4 year old child killed in Gaza bombing

[Phoenall]

Essentially, though theoretically it doesn't have to. Regardless, we don't get to redefine words simply because the State does them. Murdering innocent civilians becomes "collateral damage," yet it's still one group of people killing innocent people. Sorry, still murder.

Just as firing unguided rockets into civilian homes and neighborhoods is a War Crime.

Who's denying that? The problem is that this war crime somehow justifies the war crime of blowing up entire civilian neighborhoods, with the civilians still present, in the minds of some people.

Not a war crime if the civilian area is in use by the military/militia is it, or don't you bother checking on what International law and the rules of war say on the subject. The only true war crime is the use of civilian areas to engage in war

 

[Phoenall]

Given the fact that they've been purposefully targeting civilian infrastructure I would say it's pretty clear they have been doing just that. You can talk about Hamas using human shields if you want, but it doesn't excuse Israel for then simply choosing to mow down those human shields. Regardless of whether they've been deliberately targeting civilians, however, they have killed a large number of civilians, which at the very least amounts to manslaughter on a massive scale. Though once you reach the number of dead civilians that Israel has racked up I would say it clearly ceases to be manslaughter and turns into murder.

Are people just suddenly stupid?

This lie was already de-bunked by multiple sources, including the BBC's head statistician. The vast majority of those killed were hamas fighters.

Yeah, right.

YES! RIGHT and even the records show that they were terrorists.

 

[Phoenall]

Essentially, though theoretically it doesn't have to. Regardless, we don't get to redefine words simply because the State does them. Murdering innocent civilians becomes "collateral damage," yet it's still one group of people killing innocent people. Sorry, still murder.

Just as firing unguided rockets into civilian homes and neighborhoods is a War Crime.

Who's denying that? The problem is that this war crime somehow justifies the war crime of blowing up entire civilian neighborhoods, with the civilians still present, in the minds of some people.

Just in the minds of the uneducated are blowing up neighborhoods war crimes, Ethel.

Then you don't object to Hamas firing into Israeli neighborhoods either, right?

Only in the minds of the uneducated that can only see one side of the argument. The fact that they cease to be civilian areas once hamas puts a rocket launcher in place as detailed in the Geneva conventions. I would advise you to read them, all 4 so you get an idea of just how much hamas is in breach of them and how Israel is working well within them

 

[Phoenall]

Shocking.

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israelgaza-conflict-mortar-attack-kills-4yearold-boy-in-israel-9686493.html

I suppose this is collateral damage, as all the other children who have been killed?

No, this is murder, just like every other innocent man, woman, and child that has been killed.

War = Murder?

Essentially, though theoretically it doesn't have to. Regardless, we don't get to redefine words simply because the State does them. Murdering innocent civilians becomes "collateral damage," yet it's still one group of people killing innocent people. Sorry, still murder.

Has Israel been killing civilians on a large scale merely for the sake of killing civilians?

I think not.

That's the modus operandi of Hamas, however, and all the lipstick in the world isn't gonna dress-up that pig.

Given the fact that they've been purposefully targeting civilian infrastructure I would say it's pretty clear they have been doing just that. You can talk about Hamas using human shields if you want, but it doesn't excuse Israel for then simply choosing to mow down those human shields. Regardless of whether they've been deliberately targeting civilians, however, they have killed a large number of civilians, which at the very least amounts to manslaughter on a massive scale. Though once you reach the number of dead civilians that Israel has racked up I would say it clearly ceases to be manslaughter and turns into murder.

Israel target military bases and rocket bases who previously were, maybe, civilian areas.

Once they started holding weapons that killed and Injured Israelis, they are no longer views as civilian areas.

So every person is guilty if a Hamas militant decides to hide in a civilian neighborhood or school? Sorry, that's not the way it works.

That's not what was said though was it, you just slipped that in to try and defend hamas. While hamas is using civilian areas to launch rockets and mortars they are making those areas valid military targets. No amount of obfuscation or manipulating of the evidence can change that. If the civilians knowingly congregate were a hamas militant is hiding to protect them behind a human shield then they no longer innocent civilians. THAT IS EXACTLY HOW IT WORKS

 

[Phoenall]

Shocking.

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israelgaza-conflict-mortar-attack-kills-4yearold-boy-in-israel-9686493.html

I suppose this is collateral damage, as all the other children who have been killed?

No, this is murder, just like every other innocent man, woman, and child that has been killed.

