that “709 of them are identified as Hamas terror operatives”, 295 are “uninvolved Palestinians”, while the remaining 162 are “men that have not yet been attributed to any organization”.222 Of the 295 “uninvolved Palestinians”, 89 were children under the age of 16 and 49 women. According to these figures, at least 60 per cent, and possibly as many as three out of four, of those killed were combatants. The Mission notes, however, that the Israeli Government has not published a list of victims or other data supporting its assertions, nor has it, to the Mission’s knowledge, explained the divergence between its statistics and those published by three Palestinian sources...

Needless to say, the report did not question the veracity of the Palestinian sources, even as such sources had a motive to overstate civilian casualties/understate combatant casualties. As if that were not enough, the report then sought to further undermine Israel's credibility stating:

The Mission notes that the statistics from non-governmental sources are generally
consistent. Statistics alleging that fewer than one out of five persons killed in an armed conflict was a combatant…


It should be noted that a basic responsibility inherent in any competent legal endeavor is to focus on finding facts. The Goldstone investigation failed to satisfy that basic obligation. As a result, its conclusions were little more than politicized soundbites that lacked foundation in international law e.g., the most prominent example being the report's novel interpretation that armed Hamas police officials were civilians.

Now that Hamas has finally acknowledged more accurate statistics, it remains to be seen whether the flimsy Goldstone report will be revised to reflect the facts. My guess is that it won't.

The failure to revise the report in light of facts that confirm one of the report's material defects will provide further evidence that the report's author had little desire for fact finding. Instead, it will confirm his having pursued a little more than a political crusade aimed at delegitimizing Israel for its having acted in self defense.
 

William Rea

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 23, 2010
Messages
8,949
Reaction score
2,231
Location
UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
Today, Haaretz reported:

Hamas admitted last week that between 600 and 700 of its militants were killed during Operation Cast Lead – a figure consistent with that reported by the Israel Defense Forces...

Hamas’ military wing had previously claimed that only 49 of its militants were killed during the three-week operation that the IDF launched in December 2008. Israel had put the figure at 709.


This latest information shatters the Goldstone Report's efforts to debunk the casualty figures reported by Israel. That flawed report had claimed:

The Israeli armed forces claim that 1,166 Palestinians were killed during the military operations “according to the data gathered by the Research Department of the Israel Defense Intelligence”. They allege that “709 of them are identified as Hamas terror operatives”, 295 are “uninvolved Palestinians”, while the remaining 162 are “men that have not yet been attributed to any organization”.222 Of the 295 “uninvolved Palestinians”, 89 were children under the age of 16 and 49 women. According to these figures, at least 60 per cent, and possibly as many as three out of four, of those killed were combatants. The Mission notes, however, that the Israeli Government has not published a list of victims or other data supporting its assertions, nor has it, to the Mission’s knowledge, explained the divergence between its statistics and those published by three Palestinian sources...

Needless to say, the report did not question the veracity of the Palestinian sources, even as such sources had a motive to overstate civilian casualties/understate combatant casualties. As if that were not enough, the report then sought to further undermine Israel's credibility stating:

The Mission notes that the statistics from non-governmental sources are generally
consistent. Statistics alleging that fewer than one out of five persons killed in an armed conflict was a combatant…


It should be noted that a basic responsibility inherent in any competent legal endeavor is to focus on finding facts. The Goldstone investigation failed to satisfy that basic obligation. As a result, its conclusions were little more than politicized soundbites that lacked foundation in international law e.g., the most prominent example being the report's novel interpretation that armed Hamas police officials were civilians.

Now that Hamas has finally acknowledged more accurate statistics, it remains to be seen whether the flimsy Goldstone report will be revised to reflect the facts. My guess is that it won't.

The failure to revise the report in light of facts that confirm one of the report's material defects will provide further evidence that the report's author had little desire for fact finding. Instead, it will confirm his having pursued a little more than a political crusade aimed at delegitimizing Israel for its having acted in self defense.
This type of reporting is completely disreputable in that it states "Hamas admitted last week that between 600 and 700 of its militants were killed during Operation Cast Lead" but no such thing is said. The reality is that what Fathi Hamad said is actually supported by Goldstone...

