[mir]

Israel is using white phosphorus while battling Hamas:
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/172089-White-Phosphorous-Israel-fires-artillery-shells-into-Gaza


I cant imagine how much that must hurt, being hit by only one tiny fragment of one of those shells.

[Mitch]

Seems rather one-sided story there.

[macman104]

The article itself does seem extremely one sided and the commentary doesn't help the writers case of a non-bias article (or even remotely close).  As far as I know, there is no evidence that it is being used to attack individuals, but simply as a lighting/marking agent.  Even the Red Cross does not say Israel is using the phosphorus illegally.

Also, let us not forget that as early as the Iraq war the US used white phosphorus during it's assault of Fallujah in 2004 (Yes, there was international outcry then too, but..yea).

[Arkcon]

Yeah, macman104: I'd heard about that back then as well.  It seems to me that mentioning white phosphorous is something of an internet meme -- they might be weapons, or someone might have been accidentally hit with tracer fire, so in a way, it might be a chemical attack, or it might be a coincidence, but since people might have casual phosphors exposure, like mir: it just generates excitement for it's own sake.  This was definitely the case, back in 2004, sci.chem was constantly mentioning white phosphorus, trying to determine it's contents in shells -- based on blast-burn radius or some such foo, even after the US admitted it.  That's where I get the meme label for these sorts of stories -- an idea, that propagates, not because it has info on it's own, or leads to other info, but instead exists because it's exciting, just by mentioning it.

[ARGOS++]

Dear All;

News from today:
Mr. Kellenberger, President of the International Red Cross (ICRC), just back from a visit of the Hospitals of Ghasa reported, that not himself, nor one of his ICRC medical were able to detect any sign/wound which they could relate/correlate to phosphorus in any kind yet.

Good Luck!
                    ARGOS⁺⁺

[P]

The news last night suggested that the white phospherous was used only to provide a smoke screen for troop advancement. They pop out a few flares that give off white smoke for ages to give cover to advancing troops.  It suggested that injuries caused buy these happened in an attempt to stamp out the flares.  So  -  these civilians that were supposedly burnt up by white phospherous attacks were actually burnt when they were trying to sabotage the Isreali smoke screens by trying to stamp out the flares.

[DrCMS]

OK so Israel has not used white phosphorus against civilians but they have killed a lot of them in other ways.  So far >1000 Palestinians have died with more than 1/3 of those children compared with 13 Israeli's 3 civilians and 10 IDF and 3 of those were killed by their own side.  Israels responce to the terrorists attacks by Hamas has been disproportionate.

From 1969-1999 the UK was dealing with terrorist attacks by the IRA. 
The IRA killed ~1800 people (~1100 from the security forces and ~650 civilians)
and injured 20000 (~6000 from the security forces and ~14000 civilians). 
So not trivial numbers of dead and injured.

Did the UK government launch air strikes against the Catholic area's of Belfast or over the border into Eire?
Did we attack them with tanks, did we stop them leaving the country, did we deny them food and medical supplies, did we cut off the water and electricity?  They voted for Sinn Fein so surely they were all asking for trouble?  They had guns and bombs supplied by an overseas power so should we have bombed Boston as well?

No we did not because it would have been sinking to the level of the terrorists and worse to do any of that.

So why should Israel do what its doing and not have the UN and the west going in to stop them.

Oh yes that's right they're Jews killing Arabs and that's OK with the USA especially with AIPAC pulling the strings.  Noboby dares criticise Israel because as soon as they do they're accused of antisemitism. 

I think Israels action are disgusting for a so called civilised democratic country.  I think it will lead to more terrorist attacks against them and also against the USA and UK.

[DrCMS]

Well the IDF have now attacked the UN building in Gaza city with white phosphorus. 

So we can forget all their bogus claims of not targeting civilians with white phosphorus for the lies that they are.

They claimed they were shot at from the UN compound but have since retracted that.

Hamas are terrorist scum but Israel are even worse.

[macman104]

I'm sorry, but when Hamas attacks from a densely populated area, what else would you have Israel do?  They are in an impossible position; if they sit and do nothing, their people die.  If they go in with infantry right away, they suffer larger causalities.  So, they go in with air, but because of the dense population, there is collateral damage, and the international world becomes outraged. 

There was a cease fire and Hamas broke the silence by firing katusha rockets into civilian areas.  I have been told by friends in the Israeli army how confusing it is to them, that there are army establishments within range, and Hamas attacks the civilian establishments instead of the military.

I will never understand the argument that Israel is worse because more people have been killed.  Does it not matter the motive or purpose of the attacks?  Why would it be different if the katusha rockets were more accurate and caused an equal number of civilian casualties?  Hamas uses the citizens of Gaza as shields, and because of that, there are more civilian casualties.

If you honestly believe that Israel would continue to cause civilian casualties given the ability to never injure a single civilian, then I have no way to convince you otherwise.

[Mitch]

The problem is that there is no good solution.

[macman104]

I should also add, that I don't even come close to liking how many civilian deaths there are.  There is nothing to rejoice about civilian deaths, regardless of whose side the death was on.  It is always a loss.  And I'm not going to say that Israel has a perfectly clean slate.  However, when push comes to shove, Israel must defend its civilians.

[DrCMS]

Even the Red Cross does not say Israel is using the phosphorus illegally.

I'm pretty sure they do now.

I'm sorry, but when Hamas attacks from a densely populated area, what else would you have Israel do?  They are in an impossible position; if they sit and do nothing, their people die.  If they go in with infantry right away, they suffer larger causalities.  So, they go in with air, but because of the dense population, there is collateral damage, and the international world becomes outraged. 