War = Murder?

Essentially, though theoretically it doesn't have to. Regardless, we don't get to redefine words simply because the State does them. Murdering innocent civilians becomes "collateral damage," yet it's still one group of people killing innocent people. Sorry, still murder.

Has Israel been killing civilians on a large scale merely for the sake of killing civilians?

I think not.

That's the modus operandi of Hamas, however, and all the lipstick in the world isn't gonna dress-up that pig.

Given the fact that they've been purposefully targeting civilian infrastructure I would say it's pretty clear they have been doing just that. You can talk about Hamas using human shields if you want, but it doesn't excuse Israel for then simply choosing to mow down those human shields. Regardless of whether they've been deliberately targeting civilians, however, they have killed a large number of civilians, which at the very least amounts to manslaughter on a massive scale. Though once you reach the number of dead civilians that Israel has racked up I would say it clearly ceases to be manslaughter and turns into murder.

Why LIE when the truth is known, the targets are valid military targets under the terms of the Geneva conventions. Once hamas or their representatives placed rocket launchers in the midst of civilian buildings they became valid military targets. I would recommend that you read the whole of the Geneva conventions and see just what it says about using civilian areas to launch an attack, what happens to civilians once they agree to become human shields. Then see what they say about the warnings given to evacuate the area. It is murder but not by Israel, the blame lies at the feet of hamas for not taking every precaution to minimise the risk to the civilian population.
Finally if you look at the deaths you will find that the majority are males aged between 17 and 35 the age group that is also the one for hamas terrorists.

Israel purposefully bombing entire neighborhoods or schools, with very little warning, sometimes as little as a half hour, says that they do not care if they kill innocent civilians. And, again, human shields are not generally voluntary, if ever.

As for Hamas, they don't care about the Geneva Conventions, and it's in their interest to maximize civilian casualties in Israel's strikes for propaganda purposes. The Israeli government is just stupid enough to do exactly what Hamas wants them to do.

Sorry, fool...
66:1 "non-Hamas" to Hamas?
You can't tell me 66 people can't take on 1.
MANY of those "innocents" CAN'T be THAT innocent.

And from what orifice are you pulling that ratio? How many unarmed civilians does it take to overpower an armed aggressor? And do you think Hamas asks their neighbors what they think before they fire a rocket?

Why, all of the Jew haters on this very board who complain that there is somewhat over 1 million "innocent" civilians living in the Gaza and "ONLY" 15,000 Hamas.
Do the math; I used the good old Windows 7 Calculator.

By your calculation, there are very few innocent civilians among the Israeli Jews. Most support the current terrorist regime running Israel.

Which body has declared Israel to be a terrorist regime apart from the ISLAMONAZI SCUM. Nice of you to show your RACIST JEW HATRED AGAIN

 

[Phoenall]

And from what orifice are you pulling that ratio? How many unarmed civilians does it take to overpower an armed aggressor? And do you think Hamas asks their neighbors what they think before they fire a rocket?

As long as the terrorist filth enjoys support financially from its backers in the mideast - and from useful idiots in the West, apologizing for their violence and murder, manufacturing excuses for them no matter how horrendously they behave, peace will never be achieved.

It is sad to say, but I don't know which of those two are more problematic, the financial supporters or the apologists, who run to the media who are only to vapid and scummy to refuse, but are utterly clueless too stupid to recognize how they are being used by the terrorists. It does make one wonder how this minor, inconsequential conflict receives so much media attention, while other, much more impactful and massive wars receive so little.

"how this minor, inconsequential conflict receives so much media attention, while other, much more impactful and massive wars receive so little"

Because this atrocity is supported by Governments in the west, whose citizens (outside those in the US) are against their financing and support of mass murder.

ISLAMONAZI PROPAGANDA

 

[Phoenall]

Basically, Israel is us. Europeans. The West.

Their possession of land in the M.E. is solely due to force of arms supplied from and paid for by The West. Europe. America.

Not that the other conflicts don't deserve comment and their atrocities deserve condemnation. It just that in opposing Israel's atrocities we oppose our own governments in their collusion to those crimes.

If Israel wants to be part of the civilised world, a first world nation, then it needs to raise its game in regards to law, justice, war crimes and democracy. Other than that we will not allow it to pretend to be civilised.

Who is this "WE" that dares to speak for everyone, sound like a neo Marxist plot to me, what next thought control ?

