Does the IDF target civilians?

[Mycroft]

Ooo, are you reproaching me for checking sources for numbers? Well, you know, unlike you, I don't pretend to know everything, so that's why I get info from Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, B'Tselem, and even Wikipedia.

It's good to check sources. What's silly is to claim I'm wrong, then post information that doesn't contradict anything I said.

But even that is an improvement over most of your arguments, which is mostly to ignore information you don't like while insulting the person that disagrees with you.

You have a lot in common with another poster, E.J.Armstrong.

 

[Orwell]

It's good to check sources. What's silly is to claim I'm wrong, then post information that doesn't contradict anything I said.

But even that is an improvement over most of your arguments, which is mostly to ignore information you don't like while insulting the person that disagrees with you.

You have a lot in common with another poster, E.J.Armstrong.

You claimed that the PA wasn't democratic. You used Arafat's election as an example. True, the PA could be more democratic. But the current PA president was elected, and as far as I know, the election was reasonably fair.

 

[Mycroft]

You claimed that the PA wasn't democratic. You used Arafat's election as an example. True, the PA could be more democratic. But the current PA president was elected, and as far as I know, the election was reasonably fair.

There are valid questions on how democratic the PA democracy really is, questions you don't want to consider because they might force you to consider truths outside your simplistic opinions.

For example, polls that show that 60% of Palestinians favor continued violence against Israel also show that 40% of them don't. Where is their candidate?

The answer? That candidate isn't allowed to participate in the process. To get on the ballot, one must be represented by a "party." Among Palestinian-Arabs, "party" means terrorist faction. To be a candidate of a terrorist faction, one must be vetted by participating in a certain amount of violence against Israel. The result? The shopkeeper who in the US or Canada might choose to get into politics is shut out in the Palestinian territories. Only the guys with the support of men with guns can run.

Is that democracy? Well, I have my opinion, what’s yours?

 

[Orwell]

There are valid questions on how democratic the PA democracy really is, questions you don't want to consider because they might force you to consider truths outside your simplistic opinions.

(shrug) You think my notions are simplistic, I think your notions are simplistically dumb.

For example, polls that show that 60% of Palestinians favor continued violence against Israel also show that 40% of them don't. Where is their candidate?

The answer? That candidate isn't allowed to participate in the process. To get on the ballot, one must be represented by a "party." Among Palestinian-Arabs, "party" means terrorist faction. To be a candidate of a terrorist faction, one must be vetted by participating in a certain amount of violence against Israel. The result? The shopkeeper who in the US or Canada might choose to get into politics is shut out in the Palestinian territories. Only the guys with the support of men with guns can run.

Is that democracy? Well, I have my opinion, what’s yours?

Well, I have no idea if what you say about those polls or about all Palestinian parties being in favour of violence is true. But it doesn't matter, that's not terribly important if we are specifically talking about how democracies tend to operate. You know how it goes, democracy is the worst form of government except for all those others that have been... People don't always get the democracy they want, specially if they are in the minority. I mean, try to get elected in the US is you're neither a Republican or a Democrat. In the US, you typically have a choice between right wing lite and right wing. "Is that democracy?" Well, yeah, it is. These days, one of the most common complaints concerning western style democracy is that the policies of the main ruling parties are often hard to differentiate... Try to get elected in Canada if you're not a member of a registered party. Hell, try to get elected anywhere in a representative democracy without being a member of a party. It can be done, sure, are there are examples of that, but it's way harder.

Also, considering the political context and the history of the middle east, it's already pretty surprising that the Palestinians have some kind of democracy.

 

[Mycroft]

(shrug) You think my notions are simplistic, I think your notions are simplistically dumb.

Insult in place of argument, I guess you win.

I call your notions simplistic because you demonstrate that’s how you want them to be. Whenever evidence of another point of view is brought up, you say things like ”I don’t know, but it doesn’t matter.” or ”I don’t care” or ” I am not interested”. Anything that’s more complex than your simplistic view is summarily rejected as not even being worth considering.

Well, I have no idea if what you say about those polls or about all Palestinian parties being in favour of violence is true. But it doesn't matter…

Ah, perfect example. You don’t know, you don’t care. It doesn’t fit your preconception so it gets dismissed without consideration.

In fact, it’s not that hard to learn about. Who are the Palestinian parties? Who backs them?

But it doesn't matter, that's not terribly important if we are specifically talking about how democracies tend to operate.

Except we’re not talking about how democracies operate. We’re talking about how “democracy” operates among the Palestinians. This is not an abstract discussion, it’s about real people living real lives.

