So why do people hate Israel? - Page 182




 
--
 
June 28th, 2014  
VDKMS
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
and what does being a sovereign State have to do with the question the Zionists have long been known for their disregard of all international Laws and Conventions. Nowhere does this give them the Right to occupy the land of another people then drive the legitimate occupants out. I also noticed on the list that Israel is not recognised by 22 States.[I]Thus the state of Israel places itself straight away above international law.
The land Israel has now is because of tho things:
1 : Decision by the International community to give the Jews a homeland.
2 : extra land because of a defensive war.

The Arabs wanted to destroy a member of the UN which is a gross violation of international law and international law gave Israel the right to fight back. This happend several times.


Quote:
Imposed on the U.N. on the 11 May 1949 by the will of the United States, the State of Israel was only admitted on three conditions :

1 - Not to touch the status of Jerusalem;

2 - To allow Palestinian Arabs to come back to their homes;

3 - To respect the borders fixed by the partition decision.
1 - during the last peace negotiations with Olmert he gave Jerusalem an international statuts. Abbas refused.

2 - You forget one very important thing:

"Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date"


Terrorists will not live at peace with their Jewish neigbours.

3 - Since the "Palestinians" Arabs refused their part of the deal the eastern border of Israel borders Jordan, AKA the border of the non existing Arab partition.



Quote:
Speaking about this U.N. resolution on "sharing", taken well before its admission, Ben Gurion declares:"The State of Israel considers the U.N. resolution of 29 November 1947 (Res. 181) to be null and void."
You are twisting the truth here:
from Letter dated 30 March 1999 from the Permanent Representative of Israel to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General:

For these reasons, Israel's first Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion stated before the Knesset on 3 December 1949: "Thus we can no longer regard the United Nations resolution of 29th November as having any moral force. After the United Nations failed to implement its own resolution, we regard the resolution of the 29th November concerning Jerusalem to be null and void."


Quote:
You stated that you could see such miraculous things as the protesters "uninjured" foot in frame 633, which at the time was still within his shoe, but when requested to show the Frame showing this you could not produce any evidence as to how you came by this miracle Frame 633. (Lie)
You claimed that it could also be seen that the exit hole in the sole of the protesters shoe showed the edges to be turned inwards, but when asked for the evidence to support this miracle you could not.(It was a Lie)
You quoted a mysterious "full length version" of the film of the protestor being shot in the foot, but a search of the Internet reveals no such thing ever existed.(Lie)

You have been asked to show proof of these statements you made a dozen times, but you have studiously ignored any request because you know them to be lies.
blablablabla. He was not even hit! Period.
June 28th, 2014  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
The land Israel has now is because of tho things:
1 : Decision by the International community to give the Jews a homeland.
2 : extra land because of a defensive war.

The Arabs wanted to destroy a member of the UN which is a gross violation of international law and international law gave Israel the right to fight back. This happend several times.
You persist in taking random events and linking them.
1) Even if the UN signed over 50% of Palestine to a Jewish homeland in violation of international law at the time it did not give the other 50% to them they took it.

2) Extra land from a "defensive" war has been so shot full of holes that you cant even convince the Americans of it any more but lets assume for shits and giggles that you are right and that Egypt, Jordan and Syria were going to attack Israel and the Israelis attacked first (please not that is your narrative and I think that is a load of BS) the West Bank was occupied by Jordan and not part of Jordan (Only Pakistan and Britain recognised the annexation) therefore the West Bank was not Jordanian to take.



Quote:
3 - Since the "Palestinians" Arabs refused their part of the deal the eastern border of Israel borders Jordan, AKA the border of the non existing Arab partition.
Again you are omitting facts here but please explain how any area that was never assigned to a Jewish state suddenly becomes Jewish land because 3rd party countries used it to attack the area assigned to a Jewish state.

In essence it is like saying that all of occupied Europe belongs to the countries that drove the Germans out.

Like it or not the land was still assigned to an Arab state and as such it can not be considered up for grabs.



Quote:
blablablabla. He was not even hit! Period.
Would you like to change your testimony?

I find it incredibly odd that a man can beconvicted of actions you claim didn't happen.