Israel attacked the police command and killed 250 (The best way to keep a country stable is to kill its police force?)
Up to 300 members of the military wing were killed.
Up to 150 security personnel were killed (undefined what security is, government workers maybe?).

Goldstone quotes many sources for estimates but for example he quoted data that...
136 to 248 police had been killed Items 356 and 354 Page 90.
237 combatants were killed Item 356 Page 90

And do you know what, this startling revelation in Haaretz doesn't change the fact that potentially...

342 INNOCENT children
111 INNOCENT women
A total of 926 INNOCENT civilians

WERE ALL KILLED.

Nice way to spit on the graves of those people to prove your point.
 
Last edited:

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
115,068
Reaction score
32,526
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I thought the point was tha Hamas is a bunch of murderous, lying bastards that should never be trusted for accurate numbers of any sort.

49 vs. 300? Who lost count so badly? This is ridiculous.
 

William Rea

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 23, 2010
Messages
8,949
Reaction score
2,231
Location
UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
I thought the point was tha Hamas is a bunch of murderous, lying bastards that should never be trusted for accurate numbers of any sort.

49 vs. 300? Who lost count so badly? This is ridiculous.
What it does is leave Goldstone almost intact and not in any way debunked.
 

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
19,674
Reaction score
6,198
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Today, Haaretz reported:

Hamas admitted last week that between 600 and 700 of its militants were killed during Operation Cast Lead – a figure consistent with that reported by the Israel Defense Forces...

Hamas’ military wing had previously claimed that only 49 of its militants were killed during the three-week operation that the IDF launched in December 2008. Israel had put the figure at 709.


This latest information shatters the Goldstone Report's efforts to debunk the casualty figures reported by Israel. That flawed report had claimed:

The Israeli armed forces claim that 1,166 Palestinians were killed during the military operations “according to the data gathered by the Research Department of the Israel Defense Intelligence”. They allege that “709 of them are identified as Hamas terror operatives”, 295 are “uninvolved Palestinians”, while the remaining 162 are “men that have not yet been attributed to any organization”.222 Of the 295 “uninvolved Palestinians”, 89 were children under the age of 16 and 49 women. According to these figures, at least 60 per cent, and possibly as many as three out of four, of those killed were combatants. The Mission notes, however, that the Israeli Government has not published a list of victims or other data supporting its assertions, nor has it, to the Mission’s knowledge, explained the divergence between its statistics and those published by three Palestinian sources...

Needless to say, the report did not question the veracity of the Palestinian sources, even as such sources had a motive to overstate civilian casualties/understate combatant casualties. As if that were not enough, the report then sought to further undermine Israel's credibility stating:

The Mission notes that the statistics from non-governmental sources are generally
consistent. Statistics alleging that fewer than one out of five persons killed in an armed conflict was a combatant…


It should be noted that a basic responsibility inherent in any competent legal endeavor is to focus on finding facts. The Goldstone investigation failed to satisfy that basic obligation. As a result, its conclusions were little more than politicized soundbites that lacked foundation in international law e.g., the most prominent example being the report's novel interpretation that armed Hamas police officials were civilians.

Now that Hamas has finally acknowledged more accurate statistics, it remains to be seen whether the flimsy Goldstone report will be revised to reflect the facts. My guess is that it won't.

The failure to revise the report in light of facts that confirm one of the report's material defects will provide further evidence that the report's author had little desire for fact finding. Instead, it will confirm his having pursued a little more than a political crusade aimed at delegitimizing Israel for its having acted in self defense.
They seem to be trying to establish some form of credibility, seeing that lying about their death tolls isn't really fooling anyone.