You know how it goes, democracy is the worst form of government except for all those others that have been... People don't always get the democracy they want, specially if they are a minority. I mean, try to get elected in the US is you're neither a Republican or a Democrat. In the US, you typically have a choice between right wing lite and right wing.

WTF…? We’re not talking about people who don’t get their way because they’re the minority. We’re talking about people who can’t participate because men with guns won’t let them.

Go to the Palestinian territories, convince some poor schmuck to run on a platform of living in peace with the Israelis, and see how fast he gets dragged from his home and shot as a collaborator. That’s what I’m talking about.

"Is that democracy?" Well, yeah, it is.

Also, considering the political context and the history of the middle east, it's already pretty surprising that the Palestinians have some kind of democracy.

Not if you understand it for what it is.

 

[Orwell]

But here I am discussing the legitimacy of the PA instead of reminding you clowns about Israel's terrible human rights record...

The Israeli army killed more than 700 Palestinians, including some 150 children. Most were killed unlawfully — in reckless shooting, shelling and air strikes in civilian residential areas; in extrajudicial executions; and as a result of excessive use of force. Palestinian armed groups killed 109 Israelis — 67 of them civilians and including eight children — in suicide bombings, shootings and mortar attacks. Stringent restrictions imposed by the Israeli army on the movement of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories caused widespread poverty and unemployment and hindered access to health and education facilities. The Israeli army destroyed several hundred Palestinian homes, large areas of agricultural land, and infrastructure networks. Israel continued to expand illegal settlements and to build a fence/wall through the West Bank, confining Palestinians in isolated enclaves cut off from their land and essential services in nearby towns and villages. Israeli settlers increased their attacks against Palestinians and their property and against international human rights workers. Certain abuses committed by the Israeli army constituted crimes against humanity and war crimes, including unlawful killings; extensive and wanton destruction of property; obstruction of medical assistance and targeting of medical personnel; torture; and the use of Palestinians as “human shields”. The deliberate targeting of civilians by Palestinian armed groups constituted crimes against humanity.

http://web.amnesty.org/report2005/isr-summary-eng

I may have posted that before. But it's just a reminder, eh?

 

[Orwell]

Insult in place of argument, I guess you win.

Calling my arguments simplistic is insulting. I just reattributed.

I call your notions simplistic because you demonstrate that’s how you want them to be. Whenever evidence of another point of view is brought up, you say things like ”I don’t know, but it doesn’t matter.” or ”I don’t care” or ” I am not interested”. Anything that’s more complex than your simplistic view is summarily rejected as not even being worth considering.

Yeah, whenever you start along "Palestinian bad - Israeli good" crap, I am not interested. I don't want to play along with your childish villains and heroes politics.

Ah, perfect example. You don’t know, you don’t care. It doesn’t fit your preconception so it gets dismissed without consideration.

In fact, it’s not that hard to learn about. Who are the Palestinian parties? Who backs them?



Except we’re not talking about how democracies operate. We’re talking about how “democracy” operates among the Palestinians. This is not an abstract discussion, it’s about real people living real lives.



WTF…? We’re not talking about people who don’t get their way because they’re the minority. We’re talking about people who can’t participate because men with guns won’t let them.

Go to the Palestinian territories, convince some poor schmuck to run on a platform of living in peace with the Israelis, and see how fast he gets dragged from his home and shot as a collaborator. That’s what I’m talking about.

More rhetoric and demonising. Dull, tedious, boring. Here's something I posted before:

To you (and others on this forum), it's as if politics amounts simply to reacting to bedtime stories that have cookie-cutter heroes and villains and gratifying moral endings, it's not about doing things in the world, it's about achieving catharsis. I'm not saying that's wrong. If it's what you want to make of politics, okey-dokey.

But as I've already said, I'm not interested.

 

[Orwell]

Actually I've enjoyed debating Orwell, he's not stupid or heartless...just misguided IMHO. As I said pages ago I've never met an Israeli that likes the occupation, even my goofy mother, an orthodox jew & Likudnik, wants it to end. The problem is there is no one to end it with. For a decade only Arafat made the decisions and he played both sides of the fence. Then Abbas took over and so far he's been steamrolled by the very same terror organizations Arafat payed off with money, turf and weapons, including his very own party's Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades.

Caught in between this boiling cauldron of jihadists and militants are the noncombatant Palestinians and Israel. It could all be over tomorrow if the PA disarmed and dismantled the terror groups - who ironically threaten the PA as much as anyone.