IDF convicts commander, soldier in shooting of bound Palestinian
Lt. Col. Omri Burberg was filmed holding the blindfolded prisoner and ordering his soldier, Staff Sgt. Leonardo Korea, to fire a rubber bullet his leg in Na'alin two years ago.


By Anshel Pfeffer | Jul. 15, 2010 | 10:26 AM

An Israel Defense Forces court on Thursday convicted a former commander and a soldier involved in shooting a bound Palestinian at close range in the West Bank city of Na'alin two years ago.

The affair unfolded after Lt. Col. Omri Burberg was filmed holding the blindfolded and bound prisoner and ordering Staff Sgt. Leonardo Korea to fire a rubber bullet his leg. The Palestinian, 27-year-old Ashraf Abu Rahme, was lightly wounded in the incident.


Burberg and Korea were charged with unbecoming behavior after a military-police investigation into the affair. Burberg was transferred following the incident from his post in Battalion 71 to the armored corps training grounds at Tze'elim.

In response to the relatively light charges, four civil-rights organizations petitioned the High Court of Justice on behalf of Abu Rahme, requesting that the court order the Military Advocate General to change the charge to something more serious.
Military Advocate General Avichai Mandelblit responded by adding attempted threat and behavior unfitting for a commander to the charges against Burburg, and illegal use of a weapon to the charges against Korea.

Burberg arrested Ashraf Abu Rahme on July 7, 2008 for his "involvement in disrupting the peace." The prisoner was taken to the entry of the village, where he was bound and his eyes were covered.

Burberg, who had known Abu Rahme because of his role in previous demonstrations, allegedly said: "Now you will stop demonstrating against the IDF." Abu Rahme responded in Arabic, which suggests he might not understand Hebrew.

The officer suspected that Abu Rahme was lying, and turned to Korea, a soldier on his staff, and asked him: "What do you say - should we take him aside and shoot him with a rubber [bullet]?"

Korea said in response: "I have no problem to shoot him with a rubber [bullet]."

Burberg stood the prisoner on his feet, led him to a nearby jeep and told L. to prepare a rubber bullet. "I already have one in the barrel," L. responded.

At that point, L. aimed at the Palestinian's foot and fired a rubber bullet from a very short range. Burberg allegedly pushed the soldier and shouted at him for shooting a bound prisoner. L. said he thought he had received an order to shoot.
"As a result of the shooting, Abu Rahme suffered superficial injuries on his left toe, was treated by a medic and did not require further care," the chief prosecutor, Colonel Liron Liebman, wrote in the original indictment.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomac...inian-1.302101


Right so now we have established it did happen how about answering his questions rather than trying to weasel around them.

In an effort to improve your hasbara training mainly because I like a challenge which to date you are not providing let me offer you one more piece of advice stop treating people like idiots as we can see what is going on you cant deny it all you can do is try to justify it. I have tried giving you this advice before and clearly it isn't sinking in so perhaps pass it on to your controller.

Where is boyne by the way I haven't seen him on in a while, still changing location flags or is that sorted now?
July 1st, 2014  
VDKMS
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
You persist in taking random events and linking them.
1) Even if the UN signed over 50% of Palestine to a Jewish homeland in violation of international law at the time it did not give the other 50% to them they took it.
The Mandate of Palestine IS international law and legally binding. The Partition plan was rejected by the Arabs.

"The Mandate was subsequently protected by Article 80 of the United Nations Charter that recognizes the continued validity of the rights granted to all states or peoples, or already existing international instruments including those adopted by the League of Nations. The International Court of Justice has consistently recognized that the Mandate survived the demise of the League of Nations."


So, in fact the Jews can settle anywhere in the land allocated to them and this includes the West Banks and Gaza.

Quote:
2) Extra land from a "defensive" war has been so shot full of holes that you cant even convince the Americans of it any more but lets assume for shits and giggles that you are right and that Egypt, Jordan and Syria were going to attack Israel and the Israelis attacked first (please not that is your narrative and I think that is a load of BS) the West Bank was occupied by Jordan and not part of Jordan (Only Pakistan and Britain recognised the annexation) therefore the West Bank was not Jordanian to take.
Read international law! The (Egyptian) blockade of (Israeli) ports is an act of war in international law and gives the blocked nation (Israel) the right to start a defensive war. And because Egypt had military agreements, those nations also became ones that started the act of war.