Although I don't think that this puts a final nail in the Goldstone committee's credibility's coffin, if only because they've had no credibility to begin with, they should just change their name from the UNHRC to "The less-credibility-than-Hamas UN council for anti-Israeli affairs".
 

justabubba

long standing member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
49,737
Reaction score
31,561
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
pleased to see members of the pro-israeli contingent are finally recognizing the validity of the data and conclusions established by the Goldstone investigation
 

Whovian

Banned
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
7,153
Reaction score
2,250
Location
dimensionally transcendental
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
New evidence of Goldstone bias - New York Israel Conflict | Examiner.com

YouTube - Dore Gold Debunks Goldstone Report Fallacies
Muhammad Abu Askar, a longtime member of Hamas' Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades, appeared before the Goldstone Panel arguing that his house had been "unjustly" blown up by Israel. No one bothered to ask him whether Hamas munitions were being stored in his house.
The IDF reported that Abu Askar's house served as a storage facility for large stockpiles of weapons and ammunition, including Iranian-supplied Grad rockets that had been used against Israeli cities like Ashkelon, Ashdod, and Beersheba. The Izz al-Din al-Qassam website disclosed that Khaled Abu Askar, Muhammad's son, provided Hamas operatives with rockets and military equipment.
The Abu Askar case is one of many incidents where the Goldstone team refused to consider that Hamas was exploiting civilian areas to gain military advantage.
Commentary » Blog Archive » Goldstone’s Past: Apartheid Hangman

The Case Against the Goldstone Report | FrontPage Magazine
 

donsutherland1

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
11,691
Reaction score
9,981
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Goldstone quotes many sources for estimates but for example he quoted data that...
237 combatants were killed Item 356 Page 90
600 to 700 Hamas militants is approximately triple the Goldstone report's reference to "237 combatants."

That more than 50% of the casualties were not civilians (600-700 Hamas militants/1169 fatalaties) debunks the bogus speculation that " fewer than one out of five persons killed in an armed conflict was a combatant."

Those are the facts. Now that the Hamas terrorist group has conceded its casualties, the facts can no longer be obscured by the politically-motivated Goldstone report.
 

donsutherland1

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
11,691
Reaction score
9,981
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Although I don't think that this puts a final nail in the Goldstone committee's credibility's coffin, if only because they've had no credibility to begin with, they should just change their name from the UNHRC to "The less-credibility-than-Hamas UN council for anti-Israeli affairs".
I completely agree. This new information only further highlights how badly flawed that report was. But one probably should not have expected otherwise from a purely political pursuit to delegitimize Israel and undermine Israel's right of self defense. That lazy and worse legal reasoning was utilized, no meaningful effort at due diligence was pursued, and casualty figures were mischaracterized to try to manufacture an impression that Israel made no effort to safeguard the lives of civilians is all par for the course.
 

Lord Tammerlain

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
19,028
Reaction score
8,114
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
600 to 700 Hamas militants is approximately triple the Goldstone report's reference to "237 combatants."

That more than 50% of the casualties were not civilians (600-700 Hamas militants/1169 fatalaties) debunks the bogus speculation that " fewer than one out of five persons killed in an armed conflict was a combatant."

Those are the facts. Now that the Hamas terrorist group has conceded its casualties, the facts can no longer be obscured by the politically-motivated Goldstone report.
Goldstone report separated militants from security/police forces as shown by Rea, combine the two and the difference is about 20%
 

Demon of Light

Bohemian Revolutionary
DP Veteran
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
5,095
Reaction score
1,544
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
600 to 700 Hamas militants is approximately triple the Goldstone report's reference to "237 combatants."

That more than 50% of the casualties were not civilians (600-700 Hamas militants/1169 fatalaties) debunks the bogus speculation that " fewer than one out of five persons killed in an armed conflict was a combatant."

Those are the facts. Now that the Hamas terrorist group has conceded its casualties, the facts can no longer be obscured by the politically-motivated Goldstone report.
For heaven's sake don, he already pointed out how the actual comment from Hamas did not even remotely suggest the Goldstone report was wrong. Haaretz took some comments and twisted them around to say something they did not really say. The fact they consider the police officers killed during the war "martyrs" does not mean they were combatants.

Why do you take the IDF's figures more seriously than ANYBODY ELSE'S FIGURES?!
 

William Rea

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 23, 2010
Messages
8,949
Reaction score
2,231
Location
UK
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
600 to 700 Hamas militants is approximately triple the Goldstone report's reference to "237 combatants."

That more than 50% of the casualties were not civilians (600-700 Hamas militants/1169 fatalaties) debunks the bogus speculation that " fewer than one out of five persons killed in an armed conflict was a combatant."