Well, you finally said something that makes sense (except for the me being misguided part, of course )i.e. that doesn't sound like your usual prejudiced filled diatribes. Congratulations! But just one question... You seem to wish that the PA had more control over the more militant groups. Now, who do you think Israeli human rights abuses help the most? The Pa or the militant groups?

 

[a_unique_person]

a_u_p, it so happens that the Nattering Nabob of Negativism was not presenting evidence of IDF targeting, despite being asked to do so. He presented evidence of the IDF operating as a military organization, fighting Islamic terror (Gaza and the West Bank and even Lebanon) and attempting to crush an ongoing series of suicide bombers which were/are prevalent over the years cited, and in the process, having to go into hostile civilian areas (down dangerous alleyways and into ambushes and facing mobs rioting, etc...)
He somehow managed to overlook the reports of MACHSOM-WATCH, which describe Human Rights abuses by the IDF -- abuses which are appalling in my opinion. but also fail to support claims of targeting (http://www.machsomwatch.org/docs/monthlyReports/June2004Eng.asp?link=summaries&lang=eng)

During his ongoing efforts to bolster his side of the argument, he tried to illustrate how the Palestinians are moving away from supporting terrorism as a means to their end (the end being the destruction of Israel, not the end of the 1967 occupation, if I'm not mistaken). He says that the democracy of the Palestinians is at such an advanced stage, that Israel should have few concerns about the continuation of Islamic terror, since the PA (Abbas) is the shining White Knight who will bring peace and calm to his own constituents and allow Israel to withdraw its forces back to barracks for a much-need rest.

============================
And meanwhile, Palestinian sources said the Israeli Air Force targeted and destroyed an abandoned metal workshop and a charity run by Islamic Jihad.

Heavens to Betsy, that sure sounds like the IDF is targeting civilians! Someone had better go wake up Orwell, this early Sunday morning, so he can add this to his list...

Well, if I read the papers correctly on current events, the PA is undergoing a cleaning out of the corruption in the old guard with a new administration. Hence all the uproar. Hopefully, this will be achieved.

 

[Mycroft]

Calling my arguments simplistic is insulting. I just reattributed.

The difference, of course, is I tell you how and why your beliefs are simplistic.

Yeah, whenever you start along "Palestinian bad - Israeli good" crap, I am not interested. I don't want to play along with your childish villains and heroes politics.

Got it. Identifying fundamental flaws in the Palestinian elections is ” Palestinian bad - Israeli good” crap. It makes the issues too complicated, so you just dismiss it. Simplistic.

More rhetoric and demonising. Dull, tedious, boring. Here's something I posted before:

Uh-huh. A fact based point of view that disagrees with you is dull, tedious and boring. It makes the issues too complicated, so you just dismiss it.

But as I've already said, I'm not interested.

Yes, that’s obvious. The question is why you take issue with those that are interested?

 

[Orwell]

The difference, of course, is I tell you how and why your beliefs are simplistic.

Yeah, by telling me that Palestinians are baaaaddd. And in case you haven't noticed, I've also told you why I think your "beliefs" are simplistic and dumb. Remember the villains and heroes stuff?

Got it. Identifying fundamental flaws in the Palestinian elections is ” Palestinian bad - Israeli good” crap. It makes the issues too complicated, so you just dismiss it. Simplistic.

You didn't identify flaws. You said:

WTF…? We’re not talking about people who don’t get their way because they’re the minority. We’re talking about people who can’t participate because men with guns won’t let them.

Go to the Palestinian territories, convince some poor schmuck to run on a platform of living in peace with the Israelis, and see how fast he gets dragged from his home and shot as a collaborator. That’s what I’m talking about.

And you didn't back those assertions up. Without some evidence, that's not identifying flaws, that's saying "Palestinians baaaad". Back your assertions up with credible links (by the way, I'm not talking about Arafat's election, I'm talking about the current PA President, so don't bother with old links), and I'll concede your point about the flaws of Palestinian democracy. But just remember that flawed Palestinian democracy does not justify Israeli human rights abuses.

Uh-huh. A fact based point of view that disagrees with you is dull, tedious and boring. It makes the issues too complicated, so you just dismiss it.

No, that's not it. Can't you read? 'Cause here's what I've said:

To you (and others on this forum), it's as if politics amounts simply to reacting to bedtime stories that have cookie-cutter heroes and villains and gratifying moral endings, it's not about doing things in the world, it's about achieving catharsis. I'm not saying that's wrong. If it's what you want to make of politics, okey-dokey.

 

[WildCat]

Yeah, by telling me that Palestinians are baaaaddd. And in case you haven't noticed, I've also told you why I think your "beliefs" are simplistic and dumb. Remember the villains and heroes stuff?

