International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?

[P F Tinmore]

abi, please tell me when the French in their resistance to the Nazi's during WWII committed suicide bombings upon civilian targets. Show me where the French rammed vehicles randomly into civilian targets. Please. Tell us when the French sent a few armed resistance fighters into a place of worship to kill a few Germans. Unless you or anyone else can show me otherwise, I am under the impression that the French resistance did their best to target military targets only. As you stated in your OP, snipers shot at guards at the outposts.

That is why it is a huge insult to the French to compare the French resistance during WWII to what the Palestinians do. Any French on this board? And that is also why you did not pursue this line of questioning with me. Because you KNEW that it would not paint the picture you always want to paint.

That it's all the fault of those EVIL JOOS (Zionists).

Illegal settlers are not considered civilians.

 

[abi]

Illegal settlers are not considered civilians.

This is another question I had. Is this actually stated in law? Is there international law or standards regarding the occupier's status as civilians or as a foreign military?

 

[P F Tinmore]

I have been looking at this, especially after reading several posts that claim no matter what the Palestinians do, they are terrorists. I have even seen the nonviolent resistance such as BDS labeled as terrorists. When the Nazis occupied France, Germans were being attacked. Snipers were even shooting their occupiers at checkpoints and these men were heralded as war heroes. So, what, in today's world is acceptable when resisting your oppressors?

I am curious to know, especially from a zionist, if there is any legitimate forms of resistance and if so, what they would be.

what occupation, dum dum?

what kind of government did so-called palestininans have?

who was their head of government?

what items did they use for trade?

who were their trading partners?

pssssst.... you, like every other terrorist supporter, will be unable to respond to the above... because there was no such "people".

but if they were actually interested, they could govern themselves instead of using all of their resources for missiles.

We have established on multiple threads that the Palestinian people existed. That is enough for most of us to grant them their inalienable rights.

It sure would be nice if they would actually claim those inalienable rights peacefully instead of resorting to the violence they have committed on civilian targets all these decades.

They do. It is called BDS.

 

[P F Tinmore]

6,000 Jews also died in the War of Independence.

OMG, like a Nazi whining about the German deaths. Scary.

5 Arab armies invaded Israel. What does that have to do with the Nazis?

Not true.

 

[Hollie]

6,000 Jews also died in the War of Independence.

OMG, like a Nazi whining about the German deaths. Scary.

5 Arab armies invaded Israel. What does that have to do with the Nazis?

Not true.

Arab-Islamist armies tried to invade and were dealt humiliating defeats.

 

[RoccoR]

International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ abi, et al,

This is an example of myptic vision and preconceived notions.

Interesting, thank-you, but the Germans did not demolish European cities and move 'civilians' into the new German only cities that they created on top of those demolished. It didn't happen like that.

It certainly is not the fault of the Palestinian people that the zionists have done exactly that. And this has now gone on for decades. Big difference there as well.

(COMMENT)

• Germans did not demolish European cities and move 'civilians' into the new German only cities that they created on top of those demolished. It didn't happen like that.

There: Different political-military objectives, different legal and mral environments, and different technologies create wholely different paths.

You cannot equate WWII campagnswith the Palestinian Agreed upon Area "C" Settlements.​

• It certainly is not the fault of the Palestinian people that the zionists have done exactly that. And this has now gone on for decades. Big difference there as well.

The Palestinian peple, at some point, must take ownership and responsibiltyfor the century long string f bad political, economic and military decisions.

AND, the Palestinian people must accept the consequence for their uncooperative and hostile behaviors that have lead themselves to this dismal outcome. And you continue to do so.​

But neither of these have anything to do with methodologies in establishing Third and Fourth Generations resistance movements. And I don't think that anyone is actually going to sitdown and tell you what needs to be corrected and what needs to be implemented. It is not in the Middle East's Regional Security Interest for the Arab Palestinians to extract themselves from the chaos which entangles them. The Regional Area Nations are quite satisfide to have the Israelis saddled to with the quarentine and retraint issues.

Mst Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

Illegal settlers are not considered civilians.

