stirring the pot

benaakatz

Active member
In 2007, Israel achieved a civilian casualty ratio of 1:30, or one civilian casualty for every thirty combatant casualties, in its airstrikes on militants in the Palestinian territories.[5] Commentators have noted that, "No army in history has ever had a better ratio of combatants to civilians killed in a comparable setting".[6]

[5] Harel, Amos (December 30, 2007). "Pinpoint attacks on Gaza more precise". Haaretz. Retrieved October 11, 2011. http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/pinpoint-attacks-on-gaza-more-precise-1.236163

[6] Dershowitz, Alan (January 3, 2008). "Targeted Killing Is Working, So Why Is The Press Not Reporting It?". The Huffington Post. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-dershowitz/targeted-killing-is-worki_b_79616.html?
 
In 2007, Israel achieved a civilian casualty ratio of 1:30, or one civilian casualty for every thirty combatant casualties, in its airstrikes on militants in the Palestinian territories.[5] Commentators have noted that, "No army in history has ever had a better ratio of combatants to civilians killed in a comparable setting".[6]
Your "stirring" is just that, beyond which it is totally meaningless, picking one year out of 60+ is hardly a representative cross section,... then limiting it to one type of killing to distort it even further.
These figures are only from 2000 -2012 and they make your claim look stupid.
http://old.btselem.org/statistics/english/Casualties.asp

It reminds me of the glutton who bolts down a dozen Big Mac's with super sized fries, and then claims that he's really trying to diet as he only drank diet coke.
 
Last edited:
Your "stirring" is just that, beyond which it is totally meaningless, picking one year out of 60+ is hardly a representative cross section,... then limiting it to one type of killing to distort it even further.
These figures are only from 2000 -2012 and they make your claim look stupid.
http://old.btselem.org/statistics/english/Casualties.asp

It reminds me of the glutton who bolts down a dozen Big Mac's with super sized fries, and then claims that he's really trying to diet as he only drank diet coke.

You better read his post again. It's about the civilian casualty ratio not the total casualties. What's the civilian casualty ratio of the Palestinians? 30:1?

You better thank the IDF for their precision attacks and their restraint.
 
You better read his post again. It's about the civilian casualty ratio not the total casualties. What's the civilian casualty ratio of the Palestinians? 30:1?
You better thank the IDF for their precision attacks and their restraint.
The IDF? Oh you mean those murdering pricks who deny medical assistance to civilians, shoot at innocent Palestinians harvesting their crops, and molest women and children trying to pass through their "check points" to get food, yes, we know all about them.

I knew that you of all people would be to damned stupid to work out the ratio once we included the remaining conveniently ignored Palestinian civilian deaths. I also noticed how Ben totally missed such figures as those below.
B'Tselem and Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs said:
From 1987 to present the ratio Palestinians killed to Isrealis has been 5:1. During the same period this ratio for children has been 10:1, however during the last 5 years (since 2006) this ratio has jumped several times. During the last 5 years, Israel killed 28 Palestinians for each Israeli killed. As for children, 76 Palestinian children for each Israeli child killed.
Source(s):
Israeli human rights group B'Tselem and Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_i…
 
Last edited:
my point is that the idf, as a whole, does IN GENERAL try to limit civilian casualties in wartime.

the idf deals with a big challenge: the main two armies it fights, the hamas/islamic jihad/PRC militants (numbering about 30,000 militants total) and Hezbollah in southern lebanon have both stored their rockets and missiles and production facilities in cities and towns amongst the civilian population. they often produce and store their armaments in homes against will of the populace, who understandably do not want their homes bombed and their families placed in danger.

against individual rocket squads who operate in fields between major conflicts (the 2006 lebanon war, the war in gaza in december 2008-january 2009), the idf has been very precise.

it is up to the militants who choose to launch rockets (at the israeli civilian populace, most of whom accept the two state solution, a WAR CRIME documented by B'tselem, Amnesty International, etc. etc.) to ensure that their activities do not place their own populace in harms way

my two cents :-o
 
it is up to the militants who choose to launch rockets (at the israeli civilian populace, most of whom accept the two state solution, a WAR CRIME documented by B'tselem, Amnesty International, etc. etc.) to ensure that their activities do not place their own populace in harms way.
The Israelis only have themselves to blame, if they weren't living on someone else's land the Palestinians would have no reason to resist them would they? You steal, they resist, action and reaction, it's a fundamental law.