Keep on beating it, Orwell. It will jump up and run away any second now!

 

[webfusion]

How did a thread about the IDF not targeting civilians for death as a clear matter of policy and intent, just meander into becoming an open platform for Orwell to complain about miscellaneous Israeli Human Rights Abuses?

Let's run the videotape: (no old links, just what is happening today)
--- Palestinians in the Gaza Strip on Sunday evening fired two Qassam rockets into Israeli territory.The unprovoked launch, which took place during a mutually-declared Cease-Fire, was claimed by the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, an armed wing of Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas' faction Fatah.

Shortly after the rocket attack, IDF artillery responded with targeted shelling against rocket launching areas in the northern Gaza Strip. These rocket-launching areas are normally located within civilian areas in Gaza, as the terrorists are trying to provoke an expected barrage of IDF artillery which might cause numerous civilian Palestinian deaths.

And obviously, if there are civilian deaths as a result of the IDF targeting, the 'Human Rights Watchers' will scramble all over the story like flies to ◊◊◊◊ and declare "the Israelis are using disproportionate force and exacerbating a tense situation and escalating the conflict, etc etc..."

Not to mix things up, but I noticed a small little article in the press this morning about Syrian Security Forces kicking the a&& of Islamicists in Aleppo.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/653519.html
Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA) said two Islamic militants (from an un-named "armed terrorist group") were killed and another was wounded in a clash last week. While reading the story, this jumps out: SANA said two security personnel and two civilians were also wounded in the clash in the al-Mouwasalat area of Aleppo.

Aha!! The Syrian security services are targeting civilians!

 

[Orwell]

Wildcat just joined Jocko on my ignore list. I'm weeding out posters who never say anything interesting.

 

[Orwell]

How did a thread about the IDF not targeting civilians for death as a clear matter of policy and intent, just meander into becoming an open platform for Orwell to complain about miscellaneous Israeli Human Rights Abuses?

Let's run the videotape: (no old links, just what is happening today)
--- Palestinians in the Gaza Strip on Sunday evening fired two Qassam rockets into Israeli territory.The unprovoked launch, which took place during a mutually-declared Cease-Fire, was claimed by the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, an armed wing of Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas' faction Fatah.

Shortly after the rocket attack, IDF artillery responded with targeted shelling against rocket launching areas in the northern Gaza Strip. These rocket-launching areas are normally located within civilian areas in Gaza, as the terrorists are trying to provoke an expected barrage of IDF artillery which might cause numerous civilian Palestinian deaths.

And obviously, if there are civilian deaths as a result of the IDF targeting, the 'Human Rights Watchers' will scramble all over the story like flies to ◊◊◊◊ and declare "the Israelis are using disproportionate force and exacerbating a tense situation and escalating the conflict, etc etc..."

Here's an obvious question: if the terrorists are trying to provoke an expected barrage of IDF artillery which might cause numerous civilian Palestinian deaths (I agree with you on this point, I mean, that's what terrorist typically want, cause mayhem for political gain), then why is the IDF doing exactly what the terrorists want? Why is the IDF shelling them with artillery (which, if I recall correctly, isn't the most accurate of weapons)? Why not guided munitions, or helicopter gunboat attacks? Why isn't the IDF trying to minimise civilian casualties? I mean, that's the whole problem with this conflict! The extremists keep setting the agenda!

 

[Mycroft]

Yeah, by telling me that Palestinians are baaaaddd. And in case you haven't noticed, I've also told you why I think your "beliefs" are simplistic and dumb. Remember the villains and heroes stuff?

“Villains and heroes” is your characterization, not mine, and it’s not supported by anything I said. You’ve been invited many times to cite quotes to support these characterizations of yours, but so far you’ve refused.

I call your understanding simplistic because every time anyone says anything that doesn’t fit with your point of view, you say it’s boring, or you dismiss it as rhetoric, or you say you’re not interested. That’s you working very hard to maintain a simplistic point of view.

Which is fine. The question is why you have an issue with people who want to understand the issues with more depth.

You didn't identify flaws…

No, that's not it. Can't you read? 'Cause here's what I've said:

To you (and others on this forum), it's as if politics amounts simply to reacting to bedtime stories that have cookie-cutter heroes and villains and gratifying moral endings, it's not about doing things in the world, it's about achieving catharsis. I'm not saying that's wrong. If it's what you want to make of politics, okey-dokey.

[/QUOTE]

Bedtime stories and cookie-cutter heroes is your characterization, one that isn’t supported by anything said my me, or any of the others you’ve argued with in this thread. You can't even disagree with what people actually say, you have to make up ridiculous simplifications and disagree with that.

