There's been a great deal of name-calling, but nobody has yet answered the question of where the Geneva convention gives the right to "kill innocent people in the name of "self defense."" foopirata, Article 28 prohibits the use of human shields - it does NOT permit the killing of innocent people in spite of their use as human shields (if it did, it would read "A protected person's protected status is nullified in areas subject to military operations". I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
It is illegal to intentionally target civilians however if civilians die as a result of a attack on a military or a "dual-use" target that is not against the law. Israel has been targeting military and "dual-use" targets and as such are not violating international law even though some civilians are dieing. However reports have over and over again said the majority of those killed are in Hamas."Is Israel committing war crimes by causing civilian casualties?The 1949 Geneva Conventions aimed to end attacks purely or mainly against civilians, a tactic used heavily in World War II. Article 51 of the First Protocol to the 1949 agreements (updated in 1977) states: "The civilian population as such, as well as individual civilians, shall not be the object of attack."Article 52 adds: "Attacks shall be limited strictly to military objectives..."Therefore, there is a war crime if civilians are specifically attacked as civilians. However, it is different if they are killed as a result of a strike against a military or a "dual-use" target, (though see next answer for limits on such strikes).Precautions to minimise casualties should be taken and the argument is about whether such precautions the Israelis say they have taken have been sufficient.Indiscriminate attacks that target a wide area just to hit a few objectives or which hit military and civilian targets "without distinction" are outlawed by Article 51." <a class="user" href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5198342.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5198342.stm</a>
Again gentlemen (ladies?), the question is not whether the Geneva convention forbids collateral damage under any circumstance; the question is whether the Geneva convention specifically AUTHORIZES the killing of innocent people as 140Suffolk claims. There is a difference between a statutory crime (ie: forbidding a particular activity) and granting a legal right (ie: guaranteeing the right to engage in some activity). None of the articles cited thusfar grant such a right, so again I can award no bonus points for intelligent thought, or reading comprehension.
What cease fire???The way I understand it a cease fire is when there are no rockets falling on Israel..But there was no cease fire!!!Hamas can't control its people and should be replacedso the Israelies and Palestininans get a true shot for peace!
If someone runs at you with a knife to stab you at the heart, because you have been collectively punishing them, stealing their land, humiliating them and making their lives miserable, with the ultimate aim of annexing the entire region, then you might understand why they are running at your with a knife and perhaps give them back what they deserve.I don't see peace every being possible unless:1. Israel kills and expels every Palestinianor2. Remove all Israeli settlers and military from Palestinian land and permit them to become their own country.How could it possibly ever happen in any other way? This is a matter of doing what is right and what you would only want if it were you.
I applaud Al-Jazeera for airing this despite the stupidity of this guy. It should neuter any arguments that it is a mouthpiece for terrorists. Oh and all the pro-Israel guys here, how's your campaign of disinformation going? Swimmingly it seems.First of all Israel was the one who broke the ceasefire<a class="user" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/05/israelandthepalestinians">http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/05/israel ...</a><a class="user" href="http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=KntmpoRXFX4">http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=KntmpoRXFX4</a>Second of all they further violated the terms of the ceasefire by refusing to lift the blockade, banning exports from Gaza, effectively killing trade and resulting in 50% of the population unemployed. Way to go you Israeli peace lovers you!You claim to be targeting hamas. You fools. This isn't a war against Hamas, this a war against the Palestinian people. Hamas was legitimately elected by the Gazan people. It was Israel, who refused to deal with Yasser Arafat. You snubbed him, refused to talk with him, began assassinating leading members of Fatah, decided to try and kill Arafat himself a few times and have undermined diplomacy at every turn. When he died and Fatah descended into a corrupt mess, the people of Gaza, realising the impotency of moderate, secular Fatah elected the tough guy who promised change. Third of all your pitiful excuse about Hamas rockets is laughable. They're nothing more than fireworks whilst Israel uses everything from dense inert metal explosives to white phosphorus. It was Israel that got Hamas elected, it was Israel that broke the terms of the ceasefire, it was Israel that massacred the Gazan population and now its Israel prolonging the humantarian crisis.Of course you hacktivists are having some strange orgy in here so I expect to be buried. Fess up Zionists, this isn't a war against hamas, this is a collective punishment against the people of Gaza for having the temerity to vote their way.