This is another question I had. Is this actually stated in law? Is there international law or standards regarding the occupier's status as civilians or as a foreign military?

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

 

[abi]

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

I'm lost, are the occupiers legitimate targets for those resisting occupation or fighting for their freedom?

 

[ForeverYoung436]

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

I'm lost, are the occupiers legitimate targets for those resisting occupation or fighting for their freedom?

Well, you have already demonized all Israelis and believe they are Nazis. So the next logical step is to make them targets for freedom fighters, right?

 

[RoccoR]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ Tinmore, et al,

If you see foreign troops coming down your street, you are already behind the power curve.

Partisans and modern-day Resistance Movements are interchangeable terms. In order to be lawful, they must be readily distinguishable from the non-combatant civilians.

So, if I see foreign troops coming down my street, I have to sit on my hands because I have no uniform?

(REMEMBER)

Protected persons (such as yourself) who commit an offense which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, but which does not constitute an attempt on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration ... → ... shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offense committed. Furthermore, internment or imprisonment shall, for such offenses, be the only measure adopted for depriving protected persons of liberty. The courts provided for under Article 66 of the present Convention may at their discretion convert a sentence of imprisonment to one of internment for the same period.

The penal provisions by the Occupying Power (Foreign Occupation Forces) IAW Articles 64 and 65 may impose the death penalty against a protected person only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons.

You can do what you want, BUT be aware of the consequence and take responsibility for your actions.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

The Palestinian peple, at some point, must take ownership and responsibiltyfor the century long string f bad political, economic and military decisions.

AND, the Palestinian people must accept the consequence for their uncooperative and hostile behaviors that have lead themselves to this dismal outcome. And you continue to do so.

The Palestinians should have never allowed the world superpower to occupy their country.

Such incompetence.

 

[abi]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ Tinmore, et al,

If you see foreign troops coming down your street, you are already behind the power curve.

Partisans and modern-day Resistance Movements are interchangeable terms. In order to be lawful, they must be readily distinguishable from the non-combatant civilians.

So, if I see foreign troops coming down my street, I have to sit on my hands because I have no uniform?

(REMEMBER)

Protected persons (such as yourself) who commit an offense which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, but which does not constitute an attempt on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration ... → ... shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offense committed. Furthermore, internment or imprisonment shall, for such offenses, be the only measure adopted for depriving protected persons of liberty. The courts provided for under Article 66 of the present Convention may at their discretion convert a sentence of imprisonment to one of internment for the same period.

The penal provisions by the Occupying Power (Foreign Occupation Forces) IAW Articles 64 and 65 may impose the death penalty against a protected person only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons.

You can do what you want, BUT be aware of the consequence and take responsibility for your actions.

Most Respectfully,
R

Are all the occupiers fair game or just the ones in military uniforms?

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ Tinmore, et al,

If you see foreign troops coming down your street, you are already behind the power curve.

Partisans and modern-day Resistance Movements are interchangeable terms. In order to be lawful, they must be readily distinguishable from the non-combatant civilians.

So, if I see foreign troops coming down my street, I have to sit on my hands because I have no uniform?

(REMEMBER)

Protected persons (such as yourself) who commit an offense which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, but which does not constitute an attempt on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration ... → ... shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offense committed. Furthermore, internment or imprisonment shall, for such offenses, be the only measure adopted for depriving protected persons of liberty. The courts provided for under Article 66 of the present Convention may at their discretion convert a sentence of imprisonment to one of internment for the same period.

The penal provisions by the Occupying Power (Foreign Occupation Forces) IAW Articles 64 and 65 may impose the death penalty against a protected person only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons.

You can do what you want, BUT be aware of the consequence and take responsibility for your actions.

Most Respectfully,
R

That is 19th century domestic law. Do you have something more relevant?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The demand for the destruction of the Jewish State is never legitimate. Therefore no acts supporting this end are legitimate resistance.

The demand for a Two State solution is legitimate. A Two State solution can be achieved only through mutual recognition and negotiation. Therefore there is no need for acts of resistance and no acts of resistance are legitimate.