 

[Phoenall]

Zionists here are very concerned about putting up words against all the examples of Israeli crimes, atrocities, murders, massacres and ethnic cleansing.

But they are not really worried about the quality of the words, or thinking behind them. They just want to type something, very frequently with personal insults, or calls for more murder, or genocide and claims of illusory victories.

Thinking is not their strong suit. Nor is decency.

That have never been proven once by you or any other team Palestine member. The only crimes are those of the Palestinians, same with atrocities. One murder by a group of extremist " mafia type" Jews, no massacres and definitelty no ethnic cleansing

You are delusional Phoney, always have been. The Zionists are Mafia type Jews, they have murdered 500 children over the past 2 months.

And you can provide the evidence of this, start with the names of the people who planned these alleged murders and what the motive for these alleged murders were. You are quick to throw around the claims of murder, but when it comes to proving them you very quickly go on to the next BLOOD LIBEL and LIE b ecause you know you don't have any proof. How many of those children actually died when an Israeli thought there is a Palestinian child I will kill them, how many died as forced labour in the tunnels. How many were hamas powder monkees, human shields, killed by hamas etc.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

...Now you're getting it: All of those men should have stood trial for their crimes against humanity. The fact that they didn't has nothing to do with whether they were right, but the fact that they won.

As I said before, that dog won't hunt.

According to your logic... if you embed rocket launchers in your living room, then fire at me and my family, it would be criminal of me to fire back, because I might hit your family.

The Real World doesn't work like that.

Never has.

Never will.

Next slide, please.

No, according to my logic it would be criminal for you to hit my family, or my neighbors, assuming they're innocent of the crime for which I committed in your analogy. You completely ignore the analogy of the officer firing into a crowd because you have no answer for it. There's a reason police aren't supposed to fire into the crowd after fleeing suspects, and that's because they're not supposed to hurt innocent civilians in the hunt for a suspect.

Your policeman firing into a crowd scenario is a canard in this instance.

Other than that, your so-called logic has you positioned just north of Never-Never Land.

It's simply not Real World thinking.

Automatic gainsay... did too, did not... am too, am not... is too, is not... is painful enough and pointless enough when dealing with Reality, but, when dealing with some kind of Alternate Universe in which such things might be operative, well, there's simply no profit in such an exchange.

Inflicting civilian casualties during the course of legitimate wartime targeting operations is both justifiable and defensible, regardless of the way in which you would like The Universe to operate.

You're projecting, as your argument can be summed up as "Nuh uh."

 

[Kondor3]

...Now you're getting it: All of those men should have stood trial for their crimes against humanity. The fact that they didn't has nothing to do with whether they were right, but the fact that they won.

As I said before, that dog won't hunt.

According to your logic... if you embed rocket launchers in your living room, then fire at me and my family, it would be criminal of me to fire back, because I might hit your family.

The Real World doesn't work like that.

Never has.

Never will.

Next slide, please.

No, according to my logic it would be criminal for you to hit my family, or my neighbors, assuming they're innocent of the crime for which I committed in your analogy. You completely ignore the analogy of the officer firing into a crowd because you have no answer for it. There's a reason police aren't supposed to fire into the crowd after fleeing suspects, and that's because they're not supposed to hurt innocent civilians in the hunt for a suspect.

Your policeman firing into a crowd scenario is a canard in this instance.

Other than that, your so-called logic has you positioned just north of Never-Never Land.

It's simply not Real World thinking.

Automatic gainsay... did too, did not... am too, am not... is too, is not... is painful enough and pointless enough when dealing with Reality, but, when dealing with some kind of Alternate Universe in which such things might be operative, well, there's simply no profit in such an exchange.

Inflicting civilian casualties during the course of legitimate wartime targeting operations is both justifiable and defensible, regardless of the way in which you would like The Universe to operate.

You're projecting, as your argument can be summed up as "Nuh uh."

You're right, of course...

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

That's just it: Hamas does want innocent civilians to die. That's not an excuse for Israel to simply mow them down, however.

So there are 3 questions that can be asked:

1-what do you propose israel do in this situation, while enduring thousands of rockets fired at it?

2-why should israel respond any differently than anyone else would under these circumstances?

3-what do you propose the world and gazan arabs do to stop hamas and remove it from power?

