• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Hamas Wants Civilian Casualties

But you'd trust a statement from Israel/IDF. Even given thir record?


I trust a statement from an independent journalist and from Palestinian civilians who witnessed the attack. Do you even read my posts? Actually, don't answer that, I already know the answer.
 
Ugh... so much stupidity. Okay people, let's clear up some facts please.

First, intelligence.

The IDF knew the GPS position of all UN facilities. The UN gave them to them. The IDF does not have 24/7 live coverage of every square inch of Gaza. If you think that you're a moron.

You'd be a moron to think that Israel didn't know 1,000 people went to hide in that school.

In all liklihood the Israeli fire was counter-battery fire. Counter-battery fire uses computers to map the ballistic arc of incoming rounds and very accurately identifies the source of the fire, so that counter-fire can be directed immediately against the target. It is highly unlikely that the Israelis firing back at the militants ever had visual contact with their target.

Really? now we know Israel was lying about their being enemy fire from that school. it's apparently admitted their wasn't any enemy fire from that school

The hits on the school were tactical in nature - an immediate response by a local commander to an immediate threat. This wasn't an airstrike planned days in advance by a team of high-ranking staff.

Ahh well that makes the deaths of all those palestinians OK I suppose? :rolleyes:

Even assuming the local commander had any thoughts about the UN facility, it wouldn't surprise me if these sort of strikes are encouraged to teach the UN a lesson.

What vile people attack 1,000 civilians in order to teach the UN a 'lesson' ?


Let's be absolutely 100% clear on the facts of the matter here, people.

What BS. "facts"??? You havent' posted any facts. only conjecture


Firstly, independent journalists are reporting that militants were either inside or immediately adjacent to the UN site. This is neither IDF nor Hamas propaganda.

Assuming this is true, several facts are immediately put into place:

1) The placement of the mortar team in or adjacent to the UN compound is a violation of the Laws of International Armed Conflict, and a warcrime.

2) The UN's failure to prevent the placement of mortar teams in or adjacent to their compound is a violation of the Laws of Armed Conflict, and a warcrime. Further, it makes the UN a party to the conflict, and therefore a legitimate target.

3) As confirmed by the UN and by the IDF, Palestinian militants have a history of using UN positions for their attacks. This worsens point 2) substantially.

4) Israel's return fire against incoming fire is a perfectly legitimate and legal military action.

You are all barking up the wrong tree here people. The serious issue and concern here is neither the IDF attack on the school, nor the Hamas use of the school. The far, far, more serious issue here is the UN's failure to prevent use of their position. I cannot overemphasise how serious the UN's breach is in this regard, and I find the media lack of attention on it quite disturbing.


What a load of BS.

I've never seen such a lame attempt at absolving Israel of a serious war crime.

Now you tell me if the situation was reversed and it was Israel citizens who were killed while sheltering in a school, you'd take the same attitude. Yeah riggggggghhhht!!
 
Last edited:
Well the UN has revealed that Israel has admitted in private that there was no enemy fire coming from the school. And apparently, although I haven't seem the report myself yet, but I was just told that Israel has also admitted it publicly.

So that kind of urinates on this this thread's premise that Hamas wants civilian casualties.

I will provide links when they become available
I bet you won't.
 
That's the same nonsense boloboffin was posting about.

Well it's not nonsense is it? Israel has admitted that there was no enemy fire from the school. or are you accusing the UN of lying?

Will you accuse Israel of lying when the links are provided of their admission?

Or will you just shrink away from this specific issue and find something else to BS about?

Or ...... will you actually have the courage to hold your hands up and admit you were wrong?

We'll see. :)
 
Well it's not nonsense is it? Israel has admitted that there was no enemy fire from the school. or are you accusing the UN of lying?

Will you accuse Israel of lying when the links are provided of their admission?

Or will you just shrink away from this specific issue and find something else to BS about?

Or ...... will you actually have the courage to hold your hands up and admit you were wrong?

We'll see. :)

"The Israeli army is briefing diplomats privately that the militant fire from Jablia yesterday did not come from inside the UNRWA school compound, but from the outside

This is the most idiotic case of semantics I've read in a while.

TFT - why are you upset? Your own source claims Hamas was firing from outside the school. Outside, as in immediately outside of the school, not outside and miles away.
 
Originally Posted by IDB87
Originally Posted by Tin Foil Timothy
And what vile propaganda ...