Judea and Samaria (West Bank) was part of the Jewish homeland of the Palestine Mandate. There was no other country formed and the Arabs (they didn't call themselves "Palestinians" back then) rejected it.

Quote:
Again you are omitting facts here but please explain how any area that was never assigned to a Jewish state suddenly becomes Jewish land because 3rd party countries used it to attack the area assigned to a Jewish state.
The "Palestine Mandate" is the fact. Only the Jews were given political rights (forming a government). Nowhere in the document states that the Arabs were given political rights. The ones who were living there were allowed to stay and Arab immigration was prohibited. The Arabs allready got Transjordan which was off limits for the Jews.

Quote:
In essence it is like saying that all of occupied Europe belongs to the countries that drove the Germans out.
The European countries were there before and after the war. The Ottoman Empire was no more after the war. BTW there was no "Palestine" either before the Turks came to power.

Quote:
Like it or not the land was still assigned to an Arab state and as such it can not be considered up for grabs.
You can't have evidence for that.
"The entire League of Nations – 51 countries – unanimously declared on July 24th, 1922: “Whereas recognition has been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country."




Quote:
Would you like to change your testimony?
NO

Quote:
I find it incredibly odd that a man can beconvicted of actions you claim didn't happen.
He was not hit.

Quote:
IDF convicts commander, soldier in shooting of bound Palestinian
Lt. Col. Omri Burberg was filmed holding the blindfolded prisoner and ordering his soldier, Staff Sgt. Leonardo Korea, to fire a rubber bullet his leg in Na'alin two years ago.


By Anshel Pfeffer | Jul. 15, 2010 | 10:26 AM

An Israel Defense Forces court on Thursday convicted a former commander and a soldier involved in shooting a bound Palestinian at close range in the West Bank city of Na'alin two years ago.

The affair unfolded after Lt. Col. Omri Burberg was filmed holding the blindfolded and bound prisoner and ordering Staff Sgt. Leonardo Korea to fire a rubber bullet his leg. The Palestinian, 27-year-old Ashraf Abu Rahme, was lightly wounded in the incident.


Burberg and Korea were charged with unbecoming behavior after a military-police investigation into the affair. Burberg was transferred following the incident from his post in Battalion 71 to the armored corps training grounds at Tze'elim.

In response to the relatively light charges, four civil-rights organizations petitioned the High Court of Justice on behalf of Abu Rahme, requesting that the court order the Military Advocate General to change the charge to something more serious.
Military Advocate General Avichai Mandelblit responded by adding attempted threat and behavior unfitting for a commander to the charges against Burburg, and illegal use of a weapon to the charges against Korea.

Burberg arrested Ashraf Abu Rahme on July 7, 2008 for his "involvement in disrupting the peace." The prisoner was taken to the entry of the village, where he was bound and his eyes were covered.

Burberg, who had known Abu Rahme because of his role in previous demonstrations, allegedly said: "Now you will stop demonstrating against the IDF." Abu Rahme responded in Arabic, which suggests he might not understand Hebrew.

The officer suspected that Abu Rahme was lying, and turned to Korea, a soldier on his staff, and asked him: "What do you say - should we take him aside and shoot him with a rubber [bullet]?"

Korea said in response: "I have no problem to shoot him with a rubber [bullet]."

Burberg stood the prisoner on his feet, led him to a nearby jeep and told L. to prepare a rubber bullet. "I already have one in the barrel," L. responded.

At that point, L. aimed at the Palestinian's foot and fired a rubber bullet from a very short range. Burberg allegedly pushed the soldier and shouted at him for shooting a bound prisoner. L. said he thought he had received an order to shoot.
"As a result of the shooting, Abu Rahme suffered superficial injuries on his left toe, was treated by a medic and did not require further care," the chief prosecutor, Colonel Liron Liebman, wrote in the original indictment.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomac...inian-1.302101


Right so now we have established it did happen how about answering his questions rather than trying to weasel around them.
Where does it say that the bullet hit him??? It says
"As a result of the shooting"

Not that he was directly hit. You better read the document before posting it.

