gaza toll hits 25

catefrances

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8434062



Israeli warplanes have pounded Gaza for a fourth day, killing six more Palestinians, as a teenager died in a mystery blast, raising the death toll to 25.

The latest strike killed two Palestinians east of Gaza City on Monday, spokesman for the Hamas-run emergency services, Adham Abu Selmiya, told AFP.

Islamic Jihad identified the pair as its members, Bassam al-Ajla and Mohammed Dahir.

The Israel military said it had hit a "terrorist cell that was preparing to fire rockets".

Later it reported two more raids, one targeting "two rocket-launching sites" in northern Gaza and another against a "tunnel used by terrorists" under the border with Egypt. There were no immediate reports of casualties.

An earlier raid killed a man in his 60s and his daughter in the Jabaliya refugee camp in the northern Gaza Strip, medics said.

Several hours before that, a 15-year-old boy was killed nearby, in what the Palestinians claimed was a drone strike.

But a military spokesman denied the air force had carried out any attacks in the area at the time, and an AFP correspondent at the scene confirmed there was no sign of an air strike.

As militants kept up a steady stream of rocket fire on towns and cities in southern Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned the army could expand its operations if rocket fire continued.

"The Israeli army is prepared to expand its activities, and will continue its activities as long as necessary," he told MPs from his right-wing Likud party, hailing the Jewish state's "crushing offensive abilities".

Israeli warplanes carried out more than 10 strikes across Gaza, targeting a weapons storage facility and rocket-launching sites, and killing two militants and two civilians.

Two militants who belonged to Islamic Jihad's armed wing, the Al-Quds Brigade, were killed in strikes around the southern city of Khan Yunis.

And shortly afterwards, a blast killed a 15-year-old boy and wounded six others in what Abu Selmiya said was an Israeli drone strike.

An attack in Jabaliya killed two civilians, Mohammed Mustafa al-Hasumi, 65, and his 35-year-old daughter Faiza.

In a statement, the Israeli military said the strike targeted "a terrorist squad" who had just launched a rocket towards Israel.

While it acknowledged the strike may have caused "the apparent injury of uninvolved persons", it said the incident was "a blatant example of how terror organisations use human shields to carry out terror attacks".

Monday's bloodshed raised to 25 the number of Palestinians killed in a weekend of tit-for-tat violence that began on Friday, after Israel killed Zuhair al-Qaisi, head of the Popular Resistance Committees.

The army said Qaisi had planned a deadly attack in August 2011 and accused him of planning a repeat attack "in the coming days".

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has condemned the "rocket fire from Gaza by terrorists into southern Israel".

"We call on those responsible to take immediate action to stop these attacks. And we call on both sides, all sides, to make every effort to restore calm," she told the UN Security Council.

She later joined her counterparts from the European Union, Russia and the United Nations for a meeting of the so-called Quartet of Middle East players, which repeated its call on the parties to "remain engaged and to refrain from provocative actions".

Byrnzie

They sure are heroic. Bombing a refugee camp from the safety of an F16.

Funny, because last time I checked, extra-judicial assassinations were illegal under international law.

Oh well, they can do whatever they like. Obama has their back.

Vitalogy Man

Byrnzie wrote:

They sure are heroic. Bombing a refugee camp from the safety of an F16.

Funny, because last time I checked, extra-judicial assassinations were illegal under international law.

Oh well, they can do whatever they like. Obama has their back.

Somebody is jealous they don't have an F-16...

Article said "as a teenager died in a mystery blast, raising the death toll to 25".

however, "Israel military said it had hit a "terrorist cell that was preparing to fire rockets".


Now we know what caused the "mystery blast"...

Play with fire, and you get burned.

Israel has the right to protect itself against terrorists.

The End.

Pepe Silvia

Vitalogy Man wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

They sure are heroic. Bombing a refugee camp from the safety of an F16.

Funny, because last time I checked, extra-judicial assassinations were illegal under international law.

Oh well, they can do whatever they like. Obama has their back.

