Skip to main content

View Diary: Gaza Death toll tops 110 as Israel hits targets in densly packed residential areas killing civilians (201 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  the defense system 'Iron Dome' has had a major (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    beltane, elwior, JNEREBEL, erush1345

    impact, don't forget....

    You're right, they're not well targeted.  But most of them have been intercepted.

    •  No doubt about that (5+ / 0-)

      but the question I was responding to had to do with Hamas long-range rockets targeting school buses.  No way do they posses this sort of tactical capability.

      •  I wouldn't think so, no. They just hit things if (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        elwior, charliehall2, erush1345

        they hit things.  Probably within a 10 mile radius or so...

      •  Hamas targets civilians (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JNEREBEL, erush1345

        by pretty much random launches toward residential areas. It can't target that well.

        •  So if, according to you, (4+ / 0-)

          it "can't target well" and the launches are "random," how on earth is it "target[ing] civilians?"

          •  Because they can't target well and are launched (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Jersey Jon

            into general civilian areas the attacks will likely be considered war crimes. Precisely because they know the launches aren't well targeted and precisely because they are aimed as best they can at cities full of innocent civilians.

            •  So it's not a war crime if they can target (5+ / 0-)

              well and are launched into civilian areas?  Or is it the launching into civilian areas that makes it a war crime, in which case Israel is guilty of war crimes.  After all, a lot of Gaza is urban, which means Israeli rockets "are aimed as best they can at cities full of innocent civilians."

              •  I truly wish you would cease the habit of (0+ / 0-)

                attempting to characterize comments. It is not a tactic for debate that is effective for you as you do it so often.  Rather than re-framing the comment the way you wish it were written why not respond to the comment as written?

                Why can't you simply condemn the rocket attacks that are targeted at civilian populations?

                Why is it so difficult for you?

                •  Please. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Celtic Merlin, Friendlystranger

                  I'm asking you a question about the implications of your comment as written which you refuse to answer.  While I have consistently condemned attacks on all civilians, whether Israeli or Palestinian, your refusal to answer the question is quite telling.

                  Thank you.  And have a nice day.

                  •  My refusal to answer questions based on your (0+ / 0-)

                    distortions of my comment can be as telling as you wish it to be.

                    Will you at least listen when I ask you to please stop your practice of mis-characterizing comments? We all have a roughly equivalent reading comprehension and your intent is quite naked to anyone lurking.

          •  Martha--Hamas does have a very clear history (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            erush1345, Jersey Jon, JNEREBEL

            of targeting civilians for the purpose of targeting civilians.  While the suicide bombings have been lessened recently, it is certainly part and parcel of Hamas and IJ's recent tactics.  

            The rockets aren't particularly effective, but they are aimed towards civilian areas.  They're not aiming for a tank with these things--they're aiming for residential centres to scare (and maybe hit) people.

            •  I'm not denying that. (6+ / 0-)

              But there's two things:

              1. charliehall2 says, in the same comment, that Hamas targets civilians but can't target well.  So, which is it?

              2. If the targeting of civilians is what constitutes a war crime, which I'm actually in agreement with, then Israel is committing war crimes as well.  And yes, I am saying here that both sides do it, because charliehall2 (not you), across diaries, consistently acts as if Hamas is evil incarnate and Israel is an innocent victim.  I think the reality is a lot more complex. In fact, if that's the war crime, Israel is a lot more guilty, which is not a statement in any way meant to diminish Hamas' guilt.

              •  Well, he has (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                PeterHug, erush1345, lyvwyr101

                a much fiercer pro-I bias than I do, so usually I don't jump into those frays.  I"ll leave it to him to comment on what he has to say, if he wants to.  I don't assume you and he are going to reach any sort of agreement, so it's probably not worth the effort.

                As for war crimes, I'm not even sure if a terrorist attack is considered a 'war crime' is it?  Since it's not exactly part of a war.  I do consider direct targets on civilians--if that is the intent, to be criminal. I don't consider a Hamas attack on a tank, for example, to be criminal--but I do consider things like suicide bombings to be.

                As for the Israelis--I honestly believe that--as with the U.S. in Iraq, or the U.S. drones in Pakistan, the intent is not to target civilians--but because the responses are so immeasurably huge, civilians do die.  I  don't see this as a war-crime so much as extremely heavy-handed response--so perhaps unjust in the manner of the scale of warfare.  I mean--if someone from the next town throws a rock at you, do you drop a ton of bricks on them?   Israel thinks yes.  The UN thinks no.  I do think that, while the deaths of 110+ Palestinians in this particular event is awful, the targeting capabilities of the Israelis have prevented those deaths from reaching thousands.  

                So the 'war crime' thing is something I don't agree with.  Some have referenced the 'white phosphorous' use in 2008--and to be honest I'm not familiar enough with the details of these reports to know where those fit in.

                Anyway I'm off to sleep--

          •  we are the 99.9% (0+ / 0-)

            That's why

    •  The fact they are not well targeted makes the (0+ / 0-)

      attacks more likely to be considered war crimes.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site