Israel/hamas - Whos Gonna Break First?

[magneto]

As has already been stated ad infinitum (yawn!) WP is banned by the Geneva Convention for anti-p use. It is allowed for "quick smoke".

 

So all you pedantic wankers, what is the difference between deploying WP as a "quick smoke" option (because there are others) as opposed to it's use in an anti-p role?

 

Did you say "None at all"? Well done, that's the right answer. But then nobody said the Geneva Convention couldn't have loopholes...

 

Actually from the pictures I've seen it doesn't look like WP. Well, not the WP as used by the British Army. Because even in an anti-p role I don't see why you would use a proximity - because it's exactly that.

 

I'm not in the least bit surprised (and no-one else with even the slightest glimmer of intelligence should be surprised either) that the US would not sign away advanced weapon use. Their policy has always been to protect their troops using overwhelming firepower and if they have the money and nous to develop clever stuff to keep their guys alive why sign it away when the opposition will never have it anyway? It's not exactly rocket science. Errr - thinking about it, actually it is...

 

You utter retard.. It is the way in which the WP is being used that is under scrutiny here.. the smoke by-product of the phosphorus weapon itself

 

"Using white phosphorous as an incendiary weapon, i.e. to set fire to military targets, is subject to further restrictions. The use of such white phosphorous weapons against any military objective within concentrations of civilians is prohibited unless the military objective is clearly separated from the civilians. The use of air-dropped incendiary weapons against military objectives within a concentration of civilians is simply prohibited."

http://www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/h...nterview-170109

 

And as for the rest of your quote... stick to reading Gun Porn Monthly

[Alias]

Hamas are working hard to keep support now.

 

Victims are to be paid compensation

 

All rebuild efforts have to go through their organisation, so expect aid to be 'rebadged'

[P.K.]

So P.K, can you please tell me how DIME bombs "limit as far as they can civilian casulties", as opposed to WP???

 

Beacause my understanding is that the shrapnel in the DIME bomb is made from HMTA, which actually distrupts the body's biochemestry, damages the immune system, rapidly causes cancer, and distrupts your D.N.A breakdown. So in effect, is probably more dangerous than DU????

 

Please explain P.K how this is "an attempt to limit as far as they can civilian casualties. As Hamas views the deaths of the citizens it's supposed to be protecting as a win/win it deliberately fires rockets from densley populated areas. DIME munitions are the best way of dealing with them."

It's very very simple so even those with a very limited grasp of munitions should be able to understand DIME.

 

Your ground forces see a target e.g. a bunch of Hamas fanatics with absolutely no thought of possible Gazan civilian casualties launch a Qassam rocket in an attempt to kill innocent Israeli non-combatants going shopping or taking the kids to school or whatever. Now weapon accuracy has improved over the years, no question, but even the best targetting has a limitation. So in order to hit the target the shrapnel spread has to be at least double the expected accuracy. So a cheap and cheerful conventional shell has to have a lethality radius of at least 50 metres in order to be worth firing. This will need a munition of between 30 and 60 lbs in weight. A similar DIME munition will have a lethality radius of some 5 to 10 metres. Couple it with "smart" technology (GPS) and you can take out a Hamas Qassam rocket launcher on a road without damaging the adjoining buildings. Use a conventional shell and you kill the surrounding sheltering Palestinians who unfortunately were stupid enough to vote in Hamas.

 

Would keeping the ceasefire not been a better way of "dealing with THEM" for Israel??

Well here's a novel idea - tell "THEM" to stop firing Qassam rockets at the regional superpower.

 

You utter retard.. It is the way in which the WP is being used that is under scrutiny here.. the smoke by-product of the phosphorus weapon itself

 

"Using white phosphorous as an incendiary weapon, i.e. to set fire to military targets, is subject to further restrictions. The use of such white phosphorous weapons against any military objective within concentrations of civilians is prohibited unless the military objective is clearly separated from the civilians. The use of air-dropped incendiary weapons against military objectives within a concentration of civilians is simply prohibited."

http://www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/h...nterview-170109

You total retard. The use of WP is not banned - simple as. If those calling down the Fire Mission can't see any civilians they're acting in accordance. So tell me, are Hamas a recognised "military objective"? Have they signed up to any of the accords you are blithely quoting? Or could the IDF just put any captive or wounded HAMAS up against a wall and shoot them in accordance with international law?