Quote:
In an effort to improve your hasbara training mainly because I like a challenge which to date you are not providing let me offer you one more piece of advice stop treating people like idiots as we can see what is going on you cant deny it all you can do is try to justify it. I have tried giving you this advice before and clearly it isn't sinking in so perhaps pass it on to your controller.
Read the thread Rubber bullets, pros, cons, and other info. There your friend stated:
"deliberately shot through the thigh with a rubber bullet"

Now you show me how come that a man is shot through the tigh with a rubber bullet ends up with a blister on his toe!!!

Now who is talking BS.

Quote:
Where is boyne by the way I haven't seen him on in a while, still changing location flags or is that sorted now?
Don't know.
--
July 2nd, 2014  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS;674171

NO



He was not hit.



Where does it say that the bullet hit him??? It says
[I
"As a result of the shooting"
[/I]
Not that he was directly hit. You better read the document before posting it.



Read the thread Rubber bullets, pros, cons, and other info. There your friend stated:
"deliberately shot through the thigh with a rubber bullet"

Now you show me how come that a man is shot through the tigh with a rubber bullet ends up with a blister on his toe!!!

Now who is talking BS.



Don't know.
So your position is that Colonels get convicted for not shooting a blindfolded prisoner and apparently Palestinians can manufacture superficial injuries to their toes while in custody that are so convincing that they require medical treatment at the time of the incident?

That the shooter was either such a poor shot that he couldn't hit a grown man at 2 metres or more than likely put in a halfhearted effort and grazed his foot requiring treatment does not negate the fact that he was shot.

Let me make this easy for your hasbara addled mind and give you the reported testimony of the accused...

Quote:
The officer suspected that Abu Rahme was lying, and turned to Korea, a soldier on his staff, and asked him: "What do you say - should we take him aside and shoot him with a rubber [bullet]?"

Korea said in response: "I have no problem to shoot him with a rubber [bullet]."

Burberg stood the prisoner on his feet, led him to a nearby jeep and told L. to prepare a rubber bullet. "I already have one in the barrel," L. responded.

At that point, L. aimed at the Palestinian's foot and fired a rubber bullet from a very short range. Burberg allegedly pushed the soldier and shouted at him for shooting a bound prisoner. L. said he thought he had received an order to shoot.
"As a result of the shooting, Abu Rahme suffered superficial injuries on his left toe, was treated by a medic and did not require further care," the chief prosecutor, Colonel Liron Liebman, wrote in the original indictment.


Dance around this all you like but thems the facts and best of all they are the facts according to your side, now answer his questions.

July 6th, 2014  
VDKMS
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
So your position is that Colonels get convicted for not shooting a blindfolded prisoner and apparently Palestinians can manufacture superficial injuries to their toes while in custody that are so convincing that they require medical treatment at the time of the incident?
There was NO bullet wound and the soldiers were convicted for their behaviour.

Quote:
That the shooter was either such a poor shot that he couldn't hit a grown man at 2 metres or more than likely put in a halfhearted effort and grazed his foot requiring treatment does not negate the fact that he was shot.
If the bullet would have hit his foot the injury would have been far greater than a blister.

It's very obvious that the shot was meant to scare the guy.

Quote:
Let me make this easy for your hasbara addled mind and give you the reported testimony of the accused...



Dance around this all you like but thems the facts and best of all they are the facts according to your side, now answer his questions.

A shot was fired and the victim was not hit. A bullet, not even a rubber one, does not cause a blister when it hits a toe from 2 meters.

This is a toe hit by a bulett, where is the blister?
July 6th, 2014  
VDKMS
 
Part 3

Nazi tactics.

"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." A quote from either Hitler or Goebbels and vigorously applied not only by the "Palestinians" but also by foreign media (New York Times, Guardian, BBC , France 2 to name some).
Here are some of those lies:
Palestinians are descendants of the Filistines. ("Palestinians")

(New York Times)
al-Dura incident (France 2)
Repporter Harriet Sherwood with multiple wrong articles (Guardian)
BBC reporter Jihad Masharawi's son killed by Israeli rocket attack (BBC)

remenber this?

