150,000+ protest in UK against Gaza siege

[fskimospy]

exactly, these conditions are impossible not to violate.
it can be interpreted so that both the Iraq war and Afghanistan war are 2 huge war crimes.
what was the "military advantage" gained by replacing the regime in those countries for the USA? was Afghanistan a direct threat to the US militarily? is the Iraqi military even remotely comparable in power to the American Army?

hence, dis-proportionality.

You realize that such a quote came from an ICC analysis that examined a case and determined they were not violated, right?

http://www.icc-cpi.int/NR/rdonlyres...letter_to_senders_re_Iraq_9_February_2006.pdf

Stop trying to rationalize.

 

[Borealis7]

You realize that such a quote came from an ICC analysis that examined a case and determined they were not violated, right?

http://www.icc-cpi.int/NR/rdonlyres...letter_to_senders_re_Iraq_9_February_2006.pdf
Stop trying to rationalize.

most of whats written there can also be attributed to Israel in this conflict.
for example from your PDF:

"According to the UK Ministry of Defence, nearly 85% of weapons released by UK aircraft were
precision-guided, a figure which would tend to corroborate effort to minimize casualties.15"

Israel one-upped the UK, it got 100%.

"Publicly available information from the UK states that: lists of potential targets were identified in
advance; commanders had legal advice available to them at all times and were aware of the need to
comply with international humanitarian law, including the principles of proportionality; detailed
computer modeling was used in assessing targets; political, legal and military oversight was
established for target approval; and real-time targeting information, including collateral damage
assessment, was passed back to headquarters. This information was taken into consideration by the
Office, in accordance with the standards of critical evaluation. The information was not contradicted
by any other available information. "

exactly what Israel does as well. all targets are scoped in advance just like the UK did.

stay tuned for more, it's a lot to read

 

[fskimospy]

So first they were impossible not to violate and now you're claiming israel didn't violate them.

Sigh.

 

[Borealis7]

So first they were impossible not to violate and now you're claiming israel didn't violate them.
Sigh.

i still say they are impossible not to violate in a war. just because the UK wasn't indicted in court does not mean they didn't violate the law.
the same way your document does not incriminate the UK for these crimes, you can't incriminate Israel.

i'm searching google for ICC investogations of Israel, i can't find one decision against israel by the ICC.
according to the ICC website, Israel is not even under investigation!

 

[Harabec]

With all due respect eskimo, you seem to be so far removed from the realities of warfare (everywhere, not just here) that this looks like trying to explain a rainbow to the blind.

as an Israeli and generally as a person living in the Mid-East with muslims around me, reading your post about the Intifada showed that you do not understand this place and how conflicts, in general, go.
The US is historically in a VERY unique position of being able to wage wars anywhere, at anytime, with no consequence from anybody, while keeping its population FAR away from anything related to it.
The rest of the world simply cannot live in a "clean room" like that, shit happens and some shit needs to happen if one is to protect his fellow citizens. Many people get it, some only see the reality outside their comfy big city window while pondering philosophy.

The recent descent into utter chaos around us (Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Sinai) has shown that sometimes we gotta do what we gotta do - the world (and the united fail) will do nothing to help anyone here other than post on the internet.
I'm hoping something good will come out of the talks in Cairo, for the palestinians as well because contrary to popular belief, we don't want them to suffer (but you may continue believing otherwise), but I'm not too hopeful that Hamas will suddenly declare its goal is to provide a better future for them, instead of killing all infidels.

 

[fskimospy]

You realize I spent seven years in the military and was deployed to the Persian gulf for the Iraq war, right? That I have close friends working for the mine action office in South Sudan, right?

Much in the way that people in the US rationalize US actions you guys are doing the same.

 

[Borealis7]

You realize I spent seven years in the military and was deployed to the Persian gulf for the Iraq war, right? That I have close friends working for the mine action office in South Sudan, right?

Much in the way that people in the US rationalize US actions you guys are doing the same.

then you should know how decisions are made in the military, how the military acts, and how it uses it's precision weaponry to minimize civilian casualties, yet you chose to completely ignore that. but that's alright, as long as your president understands it too.

there is a lot of evidence on the MOs of the israeli army even on youtube, yet none from the Hamas side...
is the ICC also investigating Hamas? no? interesting...

you all have a good day, it's time for me to go home.

