How Congress can fight Hamas's use of human shields

[Fledermaus]

A ceasefire has halted for now the Hamas rocket attacks on Israeli civilians. But the conflict continues, including through campaigns at the United Nations and in the media to attribute victory and apportion blame.

During the May 2021 conflict, Hamas reportedly used civilians as human shields to protect its military assets from Israeli counterstrikes. For example, Hamas reportedly located military tunnels under a school and adjacent to a kindergarten, a mosque, and a hospital. It reportedly placed weapons stockpiles in several different houses and apartment buildings, situated pivotal intelligence research and operations facilities in the same building as the Associated Press and other foreign journalists, and installed its military intelligence headquarters next to a kindergarten. Hamas also reportedly used civilian apartment buildings for military planning and operations, positioned rocket launch sites next to civilian buildings, and situated weapons factories in the heart of densely populated civilian areas.

Following the ceasefire, a resolution, passed by the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), established a one-sided commission of inquiry designed to whitewash the use of human shields and otherwise portray the conflict’s tragic loss of life as entirely Israel’s fault. The Trump administration had withdrawn from the UNHRC in 2018, accusing the forum of having a “chronic anti-Israel bias.” But the Biden administration announced in February that it would “re-engage immediately and robustly” with the Council, explaining that a “vacuum of U.S. leadership” did “nothing” to reform the UNHRC’s “disproportionate focus on Israel.”

How Congress can fight Hamas’s use of human shields

The Trump administration did not fulfill its statutory obligation, and the Biden administration has not yet done so.

thehill.com

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm

Looks like others are seeing Hamas for what they are.

But we are told they can't be human shields because they weren't forced.

I have to wonder which Kindergarten principal volunteered their school.

 

[ecofarm]

I don't see, in the OP, what Congress can do specifically.

 

[MaryP]

I don't see, in the OP, what Congress can do specifically.

Sanctions, to begin with. It's in the article linked.

 

[ecofarm]

Sanctions, to begin with. It's in the article linked.

I read three paragraphs and that did not answer the question posed in the title, which is bad form we might note. I already felt like a sucker, that's a no-click.

 

[Fledermaus]

I read three paragraphs and that did not answer the question posed in the title, which is bad form we might note. I already felt like a sucker, that's a no-click.

Interesting.... The recommendations begin in the fifth and continue through the article.

You do know forum rules discuss over quoting....

 

[Fishking]

I read three paragraphs and that did not answer the question posed in the title, which is bad form we might note. I already felt like a sucker, that's a no-click.

The first big step is just admitting it and verbally and publicly condemning it. Ignoring it and acting as if it doesn't exist, while at the same time only dumping on Israel, only emboldens Hamas' actions.

This isn't complicated.

 

[Fabiusbile]

I have to wonder which Kindergarten principal volunteered their school.

I think it is obvious that the Palestinians did not ask the leaders of the civilian facilities.

 

[Individual]

It should be common sense that a human body is incapable of defending against a rocket response.
Any intelligent person would immediately depart from where a rocket is fired, knowing it will be targeted by those wanting to stop it from continuing.

 

[Integrityrespec]

A ceasefire has halted for now the Hamas rocket attacks on Israeli civilians. But the conflict continues, including through campaigns at the United Nations and in the media to attribute victory and apportion blame.

During the May 2021 conflict, Hamas reportedly used civilians as human shields to protect its military assets from Israeli counterstrikes. For example, Hamas reportedly located military tunnels under a school and adjacent to a kindergarten, a mosque, and a hospital. It reportedly placed weapons stockpiles in several different houses and apartment buildings, situated pivotal intelligence research and operations facilities in the same building as the Associated Press and other foreign journalists, and installed its military intelligence headquarters next to a kindergarten. Hamas also reportedly used civilian apartment buildings for military planning and operations, positioned rocket launch sites next to civilian buildings, and situated weapons factories in the heart of densely populated civilian areas.

