Good Move Israel

[fanger]

Israel is now determined to destroy all the Hamas tunnels. It's about time.

Here's a video of one they missed!

 

[Roudy]

Look the animals can't even protect their own leaders. Ha ha ha.

[ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=5pjW9Wnpimg]No casualties in Haniyeh house bombing - YouTube[/ame]

 

[MJB12741]

Now over 1300 dead Palestinians. Praise be to Hamas. Keep them rocket missiles comin'.

 

[Sweet_Caroline]

Now over 1300 dead Palestinians. Praise be to Hamas. Keep them rocket missiles comin'.

With a higher than average proportion of adult males, so yes, keep the missiles coming.

 

[RoccoR]

SAYIT, MJB12741, et al,

I think it is time that the troubles of Gaza come to an end. And the best way to do it is by allowing Israel to make a sweep right through Gaza and disarm and neutralize HAMAS and all its factions; as well as destroy all tunnels.

Israel is now determined to destroy all the Hamas tunnels. It's about time.

The mission may widen to include disarming Hamas. No one is coming to save Gaza this time and neither side seems interested in a ceasefire.

(COMMENT)

The idea of a ceasefire --- now --- only benefits the HAMAS, allowing them to reconstitute and realign their activities.

If humanitarian supplies are needed, then Israel should establish Article 14 Hospital and Safety Zones in a quadrant outside the ares under hostile fire, with at least one Article 78 (AP) corridor for an Israeli Protected Evacuation for specifically for the children and guardians. The Article 14 Hospital and Safety Zones should be fully staffed and equipped as a combined humanitarian effort with Israeli caregivers, UN activities and the NGOs; appropriately supplied and protected.

The IDF needs to establish a cantonment area on the Israeli side of the border from the Article 14 Hospital and Safety Zone, establish a corridor of supplies and assistance into the zone to render assistance.

(SIDEBAR)

Only since the outbreak of hostilities, have I heard the High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay acknowledge that HAMAS Rocket Fire was a "war crime." The fact that the High Commissioner did not make that crystal clear and very plain 2000 Rockets ago, was a contributing factor in the events leaded us to this point. The High Commissioner for Human Rights is guilty of misfeasance and nonfeasance in this regard; rendering the impression that indiscriminate Rocket Fire was somehow justified and acceptable on the part of HAMAS. The UN needs to investigate itself before it investigates anyone else. Similarly, there is the question of the UN resources being to close to HAMAS in Gaza. UN workers cannot possibly work in such proximity to the HAMAS, and not be able to render evidence of "war crimes;" to include the launch of rockets in close proximity to hospital and safe zones.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[MJB12741]

Agreede! Thank goodness the Hamas rocket missiles keep on comin' to give Israel a good reason for enough time to finish the job.

SAYIT, MJB12741, et al,

I think it is time that the troubles of Gaza come to an end. And the best way to do it is by allowing Israel to make a sweep right through Gaza and disarm and neutralize HAMAS and all its factions; as well as destroy all tunnels.

Israel is now determined to destroy all the Hamas tunnels. It's about time.

The mission may widen to include disarming Hamas. No one is coming to save Gaza this time and neither side seems interested in a ceasefire.

(COMMENT)

The idea of a ceasefire --- now --- only benefits the HAMAS, allowing them to reconstitute and realign their activities.

If humanitarian supplies are needed, then Israel should establish Article 14 Hospital and Safety Zones in a quadrant outside the ares under hostile fire, with at least one Article 78 (AP) corridor for an Israeli Protected Evacuation for specifically for the children and guardians. The Article 14 Hospital and Safety Zones should be fully staffed and equipped as a combined humanitarian effort with Israeli caregivers, UN activities and the NGOs; appropriately supplied and protected.

The IDF needs to establish a cantonment area on the Israeli side of the border from the Article 14 Hospital and Safety Zone, establish a corridor of supplies and assistance into the zone to render assistance.