"Defense officials told The Associated Press that booby-trapped bombs in the school had triggered secondary explosions that killed additional Palestinians there. "

What is vile about that statement and what makes it propaganda? Has Hamas ever booby-trapped a building in Gaza?

And you keep going on about Hamas propaganda. Could you provide an example of 'Hamas Propaganda'? You know, to hide your bias.

Incase you missed it, TFT.
 
You'd be a moron to think that Israel didn't know 1,000 people went to hide in that school.

I fail to see how this is relevant.


Really? now we know Israel was lying about their being enemy fire from that school. it's apparently admitted their wasn't any enemy fire from that school

Who cares what Israel has said?


Ahh well that makes the deaths of all those palestinians OK I suppose? :rolleyes:

No death in war is ever "OK".


What vile people attack 1,000 civilians in order to teach the UN a 'lesson' ?

No one attacked any civilians.


What BS. "facts"??? You havent' posted any facts. only conjecture

Wrong.


What a load of BS.

That's all you have to say? No attempt to argue against my interpretation of International Law? give it a shot. Since everything I said is apparently "a load of BS" it should be a pretty easy task proving me wrong.


I've never seen such a lame attempt at absolving Israel of a serious war crime.

War crimes were committed in this instance, but not by Israel.


Now you tell me if the situation was reversed and it was Israel citizens who were killed while sheltering in a school, you'd take the same attitude. Yeah riggggggghhhht!!

Not at all. I couldn't give a flying fig about Israel. I care about people being accurate about the facts, and not spewing propaganda and nonsense. You will note I categorically rejected a claim of anti-Israeli propaganda by Reuters in another thread. You appear to be utterly incapable of actually looking at this particular subject objectively. As long as you spew your mindless garbage, I will continue to correct you.

My interest in this topic is very simple. Most of the people debating it appear to have an appallingly bad grasp of international law, yet are quick to make claims of illegal action by one side or the other. I seek to educate the ignorant and ill-informed.
 
TFT - why are you upset? Your own source claims Hamas was firing from outside the school. Outside, as in immediately outside of the school, not outside and miles away.

According to the BBC, the Israeli artillery hit outside the school.

At least 40 people were killed and 55 injured when Israeli artillery shells landed outside a United Nations-run school in Gaza, UN officials have said.

Independent observers have confirmed that militants were firing from immediately outside the school according to a post earlier in this thread. (A link to that confirmation would be appreciated.)

The UN is probably correct in claiming that no militants were inside the compound. But that does not preclude militants being right outside the walls where the artillery shells hit.
 
Last edited:
Well it's not nonsense is it? Israel has admitted that there was no enemy fire from the school. or are you accusing the UN of lying?
It came from just outside the school. Which is where the IDF returned the fire. It's also where the casualties were:
Israeli mortar shells killed as many as 40 Palestinians, among them women and children, outside a United Nations school in Gaza on Tuesday where they were taking refuge in the 11th day of the conflict.
I've bolded the word that is the key to comprehending this story.

Now, you were saying? :rolleyes:
 
Just to confirm, the strikes didn't hit in the school itself:

John Ging, head of Gaza operations for the agency [UN], confirmed that at least 30 people died and 55 were injured, five critically, when three artillery tank shells landed at the perimeter of the school. He said the "indications are that these strikes originated from Israeli weapons".

...

Most of the casualties in the attack in the northern Gaza town of Jebaliya, where some 350 people had taken refuge, were outside the school premises though there were some inside as well, Ging said.

...

Two residents who spoke to an AP reporter by phone said the two brothers [two men named by Israel as amongst the dead] were known to be low-level Hamas militants. They said a group of militants - one of them said four - were firing mortar shells from near the school. An Israeli shell targeted the men, but missed and they fled, the witnesses said. Then a further three shells landed nearby, exploding among civilians, they said.

The three Israeli mortar shells that crashed down on the perimeter of the school struck at midafternoon local time, when many people in the densely populated camp were outside getting some fresh air, thinking an area around a school was safe.

...

New Zealand Herald
 
Independent observers have confirmed that militants were firing from immediately outside the school according to a post earlier in this thread. (A link to that confirmation would be appreciated.)
Right here:
A young witness from Jabaliya, Ibrahim Amen, 16, said that he had seen one of the militants, whom he identified as Abu Khaled Abu Asker, in the area of the school right before the attack.