Somebody is jealous they don't have an F-16...

Article said "as a teenager died in a mystery blast, raising the death toll to 25".

however, "Israel military said it had hit a "terrorist cell that was preparing to fire rockets".


Now we know what caused the "mystery blast"...

Play with fire, and you get burned.

Israel has the right to protect itself against terrorists.

The End.

but israel is/are the terrorists

Vitalogy Man

Pepe Silvia wrote:

Vitalogy Man wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

They sure are heroic. Bombing a refugee camp from the safety of an F16.

Funny, because last time I checked, extra-judicial assassinations were illegal under international law.

Oh well, they can do whatever they like. Obama has their back.

Somebody is jealous they don't have an F-16...

Article said "as a teenager died in a mystery blast, raising the death toll to 25".

however, "Israel military said it had hit a "terrorist cell that was preparing to fire rockets".


Now we know what caused the "mystery blast"...

Play with fire, and you get burned.

Israel has the right to protect itself against terrorists.

The End.

but israel is/are the terrorists

Naw... Terrorists don't have F-16s. They usually hide bombs on their children.

Pepe Silvia

Vitalogy Man wrote:

Pepe Silvia wrote:

Vitalogy Man wrote:

Somebody is jealous they don't have an F-16...

Article said "as a teenager died in a mystery blast, raising the death toll to 25".

however, "Israel military said it had hit a "terrorist cell that was preparing to fire rockets".


Now we know what caused the "mystery blast"...

Play with fire, and you get burned.

Israel has the right to protect itself against terrorists.

The End.

but israel is/are the terrorists

Naw... Terrorists don't have F-16s. They usually hide bombs on their children.

The Department of Defense Dictionary of Military Terms defines terrorism as:

The calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological.


and are you saying if they bought a f-16 you would no longer consider them as such?

JonnyPistachio

Gotta love when people mistake advanced technology for defensive purposes. Advanced technology cant possibly be terrorist related! :?

usamamasan1

Vitalogy Man wrote:

Play with fire, and you get burned.

Israel has the right to protect itself against terrorists.

The End.

truth be told

keeponrockin

usamamasan1 wrote:

Vitalogy Man wrote:

Play with fire, and you get burned.

Israel has the right to protect itself against terrorists.

The End.

truth be told

Not disagreeing per se.

But this argument could be made the other way around.

usamamasan1

I guess that's why we war so much. Us silly humans.

gimmesometruth27

does israel have the right to steal and occupy land in what the international community has called an illegal occupation?

i think israel would do itself a lot of favors by going back to the pre 1967 borders. this land snatching and illegal settlement expansion is one of the root causes for groups like hamas to act in the manner that they do.

israel reminds me a lot of andrew breitbart. israel will do something, and then when the international community condemns israel for whatever action, it cries and complains that it's actions are misunderstood or taken out of context.

"national defense" should not be used as justification for any pre-emptive attacks, no matter what country is doing the attacks. it is ironic that "national defense" usually elicits an offensive response, and the cycle continues...

catefrances

usamamasan1 wrote:

Vitalogy Man wrote:

Play with fire, and you get burned.

Israel has the right to protect itself against terrorists.

The End.

truth be told

truth is never told in this issue. it gets obfuscated so that the oppressor ebcomes the victim.. what kind of fucked up shit is that?? palestinians shouds stop blowing up innocent israelis blah blah blah. how about the isareli govt stop stealing land and oppressing the palestinians. and you know when they oppress the palestinians their own people become oppressed as well... they just cant see it. how about they stop talking about their god given right to occupy the holy land and become as righteous as their religion says they can attain through action. dont give me this bullshit that the palestinians will take advantage of a real peace deal and see the israelis as weak, acting to reclaim by force, the territory lost. as humans, as humans who believe in a higher power that is not their call. their call is to be as righteous as they claim to be. afterall God will sort it all out, wont he?

usamamasan1

In God We Trust.

