Israel begins ground operations

[Stout]

Denying your enemy war materiel is not "collective punishment". It wasn't just "Palestinian militants" firing rockets at Israel, it was the army of the government of Gaza!

Now that's the relationship I was trying to establish yesterday when I was asking whether Hamas was democratically elected or some militant group that had seized power.

I side the Israelis on this, if the Palestinians elected a government that wanted to go to war, then obviously they got just that.

Now where was it I was reading someone going on about Israel dropping 100 pound bombs on a civilian population ? When i read articles like this I'm really having a tough time swallowing this whole "Israelis are targeting civilians" argument.

 

[Thunder]

It is against the Geneva Conventions to withhold food and medicine from a civilian population..even if they have chosen to elect a crappy Islamic extremist govt.

Imagine what would happen if one day, some nation that we are dependant upon for food and medicine, decided to withhold it from us, because they decided they didn't like our choice of leadership?

Bad guys withhold food and medicine. Good guys dont.

 

[Darth Rotor]

It is against the Geneva Conventions to withhold food and medicine from a civilian population..even if they have chosen to elect a crappy Islamic extremist govt.

Imagine what would happen if one day, some nation that we are dependant upon for food and medicine, decided to withhold it from us, because they decided they didn't like our choice of leadership?

Bad guys withhold food and medicine. Good guys dont.

Then the UN Charter is in violation of the Geneva Convention. It explicitly allows for embargoes and blockades. Read Articles 40-52. Come back when you understand them.

Care to try again, Parky?

DR

 

[gdnp]

Then the UN Charter is in violation of the Geneva Convention. It explicitly allows for embargoes and blockades. Read Articles 40-52. Come back when you understand them.

Care to try again, Parky?

DR

Yes. The UN charter allows for embargoes and blockades. When authorized by the security council. I do not recall Israel asking for a security council resolution authorizing their Gaza blockade.

Or would you assert, for example, that because the security council can authorize the use of lethal force, that the use of lethal force outside of a security council authorization is legal?

Oh, and I'd like some examples where the security council embargoed food and medicine to a civilian population. The closest that comes to mind are the Iraq sanctions, and there they set up alternative means of delivering humanitarian supplies (the oil for food program).

 

[IDB87]

Yes. The UN charter allows for embargoes and blockades. When authorized by the security council. I do not recall Israel asking for a security council resolution authorizing their Gaza blockade.

If they (Israel) do not ask for authorization, and proceed with a blockade, is there a certain set of protocols the U.N. must follow inorder to end the illegal blockade? The same applies to Hamas targetting civilians - are there steps the U.N, set by its' own rules and standards, must follow to end the illegal targetting of Israeli civilians that hold no military significance?

Parky:

Could you explain to me how two military bodies slugging it out in urban centers with high-powered rifles and explosives is fair? All military equipment (including the training of the soldier), throughout history, is and was designed to give one side an advantage.

 

[Thunder]

Yes. The UN charter allows for embargoes and blockades. When authorized by the security council. I do not recall Israel asking for a security council resolution authorizing their Gaza blockade.

Or would you assert, for example, that because the security council can authorize the use of lethal force, that the use of lethal force outside of a security council authorization is legal?

Oh, and I'd like some examples where the security council embargoed food and medicine to a civilian population. The closest that comes to mind are the Iraq sanctions, and there they set up alternative means of delivering humanitarian supplies (the oil for food program).

Um...I think it is fair to say:

"DR.....you got BUSTED!!!!"

 

[Darth Rotor]

Yes. The UN charter allows for embargoes and blockades. When authorized by the security council. I do not recall Israel asking for a security council resolution authorizing their Gaza blockade.

Nor do they need to. A state of belligerency exists, whether or not it is declared, at which time the two parties can act as do belligerents. Funny, they are doing that. I find it bizarre that the UN -- not a state -- can order an embargo on behalf of Bosnia or the people of Haiti, but that a nation in a state of belligerency with another party can't. Sorry, that's a little inside out.

By the way, did either of you bother to read Article 51?

I thought not. From Parky I expect that, but from you I expected better.

Likewise, with your love of the UN, do you hold the attack on Serbia 1999 was unlawful? That wasn't a UN op either. Curious at your reasoning here.

Or would you assert, for example, that because the security council can authorize the use of lethal force, that the use of lethal force outside of a security council authorization is legal?

I will point out that a state of belligerency, when it exists, opens the door for belligerent acts, of which a blockade is one. An embargo, such as the trade embargo the Arabs laid on the US, or the US laid on certain good with the Soviets, are not beliggerent acts, and to NOT require UN authorization in any case.

Parky, if you were smart enough to understand this conversation, I'd address you, but you aren't.

Oh, and I'd like some examples where the security council embargoed food and medicine to a civilian population. The closest that comes to mind are the Iraq sanctions, and there they set up alternative means of delivering humanitarian supplies (the oil for food program).

Since that faulty Parkyesque summary has already been shown, in this thread and about ten others in the past month, to be incorrect -- hum aid has indeed been sent, and some getting in, and as noted by numerous reports, frequently misdirected, sorta like Iraq, please try again.

DR

 

[interwaff]

I wonder how long oporations will last.

