Author Topic: Isreal's latest method of dealing with suicide bombers. (Read 1306 times)

Elfenwolf · « **Reply #75 on:** July 23, 2002, 10:47:13 PM »

Sorry Eagler, civilian casulties are part of war. I agree with you that it's one huge mess that gets scarier every day.

Fjoder · « **Reply #76 on:** July 24, 2002, 02:32:15 AM »

Cry me a river babek.

IDF doesnt target civilians, never had never will.

If you however do a saddam - hiding behind civilians, there will be civilian casualties. no doubt about it. Is it right? well in this case its a small price to pay for getting rid of the top hamas military guy personally responsible for the death of many many many israeli civilian women, children and men.

Does it justify the killing of palestinian civilians, well no it doesnt.
but if the little maggots stopped hiding behind civilians (which isnt allowed according to the Geneve convention 4th paragraph)
Less civilians would get hurt.

Just take the Jenin incident, instead of bombing the toejam out of the jenin refugee camp, they went in with troops and took heavy losses. go figure why.

btw Sharon is no terrorist, I dont understand where you get your info?.

Peter

Fjoder · « **Reply #77 on:** July 24, 2002, 02:52:06 AM »

The weasel arafat gets what he wants by this.

HE refuses to deal with terorrist. forcing Israel to take a stand
By eliminating the opposive groups to Arafat, Arafat will gain more adn more control of his lawless soon-to-be-palestine.

He cant eliminate the hamas or the Islamic Jihad groups, it would be bad PR for him, so he lets Israel do the dirty work for him.

IDF should take out arafat too.

P.

babek- · « **Reply #78 on:** July 24, 2002, 03:49:47 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Fjoder
Cry me a river babek.

IDF doesnt target civilians, never had never will.

Israel wanted to kill a terrorist leader. Thats OK.

But they fired a missile in a six-level-civilian-building full of innocent civilians. Thats what I call a terroristic act.

The IDF accepted the death and harm of these civilians in order to get this one terrorist.

And so you are definitivly wrong: The IDF HAS targeted civilians and so it was logical that 150 people were killed or injured.

All the nations worldwide condemned this brutal act and it was really a shame.

Especially if you consider the fact that these "leaders" will be replaced in very short time and now the terrorists have no problems to get new people for kamikaze-operations.

Then about your question who defined Sharon as a terrorist.

There are countries in Europe, where Sharon has been defined as a war-criminal who performed terroristic acts.
For example Belgium.

And I agree with this definition.

Is really a pity that the great israeli politician Rabin was murdered. Maybe with him as a great and charismatic personality the conflict would have been settled.

But so - the terror on both sides will continue and the price will be payed by the innocents.

PS: What means "Cry me a river" ?

Fjoder · « **Reply #79 on:** July 24, 2002, 04:33:33 AM »

Well for you news, The Belgium warcourt (whatever its called)aquitted Sharon of all accusations against him.

Arafat must be the only leader accepting a nobel peaceaward in a military uniform says it all.

Rabins assassination was very unfortune, and I hope the killer rottens in hell for his act.

However Barak succeeded Rabin, and went even further with his peaceplans than Rabin could ever imagine.

But you can never make deals with a weasel, barak failed, and Arafat started intifada II. Barak was succeeded by Sharon to deal with the intifada II and the suicide bombers.

Have in mind - There IS NO PEACETREATY between the israelis and the palestines, meaning its a war going on.

The palestines have not sign one single international convention.
Israel has, it means Israel have a right to defend themselves in any manners to protect their civilians (UN §51). They can even occupy the westbank/gaza with support from the 4th Geneve convention.

Peter

straffo · « **Reply #80 on:** July 24, 2002, 04:40:08 AM »

Quote

But you can never make deals with a weasel, barak failed, and Arafat started intifada II. Barak was succeeded by Sharon to deal with the intifada II and the suicide bombers.

it's not my interpretation ... IMO Sharon started (or re started) all during his campaign to be prime minister ...
When he visited a mosqué in Jerusalem (sorry forgot the name)

Quote

Have in mind - There IS NO PEACETREATY between the israelis and the palestines, meaning its a war going on.

There is no war declared either ...

Quote

The palestines have not sign one single international convention.
Israel has, it means Israel have a right to defend themselves in any manners to protect their civilians (UN §51). They can even occupy the westbank/gaza with support from the 4th Geneve convention.

As Isreal deny the right of having a state for the Palestinian how can they sign any treaty when not being recognized as a state ?

Fjoder · « **Reply #81 on:** July 24, 2002, 04:59:34 AM »

Straffo:

1st.

No the walk on the holy mountain had very little to do with it.
It was just a poor excuse, the intifada II was to start regardless of the walk.

2nd
Well , yes and no, you have two kinds of "wars".
1. direct war.
2. state of war. (? krigstillstånd - any nordic know a better word)

In the current crises we have #2.
Since the westbank/gaza are nomansland, it gets very complicated, (Egypt and Jordan gave up these areas, and Israel never claimed them). but we still have a state of war.