Those are the facts. Now that the Hamas terrorist group has conceded its casualties, the facts can no longer be obscured by the politically-motivated Goldstone report.
Don, With respect, if you cannot discern between what Haaretz "interpreted" that Fathi Hamad said as "600-700 Hamas militants" for a headline and what they later report he ACTUALLY said and you only wish to quote Israeli sources for figures then what hope is there?
 
Last edited:

donsutherland1

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
11,691
Reaction score
9,981
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
The fact they consider the police officers killed during the war "martyrs" does not mean they were combatants.
Under international law, the armed police officers were legitimate military objectives. They were not civilians. What the IDF says has no bearing on that issue. What is solely relevant is that the Hamas police officers did not meet the criteria set forth for civilian status.
 

Gardener

free market communist
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
26,661
Reaction score
15,927
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Don, With respect, if you cannot discern between what Haaretz "interpreted" that Fathi Hamad said as "600-700 Hamas militants" for a headline and what they later report he ACTUALLY said and you only wish to quote Israeli sources for figures then what hope is there?
Quite a bit more hope, I'd say, than all those who place such unquestioning trust in a terrorist organization for their point of view.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mpg

Demon of Light

Bohemian Revolutionary
DP Veteran
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
5,095
Reaction score
1,544
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Under international law, the armed police officers were legitimate military objectives. They were not civilians. What the IDF says has no bearing on that issue. What is solely relevant is that the Hamas police officers did not meet the criteria set forth for civilian status.
Civilian police forces are considered non-combatants under international law. The blanket attacks on police stations were clearly illegitimate, never mind the attack on a police graduation ceremony.

Quite a bit more hope, I'd say, than all those who place such unquestioning trust in a terrorist organization for their point of view.
I am not putting any trust in Hamas. However, their figures here line up with those of several non-governmental organizations in Israel and Gaza and do not contradict the Goldstone Report.
 

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
19,674
Reaction score
6,198
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Civilian police forces are considered non-combatants under international law. The blanket attacks on police stations were clearly illegitimate, never mind the attack on a police graduation ceremony.
International law declares the attacks on police to be illegitimate only when they're not serving a part in the military force of the government, which is not the case with the terrorist organization of Hamas.
Since the police forces of Hamas are instructed to take part in Hamas' war with Israel they become legitimate targets under international law, and are fully recognized as enemy combatants.

Of course, beyond the legal field, a person who signs up to an active terrorist organization may be targeted at will without any moral issues covering the action, as such person would constitute as a member of a terrorist organization, a terrorist.

I am not putting any trust in Hamas. However, their figures here line up with those of several non-governmental organizations in Israel and Gaza and do not contradict the Goldstone Report.
The point of the thread which you seem to have... 'missed', is that the current figures the terrorists admit to now after giving up on lying about it are closer to the IDF figures than they are to anyone else.
Unsurprising to some, of course, who know that the IDF was and is the most credible organization amongst those who have covered the war death tolls.
 
Last edited:

donsutherland1

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
11,691
Reaction score
9,981
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Civilian police forces are considered non-combatants under international law. The blanket attacks on police stations were clearly illegitimate, never mind the attack on a police graduation ceremony.
The problem is that Hamas' "police," and the use of quotes is deliberate, perform dual roles. They do not perform purely civilian functions. The same applies to Hamas' "police stations." Those facilities also do not perform purely civilian functions. Hence, in both cases they were legitimate military objectives.
 

Lord Tammerlain

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
19,028
Reaction score
8,114
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The problem is that Hamas' "police," and the use of quotes is deliberate, perform dual roles. They do not perform purely civilian functions. The same applies to Hamas' "police stations." Those facilities also do not perform purely civilian functions. Hence, in both cases they were legitimate military objectives.
Which then counters your analysis of the Goldstone report, its report of militants killed and police/security forces killed come quite close to the 600 number, making the report fairly accurate does it not
 

donsutherland1

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
11,691
Reaction score
9,981
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Which then counters your analysis of the Goldstone report, its report of militants killed and police/security forces killed come quite close to the 600 number, making the report fairly accurate does it not
My objection is the Goldstone report's flawed conclusion that fewer than one-in-five persons killed was a combatant. I have no objections to total fatalities being reported in the 1,200 +/- 100 vicinity. Hamas' figures suggest that more than half of those killed were, in fact, from the terrorist organization. Therefore, the idea that less than 20% of those killed were civilians is wrong. Needless to say, that language very likely will not be corrected in the report. The failure to make the necessary correction will further demonstrate that Mr. Goldstone conducted an exercise aimed at achieving political ends, not finding the facts.
 