Likely until the fat lady sings, like when one goes to the opora.

"Fat" as in Oporah Winfrey.

"Sings" as the oporative word.

 

[Pardalis]

Guerilla war will only increase the casualties, I don't think Israel has any chance to take Hamas down without taking twice as much civilians in the process. It's hard to crunch big numbers but I just saw the 500 casualties mark in the news, and that's pretty steep. They've got to start thinking if it's worth it.

 

[WildCat]

Guerilla war will only increase the casualties, I don't think Israel has any chance to take Hamas down without taking twice as much civilians in the process. It's hard to crunch big numbers but I just saw the 500 casualties mark in the news, and that's pretty steep. They've got to start thinking if it's worth it.

They can do it now, while Hamas is relatively weak or they can do it later, after Hamas has had more years with which to smuggle even more and better arms from their Iranian patrons and to train and build up their army.

The first "it" in "is it worth it" is Israels very existence.

It's funny that no one is mentioning Iran in these threads, as if they were just a casual bystander.

 

[DC]

They can do it now, while Hamas is relatively weak or they can do it later, after Hamas has had more years with which to smuggle even more and better arms from their Iranian patrons and to train and build up their army.

The first "it" in "is it worth it" is Israels very existence.

It's funny that no one is mentioning Iran in these threads, as if they were just a casual bystander.

Israel has the USA and alot others that provide Money Intell and Arms, even including Submarines, fighterjets, Helicopters etc etc.

And Palestina has Iran that provides them with Money and Arms.

Whats to mention?

 

[Pardalis]

The first "it" in "is it worth it" is Israels very existence.

I know Hamas' goal, and I know any war costs lives, but the body count is growing exponentially now with the ground operations. I'm starting to wonder if the end result, the destruction of Hamas, is ever likely to be acheived.

It cost 1 thousand lives in Lebanon and Hezbollah are still around.

 

[DC]

will the Children and other relatives of the killed Hamas members be peacefull in future?

 

[Pardalis]

will the Children and other relatives of the killed Hamas members be peacefull in future?

Well they were going to get brainwashed by their Hamas fathers if they stayed alive anyway, but the Israeli retaliation will further the resentment and hatred too I agree. So damned if you do, damned if you don't. A real mess.

 

[Texas]

Guerilla war will only increase the casualties, I don't think Israel has any chance to take Hamas down without taking twice as much civilians in the process. It's hard to crunch big numbers but I just saw the 500 casualties mark in the news, and that's pretty steep. They've got to start thinking if it's worth it.

There is nothing worse than entering a Guerrilla war and then leaving it before the job is done. Yes there have been about 100 civilian deaths so far but to pullout with Hamas still in control on the heels of Lebanon it will destroy Israel's military credibility as an effective deterrent and you can bet that Israel's enemies in the Middle East are watching events closely. Israel is fast losing its larger than life image as an unbeatable military power and given the geographical realities surrounding it that is a very real threat to its future viability as a country.

 

[Texas]

will the Children and other relatives of the killed Hamas members be peacefull in future?

Would they have been peaceful had their Hamas parents lived? There is an old ethics exercise that asks would it have been right to travel back into time and kill Hitler as a child. Given what Palestinian children are being taught in schools, Mosques and their parents and the honoring of suicide bombers in Palestinian culture as martyrs is it unreasonable to assume that most adolescent children are so indoctrinated into genocidal hatred that they are no longer "innocent"?

 

[a_unique_person]

They can do it now, while Hamas is relatively weak or they can do it later, after Hamas has had more years with which to smuggle even more and better arms from their Iranian patrons and to train and build up their army.

The first "it" in "is it worth it" is Israels very existence.

It's funny that no one is mentioning Iran in these threads, as if they were just a casual bystander.

For all the claims of Hamas having stockpiles of advanced weapons, I haven't seen any sign of it to date.

 

[Pardalis]

There is nothing worse than entering a Guerrilla war and then leaving it before the job is done.

It depends on what "done" means, the job wasn't done in Lebanon for example.

They had every reason to retaliate, but until what point?

 

[Darth Rotor]

For all the claims of Hamas having stockpiles of advanced weapons, I haven't seen any sign of it to date.

You most likely wouldn't, until they use them, if they have them. Why? It is in their interest to exploit technological surpise.

For a better example, albeit old and more along the lines of conventional warfare, consider the SA 6 in 1973. It worked better due to the Egyptians doing a little OPSEC and not broadcasting their newer, monopulse radar guided SAM's.

It was eventually countered, but exacted a price.

DR

 

[Texas]

It depends on what "done" means, the job wasn't done in Lebanon for example.

They had every reason to retaliate, but until what point?

If all Isael wanted to do was retaliation it could have stopped with the air assault. Israel first stated that its goal was to "change the facts on the ground" in Gaza. Now Israel is saying that it has no intention of deposing Hamas. Lebanon very badly damaged the credibility of Israel's resolve and if they do the same thing in Gaza it will be critically damaged or even destroyed. Israel is playing a VERY dangerous game by giving groups like Hezboallah and Hamas moral victories. Should Israel withdraw with Hamas still in control then every life lost on both sides were lost just to maintain the status-quo. To me that would actually be a moral crime Israel could fairly be accused of commiting.