The only way for Israel to get rid of Hamas, which would be a good thing, would be to marginalize Hamas among Palestinian civilians. Blowing up neighborhoods, apartment buildings, and schools is just going to send Palestinians back into the arms of Hamas, but if the Israeli government could come in and edge Hamas out by providing support to Palestinian civilians the way Hamas does, and far more effectively and on a greater scale than Hamas could, then Palestinians would eventually come around and reject Hamas for the violent terrorists that they are. It would also involve stopping settlements and ending the blockade, I'm sure, but what form it would ultimately take I couldn't say.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

That's only partly true.

We enterd this current war because we had no other choice.

It was Netanyahoo's choice how to end it. He had no choice but to start it.

That any war is inevitable is a lazy response, because they're not. It's only inevitable in the sense that politicians, especially politicians being armed and funded by the United States government, have little incentive to find an alternative path to peace.

That's nonsense. Israeli civilians (myself included) were under attack 24/7. When your civilians are under attack, you fight back.

No cliches about "politic interests" here.

And yet you don't see the problem? Why is Hamas attacking you, in fact, why is Hamas in power at all? The reason is that Palestinians see the Israeli government as an aggressor. It doesn't matter if you disagree, it's a fact that that's how they feel, so they elect a group that helps them in many ways, claims to care about them, and is willing to "fight back" against Israel.

The problem is it's a never-ending cycle: Hamas fires rockets, Israel goes for shock-and-awe, Hamas fires rockets, Israel goes for shock-and-awe, Hamas fires rockets, Israel goes for shock-and-awe, Hamas fires rockets, Israel goes for shock-and-awe, etc... Both sides get to blame the other. There are only two ways to stop it that I can see. The first way is completely wiping out the Palestinians in an actual genocidal purge, which I don't think you or much of anybody else is advocating, and would ultimately lead to other issues as I think Israel would then find itself fending off other Muslim countries. The second is that Israel become the adult, we know Hamas isn't going to do it, and change the way they deal with Palestinians in general. Israel has enough defense capabilities to protect its citizens against the majority of weak attacks from Hamas, and in the meantime could change the way they are perceived by Palestinian citizens through peaceful means.

Violence from Israel, whether they started it or not, is only going to lead to more violence from Hamas. Israel changing the way they're perceived by Palestinian civilians, however, would leave Hamas marginalized and with no base of support.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

So you want Palestinians to br disarmed and subjects of Israel DW?

I want the Palestinians to grow up, turn their focus and energy on throwing out Hamas and the PLO and to start living like the rest of the civilized world. That means they throw out missles and other weapons used against Israel, provide proof of that, and then start to build their economy.

I am quite confident that if Israel has proof that the threat against them is over, that Gaza will be opened for business with the world and Israel.

Simply lay down your arms and live in peace.

Oh, and btw...before you say it. Nowhere do I advocate that the Palestinians subjugate themselves to Israel. Only to stop attacking them.

Maybe Israel needs to make some overtures to the Palestinians to make them want to throw out Hamas. As long as Israel is indiscriminately bombing civilian areas and killing people it's just going to make more people sympathetic to Hamas.

You prove to not know much about the situation.

Civilians already tried to rebel against Hamas. Their voices were silenced and most of them were shot dead, and added to the "victims" of the "occupation".

They won't rebel again soon, they're afraid for their lives

Who said anything about rebelling? I said they would stop supporting Hamas and that it would slowly die out on its own.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

So you want Palestinians to br disarmed and subjects of Israel DW?

I want the Palestinians to grow up, turn their focus and energy on throwing out Hamas and the PLO and to start living like the rest of the civilized world. That means they throw out missles and other weapons used against Israel, provide proof of that, and then start to build their economy.

I am quite confident that if Israel has proof that the threat against them is over, that Gaza will be opened for business with the world and Israel.

Simply lay down your arms and live in peace.

Oh, and btw...before you say it. Nowhere do I advocate that the Palestinians subjugate themselves to Israel. Only to stop attacking them.

Maybe Israel needs to make some overtures to the Palestinians to make them want to throw out Hamas. As long as Israel is indiscriminately bombing civilian areas and killing people it's just going to make more people sympathetic to Hamas.

There is nothing indiscriminate about it. They are deliberately targeting Hamas military assets and leaders. Legitimate actions in war.

Israel has made overtures to the Palestinian people. Get rid of Hamas and life gets better. As soon as Israel no longer feels threatened and no longer has to hide under a missile shield, then peace will reign.

When your actions kill innocent civilians they cease to be legitimate. If an officer fires into a crowd after a fleeing suspect is his action legitimate?