Following the ceasefire, a resolution, passed by the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), established a one-sided commission of inquiry designed to whitewash the use of human shields and otherwise portray the conflict’s tragic loss of life as entirely Israel’s fault. The Trump administration had withdrawn from the UNHRC in 2018, accusing the forum of having a “chronic anti-Israel bias.” But the Biden administration announced in February that it would “re-engage immediately and robustly” with the Council, explaining that a “vacuum of U.S. leadership” did “nothing” to reform the UNHRC’s “disproportionate focus on Israel.”

How Congress can fight Hamas’s use of human shields

The Trump administration did not fulfill its statutory obligation, and the Biden administration has not yet done so.

thehill.com

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm

Looks like others are seeing Hamas for what they are.

But we are told they can't be human shields because they weren't forced.

I have to wonder which Kindergarten principal volunteered their school.

Hard to fight a terrorist group when some members of Congress defend them. USA is becoming a country that allows "immigrants" into the country who actually hate America and are working against it, several of them are in the U.S. Congress.

 

[oneworld2]

Notwithstanding the fact that the use of civilians to engage in military procedures that placed them in grave / mortal danger ( human shields) was at one time OFFICIAL IDF policy and that the state of Israel has around 600,000 living human shields serving as human shields for a land annexation programme within the OPTs, the accusations of the use of human shields by Palestinian factions has been investigated on many occasions before by various HRs groups and shown to be highly dubious at best. And notwithstanding who it is that is doing the " reporting" of alleged uses of HSs, an outfit renowned for false accusations and telling lies, the IDF. Let's have a delve through this..............


First from the link as to what constitutes a human shield. My contention is that being FORCED by military forces to protect military personnel/kit and/or carry out the role as a shield for their operations is what is generally referred to by the term. The link gives some examples and ALL of them also refer to the FORCED use of people as HSs ( Read the first link to the ICRC breakdown, they are the examples they give )

Then there is the charge that if you commit attacks from civilian areas and put people at risk of death or injury from any retaliation this too is the use of human shields. There is a instruction to military operatives to " take feasible precautions to separate civilians and military objectives ." Fair enough, but in the case of Gaza, one of the most densely populated pieces of land on earth the word " feasible" is a crucial aspect because nowhere are combatants compelled to line up like ducks in a field so as to be mown down.

That Hamas has encouraged people to stand up as human shields to Israeli onslaughts is not in doubt because it is well documented and admitted to by Hamas themselves BUT that is a request , not an imposition, like when the IDF place Palestinian civilians between themselves and other groups of hostile Palestinians.

So ,imo, there are two key elements.......

Are they being FORCED to act as shields AND how feasible is it, given the dynamics of Gaza and the disparity of options available to both sides, to prosecute conflict without endangering civilians. If you look at these two parts to the equation the charges of the uses of HSs becomes more and more a propaganda weapon than a objective analysis imo

 

[Chagos]

PuBS above

From HRW recommendations to Hamas

Cease conducting attacks from locations near populated areas in Gaza in violation of international humanitarian law requiring all feasible precautions to protect civilians from the effects of attacks, and avoid locating military objectives in densely populated areas;

https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/ioptqassam0809web.pdf

Equating Israeli settlers (of whatever state of legality or lack of it) with human shields in Gaza is the height of turning logic on its head.

For one thing the IDF does not use those settlements as a base for combating Palestinian terrorists in Gaza, on the contrary, presence it holds is for protection of the settlers from attacks.

But with the hypocrisy constantly applied here by the usual suspect, IDF presence makes them legitimate targets as much as Tel Aviv.

Condemning indiscriminate rocket fire as war crimes against Israeli civilians while justifying them in the same breath on account of there being no place in Israel without IDF presence.

Reminds me of the guy here praying that tomorrow NATO will have good weather. When queried on such an unusual request, pointing out "cuz then all the rest of us will have good weather too".