The very fact that the Zionists put Israel on Palestinian land was what put their people in harms way.

Like I said, your initial post was about a very narrow cross section in a very limited field, and as such really means nothing at all, as the total of Israel's war crimes and crimes against humanity far outweigh anything the Palestinians have ever done, or will ever get done should they have another 100 years of resistance.
 
Last edited:
i understand your viewpoints even if i disagree.

i guess my question to you would be, do you support palestinian militant attacks that SOLEY target civilians?

no matter who is right or wrong it is my opinion that these attacks are never justified. rocket attacks have caused severe PTSD disorders in over 50 to some 70 percent of israeli children living within range and constant bombardment.

i don't think that's right

thankfully, things have "cooled down" recently and few civilians on either side have died recently
 
i understand your viewpoints even if i disagree.

i guess my question to you would be, do you support palestinian militant attacks that SOLEY target civilians?

no matter who is right or wrong it is my opinion that these attacks are never justified. rocket attacks have caused severe PTSD disorders in over 50 to some 70 percent of israeli children living within range and constant bombardment.

i don't think that's right

thankfully, things have "cooled down" recently and few civilians on either side have died recently
I love to see those who oppress others, or are a willing part of the problem get their just desserts. There is something very satisfying in seeing an oppressor get a bit of grief, and I don't care who they are, the main problem being that it doesn't happen often enough.

As for the Israeli children, I'll quote the Israeli answer, "They are collateral damage, I'm really, really sorry". My personal view being that, if their parents hadn't have placed them in harms way, it wouldn't be an issue would it?

You see, that's how these things come back to bite you on the @rse, if you allowed the Palis to have enormous financial aid from the US plus a large army armed with modern guided weapons, many of these civilian deaths could probably be avoided.
 
Last edited:
I love to see those who oppress others, or are a willing part of the problem get their just desserts. There is something very satisfying in seeing an oppressor get a bit of grief, and I don't care who they are, the main problem being that it doesn't happen often enough.

As for the Israeli children, I'll quote the Israeli answer, "They are collateral damage, I'm really, really sorry". My personal view being that, if their parents hadn't have placed them in harms way, it wouldn't be an issue would it?

You see, that's how these things come back to bite you on the @rse, if you allowed the Palis to have enormous financial aid from the US plus a large army armed with modern guided weapons, many of these civilian deaths could probably be avoided.

So all Israelis are guilty for atrocities and their crime is; they are born in Israel?
 
So all Israelis are guilty for atrocities and their crime is; they are born in Israel?
Firstly, "Where exactly did I say that" Please read my answers carefully and don't go trying to escalate the situation by applying your own interpretations. Should I wish to, I can very easily do that myself, there's any amount of evidence out there.

You can't apply one set of rules for the Palis and expect a different set of rules for yourself. If your government treats others like sh!t, beating harassing and murdering women and children in their thousands, and you enjoy the spoils, you can be sure that it's going to bite you on the bum eventually.

As I said earlier. "For every action, there is a reaction, and at some time and place not necessarily of your choosing, there will be a price to pay.
 
Last edited:
Firstly, "Where exactly did I say that" Please read my answers carefully and don't go trying to escalate the situation by applying your own interpretations. Should I wish to, I can very easily do that myself, there's any amount of evidence out there.

You can't apply one set of rules for the Palis and expect a different set of rules for yourself. If your government treats others like sh!t, beating harassing and murdering women and children in their thousands, and you enjoy the spoils, you can be sure that it's going to bite you on the bum eventually.