Says that right on my dosh

gimmesometruth27

catefrances wrote:

usamamasan1 wrote:

Vitalogy Man wrote:

Play with fire, and you get burned.

Israel has the right to protect itself against terrorists.

The End.

truth be told

truth is never told in this issue. it gets obfuscated so that the oppressor ebcomes the victim.. what kind of fucked up shit is that?? palestinians shouds stop blowing up innocent israelis blah blah blah. how about the isareli govt stop stealing land and oppressing the palestinians. and you know when they oppress the palestinians their own people become oppressed as well... they just cant see it. how about they stop talking about their god given right to occupy the holy land and become as righteous as their religion says they can attain through action. dont give me this bullshit that the palestinians will take advantage of a real peace deal and see the israelis as weak, acting to reclaim by force, the territory lost. as humans, as humans who believe in a higher power that is not their call. their call is to be as righteous as they claim to be. afterall God will sort it all out, wont he?

nice post, i especially agree with the underlined parts.

catefrances

usamamasan1 wrote:

In God We Trust.

Says that right on my dosh

doesnt say it on mine... thank fuck.

Byrnzie

Vitalogy Man wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

They sure are heroic. Bombing a refugee camp from the safety of an F16.

Funny, because last time I checked, extra-judicial assassinations were illegal under international law.

Oh well, they can do whatever they like. Obama has their back.

Somebody is jealous they don't have an F-16...

Article said "as a teenager died in a mystery blast, raising the death toll to 25".

however, "Israel military said it had hit a "terrorist cell that was preparing to fire rockets".


Now we know what caused the "mystery blast"...

Play with fire, and you get burned.

Israel has the right to protect itself against terrorists.

The End.

If the Israeli's say it then it must be true, right? Just like them saying they didn't use white phosphorous on Gaza in 2008-2009.

yosi

I'm confused. By all accounts the great majority of those killed by Israel in the most recent flare up were militants. Given that Israel is using F-16s, which could easily kill hundreds of people in the blink of an eye, it seems to me that Israel should actually be commended, in this instance, for trying so hard not to kill civilians. Whatever you think about the justifications for the violence it seems plainly obvious that Israel is going out of its way at the moment to carry out military actions without killing civilians. That's a good thing.

gimmesometruth27

yosi wrote:

I'm confused. By all accounts the great majority of those killed by Israel in the most recent flare up were militants. Given that Israel is using F-16s, which could easily kill hundreds of people in the blink of an eye, it seems to me that Israel should actually be commended, in this instance, for trying so hard not to kill civilians. Whatever you think about the justifications for the violence it seems plainly obvious that Israel is going out of its way at the moment to carry out military actions without killing civilians. That's a good thing.

MOST may have been militants...not ALL....

no praise should be heaped on any country dropping bombs on civilians.

the fact that you are excusing that little tidbit is troubling...

Byrnzie

yosi wrote:

I'm confused. By all accounts the great majority of those killed by Israel in the most recent flare up were militants. Given that Israel is using F-16s, which could easily kill hundreds of people in the blink of an eye, it seems to me that Israel should actually be commended, in this instance, for trying so hard not to kill civilians. Whatever you think about the justifications for the violence it seems plainly obvious that Israel is going out of its way at the moment to carry out military actions without killing civilians. That's a good thing.

Extra-judicial assassinations are illegal under international law, are they not?

yosi

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

yosi wrote:

I'm confused. By all accounts the great majority of those killed by Israel in the most recent flare up were militants. Given that Israel is using F-16s, which could easily kill hundreds of people in the blink of an eye, it seems to me that Israel should actually be commended, in this instance, for trying so hard not to kill civilians. Whatever you think about the justifications for the violence it seems plainly obvious that Israel is going out of its way at the moment to carry out military actions without killing civilians. That's a good thing.

MOST may have been militants...not ALL....

no praise should be heaped on any country dropping bombs on civilians.

the fact that you are excusing that little tidbit is troubling...

