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

  •  READ the story (0+ / 0-)

    When Hamas purposefully operates, fires from civilian enclaves THEY are causing the deaths of those kids.

    •  Your statement is merely a rationalization to (0+ / 0-)

      avoid responsibility. If, for example, you look at the NYT reporting this morning of the Dalou family disaster, the IDF explanation was that they were aiming at someone they said commanded the fire of rockets, but then also said they had no proof that the person allegedly in their gunsights was anywhere near the building  which they targeted and destroyed at all, but the kids are still dead.

      •  No, YOUR statement (0+ / 0-)

        is that exactly. Does Hamas follow the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) ? No

        The fundamental aim of LOAC is to prevent unnecessary casualties and destruction within the context of military conflict. In pursuit of that goal, three principles govern: necessity, distinction, and proportionality. “Necessity” requires that combatants only attack targets necessary to accomplish military objectives. “Distinction” requires that combatants not only distinguish between civilians and combatants, but they also distinguish themselves from civilians. "Proportionality” requires a combatant to use only that force necessary to accomplish the military objective (though not necessarily  the same force as your enemy.

        Hamas does not follow ANY off the above rules.

      •  And BTW (0+ / 0-)

        That Times story? It leaves out the single most relevant piece of information: FOUR senior Islamic Jihad terrorists were killed in the Israeli strike. Obviously, using the media building. (see my points above).

        Funny that both Islamic Jihad and the IDF noted the presence of terrorists in the building, and that they were eliminated in the strike.

        The senior PIJ cadre was operating in a media building. They were’t there to be interviewed. They were using reporters as human shields.

        — IDF (@IDFSpokesperson) November 19, 2012

        A direct hit was identified on the target. Four senior members of Palestinian Islamic Jihad were known to have been in the media building.

        — IDF (@IDFSpokesperson) November 19, 2012

        BREAKING: Gaza group Islamic Jihad says Israeli strike on media center killed one of its top militant leaders.

        — The Associated Press (@AP) November 19, 2012

        Relying on the Times reporting for your information regarding Gaza is like relying on Fox for polls.

        •  So your premise is that it does not matter how (0+ / 0-)

          many civilians are killed as long as one possibly legitimate target is?  So blowing up Tel Aviv would be legit if Hamas got Bibi somehow into the process? Or is it your baseline premise that once your side has identified someone as a terrorist,whether he or she is or not, anything at all is thereafter legit?

          •  Care to read what I write (0+ / 0-)

            instead of putting your words in my mouth?

            The story, you cited, failed to even inform readers such as yourself that the reason the media building was targeted was because it housed four terrorists - who were killed. But others were not.

            Read my earlier post about the Law of Armed Conflict. By these definitions the actions by Hamas constitute war crimes and terrorism. Unless you think that purposefully targeting innocent civilians while hiding amongst your own civilians is  a legitimate act of war.

            And if you believe that Bibi is a terrorist that is your (twisted) right. And even if Hamas thought it was legit to kill him, they would need to establish the need to do so, do so with an identified army, target only military targets, and use only necessary force. Again they do none of the above.  In fact they do the opposite.

            Not sure why you are so defensive of them and their tactics.

            •  Which raises another question. (0+ / 0-)

              You say that one of the elements of having the right to target someone is that one does so with an identified army. Is this part of the reason that Israel is fighting state recognition for PA in the UN, because as a state it would have a recognized army, and therefore the legal right to defend itself from IDF, rather than whatever your opinion is of whoever is firing from gaza?

              •  No it isn't (0+ / 0-)

                And you saying so doesn't make it so.

                Having a charter that DOESN'T call for the destruction of Israel MIGHT make their acceptance of a state a little easier to deal with.

                It isn't my OPINION of who is firing from Gaza it is fact.

                But nice try at changing the subject.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site