Ongoing Israeli-Palestinian Violence

Kidkaroo said:
Who is ultimately to blame for the death of these civilians, the belligerent force who started the war and fires its missiles from civilian areas or the side defending itself. Do you honestly not see the difference?

Can you name any other defence force that warns its enemy before retaliating?
Click to expand...

Not suggesting that Hamas is blameless, just that the IDF cannot simply use the term "human shields" to wave away every civilian casualty. Being attacked doesn't give Israel the right to inflict however many casualties as they feel like. Somewhere along the line your Middle East democracy has to start acting like a decent country by not inflicting so many civilian casualties, not by simply blaming deaths caused by IDF ordinance on Hamas.
 
Kidkaroo said:
Do you dispute the that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East?

Of course Israel is held to a higher standard, it's the fact that the standard they're held to is not expected from any other nation that is the problem.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that no other country gets criticised for causing disproportionate civilians deaths?
 
Cray said:
Not suggesting that Hamas is blameless, just that the IDF cannot simply use the term "human shields" to wave away every civilian casualty. Being attacked doesn't give Israel the right to inflict however many casualties as they feel like. Somewhere along the line your Middle East democracy has to start acting like a decent country by not inflicting so many civilian casualties, not by simply blaming deaths caused by IDF ordinance on Hamas.
Click to expand...

I trust you aren't disputing the fact that Hamas used human shields? What would you do in Israel's case, when your cities are under fire from hundreds of Iranian-made missiles? What is an acceptable level of civilian casualties to you?
 
Cray said:
Are you suggesting that no other country gets criticised for causing disproportionate civilians deaths?
Click to expand...

That's exactly what I'm saying. No other country gets demonised for defending itself.
The US uses drones to take out entire wedding parties in the hope of killing a Taliban leader, and the outcry from the "international community" is muted at best.
 
Kidkaroo said:
I'll take that as a "NO"
Click to expand...

Warnings that are ineffective are nothing more than a public relations stunt - the death toll in the recent Gaza conflict shows how useless roof knocking is.
 
Last edited:
Kidkaroo said:
That's exactly what I'm saying. No other country gets demonised for defending itself.
The US uses drones to take out entire wedding parties in the hope of killing a Taliban leader, and the outcry from the "international community" is muted at best.
Click to expand...

You mean like the following article criticising the drone policy..

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/23/obama-drone-program-anniversary_n_4654825.html

Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International issued a pair of reports in October fiercely criticizing the secrecy that shrouds the administration's drone program, and calling for investigations into the deaths of drone victims with no apparent connection to terrorism. In Pakistan alone, TBIJ estimates, between 416 and 951 civilians, including 168 to 200 children, have been killed.

Critics of the drone program generally acknowledge that most of the people killed in Pakistan were likely members of terrorist groups. But that has not pleased Pakistanis: Hakimullah Mehsud, a Pakistani Taliban leader, was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of civilians, but his death by drone in November prompted a wave of popular outrage over the incursion on national sovereignty
Click to expand...

So yeah, no criticism at all then..
 
Kidkaroo said:
I said "muted criticism" which it is, compared to the worldwide outcry over Israel defending itself.
Click to expand...

"muted criticism" is a very subjective term. I have seen a number of articles and pieces criticising drone strikes. The very nature of drone strikes is that they are sporadic and covert so difficult to cover in the press. Also keep in mind that drone strikes killed 2400 people over 5 years, Israel managed 2194 in under two months.
 
Cray said:
Warnings that are ineffective are nothing more than a public relations stunt - the death toll in the recent Gaza conflict shows how useless roof knocking is.
Click to expand...

Pamphlet drops, phone calls, roof knocking etc. warns the civilian population, but Hamas as well. Hamas responds to these warnings by using human shields.

Again I ask, what would you do if your county was on the receiving end of hundreds of missiles fired by an entity sworn to your destruction?
 
Kidkaroo said:
Pamphlet drops, phone calls, roof knocking etc. warns the civilian population, but Hamas as well. Hamas responds to these warnings by using human shields.

Again I ask, what would you do if your county was on the receiving end of hundreds of missiles fired by an entity sworn to your destruction?
Click to expand...

What would you do if you where evicted from your homeland and corralled into two tiny pieces of land ? (one of which is continually being encroached upon). To answer your question I would hope for more proportional response than killing 2192 in "defence" of 73 killed by the other side.
 
Cray said:
Kidkaroo said:
"muted criticism" is a very subjective term. I have seen a number of articles and pieces criticising drone strikes. The very nature of drone strikes is that they are sporadic and covert so difficult to cover in the press. Also keep in mind that drone strikes killed 2400 people over 5 years, Israel managed 2194 in under two months.
Click to expand...

Israel is under direct attack, and responds by taking out missile sites which Hamas locates in civilian areas.
US is not under direct attack, and blows up wedding parties without warning.

Compare the reaction to Hamas firing missiles into Israel, and starting wars, to that which follows Israel's retaliation.

Fact is, if Hamas stops these wars there would be no need for retaliatory strikes.
Click to expand...
 
Cray said:
What would you do if you where evicted from your homeland and corralled into two tiny pieces of land ? (one of which is continually being encroached upon). To answer your question I would hope for more proportional response than killing 2192 in "defence" of 73 killed by the other side.
Click to expand...

So it's proportionality you want, more dead Israelis would make it acceptable? The side starting the war gets a pass, while those defending themselves get condemned. Do you hold any other country to that standard?
 
Cray said:
What would you do if you where evicted from your homeland and corralled into two tiny pieces of land ? (one of which is continually being encroached upon). To answer your question I would hope for more proportional response than killing 2192 in "defence" of 73 killed by the other side.
Click to expand...

So it's proportionality you want, more dead Israelis would make it acceptable? The side starting the war and using human shields gets a pass, while those defending themselves get condemned. Do you hold any other country to that standard?
 
Fact is, if Hamas stops these wars there would be no need for retaliatory strikes.
Click to expand...

Seeing as you ignored the report on Netanyahu refusing independence for Palestinians I'll ask again here.

What motivation is there for hamas to stop their attacks if doing so will not ever affect the Israeli control.
 
daveza said:
Seeing as you ignored the report on Netanyahu refusing independence for Palestinians I'll ask again here.

What motivation is there for hamas to stop their attacks if doing so will not ever affect the Israeli control.
Click to expand...

As I replied at the time, a majority of both Israelis and Israeli political parties support the 2 state solution. IF it is the new policy of Netanyahu to "refuse independence for Palestinians" then he will be voted out at the next election. Unlike the PA, Israel holds regular elections which are open to all citizens irrespective of race or religion.

Now let me ask you, in the light of the various PA's attitudes towards Israel (death or mere destruction) and regular military attacks against Israel, coupled with past intransigence in peace negotiations, what motivation does Israel have to give the Arabs a state.
 
Last edited:
Kidkaroo said:
So it's proportionality you want, more dead Israelis would make it acceptable? The side starting the war and using human shields gets a pass, while those defending themselves get condemned. Do you hold any other country to that standard?
Click to expand...

A defending country doesn't get a free pass to inflict any casualties they want in response to aggression, there has to be some sort of proportional response when dealing with countries that attack you. This is why the US bombed Libya in 1986 in response to a terrorist incident.

By your rationale the US would have been free to invade the entire country as a "defender". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_United_States_bombing_of_Libya
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X