If a house is filled with 10 serial killers and 1 boy, is it a civilian area or a legitimate one.

If a house is filled with 10 serial killers and 1 boy is the correct response to blow up the house and the houses that surround it with civilians still inside?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

...Now you're getting it: All of those men should have stood trial for their crimes against humanity. The fact that they didn't has nothing to do with whether they were right, but the fact that they won.

As I said before, that dog won't hunt.

According to your logic... if you embed rocket launchers in your living room, then fire at me and my family, it would be criminal of me to fire back, because I might hit your family.

The Real World doesn't work like that.

Never has.

Never will.

Next slide, please.

No, according to my logic it would be criminal for you to hit my family, or my neighbors, assuming they're innocent of the crime for which I committed in your analogy. You completely ignore the analogy of the officer firing into a crowd because you have no answer for it. There's a reason police aren't supposed to fire into the crowd after fleeing suspects, and that's because they're not supposed to hurt innocent civilians in the hunt for a suspect.

Your policeman firing into a crowd scenario is a canard in this instance.

Other than that, your so-called logic has you positioned just north of Never-Never Land.

It's simply not Real World thinking.

Automatic gainsay... did too, did not... am too, am not... is too, is not... is painful enough and pointless enough when dealing with Reality, but, when dealing with some kind of Alternate Universe in which such things might be operative, well, there's simply no profit in such an exchange.

Inflicting civilian casualties during the course of legitimate wartime targeting operations is both justifiable and defensible, regardless of the way in which you would like The Universe to operate.

The guy was never part of war, he see things how he believes should be done. Can't hold it against him really. Sadly, he also doesn't get that things don't work like he wishes them to work, in real life.

Oh brother.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

So you want Palestinians to br disarmed and subjects of Israel DW?

I want the Palestinians to grow up, turn their focus and energy on throwing out Hamas and the PLO and to start living like the rest of the civilized world. That means they throw out missles and other weapons used against Israel, provide proof of that, and then start to build their economy.

I am quite confident that if Israel has proof that the threat against them is over, that Gaza will be opened for business with the world and Israel.

Simply lay down your arms and live in peace.

Oh, and btw...before you say it. Nowhere do I advocate that the Palestinians subjugate themselves to Israel. Only to stop attacking them.

Maybe Israel needs to make some overtures to the Palestinians to make them want to throw out Hamas. As long as Israel is indiscriminately bombing civilian areas and killing people it's just going to make more people sympathetic to Hamas.

There is nothing indiscriminate about it. They are deliberately targeting Hamas military assets and leaders. Legitimate actions in war.

Israel has made overtures to the Palestinian people. Get rid of Hamas and life gets better. As soon as Israel no longer feels threatened and no longer has to hide under a missile shield, then peace will reign.

When your actions kill innocent civilians they cease to be legitimate. If an officer fires into a crowd after a fleeing suspect is his action legitimate?

Nonsense.

Civilians lose their legal protection when they are positioned too closely to war-assets.

Especially when they remain nearby such assets willingly and when their side is utilizing them to hide behind.

So when a criminal runs into a crowd that crowd loses their legal protection and right to live, even though they had nothing to do with the criminal and likely had no idea what was going on in the first place?

When the crowd wishes to support the criminals then it's their responsibility.

Let's say a rubber is about to rob a bank, and he uses a friend of his to drive him there. The friend gives him tips and wishes him luck in the rubbery, that ends with a mother and child held hostage and killed.

Basically you're saying that the driver should be cut some slack, because he just "drove" the guy...

The crowd isn't supporting the criminal, the crowd is simply there when the criminal runs into them. Have they forfeited their rights simply because they're there?

Regardless, you just said that plenty of Palestinians tried to rebel against Hamas, so how could they be supporting them? Do Palestinian civilians, generally speaking, prefer Hamas to the Israeli government? Probably, but that doesn't mean that they actively support Hamas materially or that they themselves are guilty of any aggression against Israel. Most Palestinians are likely just trying to live in peace.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Shocking.

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israelgaza-conflict-mortar-attack-kills-4yearold-boy-in-israel-9686493.html

I suppose this is collateral damage, as all the other children who have been killed?

No, this is murder, just like every other innocent man, woman, and child that has been killed.

War = Murder?

Essentially, though theoretically it doesn't have to. Regardless, we don't get to redefine words simply because the State does them. Murdering innocent civilians becomes "collateral damage," yet it's still one group of people killing innocent people. Sorry, still murder.

