[RD] War in Gaza News: Pas de Deux

[Kyriakos]

By itself it means nothing, sadly. There are similar resolutions (eg) against Turkey occupying the northern part of Cyprus, and that has been going on for half a century.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

Canada’s ambassador to the UN Bob Rae said the resolution lacks a condemnation of terrorism and suggests that only one side, Israel, is responsible for the unlawful acts in the occupied territories.

Do Canada's ambassadors have to go through some mental retardation facility before they're considered eligible for representing their country? Of course the resolution doesn't condemn terrorism because it's not a resolution about terrorism; it's about Israel's occupation of the West Bank, which is illegal, terrorism or no terrorism. And the part about Israel being the only party responsible for unlawful acts is a good one too, considering Israel's presence in the West Bank is unlawful in the first place.

 

[Gorbles]

Amnesty International for example, although they seem to suggest that can only be on the basis of "race" by which they mean skin color I assume, not very useful in the ME.

Israel's apartheid against Palestinians

Palestinians are systematically subjected to home demolitions and forced evictions, and live in constant fear of losing their homes. For more than 73 years, Israel has been forcibly displacing entire Palestinian communities. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians’ homes have been demolished...

www.amnesty.org

Note, one does not exclude the other, you can democratically decide to implement an apartheids regime too..

Sure, that's one example. My point is that a) more do not and b) the ones that do tend to have less (if any) outright power or influence with regards to making a material difference.

Heck, the ICJ has made at least one ruling, and that is still hamstrung by being unable to enforce said ruling. We're dependent on world governments driving action, and they mostly are - in support of Israel. The countries that oppose tend to lack the ability to follow up on that opposition.

 

[Snowygerry]

National governments you mean ? But even inside the EU(or Belgium) it is incredibly difficult to decide on a single policy, you have one group that supports Israel another that support Palestine, and a majority that don't care...

Inevitably you end up with a policy that is neither here or there...

 

[Yeekim]

Explosions happened in the middle of the day, outside, in central city locations and literal walkers-by lost limbs. And you are ok with that and think it is fine?

Yes.

What if such happened in your city and someone completely innocent you knew lost a leg just because they were walking near a terrorist group member without being aware of it?

Hundreds of terrorist group members in my city would represent the kind of threat where a lost leg would be a small price to pay to get rid of them.

 

[Gorbles]

National governments you mean ? But even inside the EU(or Belgium) it is incredibly difficult to decide on a single policy, you have one group that supports Israel another that support Palestine, and a majority that don't care...

Inevitably you end up with a policy that is neither here or there...

I understand the reality. I'm just defending my initial post that you described as "nonsense", because apparently Israel is frequently described as a "religious apartheid state". I don't think it is - at least by any body with the ability to effect material change. The ones with the power, like you said, end up "neither here nor there" at best. I'd also say that most policies actually end up being more pro-Israel than they do pro-Palestine.

 

[r16]

nothing to worry about . Orban's Hungary declares the things were assembled in Bulgaria . Some other option is Czech Republic where a Qatari bought them and sent to Lebanon by a ship that sailed from Hamburg . To avoid Jordan becoming a subject of revenge , if my post above was ever true . You know , merely reading stuff from the web . Though the Czech company is said to be owned by an American Jew . And if you follow the stated adress of the single Hungarian "worker" , it turns out she lives in the French Gendarme barracks in Paris . Back in the day , people used to be more secretive . Western Goverments might be chiming in to help in cover up ...

 

[Kyriakos]

Yes.

Hundreds of terrorist group members in my city would represent the kind of threat where a lost leg would be a small price to pay to get rid of them.

What if they were identified as terrorist groups not by the bulk of your city's population but by a country you detest? Eg I am sure (unnamed country) views several pro (unnamed other country) supporters as terrorists, what if it thought (like you do) that it is fine to maim innocents in a third country sympathetic to the second, so as to take the terrorist group out?
Keep in mind that Lebanon is not at war with Israel. Harming its civilians is not something done during war, but peace, and you are still ok with it.