(SIDEBAR)

Only since the outbreak of hostilities, have I heard the High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay acknowledge that HAMAS Rocket Fire was a "war crime." The fact that the High Commissioner did not make that crystal clear and very plain 2000 Rockets ago, was a contributing factor in the events leaded us to this point. The High Commissioner for Human Rights is guilty of misfeasance and nonfeasance in this regard; rendering the impression that indiscriminate Rocket Fire was somehow justified and acceptable on the part of HAMAS. The UN needs to investigate itself before it investigates anyone else. Similarly, there is the question of the UN resources being to close to HAMAS in Gaza. UN workers cannot possibly work in such proximity to the HAMAS, and not be able to render evidence of "war crimes;" to include the launch of rockets in close proximity to hospital and safe zones.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[fanger]

Agreede! Thank goodness the Hamas rocket missiles keep on comin' to give Israel a good reason for enough time to finish the job.

More! he cried

 

[Billo_Really]

If you believe that, then you have no business 'debating' in this forum.

An occupational force cannot claim self defense. Ergo, any action by Hamas, is not an attack, it's resistance. Once the occupation has ended and Hamas shoots a rocket at Israel, then and only then, does it become an "attack".

Do you know what an occupation is?

Do you know what obligations the occupying power has, according to the "laws of occupation"?

Do you know what is prohibited (by the occupying power), according to those laws?​

A 'no' answer on any of those, means, you're the one who shouldn't be in this debate.

 

[Crystalclear]

Israel is now determined to destroy all the Hamas tunnels. It's about time.

Here's a video of one they missed!

It's sad too see, but Israel cannot always hit the targets right. Mistakes are always made in wars and Israel didn't want to target civilians, but tunnels and military sites. If Hamas would have the weapons Israel has they would have killed all the Israelis.

 

[RoccoR]

Billo_Really, et al,

This is wrong on so many different levels, I hardly know where to begin.

An occupational force cannot claim self defense. Ergo, any action by Hamas, is not an attack, it's resistance. Once the occupation has ended and Hamas shoots a rocket at Israel, then and only then, does it become an "attack".

(COMMENT)

If you claim to be under occupation in Gaza, then --- the resistance movement is punishable.

Article #68

Protected persons who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, but which does not constitute an attempt on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration, nor a grave collective danger, nor seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations used by them, shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offence committed. Furthermore, internment or imprisonment shall, for such offences, be the only measure adopted for depriving protected persons of liberty. The courts provided for under Article 66 of the present Convention may at their discretion convert a sentence of imprisonment to one of internment for the same period.

The penal provisions promulgated by the Occupying Power in accordance with Articles 64 and 65 may impose the death penalty against a protected person only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons, provided that such offences were punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory in force before the occupation began.

The death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person unless the attention of the court has been particularly called to the fact that since the accused is not a national of the Occupying Power, he is not bound to it by any duty of allegiance.

In any case, the death penalty may not be pronounced on a protected person who was under eighteen years of age at the time of the offence.

SOURCE: ICRC, GCIV

The "Resistance Movement" is NOT outside the law. It has no special dispensation to operate against the "Occupying Power."

Do you know what an occupation is?

(COMMENT)

Ah, yes. A big question. The foundation for the definition of an "occupation" is set out in Article*42 of the Hague Regulations of 1907.

ARTICLE 42

Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army.

The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.​

SOURCE: ICRC Convention (IV) respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land and its annex: Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land. The Hague, 18 October 1907.

You will notice the key passage: "actually placed under the authority of the hostile army"

If GAZA was really under the authority of the Israeli Defense Force (IDF), there would be no ongoing conflict. They would already be there and HAMAS would not.

Do you know what obligations the occupying power has, according to the "laws of occupation"?

(COMMENT)

I think many, in this discussion actually do understand.

Do you know what is prohibited (by the occupying power), according to those laws?[/INDENT]

(COMMENT)

I think many do understand. But if you have a specific allegation, let's hear it.

A 'no' answer on any of those, means, you're the one who shouldn't be in this debate.

(COMMENT)

May be you should reconsider your position.