Not if the "innocent" are actually acting as human shields, then it becomes a case of dead militia. They cant claim to be innocent once that take on the role of human shields.

For starters, you have no idea what percentage of the innocent civilians were actually human shields, and your argument rests on the ridiculous assumption that the human shields for whatever reason volunteered to be human shields.

Look at the evidence available from hamas themselves who have publicly stated that the people of gaza will not move, but will stay and protect their homes. So going on these facts less than 5% will be innocent civilians, the rest forced or accepting being human shieklds

So you're not innocent if you're forced to be a human shield against your will? Solid logic there.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Shocking.

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israelgaza-conflict-mortar-attack-kills-4yearold-boy-in-israel-9686493.html

I suppose this is collateral damage, as all the other children who have been killed?

No, this is murder, just like every other innocent man, woman, and child that has been killed.

War = Murder?

Essentially, though theoretically it doesn't have to. Regardless, we don't get to redefine words simply because the State does them. Murdering innocent civilians becomes "collateral damage," yet it's still one group of people killing innocent people. Sorry, still murder.

Has Israel been killing civilians on a large scale merely for the sake of killing civilians?

I think not.

That's the modus operandi of Hamas, however, and all the lipstick in the world isn't gonna dress-up that pig.

Given the fact that they've been purposefully targeting civilian infrastructure I would say it's pretty clear they have been doing just that. You can talk about Hamas using human shields if you want, but it doesn't excuse Israel for then simply choosing to mow down those human shields. Regardless of whether they've been deliberately targeting civilians, however, they have killed a large number of civilians, which at the very least amounts to manslaughter on a massive scale. Though once you reach the number of dead civilians that Israel has racked up I would say it clearly ceases to be manslaughter and turns into murder.

Why LIE when the truth is known, the targets are valid military targets under the terms of the Geneva conventions. Once hamas or their representatives placed rocket launchers in the midst of civilian buildings they became valid military targets. I would recommend that you read the whole of the Geneva conventions and see just what it says about using civilian areas to launch an attack, what happens to civilians once they agree to become human shields. Then see what they say about the warnings given to evacuate the area. It is murder but not by Israel, the blame lies at the feet of hamas for not taking every precaution to minimise the risk to the civilian population.
Finally if you look at the deaths you will find that the majority are males aged between 17 and 35 the age group that is also the one for hamas terrorists.

Israel purposefully bombing entire neighborhoods or schools, with very little warning, sometimes as little as a half hour, says that they do not care if they kill innocent civilians. And, again, human shields are not generally voluntary, if ever.

As for Hamas, they don't care about the Geneva Conventions, and it's in their interest to maximize civilian casualties in Israel's strikes for propaganda purposes. The Israeli government is just stupid enough to do exactly what Hamas wants them to do.

They gave fair warning which is more than hamas does of taking out military structures

...Given the fact that they've been purposefully targeting civilian infrastructure I would say it's pretty clear they have been doing just that...

Targeting of infrastructure does not equate to (nor even reliably hint at) genocide. Sorry.

...You can talk about Hamas using human shields if you want, but it doesn't excuse Israel for then simply choosing to mow down those human shields...

If you are shooting rockets at my family down the block, doing it from your own living room because you're banking on my reluctance to hurt your family, I am well within my rights (and you should not be surprised when I choose) to return fire - no doubt feeling badly about harming your family, but choosing my family's survival over yours. This is not a difficult concept to grasp.

...Regardless of whether they've been deliberately targeting civilians, however, they have killed a large number of civilians...

Ah, so now the case for 'murder of civilians' begins to weaken just a wee bit, eh?

Yes - you and I both new it was going to go this way, before we even began this sequence, didn't we?

The Israelis have, indeed, killed large numbers of civilians during the course of this latest Gaza War.

That is because Hamas war-assets are embedded within their civilian population centers.

Want the large-scale collateral civilian casualties to stop.

Move the war assets away from civilian population centers.

Or suffer continued high levels of civilian collateral casualties.

That is the choice of Hamas - not Israel.

...which at the very least amounts to manslaughter on a massive scale...

Hardly.

It amounts to collateral civilian casualties on a significant scale, incurred during legitimate wartime targeting operations.

The US Army Air Force and the Royal Air Force also inflicted civilian casualties on a significant scale during legitimate wartime targeting operations.