How about them not using their army or air force but negotiating instead.  As I said earlier the IRA worked from civilian areas but the UK did not attack with our army, navy or air force because we are a civilised society.  With power comes resposibility.  In the end we negotiated with the IRA and most of the country did not like that but it worked.  Now UK civilians are not getting blown up by IRA bombs.

There was a cease fire and Hamas broke the silence by firing katusha rockets into civilian areas.  I have been told by friends in the Israeli army how confusing it is to them, that there are army establishments within range, and Hamas attacks the civilian establishments instead of the military.

Israel broke the ceasefire by blockading the Gaza strip in.  How would you react if somebody invaded your country took all the best land dumped you off to a tiny little strip then started taking bits of that and then built a big wall round you and kept all the food water medical supplies etc on their side.  Would you be happy to live like that or not?

I will never understand the argument that Israel is worse because more people have been killed.  Does it not matter the motive or purpose of the attacks?  Why would it be different if the katusha rockets were more accurate and caused an equal number of civilian casualties?  Hamas uses the citizens of Gaza as shields, and because of that, there are more civilian casualties.

Of course it matters how many people die you stupid insensitive idiot.  Israel using its well equipped air force and army (provided by the USA) has killed hundreds of innocent women and children by attacking civilian areas.  Hamas has killed a handful by the same approach.  Israel is meant to be a civilised country but is acting like the terrorists.

If you honestly believe that Israel would continue to cause civilian casualties given the ability to never injure a single civilian, then I have no way to convince you otherwise.

These is no way to do what they are doing and not kill civilians and that's my point they knew at the outset that their actions would lead to the deaths of many innocent civilians but they did it anyway and that makes them scum.

They can not claim the moral high ground one day and act like murdering terrorists the next.

[P]

I'm sorry, but when Hamas attacks from a densely populated area, what else would you have Israel do?  They are in an impossible position; if they sit and do nothing, their people die.  If they go in with infantry right away, they suffer larger causalities.  So, they go in with air, but because of the dense population, there is collateral damage, and the international world becomes outraged. 

How about them not using their army or air force but negotiating instead.  As I said earlier the IRA worked from civilian areas but the UK did not attack with our army, navy or air force because we are a civilised society.  With power comes resposibility.  In the end we negotiated with the IRA and most of the country did not like that but it worked.  Now UK civilians are not getting blown up by IRA bombs.

It's not as simple as that - This situation is COMPLETELY different.  The IRA  (As much as I thought we should have been harder on the people we caught) had peace as their ultimate aim. Hamas DO NOT WANT PEACE - they just wan't a war between the Arabs and Isreal. Anyway - we perminately had troops in N.Ireland for years.

Of course it matters how many people die you stupid insensitive idiot.

If we go to war, we try to minimise all civillian casaulties, but if there are to be any, then you make sure it is the opposition's - not your own. I'm quite disapointed - I thought CMS would have the intelect to be able to debate this without turning to personal insults.  However - it is a VERY dificault subject to discuss without it becoming heated.

If it were all so simple then this BS wouldn't have carried on for so long...   It's been the same old storey for over 70 - 80 years...  it is going in circles between ceasefires-terrorist-attacks-war-occupation-ceasefire and withdrawl - terrorist attacks - war - occupation - ceasefire...etc.. 

My stace: Isreal have the right to do WHATEVER is nescessary to put a FINAL stop to Hamas. There is no final and complete solution short of the destruction/dissolution of Isreal or Palestine.  The path of least death in my opinion would be to give Isreal the Gaza strip and West Bank and distribute the terroist troops and their civillian families that they hide behind into the surounding Arab nations.  But I don't think their book allows them to give up.


What's your solution CMS?  The path of least death? 

[Mitch]

Don't know the answers to these questions, just trying to be analytical.

How many Israeli's died for this war to begin? Is this a small or large number when compared to their normal murder rate? Do they invade all bad neighborhoods where the murder rate is larger than the death rate due to terrorism?

[DrCMS]

It's not as simple as that - This situation is COMPLETELY different.  The IRA  (As much as I thought we should have been harder on the people we caught) had peace as their ultimate aim. Hamas DO NOT WANT PEACE - they just wan't a war between the Arabs and Isreal. Anyway - we perminately had troops in N.Ireland for years.

No it is that simple the IRA wanted a united Ireland not peace.  We were not at war with Northen Ireland they already had peace they wanted a united catholic country.  Yes we had troops in Northen Ireland for 30 years but we did not unleash the full might of the army on the catholic areas.  When i was younger i would have quite happily voted for the army to have killed every suspected IRA member.  But it would not have worked it would have caused more resentment and boosted IRA recruitment and lead to more bombs and more deaths.  In the end the only thing that worked was negotiontions.

Hamas wants a united muslim Palestine not a permanent on going war. Its not going to happen just like Northern Ireland is still part of ther UK and not a catholic country.

If we go to war, we try to minimise all civillian casaulties, but if there are to be any, then you make sure it is the opposition's - not your own. I'm quite disapointed - I thought CMS would have the intelect to be able to debate this without turning to personal insults.  However - it is a VERY dificault subject to discuss without it becoming heated.

When sombody makes such a crass statement as it not mattering how many people Israel kills then of cousre I will insult that person. It was a disgusting statement and part of the reason for this mess.  Israel has shown time and again that it values 1 Isreali jew more highly than 100 Israeli muslims and that is wrong.