Hamas Continues to Use Gaza's Residents as Human Shields

[donsutherland1]

More on the consequences of Hamas' human shielding...

From The Jerusalem Post:

At least ten people were killed in an IDF attack on a UN-run school in the village of Jabalya in the northern Gaza Strip, according to Palestinian reports. There were reportedly also scores of wounded on the scene...

At least 10 Hamas and Islamic Jihad gunmen were killed in other Gaza battles early Tuesday, the IDF said. Palestinians put the number of fatalities at 25.

Among the dead were three men who sought refuge at an UNRWA school in the Strip, UN official Adnan Abu Hasna said. According to Abu Hasna, the men were targeted in an air strike as they left the area of the school's restrooms.

The terrorists' use of the UNRWA school for shelter is directly responsible for the deaths of civilians who were present there.

 

[shiznit770]

More on the consequences of Hamas' human shielding...

From The Jerusalem Post:

At least ten people were killed in an IDF attack on a UN-run school in the village of Jabalya in the northern Gaza Strip, according to Palestinian reports. There were reportedly also scores of wounded on the scene...

At least 10 Hamas and Islamic Jihad gunmen were killed in other Gaza battles early Tuesday, the IDF said. Palestinians put the number of fatalities at 25.

Among the dead were three men who sought refuge at an UNRWA school in the Strip, UN official Adnan Abu Hasna said. According to Abu Hasna, the men were targeted in an air strike as they left the area of the school's restrooms.

The terrorists' use of the UNRWA school for shelter is directly responsible for the deaths of civilians who were present there.

Airstrike = direct cause

Who were the men? Were they firing from the school's windows? Or maybe they were seeking refuge! I'm all for punishing the Hamas responsible, but blowing up a school because 3 men sought refuge for unknown reasons is sick. This isn't war, this is a slaughter.

 

[ADK_Forever]

Maybe their not hiding. Maybe their just visiting.

Ahh yes, I forgot about that. In that case they should turn their WAR ON hat backwards, so it reads "WAR OFF". :lol:

 

[Billo_Really]

More on the consequences of Hamas' human shielding...

From The Jerusalem Post:

At least ten people were killed in an IDF attack on a UN-run school in the village of Jabalya in the northern Gaza Strip, according to Palestinian reports. There were reportedly also scores of wounded on the scene...

At least 10 Hamas and Islamic Jihad gunmen were killed in other Gaza battles early Tuesday, the IDF said. Palestinians put the number of fatalities at 25.

Among the dead were three men who sought refuge at an UNRWA school in the Strip, UN official Adnan Abu Hasna said. According to Abu Hasna, the men were targeted in an air strike as they left the area of the school's restrooms.

The terrorists' use of the UNRWA school for shelter is directly responsible for the deaths of civilians who were present there.

Do you realize that seeking refuge is not a threatening act? And if they did it without any weapons, Israel is in violation of IHL for targeting the school. Unless they got their guns out the window pointed at IDF soldiers or are orchastrating manuevers from the classrooms, it's not a military target. Just because someone is a member of Hamas, does not mean its okay to kill them. Only when they are actively taking part in hostilities, does it become open season.

 

[Billo_Really]

Ahh yes, I forgot about that. In that case they should turn their WAR ON hat backwards, so it reads "WAR OFF". :lol:

You would think in this day and age, their hats would have real-time messaging.

 

[donsutherland1]

What "activities" are they doing in the Hospital? I think we are all aware of Hamas' severe lack of military power.

From what I heard BBC TV (Channel 104 in NY) and the article I cited, it appears that the Hamas operatives were using the hospital for command and control and/or propaganda purposes. Hopefully, more details will emerge in coming days. As such activities contribute to the war effort, they render the hospital a military objective. Such activities are absolutely counter to the norms defined in the Laws of War.

The expectations of fighting a war on an open field are far extinct. Especially when the war is at their doorstep.

By engaging in human shielding, Hamas bears total responsibility for the civilian casualties that result from their use of civilians as shields.

Like it or not Hamas does not equal military target, yet Israel treats it as such. Their political leaders and even policemen (not military) are targeted despite their proximity to civilians. Hamas, like any other governing body, has a military branch conducting their operations.