 

Actually I would strongly recommend NOT putting them up against a wall because of the dangers of riccochets. You've always got to watch your backgrounds you know.

 

In the final analysis the type of weapon used to do the killing is immaterial - they end up just as dead which after all is the objective for all of this.

 

And as for the rest of your quote... stick to reading Gun Porn Monthly

Sorry and all that but none of my posts are from "Gun Porn Monthly". I had never heard of it until you mentioned it. What strange circles you must move in...

[stevie]

Would keeping the ceasefire not been a better way of "dealing with THEM" for Israel??

Well here's a novel idea - tell "THEM" to stop firing Qassam rockets at the regional superpower.

 

 

wtf?? Israel broke the ceasefire on the 6th November, by killing 2 civilians who got to close to the blockade.

 

ha ha regional superpower? oh how you make me laugh P.K. they got a hiding from the Hezbollah in 2006, and have just been beaten by Hamas. in fact the last war they actually did win was the 6 day war!!

[P.K.]

I sincerely hope that you have a very happy life on whichever planet it is that you inhabit...

[stevie]

I sincerely hope that you have a very happy life on whichever planet it is that you inhabit...

 

thank you very much, i'm sure i will.

 

but back to the point. do you actually believe that Hamas broke the ceasefire? or were you, like me, on this planet on the 6th November, when Israel killed 2 Palestinian civilians to break the ceasefire?

[Rog]

Would keeping the ceasefire not been a better way of "dealing with THEM" for Israel??

Well here's a novel idea - tell "THEM" to stop firing Qassam rockets at the regional superpower.

 

 

wtf?? Israel broke the ceasefire on the 6th November, by killing 2 civilians who got to close to the blockade.

 

 

 

 

Get your facts right.

 

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid...icle%2FShowFull

[Lonan3]

Get your facts right.

 

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid...icle%2FShowFull

Nice to see you backing your opinions with such an obviously neutral source.

[Chinahand]

The Jerusalem Post is a pretty liberal publication for the area, and has pretty good journalistic integrity.

 

Wiki has these:

 

 

 

I have no idea how accurate they are, but Reuter's makes it clear Hamas stated the truce was over and it was returning to violence. And the Middle East Progress website has continual low level violence occuring throughout the period. Basically rocket attacks and IDF incursions against arms smuggling returned to pre-ceasefire levels in November well before the end of the ceasefire.

 

My understanding is that Israel did little to reduce its blockade which was Hamas' main demand and so they never completely stopped firing rockets.

 

This creates a Catch 22 - Hamas has said it will not stop attempting to rearm and fight until Israel stops the blockade, Israel will not lift the blockade until Hamas renounces violence.

 

For me - Israel's relations with Jordan and Egypt show that it will respect borders and end violence if it is reciprocated. The fact that the West Bank is far far less violent with a more pragmatic approach from Fatah further increases that feeling. But is the settlement Israel wishes to enforce on the Palestinians viable or just a "Bantustan" accepted by "uncle Tom" stooges (to really mix my metaphors/analogies!).

 

I think that the situation in Gaza is totally unsustainable - with total economic collapse, no links to the outside world and a massively excessive Israeli response to every Hamas action it can only be a breeding ground for more radicalism and violence.

 

Without significant Israeli concessions to allow normalization in Gaza their can be little hope for peace. But without those concessions being reciprocated Israel has no incentive to make the first move. Peace has to have a purpose and the Palestinians have to see their lot improving as a result of a ceasefire - that didn't happen last year as the blockades etc continued.

 

Rog will say you cannot compromise with people like Hamas, but Rog do you want the current situation to just continue? What do you want - a single greater Israel with the Palestinians driven into the sea? A viable two state solution with compromises on both sides to allow a sustainable peace to develop? Or an unviable two state solution where lack of viability in the Palestinian state encourages a millenialist movement with little concern for the future as death and victory are both equally in Allah's hands.

[pongo]

The recent action has to be linked to the coming Israeli election which Benjamin Netanyahu was previously predicted to win.

 

In some ways it's typical that a less hawkish govt almost has to be more hawkish to try to stay in power. And it's why you'll never get peace until the most extreme people on both sides sit down with each other.