 

[Ordnael]

Splitting hairs here^
Hezbollah is a terrorist organization, yes or no?

 

[Kyriakos]

We don't need to be able to split the atom while discussing here, but surely the level should go a bit beyond "terrorist group operating in part of country x means all people in country x are now ok to be maimed by Israel". Lebanon is the country, not Hezbollah, and Lebanon isn't at war with anyone. Lebanon doesn't control the south, courtesy (also) of Israel invading it. The explosions also happened in cities outside the south, with no care for people there.

 

[Ordnael]

I am all for please don't harm the innocents, and I get sad at this loss of life, surely the wife and son of a Hezbollah operative are just as innocent as a Hamas hostage. But tip toeing around the fact that Hezbollah kinda had it coming just sits bad with me. I hope and want to believe Mossad tried to prevent harming innocents...I might be too gullible in this, I know!

 

[Yeekim]

what if it thought (like you do) that it is fine to maim innocents in a third country sympathetic to the second, so as to take the terrorist group out?

Besides false equivalence, that is not an "if", that is what is happening and has been happening for a while. Respect for international norms or human life definitely has not factored into decisions of that particular country. Let's just stop that derail here, OK?

If we agree that Hezbollah member is a legitimate target, then blowing up his pager represents a highly precise level of targeting that is definitely less dangerous to any innocent bystanders than a drone or a missile hit.

So, well done.

 

[MarcosQuadros]

Splitting hairs here^
Hezbollah is a terrorist organization, yes or no?

Is Azov a terrorist organization, Yes or no?

Or are the rules always different for the dear europe?

 

[r16]

hizbullah were Shia villagers who kept away from all and all Israeli invasions of Lebanon went through their villages and fields . If Israel defeats everything and someday becomes a neighbour of Turkey , will we have it coming ? Like because it is a thing because many thinks it is a thing ... That Israel's territorial ambitions are ambitious ...

 

[Gorbles]

Splitting hairs here^
Hezbollah is a terrorist organization, yes or no?

This is a question anybody can ask Google. From Wikipedia:

Hezbollah (/ˌhɛzbəˈlɑː/;[43] Arabic: حزب الله, romanized: Ḥizbu 'llāh, pronounced [ħizbu‿lːaːh], lit. 'Party of God')[a] is a Lebanese Shia Islamist political party and paramilitary group,[44][45] led since 1992 by its Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah. Hezbollah's paramilitary wing is the Jihad Council,[46] and its political wing is the Loyalty to the Resistance Bloc party in the Lebanese Parliament.

Specifically on its terrorist nature:

Either the entire organization or only its military wing has been designated a terrorist organization by several countries, as well as by the European Union.[84]

So as usual, the answer is more complex than "yes" or "no". This is a thread where complex discussions can be had, but only if you're willing to have them.

If we agree that Hezbollah member is a legitimate target, then blowing up his pager represents a highly precise level of targeting that is definitely less dangerous to any innocent bystanders than a drone or a missile hit.

I don't think the calculus for "was it a war crime" involves defense of an action by suggesting other, more dangerous war crimes also exist (by way of inflicting harm on civilians with intent).

Now, if collateral damage is acceptable for the purposes of prosecuting a war (and if it isn't, I wouldn't expect you to be arguing about the level of danger on innocent bystanders in the first place, nor would you have volunteered to lose a limb for the noble cause of ridding your country of terrorists), I would like to ask: why is it that only one side is therefore able to benefit from being allowed collateral damage? Surely this means Hezbollah, and by association Hamas (or Iran, or whoever), are perfectly welcome to do the same?

What would your reaction be, if they did?

 

[Yeekim]

Is Azov a terrorist organization, Yes or no?

No.

Now, if collateral damage is acceptable for the purposes of prosecuting a war

This is also something you can easily Google:

Military necessity, along with distinction and proportionality, are three important principles of international humanitarian law, governing the legal use of force in an armed conflict. Offensives causing collateral damage are not automatically classed as a war crimes. They are war crimes when the objective is excessively or solely collateral damage.