Hamas' personnel, facilities, and weapons are legitimate military targets. The Hamas Charter makes clear that Hamas sees its activities as interrelated in its quest to eliminate Israel. Moreover, security personnel who carry arms openly are military objectives. That they are in proximity of civilians does not render them immune from attack. The only limitation on attacking those military objectives is that the expected civilian casualties should not be excessive relative to the anticipated military advantage gained from striking those operatives. According to the UN's statistics, 75% of the casualties in the initial phase of the combat were Hamas operatives and not civilian casualties.

What you're saying equates to another country targeting a of hospital because there are Democrats in it.

Not at all. Neither the Democratic Party nor the Republican Party is a terrorist movement. Furthermore, even as the Hamas operatives use of the hospital has rendered the hospital a military objective, I've stated my personal opinion that I believe Israel should avoid air strikes on Shifa Hospital.

 

[donsutherland1]

Do you realize that seeking refuge is not a threatening act? And if they did it without any weapons, Israel is in violation of IHL for targeting the school. Unless they got their guns out the window pointed at IDF soldiers or are orchastrating manuevers from the classrooms, it's not a military target. Just because someone is a member of Hamas, does not mean its okay to kill them. Only when they are actively taking part in hostilities, does it become open season.

That the article specifies that they were "gunmen" indicates that they were openly carrying weapons. Had the weapons been concealed, they would not have been identified as "gunmen." As such, they were legitimate military targets.

 

[jallman]

Do you realize that seeking refuge is not a threatening act? And if they did it without any weapons, Israel is in violation of IHL for targeting the school. Unless they got their guns out the window pointed at IDF soldiers or are orchastrating manuevers from the classrooms, it's not a military target. Just because someone is a member of Hamas, does not mean its okay to kill them. Only when they are actively taking part in hostilities, does it become open season.

So what do you call the weeks of rocket fire that provoked this if not "open hostilities".

I find it so pathetic that you will seek any chance to make excuses for the aggressor now that they are being responded to but your outrage was nowhere to be found when Israeli civilians suffered Hamas rocket attacks for weeks leading up to this.

 

[Billo_Really]

From what I heard BBC TV (Channel 104 in NY) and the article I cited, it appears that the Hamas operatives were using the hospital for command and control and/or propaganda purposes. Hopefully, more details will emerge in coming days. As such activities contribute to the war effort, they render the hospital a military objective. Such activities are absolutely counter to the norms defined in the Laws of War.



By engaging in human shielding, Hamas bears total responsibility for the civilian casualties that result from their use of civilians as shields.



Hamas' personnel, facilities, and weapons are legitimate military targets. The Hamas Charter makes clear that Hamas sees its activities as interrelated in its quest to eliminate Israel. Moreover, security personnel who carry arms openly are military objectives. That they are in proximity of civilians does not render them immune from attack. The only limitation on attacking those military objectives is that the expected civilian casualties should not be excessive relative to the anticipated military advantage gained from striking those operatives. According to the UN's statistics, 75% of the casualties in the initial phase of the combat were Hamas operatives and not civilian casualties.



Not at all. Neither the Democratic Party nor the Republican Party is a terrorist movement. Furthermore, even as the Hamas operatives use of the hospital has rendered the hospital a military objective, I've stated my personal opinion that I believe Israel should avoid air strikes on Shifa Hospital.

You mean they don't have to be actively shooting Israeli's to be military targets?

I'm sorry, what they do in the hospital has to be a threat to Israeli ground troops to justify the need to make it a target. It has to be a military necessity, which, short of lobbing grenades off the roof, Israel would be hard pressed to show just cause.

 

[Degreez]

That the article specifies that they were "gunmen" indicates that they were openly carrying weapons. Had the weapons been concealed, they would not have been identified as "gunmen." As such, they were legitimate military targets.

Oh, so they could have been 3 police officers who injured from F-16 attacks that were carried into the hospital?

If 3 people are enough reason for Israel to destroy a hospital, then someone should tell Olmert that there's 10 Hamas militants inside the US :roll:

And what you call 'hiding behind civilians', the rest of the us call living among the most densely populated places on Earth.

 

[Billo_Really]

So what do you call the weeks of rocket fire that provoked this if not "open hostilities".

I find it so pathetic that you will seek any chance to make excuses for the aggressor now that they are being responded to but your outrage was nowhere to be found when Israeli civilians suffered Hamas rocket attacks for weeks leading up to this.