 

[Jocko]

Well, you know, unlike you, I don't pretend to know everything...

Thanks for the sig line, that's a keeper.

 

[demon]

quote:
A British UN project manager, shot by an Israeli sniper, was unlawfully killed a UK inquest has concluded.
Iain Hook, 54, of Felixstowe, Suffolk, was in a UN compound in Jenin when he was shot in November 2002.
On Friday, jurors unanimously agreed Mr Hook, who was born in Essex, had been the victim of a "deliberate" killing.
Coroner Dr Peter Dean said he was so concerned by the case and the fact 13 UN workers have died in Jenin, he will write to Prime Minister Tony Blair.
Dr Dean will also send a copy of his letter to the Foreign Secretary Jack Straw and a separate letter will be sent to the Israeli ambassador.
'Fully accountable'
When delivering the verdict Dr Dean said the Ipswich inquest was the only one to consider other deaths in the area.
He said action needed to be taken "particularly as this was not the first death of a UN worker, but the 13th".
After the verdict a statement from Iain Hook's widow Cathy and his family called on the UK, Israeli and United Nation's authorities "to apply appropriate and proportionate pressure to make sure those responsible are fully accountable for their actions in accordance with international law".
The statement adds they must "take steps to ensure the security of existing and future humanitarian operations in Israel and Worldwide".
The inquest at Ipswich Crown Court had heard that the shooting took place after troops surrounded the nearby hideout of an Islamic Jihad leader.
Mr Hook was leading a UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) project to rebuild the camp in the West Bank, which was home to 13,000 Palestinian refugees.
'Not mistaken'
Earlier Dr Peter Hansen, former Commissioner General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) said that over the past four years 13 UNRWA workers, including Mr Hook, had been shot in similar circumstances by the Israeli army.
Mr Hook was the only non-Palestinian.
On Monday in a statement Paul Wolstenholme, a colleague of Mr Hook who was in the compound at time of the shooting, said the Israeli special forces sniper would have known Mr Hook was not a Palestinian.
"It was not a case of mistaken identity, it was a deliberate act," he said.
The Israeli authorities declined to attend the inquest.
The inquest heard that the Israeli authorities claimed the sniper had mistaken Mr Hook's mobile phone for a pistol.
Dr Hansen showed the jury photographs of where the gunman was positioned and said: "It is fairly difficult to imagine how a small mobile phone could be mistaken for a gun."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/suffolk/4534620.stm

 

[webfusion]

Not in a vaccuum

demon, had you even considered that mr Hook, while his death was one of many caused by IDF war maneuvers, was not targeted specifically, but rather his demise came about in the heat of battles that were ongoing at the time in Jenin?

• Four people were shot dead, including the British U.N. worker and a Palestinian child, as Israeli troops Friday swept into West Bank towns and southern Gaza, following a Jerusalem bombing that killed 11 people.

The IDF did not go out to Jenin one sunny afternoon to target mr hook or the kids. Their mission was not to find mr hook and kill him. Their mission was not to cause the deaths of as many Palestinian civilians as they could, in revenge for yet another brutal intentionally targeted attack against Israeli civilians in the heart of their capital city.

No.

The IDF was in Jenin, to stop the terrorist organizations, to round up terrorist militants and to put an end to the Palestinian version of AlQuaeda. Mr hook had hooked-up with the wrong crowd that fateful day, and was in the crossfire. Although I wasn't there, I do know similar circumstances first-hand while serving in the IDF, and I would say that his life ended tragically as the unfortunate outcome of being out on the streets of Jenin while a huge 'effing firefight was underway, as a direct IDF response to continued Islamic terror that had just ended the lives of innocent civilians in a manner similar to 9-11.

But, demon, please don't let those facts interrupt or influence your posts.
Carry on.


((((((eta -- link to IDf website: http://www1.idf.il/DOVER/site/mainpage.asp?sl=EN&id=7&docid=33526.EN
"The IDF is determined to protect Israeli citizens and IDF forces by operating against any group or individual that carries out terrorist activity or supports it." )))))

 

[demon]

webbie:
"demon, had you even considered that mr Hook, while his death was one of many caused by IDF war maneuvers, was not targeted specifically, but rather his demise came about in the heat of battles that were ongoing at the time in Jenin?"


Yes, I considered it but I think I`ll stick with the findings of the Inquest if you don`t mind ie he was not mistaken for a Palestinian and was deliberately killed.
Guess there were no poor helpless cats stuck up trees for the wonderful IDF to rescue that day.