As to force in enlisting human shields, have those running hospitals, schools etc. in Gaza or all sorts of other communal establishments been asked for permission to use them as storage points for weapons, have their premises under-tunnelled for the purpose of waging attacks?

 

[Fledermaus]

Notwithstanding the fact that the use of civilians to engage in military procedures that placed them in grave / mortal danger ( human shields) was at one time OFFICIAL IDF policy and that the state of Israel has around 600,000 living human shields serving as human shields for a land annexation programme within the OPTs, the accusations of the use of human shields by Palestinian factions has been investigated on many occasions before by various HRs groups and shown to be highly dubious at best. And notwithstanding who it is that is doing the " reporting" of alleged uses of HSs, an outfit renowned for false accusations and telling lies, the IDF. Let's have a delve through this..............


First from the link as to what constitutes a human shield. My contention is that being FORCED by military forces to protect military personnel/kit and/or carry out the role as a shield for their operations is what is generally referred to by the term. The link gives some examples and ALL of them also refer to the FORCED use of people as HSs ( Read the first link to the ICRC breakdown, they are the examples they give )

Then there is the charge that if you commit attacks from civilian areas and put people at risk of death or injury from any retaliation this too is the use of human shields. There is a instruction to military operatives to " take feasible precautions to separate civilians and military objectives ." Fair enough, but in the case of Gaza, one of the most densely populated pieces of land on earth the word " feasible" is a crucial aspect because nowhere are combatants compelled to line up like ducks in a field so as to be mown down.

That Hamas has encouraged people to stand up as human shields to Israeli onslaughts is not in doubt because it is well documented and admitted to by Hamas themselves BUT that is a request , not an imposition, like when the IDF place Palestinian civilians between themselves and other groups of hostile Palestinians.

So ,imo, there are two key elements.......

Are they being FORCED to act as shields AND how feasible is it, given the dynamics of Gaza and the disparity of options available to both sides, to prosecute conflict without endangering civilians. If you look at these two parts to the equation the charges of the uses of HSs becomes more and more a propaganda weapon than a objective analysis imo

How Congress can fight Hamas's use of human shields​

HAMAS.

Not the IDF.

HAMAS.

You know. The real terrorists.

HAMAS.

Human Shields are human shields are human shields....

Hamas INTENTIONALLY uses high density civilian areas, hospitals, schools and mosques to store and/or launch rocket and other weapons.

 

[Individual]

Israel should just airdrop leaflets in Arabic explaining that any and all locations containing military supplies and/or from which attacks on Israel initiate will be targeted in response by Israel. Remain at your own risk.
The U.S. Congress, President, and/or the UNHRC should stand back and allow Hamas and Israel to either find a way to coexist peacefully or annihilate one or both.
Perhaps the best thing the U.S. and all other countries could do would be to cease subsidizing both, eliminating all trade with the exception of food/medicine with them.

 

[oneworld2]

How Congress can fight Hamas's use of human shields​

HAMAS.

Not the IDF.

HAMAS.

You know. The real terrorists.

HAMAS.

Human Shields are human shields are human shields....

Hamas INTENTIONALLY uses high density civilian areas, hospitals, schools and mosques to store and/or launch rocket and other weapons.

Once again your post is just erratic tripe that doesn't actually address the post it is suppose to be a reply to. You have failed to address the two points I raised that were linked in the OP you created.

 

[oneworld2]

Israel should just airdrop leaflets in Arabic explaining that any and all locations containing military supplies and/or from which attacks on Israel initiate will be targeted in response by Israel. Remain at your own risk.
The U.S. Congress, President, and/or the UNHRC should stand back and allow Hamas and Israel to either find a way to coexist peacefully or annihilate one or both.
Perhaps the best thing the U.S. and all other countries could do would be to cease subsidizing both, eliminating all trade with the exception of food/medicine with them.