 

[dawheat]

No, I'm saying that the Israeli response should be proportionate to the injury suffered.

Disproportionate attacks are a war crime, by the way, as is collective punishment. What is your stance on war crimes?

This comes across as a bit ivory tower. Industrialized countries have almost always responded disproportionally to attacks or threats. The casualties in the American war on terror has been massively disproportional. I approve of targeted strikes by the US against identified targets, even if it means taking out the nearby non-combatants - we don't flatten blocks but taking out a specific building is always going to be messy. From the American POV, it's far preferable to putting ground troops in harms way.

I agree in the overall situation in Gaza and that Israel has done a lot of wrong - but when it comes down to tactical situations where they are taking out identified munitions dumps or rocket launchers, they are fair game in war. No where have I read of *indiscriminate* attacks by IDF forces - they are targeted strikes. Using human shields or other such tactics fall on the user of those tactics, not the attacker. Otherwise, the US would have to be held to the same standards.

Hey I wish the world was a better place for everyone, but when it comes to war, IMO Israel is waging a civilized war. Of course it would be infinitely better for it to not be waged at all.

 

[fskimospy]

This comes across as a bit ivory tower. Industrialized countries have almost always responded disproportionally to attacks or threats. The casualties in the American war on terror has been massively disproportional. I approve of targeted strikes by the US against identified targets, even if it means taking out the nearby non-combatants - we don't flatten blocks but taking out a specific building is always going to be messy. From the American POV, it's far preferable to putting ground troops in harms way.

I agree in the overall situation in Gaza and that Israel has done a lot of wrong - but when it comes down to tactical situations where they are taking out identified munitions dumps or rocket launchers, they are fair game in war. No where have I read of *indiscriminate* attacks by IDF forces - they are targeted strikes. Using human shields or other such tactics fall on the user of those tactics, not the attacker. Otherwise, the US would have to be held to the same standards.

Hey I wish the world was a better place for everyone, but when it comes to war, IMO Israel is waging a civilized war. Of course it would be infinitely better for it to not be waged at all.

I would suggest reading the previously linked definition of disproportionate. It doesn't mean that more of them die than of you.

As for this case, exactly three Israeli civilians died. The decision to undertake an operation leading to the deaths of 2,000 people and leveling huge portions of gaza in order to neutralize this threat is pretty incredibly disproportionate.

 

[Harabec]

If you had indeed served in a warzone, then we must be seeing to very different realities, or you simply choose to ignore reality and just argue "the rules".
Once again the numbers game - is the idea of being able to defend your population somehow faulty? Why are you trying to delegitimize it? Should we execute Israeli citizens to "make the game fair and proportionate"?
That's absurd. The threat isn't a bunch of excel tables that need to be balanced by the end of the month.

 

[blankslate]

Obviously all of those 150k+ people are antisemitic....

 

[fskimospy]

If you had indeed served in a warzone, then we must be seeing to very different realities, or you simply choose to ignore reality and just argue "the rules".

I did indeed serve in a war zone, although I was not personally involved in combat. I know lots of people who were, though. Your previous comment was simply an attempt to delegitimize my position by saying that I was "so far removed from the realities of warfare that it was like explaining a rainbow to the blind". Not cool.

Now that it turns out you were wrong you've just turned to saying that I must be ignoring reality or something to that effect. Maybe it's that as someone who isn't as emotionally attached to one side of this conflict as you are that I'm able to see the situation more objectively.

Once again the numbers game - is the idea of being able to defend your population somehow faulty? Why are you trying to delegitimize it? Should we execute Israeli citizens to "make the game fair and proportionate"?
That's absurd. The threat isn't a bunch of excel tables that need to be balanced by the end of the month.

The numbers just make it easy to see how out of proportion the response was with the threat.

 

[KMFJD]

Jew killing a Muslim and the world is outraged, Muslims killing Muslims? another day ending in y and no one cares

 

[MagickMan]

The Palestinians enjoyed this war, slaughtering Jews to make their leaders happy, right up until they finally pissed Israel off and were countered. Like the Egyptians and Jordanians said, it's best to just flatten and pave the whole Strip.

 

[squarecut1]

Obviously all of those 150k+ people are antisemitic....

Of course!