Since the palestinians havent signed any international conventions therefor they have no right according to any law
to protect themselves. domestic laws doesnt apply.

3rd.
Well they have signed alot of treaties.
http://www.ariga.com/treaties/index.htm

but Arafat keeps breaking these.
If he hadnt there would be a palestinian state by now.

Peter

I will explain the "state of war" more in details later this week.

Daff · « **Reply #82 on:** July 24, 2002, 06:07:03 AM »

"Well for you news, The Belgium warcourt (whatever its called)aquitted Sharon of all accusations against him. "

Yeah, due to a technicality. He will most likely be tried once he's no longer PM of Israel.
Hamas steps up and says they're ready to stop bombing, if the IDF pulls out of the West Bank and what does Sharon do?
He bombs a civilian target, killing nine children and calls it a 'great success'.
He's just as bad as terrorists.

Daff

Eagler · « **Reply #83 on:** July 24, 2002, 06:45:09 AM »

sorry, I wouldn't believe this for a sec. They said it because they knew Israel could not and would not pull out.

The hammer just gets bigger, on both sides but Israel's hanmmers are much bigger. You'd think the Pals would have figured that out by now.

Fjoder · « **Reply #84 on:** July 24, 2002, 06:53:54 AM »

Daff, you need to stop reading the leftwing newspapers:)

Sharon said the killing of the hamas leader was a great success.
however he regrets the civilian casualties. (see full quote on jpost.com or haaretz.com)

He wont get prosecuted even after his mandate.

Besides Israel hasnt ratified the ICC so warcrimes made by Israelis is beyond EU or any other country in the worlds jurisdiction.

Peter

Daff · « **Reply #85 on:** July 24, 2002, 07:05:53 AM »

Even the right wing papers here are condemming the attack, Fjod.
But...do you really think an attack like this is going to help?..if anything it's just going to help the palestinians justify their attacks.

Daff

P.S. Why are you still in Europe, btw?.

straffo · « **Reply #86 on:** July 24, 2002, 07:12:14 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Fjoder
Straffo:

1st.

No the walk on the holy mountain had very little to do with it.
It was just a poor excuse, the intifada II was to start regardless of the walk.

I agree but is as given the palestian oportunity ... it was not a smart move (and I don't think that Sharon is an idiot not knowning what he was about to start)

Quote

2nd
Well , yes and no, you have two kinds of "wars".
1. direct war.
2. state of war. (? krigstillstånd - any nordic know a better word)

In the current crises we have #2.
Since the westbank/gaza are nomansland, it gets very complicated, (Egypt and Jordan gave up these areas, and Israel never claimed them). but we still have a state of war.

sure

Quote

Since the palestinians havent signed any international conventions therefor they have no right according to any law
to protect themselves. domestic laws doesnt apply.

so what is their current status ?
canon fodder ?

Quote

3rd.
Well they have signed alot of treaties.
http://www.ariga.com/treaties/index.htm

yep ...

Quote

but Arafat keeps breaking these.

no just Arafat ... the Hamas broke it to ...
The PLO is constitued of different movement each having their own vision ...

Quote

If he hadnt there would be a palestinian state by now.

not likely it will annoy to many people (Israely ,Jordanian etc ...)

Fjoder · « **Reply #87 on:** July 24, 2002, 07:13:20 AM »

Israel has no other choice.

160 attacks or attempted attacks / week.

If it was against britain or denmark you would see a fullscale war.

Just look what spain did when marocco "captured" a pathetic stone(soccerfield large) outside their coast.

I think Israel is maybe restraining themselves to much due to the critisism in europe.

Peter

Why havent you moved to Cuba?

Daff · « **Reply #88 on:** July 24, 2002, 07:17:18 AM »

Why should I?..I'm not the one complaining about the area I live in.

Daff

Fjoder · « **Reply #89 on:** July 24, 2002, 07:25:47 AM »

Cant say it wasnt provocative Staffo, but it really didnt matter.

regarding "state of war"
F.i there is still a state of war between Britain and Argentina.
(Peace treaties have never been signed)

As I said due to Jordan and Egypt giving up the ter. and Israel not claiming them, the palestinians are in a hopeless situation (if you look at it from a lawyers perspective)

I think Egypt and Jordan should do more than they do right now.

There are laws to follow during wartime and occupation, the palestinians should try and follow those. If following these laws, Israel cant do much, and would force a peace treaty to be signed
and a new country to become.

Hamas isnt incharge of "palestine", Arafat is, with the largest policeforce per capita in the world you would think he could do more than he done aye?

He needs to crack down on all terrorists. fatah,Islamic jihad and hamas.

I cant speak for the jordans (remember black september in 1972)
but the majority of the israelis do want peace and a palestine.

Peter