 

If it was up to the sensible people on both sides they would have reunited the lands under one flag years ago. Or, better still, no flag.

[Rog]

Let’s just set a baseline here.

 

The British Palestine Mandate of the Levant was to provide an interim government of that part of the former Ottoman Empire and to deliver two separate lands, one for those who wanted NOT to live under the Mogan Dovid , the other for those who did since it was to become Eretz Yisrael as per the League of Nations decision regarding the dissolution of the Turkish Ottoman Empire lands.

 

The British acted unlawfully by ‘recognising’ Trans Jordan as Jordan, the intended land for those who did NOT want to live in Eretz Yisrael but did NOT recognise Israel since they were hell bent in horse-trading bits of what SHOULD all have been Israel to the Arabs in return for access to the Suez Canal, Oil deals, etc.

 

The area of land that Israel was willing to concede in return for recognised borders on the basis of better to have n% of something than 100% of sweet fuck all was in essence left for those people who did NOT want to live in a Jewish land and who for the most part had pissed on their chips by causing trouble with the Hashemite rulers in Jordan.

 

For those who wanted to remain in what was a fraction of the land that had been envisaged by the LON to become Israel there was no problem, at least not from the Israeli side, and many did and have prospered.

 

Some however took heed of the warnings of their neighboring stats and got the hell out in order not to get caught up in the promised genocide the neighboring states where about to unleash on Israel.

 

Others got to hell out at gunpoint, not Israeli guns, Arab guns held by those that wanted a free hand to do what they thought they could do.

 

Along came the ‘ 49 war and the outcome was that the Arabs lost. Borders changed, land that was uncommitted now became disputed, and things eased up.

 

Life then muddled along with enough cooperation on both sides to let progress be made in developing what had been the worst bit of the Mandate lands and Israel grew. So did the Arabs who worked with and in Israel, both peoples prospered.

 

This pissed off Hizb Al-Ikhwan Al-Muslimoon (Google it if you want) who had an axe to grind anyway for a whole shed load of reasons as they saw things, not least being that they wanted to see the Ottoman Empire restored and saw an opportunity to set in train a whole load of trouble by turning the heat on Israel.

 

Along comes Yasser Arafat, a lying cheating son of a bitch unfit to be even called a Street Arab and he and his supporters set about causing trouble. Check out his connections with The Muslim Brotherhood to get a clue.

 

Incidentally he also invented the name ‘Palestinians’.

 

For the result --- look at the region today.

[P.K.]

I think that the situation in Gaza is totally unsustainable - with total economic collapse, no links to the outside world and a massively excessive Israeli response to every Hamas action it can only be a breeding ground for more radicalism and violence.

 

Without significant Israeli concessions to allow normalization in Gaza their can be little hope for peace. But without those concessions being reciprocated Israel has no incentive to make the first move. Peace has to have a purpose and the Palestinians have to see their lot improving as a result of a ceasefire - that didn't happen last year as the blockades etc continued.

 

Rog will say you cannot compromise with people like Hamas, but Rog do you want the current situation to just continue? What do you want - a single greater Israel with the Palestinians driven into the sea? A viable two state solution with compromises on both sides to allow a sustainable peace to develop? Or an unviable two state solution where lack of viability in the Palestinian state encourages a millenialist movement with little concern for the future as death and victory are both equally in Allah's hands.

I do not think it is possible to "allow normalization" in Gaza which I believe means that something radical needs to be done or it will remain much as it is.

 

Basically as an entity it's completely unsustainable. You have about 1.3 million people crammed into just 140 sq miles. About a third of them (I think) live in UN refugee camps on handouts. The rest survive somehow. To put it in perspective you would have to increase the population of the IOM to over 2 million with about 700,000 in corpy houses living on the dole to get an idea of what it's like. OK it's like Liverpool without the "City of Culture" bit.

 

But it is unsustainable and going over it's history to apportion blame will not move it forward. Israel wants to be left alone and if their neighbours respect that then Israel respects their borders. This leads me to believe that any solution to Gaza can only be an Arab one.

[stevie]

Would keeping the ceasefire not been a better way of "dealing with THEM" for Israel??

Well here's a novel idea - tell "THEM" to stop firing Qassam rockets at the regional superpower.