Ibrahim said he saw the militant after he answered calls for volunteers to pile sand around the camp “to help protect the resistance fighters.” Ibrahim went to pile sand near the school with his brother, Iyad, 20, who was then injured by the Israeli mortar fire.
 
Let's be very clear about this.

1. It was reported widely yesterday that Israel had fired mortar shells at a U.N.-run school and killed at least 40 people. At the time, the military said that Hamas fighters had launched mortar shells from the school.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/06/AR2009010603504.html

Notice that is not some whacked-out little website. That is the Washington Post. The story is all over. The headline says:

Israel Hits U.N.-Run School in Gaza
40 Die at Shelter That Military Says Hamas Was Firing From

2. The story that I then quoted in this thread was from CNN. Again, not some CT website hating on Israel. It quoted, not a Hamas spokesman, not a U.N. spokesman, but AN ISRAELI SPOKESMAN pulling back on the "fired from the school" story.

All of Wildcat's yammering on about what Hamas has done, and how much the U.N. is untrustworthy is a straw man. I'm quoting respected sources who are talking to the Israelis.

3. Now comes a better picture of the situation on the ground and the Hamas fighters were NOT in the school and the Israeli mortars did NOT hit the school. Welcome to the fog of war.

But that does not change what Israel was saying before and what they are saying now. When they thought they had hit the school, they said Hamas was firing on them from the school. Now they have adjusted their story - to reality.

4. This is not coming from a defend-Hamas-at-all-costs perspective from me. Indeed, I'm more coming from the position of a plague on both their houses. Plenty of people are demonstrating the shortcomings of Hamas in this matter. Don't take my pointing out Israel's shortcomings as a defense of Hamas.

5. Wildcat, your first response to me ended in a very long straw man but it began with an outrageous smear of me and I demand an apology from you. Quit using cowardly smears immediately. It is not conducive to a civil discussion.

6. It is obvious that Israel is taking every effort they can to minimize civilian casualities. It does them no good at all to kill civilians, and if they did want to kill civilians, they could turn the Gaza Strip into a smoking ruin. That's why the first story about shooting at the school made no sense, especially since now we know the school is still standing. Some idiot threw out an excuse to some erroneous story, and now Israel is backtracking and Hamas is making the most of it. The lesson for an official spokesman should be: keep your yap shut until you know the facts on the ground.
 
You are honestly declaring that the UN is willing to actively support a terrorist organisation in order to bring down the state of Israel? This is not far off 9/11 Conspiracy nonesense.

As for the topic itself, it is distressing how little the newspapers over here in Britain are reporting on the allegation that Hamas were firing from the school. The Independent makes no mention of it on their front page, once again making a mockery of their name.
Yes I do believe that the UN is capable of just that. The head of that mission that was hit isn't even in Gaza it is staffed by locals and it is entirely plausible that they allowed Hamas to operate there. They have allowed UN ambulances to be used as troop transports on several occasions.

Someone up thread stated that the Guardian is reporting it and that unidentified locals confirmed that Hamas was firing from there.
 
This inside/outside stuff appears to be semantics. The Hamas members were at the perimeter of the school, and Israel hit the perimeter of the school. Outside or inside depends on your own interpretation, but I don't think any of this seriously changes the scenario.
 
But that does not change what Israel was saying before and what they are saying now. When they thought they had hit the school, they said Hamas was firing on them from the school. Now they have adjusted their story - to reality.

And the significance of that is...?

The IDF could still claim they thought Hamas was firing from inside the school, regardless of the clarification that they were, infact, firing outside of it. Once a civilian building is used militarily, it's immunity is forfeit, and it can be legally targetted.
 
And the significance of that is...?

The IDF could still claim they thought Hamas was firing from inside the school, regardless of the clarification that they were, infact, firing outside of it. Once a civilian building is used militarily, it's immunity is forfeit, and it can be legally targetted.

We've seen this vile view before in this forum.

So let's get this straight? A couple of hamas fighters fire from a building, and even though the building contains 1,000 civilians it's OK to fire artillery at the building?

I guess you're one of those people who hold what's deemed 'legal' as a higher precedence than innocent human life?

In Germany 70 years ago it was illegal to be of a certain race. I guess you would agree that those innocent people were legitimate targets as well wouldn't you?

You views have been well exposed. And any decent person would highly condemn them.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom