Israel attacks UN headquarters in Gaza

[TriskettheKid]

Such a lame argument. Considering Gaza one of the most densely populated areas Then there is always going to civilians somewhere close by. Isreal knows this but it doesn't care about Palestinian civilians. This has been proven time and time again

I can see you are a Zionist Apologist. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Your statement makes no sense.

If Gaza is one of the most densely populated areas....yet the Israelis, according to you, don't care about Palestinian civilians, why has civilian death toll been so low?

Just for a comparison:

30,000 civilians killed by the Russians during the 5-week Battle for Grozny....in the mid-90s.

Are you really trying to convince people that the Israelis just don't give a flying **** about Palestinian civilians? Because the death toll certainly doesn't reflect such a position.

 

[Thunder]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090115/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_israel_palestinians_717

Another "mistake".

You know, if Hamas just claimed that all of their rocket attacks against civilian areas were "mistakes", and that they were really trying to hit Israeli military installations, Israel would have no right to complain.

Right?

By the way, Israel first said it was a tragic mistake, now they say that Hamas was firing from within the UN building.

So, either the United Nations is conspiring with Hamas to use their facilities as a human shield..or Israel is led by filthy liars.

Which is it?

 

[Thunder]

I can see you are a Zionist Apologist. You should be ashamed of yourself.

You should be ashamed of yourself for giving up on adult debate tactics and resorting to juvenile name calling.

 

[gumboot]

Didn't someone present statistics that the death toll is less than one person per ordnance dropped by the IDF? Once you take into account deaths from ground-based weapons, that average would drop even lower. To claim the IDF are intentionally targeting civilians, yet are unable to kill even an average of 1 person per munition dropped, is simply insanity.

What a statistic like that actually points to is an incredible effort to avoid civilian casualties by the IDF.

 

[Thunder]

It's against the geneva conventinon to use white phosphorous in built up areas.

The International Red Cross says there is no evidence white phosphorous was used by Israel.

 

[fuelair]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090115/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_israel_palestinians_717

Another "mistake".

You know, if Hamas just claimed that all of their rocket attacks against civilian areas were "mistakes", and that they were really trying to hit Israeli military installations, Israel would have no right to complain.

Right?

No Parky, claims, by themselves don't make it.

 

[The Fool]

Didn't someone present statistics that the death toll is less than one person per ordnance dropped by the IDF? Once you take into account deaths from ground-based weapons, that average would drop even lower. To claim the IDF are intentionally targeting civilians, yet are unable to kill even an average of 1 person per munition dropped, is simply insanity.

What a statistic like that actually points to is an incredible effort to avoid civilian casualties by the IDF.

No, that sort of statistic is quite common. Lots of ammunition gets expended per kill in most military actions.

 

[Policenaut]

In areas that small and compact? No.

 

[BeAChooser]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090115/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_israel_palestinians_717

Another "mistake".

Your AP article (written by Palestinians?) indicates that Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said there'd been a mistake. It also mentions that Israelis struck a hospital, high rise buildings and a building housing media outlets. What your article fails to mention is that in each case the Israeli military said they were being fired on by Palestinians operating in or very near those facilities (which is a war crime, by the way). Funny how the mainstream media always forgets to mention this part of the story. It's almost as if they've chosen a side in the conflict ... the side of Hamas.

 

[Skeptic]

No Parky, claims, by themselves don't make it.

No chance of Hamas doing that, either; it's proud of its random rocketing of civilians and its attempt to kill as many Jews as possible.

Hamas cannot kill Jews by mistake since its raison d'etre is to kill Jews.

 

[a_unique_person]

Your AP article (written by Palestinians?) indicates that Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said there'd been a mistake. It also mentions that Israelis struck a hospital, high rise buildings and a building housing media outlets. What your article fails to mention is that in each case the Israeli military said they were being fired on by Palestinians operating in or very near those facilities (which is a war crime, by the way). Funny how the mainstream media always forgets to mention this part of the story. It's almost as if they've chosen a side in the conflict ... the side of Hamas.

Armed forces lie. Propaganda is just a normal part of war.
If you would like non-palestinians reporting, you will have to get on to the IDF, they are the ones keeping reporters out of Gaza, apparently for their own safety. Strangely enough, reporters are more than welcome in Sderot.

 

[FireGarden]

The IDF claims the building was used by Hamas to fire at Israeli troops, according to (for example) the Jerusalem Post.

And Olmert had this to say:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/outrage-as-israel-bombs-un-1380407.html

The Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, apologised for the shelling but claimed Hamas fighters had opened fire from the centre. "It is absolutely true that we were attacked from that place, but the consequences are very sad and we apologise for it," he said. "I don't think it should have happened and I'm very sorry."

But it turns out that this statement is wrong -- regardless of Olmert's "absolute certainty".

Well, I was wrong. There were no Hamas men in the compound. It was a mistaken firing of a tank shell (I think).

How do I know this?

You may be right about the means,
but I think you know this because your government knows that its initial story won't stand up to scrutiny.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Standard UN SOP: they attacked our building, we leave.

That's what happened in Baghdad.

Hmm, the UN isn't leaving.

Gee, wonder if we have an over reaction here?

Like it or not, it's a war zone.

On the other hand, I think that if I were Sec Gen of the UN I'd react much as the Sec Gen has reacted:

"Hey, arseholes, stop shooting at us, we are trying to stop this war."

His reaction was reasonable, given his organization's mission.

DR

 

[gumboot]

No, that sort of statistic is quite common. Lots of ammunition gets expended per kill in most military actions.

Actually I don't think they add up at all. If you look at reports, the highest figures are for about 200 tonnes of munitions dropped on Gaza by Israel - more modest estimates are about 100 tonnes.

Palestinians are reporting a death toll of about 1,000 at the moment. So that works out at an average, of 5 - 10 people per tonne dropped (whether the Palestinian casualty figures are accurate or not is another question).

In comparison, the Tokyo Fire Bombing killed about 100,000 people and involved 1,700 tonnes of munitions - 58 people per tonne.

In May 1940 the Luftwaffe dropped less than 100 tonnes of munitions on Rotterdam and killed about 1,000 people - about 10 per tonne.

Even the Blitz managed to kill over 2 people per tonne dropped, and that was a sustained campaign against a territory with sophisticated early warning systems and comprehensive bomb shelter systems, not to mention a vastly lower population density.

The UK in WW2 had a population of about 47 million - a population density of about 191 people per square kilometer. In contrast Gaza has a population density of about 3,880 people per square kilometer. In other words Gaza is about 20 times as dense as the UK was when it was exposed to the Blitz.

Were Gaza recognised as an independent territory, it would have the fourth highest density in the entire world after Monaco, Singapore and Gibraltar. Gaza City has a population density of over 5,000 people per square kilometer, making it one of the most dense cities in the world, and more dense than London.

 

[ddt]

Actually I don't think they add up at all. If you look at reports, the highest figures are for about 200 tonnes of munitions dropped on Gaza by Israel - more modest estimates are about 100 tonnes.

Palestinians are reporting a death toll of about 1,000 at the moment. So that works out at an average, of 5 - 10 people per tonne dropped (whether the Palestinian casualty figures are accurate or not is another question).

In comparison, the Tokyo Fire Bombing killed about 100,000 people and involved 1,700 tonnes of munitions - 58 people per tonne.

In May 1940 the Luftwaffe dropped less than 100 tonnes of munitions on Rotterdam and killed about 1,000 people - about 10 per tonne.

Even the Blitz managed to kill over 2 people per tonne dropped, and that was a sustained campaign against a territory with sophisticated early warning systems and comprehensive bomb shelter systems, not to mention a vastly lower population density.

The UK in WW2 had a population of about 47 million - a population density of about 191 people per square kilometer. In contrast Gaza has a population density of about 3,880 people per square kilometer. In other words Gaza is about 20 times as dense as the UK was when it was exposed to the Blitz.

Were Gaza recognised as an independent territory, it would have the fourth highest density in the entire world after Monaco, Singapore and Gibraltar. Gaza City has a population density of over 5,000 people per square kilometer, making it one of the most dense cities in the world, and more dense than London.

I'm not sure which way you're arguing. Let's take the Rotterdam comparison. The centre of Rotterdam in 1940 had a comparable population density with Gaza City now (*). The bombing was a surprise attack, so the citizens were not prepared. And it caused a firestorm. Thus, it had all the pros for killing as much citizens as possible.