Well, this was not a Nazi invention. As far back as AD717 jews and other religious groups other than muslim were required to wear distinctive clothing. In 2001 the Taliban forced the Hindu minority to wear yellow badges in public.
It's origin is Islamic.


Why is it about religion?

The first mosque ever was not build. It was a temple of another religion captured by Muhammad who destroyed the 360 symbols representing that religion and then claimed the building as his first mosque. This is tipical for his religion.
In India muslims destroyed thousands of Hindoe temples. They build mosques on top of the birthplaces of both Krishna and Rama and destroyed the Kashi Vishwanath temple.
The first thing the muslims did when they conquered Jerusalem was to build a mosque on top of the Temple Mount. That mosque became the third holiest place in Islam with the fake explanation that it was the farthest mosque when Muhammad died. Muhammad died before that mosque was build. BTW, Jerusalem is not even mentioned in the Quran.
The first thing the muslim Ottomans did when they conquered Constantinople was to declare the Hagia Sophia a mosque.
In Spain they destroyed the cathedral at Santiago de Compostela. The Córdoba Cathedral was not a mosque first but the Visigothic church of St. Vincent.
In France they were on their way to plunder and destroy the cathedral in Tours, but the invincible muslem cavalry was defeated by the Frankish infantry.
Remember 9/11? Didn't they build a mosque in the vicinity of ground zero? They don't call it a mosque but Park51. But make no mistake about it, there are prayers going on and they will attract islamists and jihadist to visit their victory mosque. I bet that the Arabic version of the prayers will not be the same as the English one.
Many moderate muslims claim that the islamists and Jihadists give a wrong interpretation of the Quran. They are wrong. The moderates have a better interpretation of the Quran. The Islamists and the Jihadists follow the Quran as the first muslims did, and they surely would have known how to follow it. The founder of the "religion of peace" fought 81 battles. The expansion of the Ummah (muslim territory) was by force. Christianity, Judaism and Hinduism didn't have an army like Islam did to expand their religion.
As long as the "Palestinians" (muslims) do not have control over the Temple Mount there will be no peace. Barak and Olmert both gave the "Palestinians" everything they wanted except control of the Temple Mount. Arafat and Abas both walked away from the peace negotiations. Now again. No control of the Temple Mount and they make an alliance with Hamas, who wants the destruction of Israel. The settlements? Has nothing to do with it. They will be destroyed once they fall into muslim hands, just as they did when they got Gaza back. The settlements are a fake excuse and only serve to play the victim. If they would tell the truth (control of the Temple Mount) the world would turn against them. As long as the region was under muslim control there was no mention nor a call for an independent "Palestine". It all started only when the ummah was going to lose territory to the Jews (same for the Christians in Lebanon BTW).
Israel used to be part of their ummah. They lost it to the Jews and want it back. Just as they wan back Al Andalus. What they forget is that most of their ummah does not belong to them.
Now the islamists have a caliphate (parts of Syria and Iraq). What was one of the first things they did? Right, destroy the other's religious buildings. The dream of Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood (of which Hamas is part of) became reality, unfortunately for them they are not in control of it. But who cares, It's all Tweedledum and Tweedledee.
August 15th, 2014  
MontyB
 
 
Well I think the activities of the last month and a bit have pretty much answered the original question.

But now I have a question for those with artillery knowledge, what do you think of the veracity of this article...

Why It's Hard to Believe Israel's Claim That It Did Its Best to Minimize Civilian Deaths

Posted: 08/13/2014 11:45 am EDT Updated: 08/13/2014 11:59 am EDT




Among the difficult reports streaming in from Gaza over the past few weeks, two especially painful events have captured my attention.
The first was the shelling of a UN school building in Jabaliya, where a number of families that had escaped or been forced to flee their homes had taken refuge.

At least 15 civilians were killed, and dozens more wounded. Israel argued they were targeting an area from which fire had been directed at Israeli forces.

The second was the bombing of a bustling market in the Shuja'iya neighborhood. At a time of precious few opportunities for civilians to safely buy food and other vital supplies, 16 people were killed and around 200 were wounded. Shops, stalls and merchandise were burned or destroyed.