As I said earlier. "For every action, there is a reaction, and at some time and place not necessarily of your choosing, there will be a price to pay.


So when you said

"As for the Israeli children, I'll quote the Israeli answer, "They are collateral damage, I'm really, really sorry". My personal view being that, if their parents hadn't have placed them in harms way, it wouldn't be an issue would it?"

Your personal view is not to have placed them there!!!??? So it is the parents fault when Israeli children are killed or wounded? Collective punishment for what some Israelis are doing and what some Israeli soldiers are doing. Regardless who is hurting civilians; it is a violation to International Law

 
So when you said

"As for the Israeli children, I'll quote the Israeli answer, "They are collateral damage, I'm really, really sorry". My personal view being that, if their parents hadn't have placed them in harms way, it wouldn't be an issue would it?"

Your personal view is not to have placed them there!!!??? So it is the parents fault when Israeli children are killed or wounded? Collective punishment for what some Israelis are doing and what some Israeli soldiers are doing. Regardless who is hurting civilians; it is a violation to International Law
You obviously haven't ever read much on this subject have you? Nor did you read my initial answer.
---snip---As for the Israeli children, I'll quote the Israeli answer,--- snip ---

If you had, you would be aware that I was merely quoting exactly what the Zionists say about similar situations concerning the Palestinians, both regarding the murder of innocents and being put in harms way.

I have noted your apparent eagerness to defend the Israelis, which raises the question, Could you explain to me why it is that you feel that it is so important that International Law is be observed by the Palestinians, but not the Israelis in these matters?
 
Last edited:
You obviously haven't ever read much on this subject have you? Nor did you read my initial answer.

If you had, you would be aware that I was merely quoting exactly what the Zionists say about similar situations concerning the Palestinians, both regarding the murder of innocents and being put in harms way.

I have noted your apparent eagerness to defend the Israelis, which raises the question, Could you explain to me why it is that you feel that it is so important that International Law is be observed by the Palestinians, but not the Israelis in these matters?


I have studied International Law, it is obvious you haven't, I however do not let my personal opinion clutter the matter. Is this your opinion or not!! My personal view being that, if their parents hadn't have placed them in harms way, it wouldn't be an issue would it?
I quoted you, so it is the Israeli parents fault if their kids are wounded or killed. I have never been supportive of Israel nor Palestine, both have committed atrocities. Regardless who is attacking civilians violate IL
 
I have studied International Law, it is obvious you haven't, I however do not let my personal opinion clutter the matter. Is this your opinion or not!! My personal view being that, if their parents hadn't have placed them in harms way, it wouldn't be an issue would it?
I quoted you, so it is the Israeli parents fault if their kids are wounded or killed. I have never been supportive of Israel nor Palestine, both have committed atrocities. Regardless who is attacking civilians violate IL
Once again, you never read my answer. I stated quite clearly and unequivocally (twice) that what I posted was exactly the answer given by the Israelis. This obviously doesn't sit well with you, apparently you feel it is perfectly acceptable when given as an excuse by Israel, but not so when I quote it in defence of the Palestinians. My personal view was also a reflection of the reasoning of the Israelis who always state that the killing of Palestinian women and children is as a direct result of them having voted Hamas into government thereby placing them all in harms way. So, not only have I given you my opinion, I have now explained how I formed that opinion.

It has obviously never occurred to you that I chose my words very carefully, and I do that so people like yourself will not attempt to put words in my mouth as it appears you are so eager to do. For someone who has allegedly studied law of any sort, your reading and comprehension skills are atrocious, not to mention your ethics, to me, it says very little for you understanding of your alleged studies.

I also noted that you completely ignored my last question.
 
Last edited:
The IDF? Oh you mean those murdering pricks who deny medical assistance to civilians, shoot at innocent Palestinians harvesting their crops, and molest women and children trying to pass through their "check points" to get food, yes, we know all about them.

