ISRAEL - IRAN - SYRIA - HAMAS - HEZBOLLAH - WWWIII?

Again, there is NO PROOF, NO SUGGESTION, NO INDICATION that Israel has EVER intentionally targeted innocents nor is there any indication that it does not mitigate such collateral damage as much as is reasonable to prevent. And in the way I look at it, to suggest otherwise is pretty strong evidence of very strong prejudice in this issue.

Again, there is NO PROOF, NO SUGGESTION, NO INDICATION that Israel has EVER intentionally targeted innocents nor is there any indication that it does not mitigate such collateral damage as much as is reasonable to prevent. And in the way I look at it, to suggest otherwise is pretty strong evidence of very strong prejudice in this issue.

Again, there is NO PROOF, NO SUGGESTION, NO INDICATION that Israel has EVER intentionally targeted innocents nor is there any indication that it does not mitigate such collateral damage as much as is reasonable to prevent. And in the way I look at it, to suggest otherwise is pretty strong evidence of very strong prejudice in this issue.

Israel does minimize civilian deaths as much as possible considering Hamas uses kids and women as human shields.

I did not ask you to 'prove a negative'. I asked you to show anything that disputes Hamas' (or Hezbollah or any other Palestinian terrorist group) practice of using civilian human shields for their gunmen and rocket launchers, weapon stockpiles, etc. Those of us on the pro-Israeli side have produced evidence ad nauseum that the Palestinians place their weapons and weapon stockpiles among civilians and use them from among civilians.

Check this site....especially the links to various sources at the bottom of the article:
http://www.geocities.com/palestiniansarelies/HumanShields.html

Now with all these reports of Palestinians using women and kids as human shields, surely you can find at least one reasonably credible source that disputes this as a normal practice by the Palestinians? Maybe a photo of a Palestinian rocket launcher that isn't in a residential neighborhood?

I am not denying that there are rockets and maybe stockpiles of weapons in civilian areas;

In the event that such abuse takes place, however, parties to the conflict remain obliged under international humanitarian law to take precautionary measures and not to target civilians or cause excessive civilian injury or damage in relation to the anticipated concrete and direct military advantage.

Foxfyre wrote:

Again, there is NO PROOF, NO SUGGESTION, NO INDICATION that Israel has EVER intentionally targeted innocents nor is there any indication that it does not mitigate such collateral damage as much as is reasonable to prevent. And in the way I look at it, to suggest otherwise is pretty strong evidence of very strong prejudice in this issue.

That is truly dishonest FF....
Isreal has consistently fired into places like airports, water treatment plants, residential areas like Aitaroun, and used the Napalm like substance White Phosphorus (as they did in the war with Lebanon in 2006).

There is ample proof, ample suggestion and ample indication that Israel as knowingly placed civilian targets in the crosshairs. (I am not however, suggeting that Lebanon or Hezbollah gets a pass.)

foxfrye; do you not recognize international laws concerning human shields where it says even if the opposing force does use human shields the other side can't target those civilians used as human shields? In other words if a Hamas fighter is firing behind a child; Israel cannot blow them both up to get at the Hamas fighter. To do so is not taking precautionary measures not to target civilians.

revel wrote:

foxfrye; do you not recognize international laws concerning human shields where it says even if the opposing force does use human shields the other side can't target those civilians used as human shields? In other words if a Hamas fighter is firing behind a child; Israel cannot blow them both up to get at the Hamas fighter. To do so is not taking precautionary measures not to target civilians.

Israel does not target innocents. You seem to suggest that so long as the enemy places it rocket launchers in residential neighborhoods that Israel just has to take whatever Hamas throws at Israel and cannot retaliate in any way. Surely you see how unconscionable that is, and how ridiculous it is to say that Israel cannot go after those rocket launchers and weapon stockpiles.

Just once Revel, I would like to see you truly condemn the Palestinian leadership and acknowledge them for the truly evil people they are. Just once I would like for you to acknowledge THEM as the villians in this instead of Israel and the cause of all the carnage and destruction.

If the Palestinians cease fire and pledge to allow Israel to be Israel and denounce all forms of terrorism and accept responsibility for their crimes, and Israel does not cease all hostile activity toward the Palestinians, then I will agree with you that Israel will become the villain.

Right now they are not.

Article 51(7) states that "the presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations. The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations".

Therefore, the unlawfulness and illegality of any practice involving the presence of civilians nearby or on military objects as a means of warfare is evident. Any party at any time is authorised to use such tactics, no matter if the human shields are voluntary or involuntary, and whether the object of the attack is a legitimate target or not.

Moreover, parties in conflict are obliged to minimize risks to civilians, separating military objectives from the civilian population, evacuating the civilian population from near immovable military objects and developing air raid precautions . Article 58 of the Additional Protocol I, clearly states that "the Parties to the conflict shall, to the maximum extent feasible: (a) without prejudice to Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention , endeavour to remove the civilian population, individual civilians and civilian objects under their control from the vicinity of military objectives; (b) avoid locating military objectives within or near densely populated areas; (c) take the other necessary precautions to protect the civilian population, individual civilians and civilian objects under their control against the dangers resulting from military operations".

In any case, the unlawfulness of the use of human shields does not permit the other parties to ignore the presence of civilians during their attacks. Once again, parties are always bound to respect the principles of distinction and proportionality, even if the counterparts do not respect their own obligations.

Such duty was reiterated in U.N. General Assembly Resolution 2444 , which was adopted by unanimous vote and states: "that the right of Parties to a conflict to adopt means of injuring the enemy is not unlimited; that it is prohibited to launch attacks against the civilian population as such;
that a distinction must be made at all times between persons taking part in the hostilities and members of the civilian population to the effect that the later be spared as much as possible".

Moreover, article 51(8) of the Additional Protocol I, provides that "any violation of these prohibitions shall not release the Parties to the conflict from their legal obligations with respect to the civilian population and civilians, including the obligation to take the precautionary measures provided for in Article 57". Finally, art. 50(3) states that "the presence within the population of individuals who do not come within the definition of civilians does not deprive the population of its civilian character".

Israeli's first obligation is to protect its citizens from people determined to kill those citizens. I don't care whether Revel or the UN or anybody else thinks Israel has no right to protect itself when Hamas puts its rocket launchers and weapon stockpiles in heavily populated civilian neighborhoods HOPING that those people will be killed so Hamas can appeal to Revel's indignation and ensure that she will continue to condemn Israel. Israel has the right to defend itself whether Revel or anybody else likes it or not.

I suppose you think the police should just allow a madman to keep slaughtering school children or people in a crowded restaurant because return fire might hit somebody other than the madman? Surely ANYBODY can see how ludicrous that concept would be.