I find it strange that you think I'm making excuses for the aggressor. I've said all along I do not support the rocket attacks. But this Israel can have its cake and eat it too crap is bull****. They're both to blame. They both caused this. Israel has occupied land that wasn't theirs for the last 42 years. Their the most armed country in the ME and they throw their weight around at a moments notice. I wouldn't have such an issue with Israel if they weren't as big a hypocrits as my county.

 

[Degreez]

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Strike on Gaza school 'kills 40'

At least 40 people have been killed in an Israeli air strike on an United Nations-run school in the Gaza Strip, Palestinian medical sources have said.

A number of children were among those who died when the al-Falluj school in the Jabaliya refugee camp took a direct hit, doctors at nearby hospitals said.

People inside had been taking refuge from the Israeli ground offensive.

Earlier, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) warned of a "full-blown humanitarian crisis" in Gaza.

Speaking on the 11th day of the Israeli assault, a senior ICRC official, Pierre Kraehenbuhl, said life in Gaza had become intolerable.

Palestinian medical sources say up to 600 people have been killed since the attacks began, and Mr Kraehenbuhl said much more needed to be done to protect civilians.

At least 70 Palestinians were killed on Tuesday, while four Israeli soldiers were killed by fire from one of their own tanks.

I wonder how many 'gunmen' Israel saw that were 'taking refuge from the ground offensive'...:roll:

 

[Billo_Really]

That the article specifies that they were "gunmen" indicates that they were openly carrying weapons. Had the weapons been concealed, they would not have been identified as "gunmen." As such, they were legitimate military targets.

You think everything is a legitmate target. What about the family of 12 you forced out of their house before you raided it, who went to the apartment building next door , which you promptly bombed, killing the entire family. What about the 111 children you killed. Were they targets too?

 

[Iriemon]

This is Haaretz - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia not the Isreali government, This is like the NY times of Isreal. You like the NY times right?

1) Where are they getting their information?

2) I have no view on the NY Times one way or the other.

 

[shiznit770]

From what I heard BBC TV (Channel 104 in NY) and the article I cited, it appears that the Hamas operatives were using the hospital for command and control and/or propaganda purposes. Hopefully, more details will emerge in coming days. As such activities contribute to the war effort, they render the hospital a military objective. Such activities are absolutely counter to the norms defined in the Laws of War.

Is there a BBC article, the JP one didn't mention anything about the hospital situation. By your logic any public place could be declared a military objective. Any public service the government renders could be said to "contribute to the war effort".

By engaging in human shielding, Hamas bears total responsibility for the civilian casualties that result from their use of civilians as shields.

Using the term Human Shielding diminishes its meaning and paints a far worse picture than what is actually happening. It is used in an attempt to justify the massive civilian casualties, when in fact (as Jakers pointed out) many of them are full time citizens and part time combatants.

Hamas' personnel, facilities, and weapons are legitimate military targets. The Hamas Charter makes clear that Hamas sees its activities as interrelated in its quest to eliminate Israel. Moreover, security personnel who carry arms openly are military objectives. That they are in proximity of civilians does not render them immune from attack. The only limitation on attacking those military objectives is that the expected civilian casualties should not be excessive relative to the anticipated military advantage gained from striking those operatives. According to the UN's statistics, 75% of the casualties in the initial phase of the combat were Hamas operatives and not civilian casualties.

What exactly is a Hamas operative? Is it limited to people carrying weapons? I suspect not given some of the above statements. Women can certainly be contributing members of Hamas, are they operatives as well? Do you see the ambiguity of the term and its shady justification?

Not at all. Neither the Democratic Party nor the Republican Party is a terrorist movement. Furthermore, even as the Hamas operatives use of the hospital has rendered the hospital a military objective, I've stated my personal opinion that I believe Israel should avoid air strikes on Shifa Hospital.

So in this new age it is legitimate to classify an entire governing group as evil. Paving way for its systematic extermination?

 

[donsutherland1]

Oh, so they could have been 3 police officers who injured from F-16 attacks that were carried into the hospital?

If 3 people are enough reason for Israel to destroy a hospital, then someone should tell Olmert that there's 10 Hamas militants inside the US :roll:

And what you call 'hiding behind civilians', the rest of the us call living among the most densely populated places on Earth.