(and if it isn't, I wouldn't expect you to be arguing about the level of danger on innocent bystanders in the first place, nor would you have volunteered to lose a limb for the noble cause of ridding your country of terrorists), I would like to ask: why is it that only one side is therefore able to benefit from being allowed collateral damage? Surely this means Hezbollah, and by association Hamas (or Iran, or whoever), are perfectly welcome to do the same?

What would your reaction be, if they did?

They are regularly carrying out such attacks, as well as attacks where civilians are not "collateral" but main target, so I don't understand why you're attempting to dress this as some hypothetical.

 

[Lexicus]

If we agree that Hezbollah member is a legitimate target, then blowing up his pager represents a highly precise level of targeting that is definitely less dangerous to any innocent bystanders than a drone or a missile hit.

"Hezbollah members" are not necessarily legitimate targets as many members of Hezbollah are noncombatants afforded various protections under international law.

However, it is obvious that Israel had no way of knowing whether these rigged devices would all be in the hands of Hezbollah combatants when they were detonated, or who else might be within the blast radius, which means that the attacks were, necessarily, indiscriminate. Indeed, we have multiple reports of women and children being caught in these explosions. There have also been reports of doctors and nurses' pagers exploding.

Here is one such episode reported in the NYT:

A 9-Year-Old Girl Killed in Pager Attack Is Mourned in Lebanon

“The enemy killed us using this small device!” mourners chanted at the funeral for Fatima Abdullah, a fourth grader.

www.nytimes.com

Fatima was in the kitchen on Tuesday when a pager on the table began to beep, her aunt said. She picked up the device to bring it to her father and was holding it when it exploded, mangling her face and leaving the room covered in blood, she said.

This is what you're praising and defending.

‘Sophisticated evil’: Beirut medics and civilians horrified by pager attacks

People describe panic when explosions started and ‘apocalyptic’ scenes inside hospitals overwhelmed by injured patients

www.theguardian.com

Hundreds of terrorist group members in my city would represent the kind of threat where a lost leg would be a small price to pay to get rid of them.

This is completely divorced from reality. Not all Lebanese people support Hezbollah, of course, but to most Lebanese people, the IDF are the terrorists, doubly so after the events of the last few days which have left most Lebanese people afraid to use things like baby monitors for fear that they will explode. Hezbollah is not a "terrorist group" but a political party with mass popular support, largely derived from the repeated Israeli invasions and attacks on Lebanon. Hezbollah formed in the first place as a result of Israel's invasion of Lebanon in 1982.

 

[Gorbles]

They are regularly carrying out such attacks, as well as attacks where civilians are not "collateral" but main target, so I don't understand why you're attempting to dress this as some hypothetical.

Hedging my bets, just in case there's a technicality that can be used to disprove a generalisation.

Regardless, you didn't answer the question. I asked what your reaction would be. To clarify: would you defend their actions as you are currently defending Israel's?

Also, can you provide a current news source for your claims about Hezbollah targeting civilians (as a main target), relevant to this round of hostilities? All I can find are pieces debating the attacks involving pagers and other communication devices (which has been attributed to Israel, though I don't know if they've claimed responsibility).

 

[Ordnael]

Is Azov a terrorist organization, Yes or no?

Or are the rules always different for the dear europe?

Why bring Ukraine invasion into this!? What's Europe got to do with this!?

First time I've read a comment throwing the notion of Azov being a terrorist organization!
As far as I know (without doing serious research) Azov are just a military unit/batallion/whatamyjigga as much as the xxxmechanized battalion...Am I wrong?

 

[Yeekim]

which means that the attacks were, necessarily, indiscriminate.

That is not what "indiscriminate" means.

Hezbollah is not a "terrorist group" but a political party with mass popular support,

It is clearly both, and therein lies the problem.