The Gazans have already experience with Israeli bombings, and sort of expected this attack. Still, the IAF manages to kill a comparable number of citizens per ordnance.

Tokyo is a bad comparison with its easily inflammable houses.

The population density of the UK as a whole is irrelevant. The Luftwaffe targeted the English cities only, not the Scottish highlands (except for one Messerschmidt that landed there in 1941 ).

(*) Currently, the Centre borough of Rotterdam has an area of 5 sq.km. and 30,000 inhabitants. In general, population has moved out of city centres since WW2, so it probably was even higher in 1940.

 

[gumboot]

I'm not sure which way you're arguing. Let's take the Rotterdam comparison. The centre of Rotterdam in 1940 had a comparable population density with Gaza City now (*).

...

(*) Currently, the Centre borough of Rotterdam has an area of 5 sq.km. and 30,000 inhabitants. In general, population has moved out of city centres since WW2, so it probably was even higher in 1940.

Your link does not support your contention. The city as a whole has a density about half that of Gaza, and only 2/3 of the entire Gaza Strip.

 

[TriskettheKid]

I'm not sure which way you're arguing. Let's take the Rotterdam comparison. The centre of Rotterdam in 1940 had a comparable population density with Gaza City now (*). The bombing was a surprise attack, so the citizens were not prepared. And it caused a firestorm. Thus, it had all the pros for killing as much citizens as possible.

The Gazans have already experience with Israeli bombings, and sort of expected this attack. Still, the IAF manages to kill a comparable number of citizens per ordnance.

Tokyo is a bad comparison with its easily inflammable houses.

The population density of the UK as a whole is irrelevant. The Luftwaffe targeted the English cities only, not the Scottish highlands (except for one Messerschmidt that landed there in 1941 ).

(*) Currently, the Centre borough of Rotterdam has an area of 5 sq.km. and 30,000 inhabitants. In general, population has moved out of city centres since WW2, so it probably was even higher in 1940.

How about Grozny?

Dec. '94-Jan. '95.

Russians killed around 30,000 civilians. The city was nowhere near the population density of Gaza, either.

Israel, on the other hand, has, in the current conflict, and only if we take Gaza sources at their word, killed a few hundred, possibly up to 500. In one of the most densely populated areas on the planet.

Yet the action is called "genocide," "extermination," or a handful of other incredibly emotive and rhetorical words.

 

[gtc]

Yet the action is called "genocide," "extermination," or a handful of other incredibly emotive and rhetorical words.

Don't forget "Holocaust".

 

[ddt]

Your link does not support your contention. The city as a whole has a density about half that of Gaza, and only 2/3 of the entire Gaza Strip.

Yes, but the city as a whole contains a lot of industry and port, e.g., all the area along the "Nieuwe Waterweg" to the sea.

Rotterdam is divided administratively into boroughs ("deelgemeenten") (map). This map shows the area that was burnt down with the 1940 bombing (the red striped area; it also shows the current boroughs). Around 80,000 people got homeless as a result. Nowadays, the borough "Centrum" has around 30,000 inhabitants. Curiously, it doesn't say what area the borough has. But look for comparison at the neighboring boroughs of Delfshaven: 70,000 inh., area 5.8 sq.km. Or Noord: 49,000 inh., area 5.37 sq.km. The (Dutch) wiki page on the history of Rotterdam mentions it already had 500,000 inhabitants in 1920 (now: 580,000) and several current parts of the whole city were annexed later: in 1933 resp. in 1941.

So, while those are no definite numbers, it's safe to say that the area targeted by the bombing had a population density of at least 5,000 inh./sq.km, maybe even the double. The way I arrived at those numbers may sound selective - I picked a largely residential area - but the targets of the IDF we've heard of (schools, police station, UN compound) are also located in residential areas.

<off-topic>
The Rotterdam city archive has some footage of the time of the bombing (nrs 1 and 2)
</off-topic>

 

[Oliver]

And people wonder why I don't believe Hamas

Well, now don't believe Israel anymore as well and you finally got it right...

ISRAEL AND HAMAS: Psychological Tricks to Demoralize the Enemy