Four quick things:

1. The three individuals were located in the UNRWA school, not Shifa Hospital.
2. There is no mention that they were injured.
3. FWIW, injured combatants (so long as they don't attempt to engage in combat), cease being military objectives. Hence, hospitalized Hamas gunmen are protected from attack under the Laws of War, unless they attempt to engage in hostilities.
4. Hamas' placement of operatives, facilities, and weapons in civilian centers is prohibited under the norms of the Laws of War. Excuses about densely-populated areas have no bearing on those norms. Hamas is engaging in human shielding and bears full responsibility any civilian casualties that result from its human shielding.

 

[Degreez]

1) Where are they getting their information?

2) I have no view on the NY Times one way or the other.

Haaretz is a legitimate news agency in Israel. It is Israel's oldest newspaper and most of there information is from the IDF.

 

[Billo_Really]

1) Where are they getting their information?

2) I have no view on the NY Times one way or the other.

You got to be kidding?

The NYT is a corporate propaganda sounding board. They're for the Iraq war and treat mostly everything the Administration has said over these last few years as practically gospel. It's true that they broke the Haditha story, but they also went silent on DSM. Corporate mainstream media is no place to get the truth.

 

[Degreez]

Four quick things:

1. The three individuals were located in the UNRWA school, not Shifa Hospital.
2. There is no mention that they were injured.
3. FWIW, injured combatants (so long as they don't attempt to engage in combat), cease being military objectives. Hence, hospitalized Hamas gunmen are protected from attack under the Laws of War, unless they attempt to engage in hostilities.
4. Hamas' placement of operatives, facilities, and weapons in civilian centers is prohibited under the norms of the Laws of War. Excuses about densely-populated areas have no bearing on those norms. Hamas is engaging in human shielding and bears full responsibility any civilian casualties that result from its human shielding.

So where is the reasoning for bombing a UN-run school? Killing only local residents or those taking refuge from the fighting.
Medics: Strikes kill 30 at U.N. school in Gaza - Israel-Palestinians- msnbc.com

And if you want to talk Laws of War, let's talk about proportionality. You echo Truman rationalists in the atomic bombing of Japan.

 

[Billo_Really]

So where is the reasoning for bombing a UN-run school? Killing only local residents or those taking refuge from the fighting.
Medics: Strikes kill 30 at U.N. school in Gaza - Israel-Palestinians- msnbc.com

And if you want to talk Laws of War, let's talk about proportionality. You echo Truman rationalists in the atomic bombing of Japan.

I think its safe to say Japan was a little bigger threat than Hamas.

 

[Iriemon]

Haaretz is a legitimate news agency in Israel. It is Israel's oldest newspaper and most of there information is from the IDF.

That's my point.

 

[Degreez]

I think its safe to say Japan was a little bigger threat than Hamas.

Not at the time Truman decided to use the atomic bomb. Russia had just declared war on Japan, and it was inevitable that this already-defeated Japan would surrender. But that issue is not for this debate.

 

[bub]

Airstrike = direct cause

Who were the men? Were they firing from the school's windows? Or maybe they were seeking refuge! I'm all for punishing the Hamas responsible, but blowing up a school because 3 men sought refuge for unknown reasons is sick. This isn't war, this is a slaughter.

40 people were killed in that school

 

[donsutherland1]

So where is the reasoning for bombing a UN-run school? Killing only local residents or those taking refuge from the fighting.

As noted earlier in this thread, there were three gunmen who were using the school as refuge. Those gunmen were legitimate military objectives.

One question that would arise is whether Israel knew about the large number of civilians in the school and whether Israel expected the civilian casualties to be excessive relative to the anticipated military advantage. To its credit, Israel is now looking into the matter.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Is there any such place?

Is there some uninhabited part of Gaza? Some part that is not dominated by civilians?
I'm not sure that there's some military only zone of Gaza for the combatants to retreat to.
Assuming the combatants took this thread to heart and decided to remove themselves from the civilian population, is there any place in Gaza where they could do so?

Israel is NOT using terrorism. It's incorrect "Carter-ite" thinking to say otherwise.
Morever, self-defence is NOT terrorism. You should learn the difference.

Yet, on this very forum, backers of Israel's actions have used the exact same reasoning to justify civilian casualties that Osama bin Laden uses. [Cites available upon request]
IMVHO, UbL's reasoning is incorrect and inappropriate in all circumstances, w/o regard to whom it is being applied. Obviously, for some, the mileage may vary with the actors involved.

Personally, I wish that everyone over there who wishes to engage in violence would remove themselves from the general population and duke it out leaving the rest of the folks to get on with their lives.

imvho ymmv