I knew that you of all people would be to damned stupid to work out the ratio once we included the remaining conveniently ignored Palestinian civilian deaths. I also noticed how Ben totally missed such figures as those below.

Did you ever wondered that the Palestinian casualties were because of retaliation and not attacks? If the fanatic palestinians would have been peacefull ones, all those civilans would still be alive.

Checkpoints are there because of terrorist attacks, not the way around.
 
The Israelis only have themselves to blame, if they weren't living on someone else's land the Palestinians would have no reason to resist them would they? You steal, they resist, action and reaction, it's a fundamental law.

The very fact that the Zionists put Israel on Palestinian land was what put their people in harms way.

Like I said, your initial post was about a very narrow cross section in a very limited field, and as such really means nothing at all, as the total of Israel's war crimes and crimes against humanity far outweigh anything the Palestinians have ever done, or will ever get done should they have another 100 years of resistance.

Then why did they first attack the Jews who lived there for generations and not the ones that immigrated and bought land???
Why did they attack the Jews at Safed in 1834 (!!) when there was no word of a creation of a Jewish state?

Like I said before, this conflict has nothing to do with Palestinians and Jews but with non-muslims on muslim ground.

If it was about Jews stealing the land they would have attack the Jewish landowners to get their land back. But they didn't because the land was not important. The religion who rules it was.
 
I love to see those who oppress others, or are a willing part of the problem get their just desserts. There is something very satisfying in seeing an oppressor get a bit of grief, and I don't care who they are, the main problem being that it doesn't happen often enough.

As for the Israeli children, I'll quote the Israeli answer, "They are collateral damage, I'm really, really sorry". My personal view being that, if their parents hadn't have placed them in harms way, it wouldn't be an issue would it?

You see, that's how these things come back to bite you on the @rse, if you allowed the Palis to have enormous financial aid from the US plus a large army armed with modern guided weapons, many of these civilian deaths could probably be avoided.

If that is your reasoning I strongly advise you to seek medical assistance!
 
As I said earlier. "For every action, there is a reaction, and at some time and place not necessarily of your choosing, there will be a price to pay.

Well said! But did you also know that the first action came from the Arabs/Palestinians?
 
You obviously haven't ever read much on this subject have you? Nor did you read my initial answer.

He knows more about the subject than you do because he reads the stories of both sides.

If you had, you would be aware that I was merely quoting exactly what the Zionists say about similar situations concerning the Palestinians, both regarding the murder of innocents and being put in harms way.

There cannot be collateral damage if you target civilians who are NOT in a war zone.
It is not because you are repeating the same lies all over again that they become truth.

I have noted your apparent eagerness to defend the Israelis, which raises the question, Could you explain to me why it is that you feel that it is so important that International Law is be observed by the Palestinians, but not the Israelis in these matters?

What international laws are not followed by Israel?
Retaliation after a Palestinian attack is legitimate.
Who rules what in the West Bank is written on paper signed by both Israel and the Palestinans (PLO).
International lawyers do not unanimously agree that the settlements are a violation.
 
Once again, you never read my answer. I stated quite clearly and unequivocally (twice) that what I posted was exactly the answer given by the Israelis. This obviously doesn't sit well with you, apparently you feel it is perfectly acceptable when given as an excuse by Israel, but not so when I quote it in defence of the Palestinians. My personal view was also a reflection of the reasoning of the Israelis who always state that the killing of Palestinian women and children is as a direct result of them having voted Hamas into government thereby placing them all in harms way. So, not only have I given you my opinion, I have now explained how I formed that opinion.

It has obviously never occurred to you that I chose my words very carefully, and I do that so people like yourself will not attempt to put words in my mouth as it appears you are so eager to do. For someone who has allegedly studied law of any sort, your reading and comprehension skills are atrocious, not to mention your ethics, to me, it says very little for you understanding of your alleged studies.

I also noted that you completely ignored my last question.

You do not choose your words carefully. You leave out things so they get another meaning.
 
Back
Top