How would that even help them ? I don't think you have thought this through or know anything about the situation in Gaza when there is an upsurge in violence ( code for Israelis are under threat too )

 

[Individual]

How would that even help them ? I don't think you have thought this through or know anything about the situation in Gaza when there is an upsurge in violence ( code for Israelis are under threat too )

Perhaps you don't understand what I posted.

 

[oneworld2]

PuBS above

From HRW recommendations to Hamas


https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/ioptqassam0809web.pdf

What is determined to be " feasible",considering the circumstances, is key to whether or not the recommendation is attainable

Equating Israeli settlers (of whatever state of legality or lack of it) with human shields in Gaza is the height of turning logic on its head.

They are illegal, get over it. It was expalianed and you have made no attempt to tackle that explanation and continue only to blow smoke imo

For one thing the IDF does not use those settlements as a base for combating Palestinian terrorists in Gaza, on the contrary, presence it holds is for protection of the settlers from attacks.

Reading for comprehension obviously isn't a strong point of yours imo. I said the ILLEGAL settlers serve as human shields for land annexation programmes. That their presence, and some of them themselves , along withjthe IDF personnel that are there to " protect" them pose a serious and present danger to the lives of Palestinians living in the West Bank. They are just the facts of the matter

But with the hypocrisy constantly applied here by the usual suspect, IDF presence makes them legitimate targets as much as Tel Aviv.

AS occupying forces they are " legitimate targets" regardless of where they are. Those under a military occupation have the inalienable right to free themselves from their occupiers. That you fail to understand how the above tries ( and fails) to deny that shows just how bizarre your postings can get

Condemning indiscriminate rocket fire as war crimes against Israeli civilians while justifying them in the same breath on account of there being no place in Israel without IDF presence.

Which didn't happen, so you are forced into lying again. Normal service is resumed

Reminds me of the guy here praying that tomorrow NATO will have good weather. When queried on such an unusual request, pointing out "cuz then all the rest of us will have good weather too".

As to force in enlisting human shields, have those running hospitals, schools etc. in Gaza or all sorts of other communal establishments been asked for permission to use them as storage points for weapons, have their premises under-tunnelled for the purpose of waging attacks?

I used what the linked material stated as its examples, don't like it ? Tough. Asking permission to do something is an unknown here, forcing at the end of a gun is something all together different and is found most commonly used by IDF people. Back to HRW and the forced IDF use of Palestinians as HSs along with the" white flag " slayings of Palestinians

Human Rights Watch’s reports on Israeli conduct of the armed conflict focused on three issues: the IDF’s use of white phosphorus munitions in populated areas, the killing of civilians with drone-launched missiles, and the killing of civilians waving white flags. Additional areas of concern are the use of heavy artillery in populated areas, the destruction of civilian property without military necessity, and the use of Palestinians as human shields.

Turning a Blind Eye

This 62-page report details the steps both Israel and Hamas have taken over the past year to investigate alleged violations of the laws of war and possible war crimes, and how those investigations have fallen far short of international legal standards.

www.hrw.org

Seems like they both engage in war crimes, how disappointing for you!

 

[oneworld2]

Perhaps you don't understand what I posted.

These are your words, correct ?

"Israel should just airdrop leaflets in Arabic explaining that any and all locations containing military supplies and/or from which attacks on Israel initiate will be targeted in response by Israel."

You assume they actually KNOW where these things are and especially in the midst of a bombardment ? That they could actually be fleeing from one they suspect only to find themselves in an area that is a definite?

You should read the following article about the realities of what you are suggesting should happen and understand how once leafleting is undertaken the military PR then blames the civilians themselves without mentioning the above. That they sometimes don't actually carry out an attack they have warned people about and might attack somewhere else where thoser people have moved to ? Where IS SAFE?

espite the limitations and shortcomings of these generalized warnings, the messages have a strategic function. They allow the military to say that a warning was given. Providing such a warning gives the military space to maneuver in broader, often international, discussions surrounding their actions in conflict. That space is created by the linguistic content and structure of the messages, and the ways in which the language of these leaflets and text messages subtly shifts responsibility for the safety of Gaza’s residents onto the shoulders of civilians themselves

Do Military Leaflets Save Lives or Just Instill Fear?