Demon of Light

Bohemian Revolutionary
DP Veteran
Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
5,095
Reaction score
1,544
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
International law declares the attacks on police to be illegitimate only when they're not serving a part in the military force of the government, which is not the case with the terrorist organization of Hamas.
Since the police forces of Hamas are instructed to take part in Hamas' war with Israel they become legitimate targets under international law, and are fully recognized as enemy combatants.
First of all, the attacks they mention in particular were the opening blows in the war including an attack on a graduation ceremony. There is no conceivable way to argue that these people were taking part in hostilities when hostilities had just been initiated and included people who had just become police. In addition the police in Gaza were not and are not part of the military forces. Some police were also members of a militant group, but they were not one and the same. Arguing that blanket attacks on police stations were justified on that basis would be akin to saying that because some teachers moonlight as soldiers of fortune it justifies blanket attacks on schools.

Of course, beyond the legal field, a person who signs up to an active terrorist organization may be targeted at will without any moral issues covering the action, as such person would constitute as a member of a terrorist organization, a terrorist.
If Hamas were only a militant organization you would have a point, but since it is also a political party and charitable organization that reasoning is inherently flawed.

The point of the thread which you seem to have... 'missed', is that the current figures the terrorists admit to now after giving up on lying about it are closer to the IDF figures than they are to anyone else.
Unsurprising to some, of course, who know that the IDF was and is the most credible organization amongst those who have covered the war death tolls.
Actually, they are close to the figures from other groups. Even calling the IDF "credible" makes everything you are saying a joke. They are as credible as a fox investigating who broke into the hen house.
 

Degreez

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
3,216
Reaction score
1,021
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
My objection is the Goldstone report's flawed conclusion that fewer than one-in-five persons killed was a combatant. I have no objections to total fatalities being reported in the 1,200 +/- 100 vicinity. Hamas' figures suggest that more than half of those killed were, in fact, from the terrorist organization. Therefore, the idea that less than 20% of those killed were civilians is wrong. Needless to say, that language very likely will not be corrected in the report. The failure to make the necessary correction will further demonstrate that Mr. Goldstone conducted an exercise aimed at achieving political ends, not finding the facts.
A combatant is someone who actively takes part in hostilities. A combatant is not someone who may or may not potentially take part in hostilities. The fact that you do not care to know the difference only highlights your own bias in regards to the current situation. Perhaps you need to reevaluate your preconceived notions that put a hamper in critical thinking.

If one was to twist things as you do, I could say the "police" that were killed in the graduation ceremony were not actually police until they graduated. Which did not up happening, because of Israel's total disregard for civilian life and international law. Four police stations were destroyed in the first minutes of Israel's military operation. None had taken any part in hostilities against Israel, thus not losing their civilian immunity.

Tell me donsutherland1, how does a prison act as a direct and main contribution to military efforts? What military necessity is there behind attacking a prison?

Your distorted view on the situation will only be amplified when you cannot answer the questions above.

It concludes, however, that the attacks against the
police facilities on the first day of the armed operations failed to strike an acceptable balance
between the direct military advantage anticipated (i.e. the killing of those policemen who may
have been members of Palestinian armed groups) and the loss of civilian life (i.e. the other
policemen killed and members of the public who would inevitably have been present or in the
vicinity)
, and therefore violated international humanitarian law.
- The Goldstone Report
 

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
19,674
Reaction score
6,198
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
First of all, the attacks they mention in particular were the opening blows in the war including an attack on a graduation ceremony. There is no conceivable way to argue that these people were taking part in hostilities when hostilities had just been initiated and included people who had just become police. In addition the police in Gaza were not and are not part of the military forces. Some police were also members of a militant group, but they were not one and the same. Arguing that blanket attacks on police stations were justified on that basis would be akin to saying that because some teachers moonlight as soldiers of fortune it justifies blanket attacks on schools.
That's plainly false, Hamas "police force" are pretty much militants, they actively take part in combat, whether with Israel or in Hamas' wars with the other terrorist organizations in the Strip.

