Hamas Wants Civilian Casualties

[Tin Foil Timothy]

Do any of you people read or understand the Geneva Conventions +? Civilians or not, weapon sites are legitimate targets in warfare.
Hamas put the weapons there, not the IDF

Some bit of paper takes precedence over common sense human decency?

So by your logic it's OK to fire at a 1,000 civilians because of 1 or 2 armed militants? I guess it is. That's what your post is condoning.


Digusting Attitude. I bet if hamas blew up 1,000 Israeli civilians becuase of one IDF fighter amongst them you wouldn't be singing the same ugly tune.

 

[WildCat]

Complete BS. If Israel can deduce that cylinders are rockets from an unmanned drone then it's intelligence is good enough to deduce that a school is full of 1,000 people sheltering from the violence.

It wasn't bombed from the air. IDF forces on the ground took incoming nortar fire and they returned fire to the source with mortars. They likely didn't even know what they were aiming at until later.

At any rate, once the enemy uses a place as a fighting position that position becomes a legitimate target. The fault is entirely with Hamas.

 

[WildCat]

Maybe Israel should be defending these positions from the terrorists so there won't be a need to shell anything. No one else seems to want to.

It's all just a big ****ing joke.

Israel is not permitted to defend UN property. That is the sole responsibility of the UN, and they have failed completely in that regard. But rest assured, you will never see a UN report which places blame on the UN.

 

[Pardalis]

At any rate, once the enemy uses a place as a fighting position that position becomes a legitimate target. The fault is entirely with Hamas.

I think it boils down to this: Hamas is using civilians as human shields, that is fairly undisputed fact, it is inexcusable and illegal warfare. But now that Israel knows that, are they justified in keeping firing at them?

I have no idea how to answer this conundrum, but it does make me feel more and more that Israel should stop the invasion, because nothing good will come out of it.

 

[WildCat]

And let's not overlook another possibility: that the UN employees at the school may have been members of Hamas:

The Canadian government is investigating an allegation that a prominent UN aid agency is employing members of what Ottawa considers to be a terrorist organization. Peter Hansen, the head of the UN Relief and Works Agency says some of its workers in the Mideast are members of Hamas, but Hansen says that's not a crime.

...That suspicion was fuelled by a CBC News interview with Hansen, who conceded some UNRWA employees are almost certainly members of Hamas. "I am sure there are Hamas members on the UNRWA payroll," he said. "And I don't see that as a crime."

...The UN says, quite bluntly, it does not hire terrorists. "What Mr. Hansen was saying was that Hamas also carries out social and humanitarian work and not every Hamas member is a militant or a terrorist," said Fred Eckhart, spokesman for the secretary general.

"We do not, when we hire people anywhere in the world, ask about political affiliations. But we do require our staff, local and international everywhere in the world, to conduct themselves in accordance with established practices, principles of the United Nations.

And why shouldn't the UN expect Hamas members to conduct hemselves properly? I mean, if you can't trust a member of an internationally recognized terrorist organization to conduct themselves properly who can you trust!
And it looks like the UN had at least one Hamas rocket maker on their payroll at a UN school in Gaza, as a headmaster!

RAFAH, Gaza Strip, May 5 (Reuters) - By day, Awad al-Qiq was a respected science teacher and headmaster at a United Nations school in the Gaza Strip. By night, Palestinian militants say, he built rockets for Islamic Jihad.

The Israeli air strike that killed the 33-year-old last week also laid bare his apparent double life and embarrassed a U.N. agency which has long had to rebuff Israeli accusations that it has aided and abetted guerrillas fighting the Jewish state.

Another honorable Hamas member conducting himself "in accordance with established practices, principles of the United Nations"!

The UN has zero credibility in this conflict.

 

[boloboffin]

Israel appears to be waffling on where exactly the militants were in relation to the school that was shelled.

"Yigal, I've got to nail you on this -- were they in an UNRWA compound or not? If they were, then you can say to people, 'Well they were there.' If they weren't, let's be clear about it, be honest, be open."

Palmor clarified that "the immediate vicinity" meant "right next to the wall." But, he added, "What wall exactly I'm not in a position to say now."

The Israeli military said Tuesday that Hamas militants were firing mortars from the U.N. school in Jabalya that was being used as a shelter by hundreds of civilians. It said a pair of prominent Hamas operatives -- Imad Abu Askhar and Hassan Abu Askhar -- were inside the school.

Those operatives, described as heads of Hamas mortar-firing operations, were killed in the strike, the Israel Defense Forces said.

 

[WildCat]

Israel appears to be waffling on where exactly the militants were in relation to the school that was shelled.

How is that waffling?

Reports yesterday said that most, if not all, of the casualties were outside the school.

The IDF said that they took fire from mortars and returned fire, also with mortars, to the source of the incoming fire.

As far as the UN goes I don't trust them and their Hamas Gaza employees one bit. If the UN was taking care of business as they should they wouldn't be hiring Hamas members to run the school in the first place, and it would be properly defended from Hamas using it as a fire base.

 

[boloboffin]

The IDF said that they were getting fire from inside the school and that Hamas fighters were in there. Now an official spokesman is all, "I'll get back to you." Waffling.

And with your beautiful cherries, you make quite a pair.

 

[Trojan_Jockey]

I think it boils down to this: Hamas is using civilians as human shields, that is fairly undisputed fact, it is inexcusable and illegal warfare. But now that Israel knows that, are they justified in keeping firing at them?

I have no idea how to answer this conundrum, but it does make me feel more and more that Israel should stop the invasion, because nothing good will come out of it.

I agree, there is no military solution to this, it just ends up as a propaganda coo for Hamas.