But the French resisted their occupation and were hailed as war heroes? Strange how you manipulate your responses depending on which thread you are on.

There are no Israeli troops in Gaza, yet they fired rockets into Israel last week and got an airstrike in return.

How do you justify that?

 

[RoccoR]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ abi, et al,

It is not cut and dry.

Are all the occupiers fair game or just the ones in military uniforms?

(COMMENT)

You have to engage your brain:
You cannot engage, for instance, ICRC personnel or the little girl running across the street or:

• 25. Medical Personnel
• 26. Medical Activities
• 27. Religious Personnel
• 28. Medical Units
• 29. Medical Transports
• 30. Persons and Objects Displaying the Distinctive Emblem of a Non-combatant activity.
  
• 31. Humanitarian Relief Personnel
• 32. Humanitarian Relief Objects
• 33. Personnel and Objects Involved in a Peacekeeping Mission
• 34. Journalists

You have to understand the difference between a combatant and a non-combatant. Of course, I've talked to many Hostile Arab Palestinians, some in this discussion group, that believe the Arab Palestinians have an exemption to the laws and can use any means to kill and Israel, for any reason. Hell, it wasn't long ago that the West Bank Idiots wanted to name a public facility in honor of Dalal Mughrabi, a former aide to Mahmoud Abbas, for the killing of 38 innocent men, women and children (12) in Israel; and who also killed Gail Ruben, niece to US Senator and nature photographer.

Of course, any day is a good day to kill a terrorist. Especially those that engage in activities inconsistent with the Customary IHL.


Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Hollie]

The Palestinian peple, at some point, must take ownership and responsibiltyfor the century long string f bad political, economic and military decisions.

AND, the Palestinian people must accept the consequence for their uncooperative and hostile behaviors that have lead themselves to this dismal outcome. And you continue to do so.

The Palestinians should have never allowed the world superpower to occupy their country.

Such incompetence.

There was never a “country of Pally’land”.

Such ignorance.

 

[abi]

...West Bank Idiots wanted to name a public facility in honor of Dalal Mughrabi, a former aide to Mahmoud Abbas, for the killing of 38 innocent men, women and children (12) in Israel; and who also killed Gail Ruben, niece to US Senator and nature photographer.

Of course, any day is a good day to kill a terrorist. Especially those that engage in activities inconsistent with the Customary IHL.


Most Respectfully,
R

Hypocrite.

Hebron settlers shed no tears after slaughter: Militant Jews are

 

[montelatici]

Let's be clear, the Zionists believe that the Palestinians should peacefully accept Jew rule and occupation of the land that prior to the end of WW1 they were, Muslims and Christians, over 90% of population.

No part of the UN designated Jewish partition was attacked by Arab armies in 47-48. Arab armies tried, unsuccessfully, to prevent the Jews from killing and/or expelling non-Jews from their homes within the UN designated Arab partition and international sector. In fact, Jaffa within the Arab sector was attacked and surrendered to the invading Jews before the state of Israel was declared. The Jews had been attacking Arabs within the Arab sector for months prior to the Arab League intervention.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Partisans and modern day Resistance Movements are interchangeable terms. In order to be lawful, they must be readily distinguishable from the non-combatant civilians.

So, if I see foreign troops coming down my street, I have to sit on my hands because I have no uniform?

No, but don't claim moral outrage when they shoot you!

 

[RoccoR]

RE: International law or even a legal framework regarding what is legitimate resistance to occupation?
※→ Tinmore, et al,

I think you will find that it is the Fourth Geneva Convention (International Humanitarian Law), updated in 1977.

If you see foreign troops coming down your street, you are already behind the power curve.

That is 19th century domestic law. Do you have something more relevant?

(COMMENT)

It is not domestic law. (Jeesh! I don't know where that came from.) It is the late 20th Century Internatinal Law, bit older than the State of Palestine. It is the Law that was directed to be observed by the Security Council [S/RES/237 (1967) 14 June 1967].

Most Respectfully,
R