If Hamas were only a militant organization you would have a point, but since it is also a political party and charitable organization that reasoning is inherently flawed.
I'm not speaking about being a militant but rather about signing up for a terrorist organization.
From the moral point of view there is of course no issue at all with the targeting of terrorists.

Actually, they are close to the figures from other groups. Even calling the IDF "credible" makes everything you are saying a joke. They are as credible as a fox investigating who broke into the hen house.
They are by far the most credible of all organizations involved in the covering of the war's death tolls, and you are still refusing to admit to the reality that those new figures by Hamas are the closest to the IDF's more than they are to any other organization, which is why your claims here are nothing but a joke and a very bad joke indeed.
 

Degreez

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
3,216
Reaction score
1,021
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
That's plainly false, Hamas "police force" are pretty much militants, they actively take part in combat, whether with Israel or in Hamas' wars with the other terrorist organizations in the Strip.
"Pretty much" is not good enough. 250 people were killed at Gaza City's main police station because they were about to become police officers. Such preemptive measures hardly comply with international law. Using the same logic Israel is using on targeting police officers, then all Israelis are legitimate targets because they will eventually serve in the IDF. Of course, that is ridiculous, but Israel's contentions are usually ridiculous.

They are by far the most credible of all organizations involved in the covering of the war's death tolls, and you are still refusing to admit to the reality that those new figures by Hamas are the closest to the IDF's more than they are to any other organization, which is why your claims here are nothing but a joke and a very bad joke indeed.
How exactly are they "credible"? They are taking part in the hostilities, which only weakens their credibility. Independent sources are far more accurate and credible. Suggesting otherwise is asinine.
 

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
19,674
Reaction score
6,198
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
"Pretty much" is not good enough. 250 people were killed at Gaza City's main police station because they were about to become police officers. Such preemptive measures hardly comply with international law.
International law openly permits the targeting of police facilities and personnel in the time of war, when such police force is not serving the sole purpose of civil order and rather is used actively in the form of combat and military.
Hence your claims here about the killing of the 250 terrorists being "against international law" is against international logic.

Using the same logic Israel is using on targeting police officers, then all Israelis are legitimate targets because they will eventually serve in the IDF. Of course, that is ridiculous, but Israel's contentions are usually ridiculous.
There is of course no similarity between the logic you're using here and the logic international law uses when it permits the targeting of police when said police has an active role in combat.
There is nothing in international law that permits the killing of civilians at times of war, international law does however openly permit the targeting of police officers when they actively serve as militants.

How exactly are they "credible"? They are taking part in the hostilities, which only weakens their credibility. Independent sources are far more accurate and credible. Suggesting otherwise is asinine.
Taking part in a war does not automatically label you non-credible when it comes to the enemy casualty death tolls.
The British army or the US army are not lacking credibility on the death tolls in Afghanistan merely because they're a party in the war in Afghanistan.

Said independent sources tend to be biased and act solely through political agenda, yet I am referring to the death tolls themselves as published by the organizations and as published by the IDF, and their respective resemblance to the recent admittance by the terrorist organization of Hamas.
 
Last edited:

donsutherland1

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
11,691
Reaction score
9,981
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Under international law, a civilian is any person who does not fit the criteria set forth in Article 4 (A) (1), (2), (3) and (6) of the Third Geneva Convention. The Hamas "policemen" fail the test set forth in Article 4 (A) (1), as they are members of Hamas' militia, which is part of the armed wing of Hamas amd Article 4 (a) (2) as they are members of an "organized resistance movement." Under no reasonable interpretation of international law were the policemen civilians. They were legitimate military objectives. Mr. Goldstone simply cannot supplant what are actually well-established principles of international law with his highly politicized account that quite frankly has no basis whatsoever in international law, customary or otherwise. Given Hamas' figures of 600-700 of its members being killed, the Goldstone report's absurd notion that the overwhelming majority of persons (>80%) killed were civilians is wrong. More than half of those killed were legitimate military objectives. As noted previously, I highly doubt that the report will be revised. It was mainly a political exercise aimed at undermining Israel's right of self-defense.
 
Top Bottom