 

[MagickMan]

Obviously all of those 150k+ people are antisemitic....

I'd say 90-95%, as a conservative estimate, if you were a fly on the wall listening to them talk to each other. :\

 

[Exophase]

I'd say 90-95%, as a conservative estimate, if you were a fly on the wall listening to them talk to each other. :\

That's totally crazy. Some people might extend disapproval of military's actions to blaming it on their ethnicity, but most won't. Even if you don't agree with the anti-Israel arguments that are everywhere it's really easy to see how they're typically not motivated by prejudice against Jews.

 

[MagickMan]

That's totally crazy. Some people might extend disapproval of military's actions to blaming it on their ethnicity, but most won't. Even if you don't agree with the anti-Israel arguments that are everywhere it's really easy to see how they're typically not motivated by prejudice against Jews.

Are you even bothering to read the signs they're carrying?

I guess not. :\

 

[JEDIYoda]

Egyptians and Jordanians said, it's best to just flatten and pave the whole Strip.

That really is basically what the Egyptians and Jordanians said!!

 

[JEDIYoda]

That's totally crazy. Some people might extend disapproval of military's actions to blaming it on their ethnicity, but most won't. Even if you don't agree with the anti-Israel arguments that are everywhere it's really easy to see how they're typically not motivated by prejudice against Jews.

Your a very sad and pathetic person....it`s very easy to see...

 

[Exophase]

Are you even bothering to read the signs they're carrying?

I guess not. :\

I wish I understand how this line of reasoning possibly worked. I don't agree with your assertion that 90-95% (a conservative estimate!) of the protestors are also opposed to Jews in general. You show ONE sign (and even then being this violently opposed to Israel doesn't necessarily mean being violently opposed to Jews across the world) and that's supposed to support your stance or negate my statement? I even said that I'm sure SOME people are like this.

There are also crazy extremists in Israel who think all kinds of vile things, it's a real shame when people take them as representative of just about everyone like you're doing now.

 

[MagickMan]

I wish I understand how this line of reasoning possibly worked. I don't agree with your assertion that 90-95% (a conservative estimate!) of the protestors are also opposed to Jews in general. You show ONE sign (and even then being this violently opposed to Israel doesn't necessarily mean being violently opposed to Jews across the world) and that's supposed to support your stance or negate my statement? I even said that I'm sure SOME people are like this.

There are also crazy extremists in Israel who think all kinds of vile things, it's a real shame when people take them as representative of just about everyone like you're doing now.

Yeah... keep your head in the sand, most of them are just harmless, misunderstood "patriots". I'll check with you in 10 years and see how far that line of thinking got you.

Even if Israel doesn't blast the whole place to smithereens, the Egyptians will, because they're just as sick of the Palestinians as anyone.

 

[nehalem256]

Thread title is a lie.

How can Israel lay siege to an area it is occupying? :hmm:

 

[Exophase]

Yeah... keep your head in the sand, most of them are just harmless, misunderstood "patriots". I'll check with you in 10 years and see how far that line of thinking got you.

The line of thinking that criticism against Israel or sympathy for Palestinians doesn't unequivocally mean criticism against people for being born Jewish?

Hell, maybe those 150k people contain a lot of other people with their "head in the sand." That'd still mean something other than overwhelmingly consisting of a bunch of racists. 90-95% indeed. How about this, give something, ANYTHING to actually substantiate your claim, instead of just using it to try to automatically shut down any further discussion.

I'm really, really getting sick and tired of the extremist sentiments here. On both sides of this issue,

 

[MagickMan]

The line of thinking that criticism against Israel or sympathy for Palestinians doesn't unequivocally mean criticism against people for being born Jewish?

Hell, maybe those 150k people contain a lot of other people with their "head in the sand." That'd still mean something other than overwhelmingly consisting of a bunch of racists. 90-95% indeed. How about this, give something, ANYTHING to actually substantiate your claim, instead of just using it to try to automatically shut down any further discussion.

I'm really, really getting sick and tired of the extremist sentiments here. On both sides of this issue,

Hey, pay attention. Calling for, and working towards, the destruction of Israel is racism, pure and simple, and that's the Palestinian objective. If you guys can't even accept that the Palestinian leaders are known, wanted terrorists who repeatedly get re-elected, then what's the point of even listening to them/you?