Harsh criticism of Israel followed each incident but -- as in the past -- Israel defended its actions, arguing that it was targeting militants and doing its best to avoid civilian casualties.

I served as a crew commander in the Israeli artillery corps at the beginning of the Second Intifada, and I feel compelled to counter this claim from Israel. The images, evidence and army reports from recent operations in Gaza -- of more than 1,900 deaths (a number which will likely increase by the time you read this) and a large amount of the population left without shelter -- show that Israel has deployed massive artillery firepower. Such firepower is impossible to target precisely.

Artillery fire is a statistical means of warfare. It is the complete opposite of sniper fire. While the power of sharpshooting lies in its accuracy, the power of artillery comes from the quantity of shells fired and the massive impact of each one.

In using artillery against Gaza, Israel therefore cannot sincerely argue that it is doing everything in its power to spare the innocent.

The truth is artillery shells cannot be aimed precisely and are not meant to hit specific targets. A standard 40 kilogram shell is nothing but a large fragmentation grenade. When it explodes, it is meant to kill anyone within a 50-meter radius and to wound anyone within a further 100 meters.

Furthermore, the humidity in the air, the heat of the barrel, and the direction of the wind can all cause unguided shells to land 30 or even 100 meters from where they were aimed. That is a huge margin of error in somewhere as densely packed as Gaza.

The imprecision of this weaponry is so great that Israeli forces are compelled to aim at least 250 meters away from friendly troops to ensure their safety -- even if those troops are sheltered. In military terms, this distance is called the "safe range of fire."

In 2006, when shelling was first used against the Gaza Strip, the "safe range of fire" for Palestinian civilians was reduced from 300 to just 100 meters. Shortly afterwards, a stray shell landed inside the home of the Ghabeen family in Beit Lahiya, killing a young girl, Hadeel, and wounding other members of her family.

In response to this and similar tragedies, human rights organizations appealed to the Israeli High Court of Justice to cease this lethal practice, and in June 2007 the Attorney-General announced that no more artillery fire was to be used in the Gaza Strip.

But just a few years later, during Operation Cast Lead, extensive artillery fire was again aimed at the heart of the Gaza Strip. And up until the recent ceasefire, throughout Operation Protective Edge, Israel has fired thousands of artillery shells into Gaza -- causing intolerable harm to civilians and widespread destruction, the extent of which will only be fully exposed when the fighting ceases.

It's true that in at least some cases, the army has informed civilians of its plans to attack a certain area and advised them to leave. But this in no way excuses the excessive damage and huge toll on civilian lives.
I write this with great sorrow for civilians hurt on both sides. Sorrow for our soldiers who have fallen in this operation, and sorrow for the future of my country and the entire region. I know that as I write, soldiers like me have fired shells into Gaza.

They had no way of knowing who or what they would hit.
Faced with so many innocent casualties, it is time for us to state very clearly: this use of artillery fire is a deadly game of Russian roulette. The statistics, on which such firepower relies, mean that in densely populated areas such as Gaza, civilians will inevitably be hit as well. The IDF knows this, and as long as it continues to use such weaponry, it will be hard to believe when it claims to be minimizing civilian deaths.

As a former soldier and an Israeli citizen, I feel compelled to ask today: have we not crossed a line?
Idan Barir served in the Israeli artillery corps during the Second Intifada and is a member of Breaking the Silence

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/idan-b...b_5673023.html
August 22nd, 2014  
VDKMS
 
here are some replies to that article that you can find all over the internet:

The writer makes an inexact comparison between sniper and artillery fire. Sniper fire has limited distance and destructive capabilities. Sniper fire will not take out an enemy tank or underground missile launcher 25 kilometers away. Artillery systems assisted by computers, gps and lasers can be very accurate. The Raytheon BAE system has an error accuracy of only 5 meters. Israel Military Industries Accular GPS system has accuracy subject to error within 10 meters.

Since the second intifada, Israel has also replaced its older radar system for acquiring and targeting areas with the more accurate EL/M-2448 Multimission Radar (Raz) system.

Israel is also working on the Romach rocket which only has an error ratio of 5 meters.