 

 

wtf?? Israel broke the ceasefire on the 6th November, by killing 2 civilians who got to close to the blockade.

 

 

 

 

Get your facts right.

 

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid...icle%2FShowFull

 

no rog, get YOUR facts right....

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/0...thepalestinians

 

has since been backed up by cnn, and i think i remember the bbc actually ran with it for a day or two, before it got pulled.

 

Israel claim to want to be left alone, yet they block the borders then break the ceasefire....

 

Israel claim they want "democracy" within the region, yet shout that the Palestinians "voted the wrong people into power" WTF???

 

I really can't see how people can justify Israel's actions, they have been land grabbing other counties land ever since they were GIVEN their land. this just goes to show why they refused to be given an island after ww2, you can't land grab on an island.....

 

And people go on about Hamas being terrorists??? Everyone who does not know a lot about the middle east should look into...... The King David Atrocity, the Yehida Atrocity, Khisas Atrocity, the Al-Sammou' Atrocity, the Bint Jbeil Atrocity...... oh i could just go on and on.... but please look into these incidents, it might open your eyes.

[Rog]

no rog, get YOUR facts right....

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/0...thepalestinians

 

has since been backed up by cnn, and i think i remember the bbc actually ran with it for a day or two, before it got pulled.

 

Check the dates and the facts on the link that I posted.

 

I note that today reports are coming in of Hamas AGAIN breaking the cease fire.

 

Israel claim to want to be left alone, yet they block the borders then break the ceasefire....

 

Israel claim they want "democracy" within the region, yet shout that the Palestinians "voted the wrong people into power" WTF???

 

WTF?

 

The Gaza Arabs voted for Hamas.

 

Hamas had declared war on Israel way back.

 

The Arabs in Gaza democratically voted for war.

 

THAT the fuck.

 

 

I really can't see how people can justify Israel's actions, they have been land grabbing other counties land ever since they were GIVEN their land. this just goes to show why they refused to be given an island after ww2, you can't land grab on an island.....

 

Don't be silly.

 

The land of which a part of Eretz Yisrael is founded upon is a part of what was stolen from them by the Arabs. Jerusalem is the capital city of Israel and has been for millennia. Even if you don’t believe in God the Bible does spell out where the Tribes of Israel were established and it’s not beyond the whit of man to establish where the old places are on today’s map.

 

In any case, and taking that into consideration, why not expect to regain independence for your homeland? As recently as 1920 the Irish did just that with the establishment of Eire.

 

 

And people go on about Hamas being terrorists??? Everyone who does not know a lot about the middle east should look into...... The King David Atrocity, the Yehida Atrocity, Khisas Atrocity, the Al-Sammou' Atrocity, the Bint Jbeil Atrocity...... oh i could just go on and on.... but please look into these incidents, it might open your eyes.

 

 

Since one of my fairly close relatives was involved in that attack I happen to know a very great deal about the KD affair. Obviously you do not. Do you know WHY the attack took place? Do you know that several warnings were given? Do you know that it was the military wing of the KD that was struck? Do you know that the intent of the attack was not to kill but destroy the records that the British had established (and in some cases stolen)? Do you know that these were being used in a very dubious manner in some cases in collusion with local ARAB terrorists as part of the ongoing horse trading of land for benefit by the British? Do you know that the British o/c lied about not having received warnings and only admitted the truth some years later?

 

Of course you don't. All you know is about Jews being Jews isn't it.

 

You really should start dealing in facts and the facts behind them in addition to using a bit of joined up thinking --- and studying the history of the region and its people.

 

If you actually look into the events that you mention you’ll find that they are not quite so cut and dried as they get presented by those with an axe to grind

[Chinahand]

If you actually look into the events that you mention you’ll find that they are not quite so cut and dried as they get presented by those with an axe to grind

Yes, but I think you should admit you are also an axe grinder with a very idealistic view of Israel's founding myth.

 

I've challenged you quite a few times to read this book its written by a former Israeli foreign minister - it admits the targeted violence used by Jews in the creation of Israel - you are attempting to justify the King David Bombing - you also need to look at Arab villages depopulated by Jewish actions - your simplisity is that they all left voluntarily fleeing fighting, or were driven out by Arab armies - I totally agree these things occurred - but they were also driven out by deliberate jewish attacks which left many dead.