...Though once you reach the number of dead civilians that Israel has racked up I would say it clearly ceases to be manslaughter and turns into murder.

More emotionalism rather than logical and objective analysis.

You have yet to establish 'intentional targeting of civilians', never mind 'murder'.

The scale of the collateral civilian casualties inflicted upon Gazans is directly related to the number of war-assets and war-operations conducted by Hamas in close proximity to their own civilian population centers and to the numbers of civilians in close proximity to any given asset or operation at the time of a given fire-mission.

Much also depends upon the willingness of civilians to temporarily flee the area after receiving preliminary warnings from the Israeli Defense Force.

Murder? Not by any sane definition - legal or ethical or metaphorical - that I've ever encountered.

Never used the word genocide, your patronizing nonsense notwithstanding. Of course the civilians are being purposefully targeted: Israel is blowing up schools where civilians are known to be congregating, not to mention the entire civilian neighborhoods that have been destroyed. It should be clear that I do hold Hamas responsible for much of the bloodshed, but I realize that Hamas is purposefully putting Palestinian in harms way, as I've already said, because they want Israel to kill as many civilians as possible. So yes, Hamas may fire rockets from some schools, neighborhoods and what have you, because they want Israel to target these areas and kill civilians. That allows Hamas to use those deaths for propaganda and turn even more Palestinians against Israel. Of course that in no way justifies Israel simply mowing down civilians in the process.

You used the analogy of me firing rockets at you from down the street, and I agree that you would then be within your rights to fire rockets back at me. But only me. My neighbors and the rest of the street had nothing to do with my firing rockets at you, and if you harm them to get at me then you are just as guilty of murder as I am.

As for using the term murder, of course it's murder. Just because the State doesn't define it as such doesn't change the fact. If you or I did what Israel or Hamas was doing there would be no question it's murder.

If your neighbours happen to be protecting you by milling around your rocket launch pad in the misguided view that they are innocents then I can target you and any of your neighbours that get killed are down to you. It is all in the Geneva conventions that spell it all out.

As for murder the Geneva convention also spell out that it is hamas that are the murderers for not evacuating the civilians from the war zone, Israek are exonerated of all blame

Except that all of Gaza is a war zone and there's no way to get out because of Israel's blockade. As for fair warning, 30 minutes is not fair warning, especially when there's nowhere else to go. Nor is it logical to assume that every single civilian is materially supporting Hamas. Give me a break.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Essentially, though theoretically it doesn't have to. Regardless, we don't get to redefine words simply because the State does them. Murdering innocent civilians becomes "collateral damage," yet it's still one group of people killing innocent people. Sorry, still murder.

Just as firing unguided rockets into civilian homes and neighborhoods is a War Crime.

Who's denying that? The problem is that this war crime somehow justifies the war crime of blowing up entire civilian neighborhoods, with the civilians still present, in the minds of some people.

Just in the minds of the uneducated are blowing up neighborhoods war crimes, Ethel.

Then you don't object to Hamas firing into Israeli neighborhoods either, right?

Only in the minds of the uneducated that can only see one side of the argument. The fact that they cease to be civilian areas once hamas puts a rocket launcher in place as detailed in the Geneva conventions. I would advise you to read them, all 4 so you get an idea of just how much hamas is in breach of them and how Israel is working well within them

I condemn both Hamas and the Israeli government equally, and I'm the one only seeing one side of the argument? I'm afraid this discussion is beyond you.

 

[Hossfly]

That's just it: Hamas does want innocent civilians to die. That's not an excuse for Israel to simply mow them down, however.

So there are 3 questions that can be asked:

1-what do you propose israel do in this situation, while enduring thousands of rockets fired at it?

2-why should israel respond any differently than anyone else would under these circumstances?

3-what do you propose the world and gazan arabs do to stop hamas and remove it from power?

The only way for Israel to get rid of Hamas, which would be a good thing, would be to marginalize Hamas among Palestinian civilians. Blowing up neighborhoods, apartment buildings, and schools is just going to send Palestinians back into the arms of Hamas, but if the Israeli government could come in and edge Hamas out by providing support to Palestinian civilians the way Hamas does, and far more effectively and on a greater scale than Hamas could, then Palestinians would eventually come around and reject Hamas for the violent terrorists that they are. It would also involve stopping settlements and ending the blockade, I'm sure, but what form it would ultimately take I couldn't say.

Palestinians who reject Hamas die by firing squad. Get that through your thick head