I'm not trying to excuse anything. I'm trying to be realistic. There is a violent conflict. Civilians are caught up in it and are at great danger. All ethical theorists of just war recognize that in such conflicts civilians will sometimes be killed by accident, or that harm to civilians will be unavoidable. In the first instance it is the ethical responsibilty of the combatents to do all they can to limit accidental civilian deaths, and in the second instance it is ethical to carry out a mission knowing that their will be civilian casualties only if the need for the mission is exceedingly great, and everything is done, again, to limit civilian deaths (if you're interested in the topic the seminal work is Michael Walzer's "Just War"). I'm not saying that it's good that civilians have been killed, or that it's excusable. I am saying that given that there is a conflict it is a good thing that the Israeli military seems to be taking its ethical responsibilities seriously and is trying hard to avoid killing civilians. They haven't always done so, and I don't see what's so wrong about recognizing the fact that they are doing so now.

Byrnzie

yosi wrote:

I'm not trying to excuse anything. I'm trying to be realistic. There is a violent conflict. Civilians are caught up in it and are at great danger. All ethical theorists of just war recognize that in such conflicts civilians will sometimes be killed by accident, or that harm to civilians will be unavoidable. In the first instance it is the ethical responsibilty of the combatents to do all they can to limit accidental civilian deaths, and in the second instance it is ethical to carry out a mission knowing that their will be civilian casualties only if the need for the mission is exceedingly great, and everything is done, again, to limit civilian deaths (if you're interested in the topic the seminal work is Michael Walzer's "Just War"). I'm not saying that it's good that civilians have been killed, or that it's excusable. I am saying that given that there is a conflict it is a good thing that the Israeli military seems to be taking its ethical responsibilities seriously and is trying hard to avoid killing civilians. They haven't always done so, and I don't see what's so wrong about recognizing the fact that they are doing so now.

You're confusing 'conflict' with 'occupation'. A conflict suggests two, relatively equal parties at war with each other. This is not the case with Israel-Palestine.

I think the following answers your points:

http://www.counterpunch.org/2009/01/13/hamas-and-gaza/
'...Israel is the aggressor in this conflict, and the Palestinians fight in self-defense. Under these circumstances, Israel’s right of self-defense cannot justify Israeli violence. Israel is certainly entitled to protect its citizens by evacuation and other non-violent measures, but it is not entitled to harm a hair on the head of a Palestinian firing rockets into Israeli cities, whether or not these rockets kill innocent civilians.

Self-defense gives you the right to resist attacks by any means necessary, and therefore, certainly, by the only means available. The Palestinians don't have the option of using violence which hits only military targets - apparently even the Israelis, with all their intelligence data and all their technological might, don't have that option! But suppose a bunch of thugs install themselves, with their families, all around your farm. They have taken most of your land and resources; they're out for more. If this keeps up, you will starve, perhaps die. They are armed to the teeth and abundantly willing to use those arms. The only way you can defend yourself is to make them pay as heavy a price as possible for their siege and their constant encroachment on your living space. You're critically low on food and medical supplies, and the thugs cut off those supplies whenever they please. What's more, the only weapons available to you are indiscriminate, and will harm their families as well as the thugs themselves. You can use those weapons, even knowing they will kill innocents. You don't have to let the thugs destroy you, thereby sacrificing your innocents (including yourself) to spare theirs. Since innocents are under mortal threat in either case, you needn't prefer the attackers' to your own.

This may not be the most high-minded conclusion. However it's a conclusion we are forced to accept - we who very clearly countenance the killing and maiming of civilians in situations not nearly so precarious as what it is to be a Palestinian in the conquered, shrinking occupied territories. The thugs should keep their families from harm by ceasing their onslaught and withdrawing from the scene. Israel's obligation is similar. It must defend itself at the least cost to others. It should keep its families from harm by giving the Palestinians complete control of their external borders and allowing the creation of a Palestinian state. After this, if Israel is attacked, it can respond. Before, its response is not legitimate self-defense but continued aggression.'