richmomzJan 2, 2009
There's been a great deal of name-calling, but nobody has yet answered the question of where the Geneva convention gives the right to "kill innocent people in the name of "self defense."" foopirata, Article 28 prohibits the use of human shields - it does NOT permit the killing of innocent people in spite of their use as human shields (if it did, it would read "A protected person's protected status is nullified in areas subject to military operations". I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
hadeesJan 2, 2009
It is illegal to intentionally target civilians however if civilians die as a result of a attack on a military or a "dual-use" target that is not against the law. Israel has been targeting military and "dual-use" targets and as such are not violating international law even though some civilians are dieing. However reports have over and over again said the majority of those killed are in Hamas."Is Israel committing war crimes by causing civilian casualties?The 1949 Geneva Conventions aimed to end attacks purely or mainly against civilians, a tactic used heavily in World War II. Article 51 of the First Protocol to the 1949 agreements (updated in 1977) states: "The civilian population as such, as well as individual civilians, shall not be the object of attack."Article 52 adds: "Attacks shall be limited strictly to military objectives..."Therefore, there is a war crime if civilians are specifically attacked as civilians. However, it is different if they are killed as a result of a strike against a military or a "dual-use" target, (though see next answer for limits on such strikes).Precautions to minimise casualties should be taken and the argument is about whether such precautions the Israelis say they have taken have been sufficient.Indiscriminate attacks that target a wide area just to hit a few objectives or which hit military and civilian targets "without distinction" are outlawed by Article 51." <a class="user" href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5198342.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5198342.stm</a>
richmomzJan 2, 2009
Again gentlemen (ladies?), the question is not whether the Geneva convention forbids collateral damage under any circumstance; the question is whether the Geneva convention specifically AUTHORIZES the killing of innocent people as 140Suffolk claims. There is a difference between a statutory crime (ie: forbidding a particular activity) and granting a legal right (ie: guaranteeing the right to engage in some activity). None of the articles cited thusfar grant such a right, so again I can award no bonus points for intelligent thought, or reading comprehension.
maikicnJan 6, 2009
What cease fire???The way I understand it a cease fire is when there are no rockets falling on Israel..But there was no cease fire!!!Hamas can't control its people and should be replacedso the Israelies and Palestininans get a true shot for peace!
jellygraphJan 12, 2009
If someone runs at you with a knife to stab you at the heart, because you have been collectively punishing them, stealing their land, humiliating them and making their lives miserable, with the ultimate aim of annexing the entire region, then you might understand why they are running at your with a knife and perhaps give them back what they deserve.I don't see peace every being possible unless:1. Israel kills and expels every Palestinianor2. Remove all Israeli settlers and military from Palestinian land and permit them to become their own country.How could it possibly ever happen in any other way? This is a matter of doing what is right and what you would only want if it were you.
mrhappymanJan 27, 2009
I applaud Al-Jazeera for airing this despite the stupidity of this guy. It should neuter any arguments that it is a mouthpiece for terrorists. Oh and all the pro-Israel guys here, how's your campaign of disinformation going? Swimmingly it seems.First of all Israel was the one who broke the ceasefire<a class="user" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/05/israelandthepalestinians">http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/05/israel ...</a><a class="user" href="http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=KntmpoRXFX4">http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=KntmpoRXFX4</a>Second of all they further violated the terms of the ceasefire by refusing to lift the blockade, banning exports from Gaza, effectively killing trade and resulting in 50% of the population unemployed. Way to go you Israeli peace lovers you!You claim to be targeting hamas. You fools. This isn't a war against Hamas, this a war against the Palestinian people. Hamas was legitimately elected by the Gazan people. It was Israel, who refused to deal with Yasser Arafat. You snubbed him, refused to talk with him, began assassinating leading members of Fatah, decided to try and kill Arafat himself a few times and have undermined diplomacy at every turn. When he died and Fatah descended into a corrupt mess, the people of Gaza, realising the impotency of moderate, secular Fatah elected the tough guy who promised change. Third of all your pitiful excuse about Hamas rockets is laughable. They're nothing more than fireworks whilst Israel uses everything from dense inert metal explosives to white phosphorus. It was Israel that got Hamas elected, it was Israel that broke the terms of the ceasefire, it was Israel that massacred the Gazan population and now its Israel prolonging the humantarian crisis.Of course you hacktivists are having some strange orgy in here so I expect to be buried. Fess up Zionists, this isn't a war against hamas, this is a collective punishment against the people of Gaza for having the temerity to vote their way.