Modern warfare isn’t only conducted with bombs, tanks, and guns—language, especially in military leaflets, also plays a central role.

www.sapiens.org

 

[Individual]

These are your words, correct ?

"Israel should just airdrop leaflets in Arabic explaining that any and all locations containing military supplies and/or from which attacks on Israel initiate will be targeted in response by Israel."

You assume they actually KNOW where these things are and especially in the midst of a bombardment ? That they could actually be fleeing from one they suspect only to find themselves in an area that is a definite?

You should read the following article about the realities of what you are suggesting should happen and understand how once leafleting is undertaken the military PR then blames the civilians themselves without mentioning the above. That they sometimes don't actually carry out an attack they have warned people about and might attack somewhere else where thoser people have moved to ? Where IS SAFE?

Do Military Leaflets Save Lives or Just Instill Fear?

Modern warfare isn’t only conducted with bombs, tanks, and guns—language, especially in military leaflets, also plays a central role.

www.sapiens.org

Ask.

 

[oneworld2]

Ask.

You don't understand question marks, that explains a lot.

 

[Chagos]

in response to

But with the hypocrisy constantly applied here by the usual suspect, IDF presence makes them legitimate targets as much as Tel Aviv.

Condemning indiscriminate rocket fire as war crimes against Israeli civilians while justifying them in the same breath on account of there being no place in Israel without IDF presence.

We get the usual dishonest reply of

"Which didn't happen, so you are forced into lying again."

easily refuted by showing the poster's statement of

The IDF are the state terrorists operating for the state of Israel and Sderot is filled with them ,like every other Israeli city is.

https://debatepolitics.com/threads/...ithout-rearming-hamas.451534/#post-1074110442

as an excuse for Hamas striking anywhere in Israel (no matter how indiscriminately).

Anyone with even average intelligence can see who is really lying here and can also see who is projecting own dishonesty onto others.

Yeah, normal service all right.

 

[Individual]

You don't understand question marks, that explains a lot.

Look and listen too.
But you seem to have ignored the rest of my post:
"The U.S. Congress, President, and/or the UNHRC should stand back and allow Hamas and Israel to either find a way to coexist peacefully or annihilate one or both.
Perhaps the best thing the U.S. and all other countries could do would be to cease subsidizing both, eliminating all trade with the exception of food/medicine with them."

If the people governed by Hamas are not willing to allow their lives be put at risk, they should speak out, get out, or elect a new government.

 

[oneworld2]

Look and listen too.
But you seem to have ignored the rest of my post:
"The U.S. Congress, President, and/or the UNHRC should stand back and allow Hamas and Israel to either find a way to coexist peacefully or annihilate one or both.
Perhaps the best thing the U.S. and all other countries could do would be to cease subsidizing both, eliminating all trade with the exception of food/medicine with them."

If the people governed by Hamas are not willing to allow their lives be put at risk, they should speak out, get out, or elect a new government.

I addressed a certain part of your post because it showed a lack of understanding about the subject. So what do you do ? Mention the other parts of the post that I didn't address

 

[Fledermaus]

Once again your post is just erratic tripe that doesn't actually address the post it is suppose to be a reply to. You have failed to address the two points I raised that were linked in the OP you created.

Once again you ignore the topic and try to derail.

 

[Fledermaus]

I addressed a certain part of your post because it showed a lack of understanding about the subject. So what do you do ? Mention the other parts of the post that I didn't address

How about addressing Hamas' constant use of Human Shields instead of trying to make a thread about Hamas into one about the IDF?