BREAKING: Family of Palestinian toddler burned alive sue Israel

[fanger]

Israel has chosen not to consider Even student Police immune from attack
Gaza Police forces Graduation Day
(50 of them were killed in the first air israeli bombing) Graphic photos
Police Station on Graduation Day Attacked Dec 27 2008

Sure. Its the same argument that you routinely make about the stabbing attacks -- they are attacking police officers who are legitimate military targets.

You can't have it both ways.

Israel has decided by it's actions that attacking police officers are legitimate military targets. Do you agree,You can't have it both ways.

 

[Shusha]

Israel has decided by it's actions that attacking police officers are legitimate military targets. Do you agree,You can't have it both ways.

Me, personally? I'm inclined to side with police forces being legitimate military targets. But that's me personally. Not entirely sure IHL will side with me on that one. As a matter of fact, I'm inclined to recall that police forces are considered civilian.

How about you?

 

[fanger]

My opinion was that Police are civilian but In this case Israel has shown how it expects police officers to be treated, now I say treat the israeli police how they treat others

 

[Shusha]

My opinion was that Police are civilian but In this case Israel has shown how it expects police officers to be treated, now I say treat the israeli police how they treat others

I usually see you argue that police are legit targets. I'm okay with that. Its a consistent argument.

Its Tinmore's hypocritical argument that gets in my craw.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The nationals of an occupying power are not considered "civilians" by the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Link?

Why do you post here when you know so little?

Even when the definition of protected persons is set out in this way, it may seem rather complicated. Nevertheless, disregarding points of detail, it will be seen that there are two main classes of protected person: (1) ' enemy nationals ' within the national territory of each of the Parties to the conflict and (2) ' the whole population ' of occupied territories (excluding nationals of the Occupying Power).

Treaties, States parties, and Commentaries - Geneva Convention (IV) on Civilians, 1949 - 4 - - Commentary of 1958​

Your practice of selectively cutting / pasting / editing what you cut and paste is really dishonest. Enemy combatants are not protected.

Why do cut and paste with such dishonesty when you know so little?

Palestinians are not enemy combatants. They are an occupied people. They have nothing to do with the war fostered upon them.

Islamic terrorists are enemy combatants. When Islamic terrorists committ acts of war, that's called committing acts of war. Thats called "getting your muhammedan ass kicked by a better trained, equipped and motivated military".

You're welcome.

Links?

 

[P F Tinmore]

My opinion was that Police are civilian but In this case Israel has shown how it expects police officers to be treated, now I say treat the israeli police how they treat others

I usually see you argue that police are legit targets. I'm okay with that. Its a consistent argument.

Its Tinmore's hypocritical argument that gets in my craw.

Palestinian police never attack Israelis. Israeli police attack Palestinians. There is no equivalence.

 

[Hollie]

Link?

Why do you post here when you know so little?

Even when the definition of protected persons is set out in this way, it may seem rather complicated. Nevertheless, disregarding points of detail, it will be seen that there are two main classes of protected person: (1) ' enemy nationals ' within the national territory of each of the Parties to the conflict and (2) ' the whole population ' of occupied territories (excluding nationals of the Occupying Power).

Treaties, States parties, and Commentaries - Geneva Convention (IV) on Civilians, 1949 - 4 - - Commentary of 1958​

Your practice of selectively cutting / pasting / editing what you cut and paste is really dishonest. Enemy combatants are not protected.

Why do cut and paste with such dishonesty when you know so little?

Palestinians are not enemy combatants. They are an occupied people. They have nothing to do with the war fostered upon them.

Islamic terrorists are enemy combatants. When Islamic terrorists committ acts of war, that's called committing acts of war. Thats called "getting your muhammedan ass kicked by a better trained, equipped and motivated military".

You're welcome.

Links?

Sure:

BREAKING: Family of Palestinian toddler burned alive sue Israel

 

[Hollie]

My opinion was that Police are civilian but In this case Israel has shown how it expects police officers to be treated, now I say treat the israeli police how they treat others

I usually see you argue that police are legit targets. I'm okay with that. Its a consistent argument.

Its Tinmore's hypocritical argument that gets in my craw.

Palestinian police never attack Israelis. Israeli police attack Palestinians. There is no equivalence.

Links?