Israel does not particularly care about its perception in the rest of the world. To some extent when you have people like TFT who think you are the source of all evil anyway you can see why they wouldn't try and appease such folk. However, moderate and rationale people do exist, and they will lose sympathy with the Israeli cause through such events. The Hamas rockets are largely ineffective, and seem almost impotent. To calculate that risking the deaths of hundreds of civilians in order to destroy half a dozen ineffective home made rockets is clearly not rational.

I believe there will be individuals in the Israeli army who don't give a **** about the lives of Palestinians. At the same time, such an attitude isn't surprising when you consider that Hamas wants to destroy their country. However, there is no military solution to this. Israel HAS to care what rational people think. The west is too keen on the underdog for Israel to ever profit from conflict with Hamas.

 

[Thunder]

Why is it that those who always accuse others of wanting civilian casualties...are the ones RESPONSIBLE for the overwhelming number of civilian casualties?

 

[IDB87]

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.

 

[gumboot]

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.
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.

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.

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.

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

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.

 

[DC]

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.
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.

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.

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.

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

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.

when it is true that Hamas used human shields, then this is propaganda by hamas.

 

[WildCat]

The IDF said that they were getting fire from inside the school and that Hamas fighters were in there. Now an official spokesman is all, "I'll get back to you." Waffling.

Now you sound like a truther, taking early reports as if they were gospel and any subsequent anomaly is evidence of a coverup or a lie.

The IDF yesterday said the fire was coming from "within a UN school". Now, seeing as it is impossible to fire a mortar from inside a building unless your goal is to commit suicide I take this to mean within the school grounds, not fired from inside a classroom as you seem to think.

You are spining the story into the nonsensical, and the UN is in deep denial.

Need I remind you that the UN also vigorously denied that one of their school headmasters, Awad al-Qiq, was a leading Islamic Jihad bomb maker? And so did his colleagues and students and family? They were all lying. Or, as in the UN staff thousands of miles away, completely clueless at best.

And yet, Reuters reports that his home was filled with Islamic Jihad posters and Hamas hailed him as a martyr who led Islamic Jihad's "engineering unit" - a euphemism for their bomb makers. In honor of his death, they fired a salvo of Qassam rockets into Israel.

The UN IMHO has absolutely no credibility when it comes to relating the facts on the ground in Gaza. Their operations in Gaza have been thoroughly infiltrated by Hamas and other militants. The admit they have Hamas members on their payroll, they admit they do not vett their employees at all for ties to terrorist groups. Indeed, the UN denies that all branches of Hamas are in fact terrorists which is at odds with the US, Canada, and pretty much every other entity that lists Hamas in all its forms as a terrorist group.

 

[Fiona]

@Gumboot. How do you know all this?

 

[gumboot]

The UN has as much teeth as the member countries are willing to allow it to have. That the UN does nothing time and again shows that these peacekeeping actions are more show than substance and that nobody seems to be willing to allow a useful ROE to be employed by their troops when they are not under their own direct command.

The problem is not the countries giving their troops ROEs. When deployed under a UN mission, soldiers are required to adhere to the ROE set by the UN. A notable example is Rwanda where the military commanders on the ground desperately asked the UN to widen their ROE to allow them to protect civilians, but the UN refused to do so.

 

[gumboot]

@Gumboot. How do you know all this?

All of what?

If you mean specifics about the incident, our local paper ran a story from an Independent from the Associated Press who talked to witnesses to the attack and they appear to confirm the IDF story. Someone else linked to a BBC article which appears to be from the same journalist.

If you mean international law, because I've read and understand the Laws of Armed Conflict. If you mean previous statements and actions by the UN and other parties involved, it's because I pay attention to the news.

If you mean counter-battery fire, I have a mild interest in military technology. I've seen video from Iraq of US bases being attacked by mortar, and the US counter-battery fire takes out the attackers before the attackers have even managed to zero in on the base - that demonstrates how good counter-battery fire is given the mortar team is two or three guys and a tube while the base is obviously an enormous and easy to spot compound.

All of my position, of course, rests on the AP report being accurate. If the reports of militants firing near the compound are false, it all changes. However thus far we have the IDF and civilians saying they were, and only the UN saying they weren't. If the report is false you have a pretty difficult scenario to explain - the IDF apparently electing to attack the UN for no good reason, and the AP working in collusion with them?

Given what the ramifications of this incident are for the UN, and given the UN's track record on these sorts of things, frankly I wouldn't trust an official UN statement on the incident as far as I could throw it.

 

[Tin Foil Timothy]

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

 

[Tin Foil Timothy]

Given what the ramifications of this incident are for the UN, and given the UN's track record on these sorts of things, frankly I wouldn't trust an official UN statement on the incident as far as I could throw it.

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

 

[gumboot]

Why is it that those who always accuse others of wanting civilian casualties...are the ones RESPONSIBLE for the overwhelming number of civilian casualties?

Intent and result are not the same thing. Also, because the method by which those wanting civilian casualties achieve this is by encouraging retaliatory strikes into civilian areas.

Don't get fooled here parky. Hamas' intent to kill civilians is not achieved by firing rockets into Israel. It is achieved by encouraging Israel to respond to those attacks by striking into Gaza.

Hamas' objective is to kill Palestinian civilians, not Israeli civilians. The death of Israelis wins Hamas nothing. The death of Palestinians wins Hamas bucketloads of international moral capital and a wave of converts to their cause. "Death to Israel!"

The same applies for Hizbollah and every other Islamic group fighting Israel. Israel knows they're caught in a trap, and that's why they display near inhuman restraint in absorbing these sorts of attacks before they lash out.