However, one must recognize that artillery is not meant as a stand alone system but as part of an integrated armed force supporting troops on the ground. Sometimes artillery is used to lay down a withering barrage to support troops on the ground to allow them to better attack and destroy enemy targets. This has consequences when the battlefield is in an urban environment. It means civilians will be collateral damage.

This is the price of war started by a terrorist organization using its own civilians as human shields while attacking Israeli forces and firing rockets at Israeli civilians.

If your neighbor held his children in front of him and shot to kill your children would you not shoot back even though his children might be killed?


here's another one

Both of the attacks mentioned by the author may not be of IDF origin. Both may be of Hamas origin. Over 10% of Hamas rockets landed inside Gaza. Additionally, in many cases where IDF fire hit accurately, secondary explosions from arms hidden by Hamas caused great damage to those nearby.

Perhaps Breaking the Silence could devote some energy to breaking the silence of the murderous irresponsibility of Hamas and its allies?



This is what I have to say:

Israel fired more than 40.000 (!) 155mm artillery shells into Gaza. If those shells were as inaccurate as the writer want us to believe then the "Palestinian" casualties would be much much higher.

If all "Palestinian" deaths were caused by artillery fire then Israel needed 20 155mm shels to kill one "Palestinian" in a densely populated area. If that was true, and some want us to believe that they target civilians, then that army better dissolve because it would be useless.

The truth is that no other army in the world is able to do so much damage with so little collateral damage. No other army in the world send SMS messages to the enemy that an attack is imminent. No other army in the world use knock-on-door bombs. On top of that, Israel also uses pamphlets to warn them.

Hamas does nothing of that. On the contrary. They told their population to stay inside because it was all Israeli psychological warfare, with all its consequences.
"Palestinian" rockets are incredibly inaccurate and deliberately target civilians. It's only because of Israeli defensive actions that there are almost no civilian deaths. (Obligation to have a safe room, bomb shelters, warning sirens and last but not least Iron Dome).
August 22nd, 2014  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS

The truth is that no other army in the world is able to do so much damage with so little collateral damage. No other army in the world send SMS messages to the enemy that an attack is imminent. No other army in the world use knock-on-door bombs. On top of that, Israel also uses pamphlets to warn them.
And somehow you think giving somewhere between 45 seconds and 5 minutes for multiple families to evacuate a building is sufficient warning or justifies attacking a civilian target.

Just as an aside I would also point out that the IRA used to provide warnings of their attacks as well, it did not make them any less of a terrorist group.

As for the rest you will understand if I disregard your comments and those of anonymous internet trolls out of preference for the views of someone that actually understands and is experienced in the use and deployment of artillery.

Oh and lets not forget that you are justifying 40000 155mm shells into what is predominantly a civilian environment and UN facilities where the population has already been concentrated.
August 23rd, 2014  
VDKMS
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
And somehow you think giving somewhere between 45 seconds and 5 minutes for multiple families to evacuate a building is sufficient warning or justifies attacking a civilian target.
Israelis have less time to run to their shelters and get NO warning from Hamas.

Quote:
Just as an aside I would also point out that the IRA used to provide warnings of their attacks as well, it did not make them any less of a terrorist group.
Hamas give no warning at all.

Quote:
As for the rest you will understand if I disregard your comments and those of anonymous internet trolls out of preference for the views of someone that actually understands and is experienced in the use and deployment of artillery.
Who says he is an IDF soldier and not a "Palestinian" fabrication?

Quote:
Oh and lets not forget that you are justifying 40000 155mm shells into what is predominantly a civilian environment and UN facilities where the population has already been concentrated.
Exclusive: Hamas rocket launch pad lies near Gaza homes

When Hamas fighters use civilian properties as a cover or a means to attack the opponent those properties becomes legitimate military targets according to the laws of war. The Hamas fighters are responsible for the safety of the civilians inside that property.

In 3 UN facilities Hamas rockets were found and in at least one occasion those rockets were given back to Hamas to attack Israel which means that the UN, who should be neutral, assisted Hamas in attacking Israel. Where is the UN investigation?
 


Similar Topics
Israel rightfully own the West Bank .
Israel strikes Beirut suburb, tightens blockade
A conversation with Iranian dissident (MUST READ)
Palestinians
American racism