 

[Shusha]

Palestinian police never attack Israelis. Israeli police attack Palestinians. There is no equivalence.

Of course, Palestinian police never attack Israelis. They are not permitted to operate where there ARE Israelis. A

Not the question. The question is whether or not police are considered civilians.

 

[montelatici]

Since the Israeli police take an active part in the hostilities, they are legitimate targets.

"Civilians, including police officers not incorporated into the armed forces, who unlawfully take a direct part in hostilities, lose their protection against attacks,..."

http://www.hpcrresearch.org/sites/default/files/publications/Session1.pdf

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore

Let's go back to the original post then. You claimed:

Wait, what?!

So Israeli police officers are legitimate military targets, while Gazan police officers are "civilians"? You can't have it both ways.

Either Israel attacked legitimate military targets or Arab Palestinians are attacking civilians. Which is it?

The nationals of an occupying power are not considered "civilians" by the Fourth Geneva Convention.

GCIV was not intended to, and does not, take nationals of an occupying power under its umbrella when it considers who is not and who is a "protected person" under that convention. If you had written that nationals of an occupying power are not covered under GCIV, then I might have agreed with you.

That is not what you wrote though. You wrote, "nationals of an occupying power are not considered "civilians" and you supplied GCIV as proof that Israelis can not be considered "civilians".

This is in error. While Israelis may not be considered "protected persons" with respect to the GCIV, this does not mean that Israelis (nationals of the so-called occupying power) are never considered "civilians" and therefore have no protection under international law and can be killed with impunity. That concept is unconscionable in the face of customary IHL and other treaties and conventions.

All civilian peoples have rights to life under international law.

The question remains on the table as to whether or not police forces are considered civilian. I believe they are not. If you have evidence that they are, please provide. But note, that would mean that Israeli police forces are also immune from attacks. You can't have it both ways. Police forces are either considered civilian and therefore under the protection of international law, or they are considered branches of the military, in which case they are not protected as civilians, but only as combatants.

I think the confusion arises because people are uninformed/misinformed about the meaning of "civilian." to most people civilians cannot be attacked. That is why GC IV uses the term protected person. Some civilians are protected, some are not. Some militants are protected, some are not. Therefore, civilians is a term that may be inaccurate as a general description.

Are police protected persons? That depends on how they function.

Palestinian police are strictly for traffic control and domestic law enforcement. They do not operate outside their own territory.

Israeli police, on the other hand, enforce foreign law in occupied territory. Their function is virtually identical to the IDF including attacking Palestinians on their own land. And besides, they are nationals of the occupying power.

 

[Hollie]

Since the Israeli police take an active part in the hostilities, they are legitimate targets.

"Civilians, including police officers not incorporated into the armed forces, who unlawfully take a direct part in hostilities, lose their protection against attacks,..."

http://www.hpcrresearch.org/sites/default/files/publications/Session1.pdf

Well then, let's stop all this whing when islamo-combatants are casualties of the hostilities.

Unless, of course, we agree that Islamic terrorists have a particular exception from consequences they create.

 

[Slyhunter]

Buildings with combatants on their grounds, or inside, with weapon cache's stored within are no longer civilian structures but are military strongholds welcome to attack.

 

[fanger]

Who are you quoting Sly?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Who are you quoting Sly?

Nobody. He is just blurting out BS Israeli talking points.

 

[montelatici]

Buildings with combatants on their grounds, or inside, with weapon cache's stored within are no longer civilian structures but are military strongholds welcome to attack.

There were no weapons aor combatants in the residential buildings bombed.

 

[Shusha]

Buildings with combatants on their grounds, or inside, with weapon cache's stored within are no longer civilian structures but are military strongholds welcome to attack.

There were no weapons aor combatants in the residential buildings bombed.

But you agree that, at least in theory, if there were, they are legit military objectives, yes?

 

[louie888]

Buildings with combatants on their grounds, or inside, with weapon cache's stored within are no longer civilian structures but are military strongholds welcome to attack.

There were no weapons aor combatants in the residential buildings bombed.

But you agree that, at least in theory, if there were, they are legit military objectives, yes?

How the hell is a Palestinian toddler you people burned alive a legit military objective?

You are sicker than I thought.

 

[Shusha]

Its not. No one said he was.

 

[Shusha]

Now, are you going to argue that people at a Shabbat dinner are legitimate military objectives?