There is the argument that the UN Security Council has insisted on the rules of "Occupation" be applied. In which case, the firing of rockets by Hamas into Israel would fall under Article 68, GCIV as previously mentioned. If the argument is that Gaza is not occupied, then the current incursion is covered under Chapter VII of the UN Charter:

Article 51

Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.​

SOURCE: Chapter VII - UN Charter

Article 1

Aggression is the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations, as set out in this Definition.

Explanatory note: In this Definition the term "State":

(a) Is used without prejudice to questions of recognition or to whether a State is a member of the United Nations;
(b) Includes the concept of a "group of States" where appropriate.​

Article 2

The First use of armed force by a State in contravention of the Charter shall constitute prima facie evidence of an act of aggression although the Security Council may, in conformity with the Charter, conclude that a determination that an act of aggression has been committed would not be justified in the light of other relevant circumstances, including the fact that the acts concerned or their consequences are not of sufficient gravity.​

SOURCE: A/RES/29/3314 14 December 1974

The argument, in the case of Gaza is, that Gaza was considered by the 1949 Armistice, to be territory occupied by Egypt. A temporary result of the 1948 Arab Invasion (Aggression) which initiated the 1948/49 War of Independence for Israel. In 1967, the territory occupied by Egypt was taken over by Israel in a conflict that was initiated by Egypt when it made an incursion demilitarized and UN supervised area with a large military force.

2. Within this line Egyptian forces shall nowhere advance beyond their; present positions, and this shall include Beit Hanun and its surrounding area] from which Israeli forces shall be withdrawn to north of the Armistice Demarcation Line, and any other positions within the line delineated in paragraph 1 which shall be evacuated by Israeli forces as set forth in paragraph 3.

SOURCE: UN Treaty Series #654 Egyptian-Israeli 1949

The end result being that the current conflict is merely an extension of the 1948/49 War of Independence which the Palestinians never resolved that ongoing dispute with a permanent treaty as the Egyptian did in 1979 or the Jordanians did in 1994. Thus, Chapter VII of the Charter Applies (Self-Defense).

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[MJB12741]

While Israel has made a lasting peace with both Arab countries of Egypt & Jordan, who have the Palestinians ever made peace with?

It appears that the only solution for peace between Israel & the Palestinians would be for Israel to end the occupation by finding some incentive to offer the surrounding Arab countries to grant their Palestinians a right of return back to their native homelands.

Billo_Really, et al,

This is wrong on so many different levels, I hardly know where to begin.

An occupational force cannot claim self defense. Ergo, any action by Hamas, is not an attack, it's resistance. Once the occupation has ended and Hamas shoots a rocket at Israel, then and only then, does it become an "attack".

(COMMENT)

If you claim to be under occupation in Gaza, then --- the resistance movement is punishable.

Article #68

Protected persons who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, but which does not constitute an attempt on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration, nor a grave collective danger, nor seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations used by them, shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offence committed. Furthermore, internment or imprisonment shall, for such offences, be the only measure adopted for depriving protected persons of liberty. The courts provided for under Article 66 of the present Convention may at their discretion convert a sentence of imprisonment to one of internment for the same period.

The penal provisions promulgated by the Occupying Power in accordance with Articles 64 and 65 may impose the death penalty against a protected person only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons, provided that such offences were punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory in force before the occupation began.

The death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person unless the attention of the court has been particularly called to the fact that since the accused is not a national of the Occupying Power, he is not bound to it by any duty of allegiance.

In any case, the death penalty may not be pronounced on a protected person who was under eighteen years of age at the time of the offence.

SOURCE: ICRC, GCIV

The "Resistance Movement" is NOT outside the law. It has no special dispensation to operate against the "Occupying Power."


(COMMENT)

Ah, yes. A big question. The foundation for the definition of an "occupation" is set out in Article*42 of the Hague Regulations of 1907.



You will notice the key passage: "actually placed under the authority of the hostile army"

If GAZA was really under the authority of the Israeli Defense Force (IDF), there would be no ongoing conflict. They would already be there and HAMAS would not.


(COMMENT)

I think many, in this discussion actually do understand.


(COMMENT)

I think many do understand. But if you have a specific allegation, let's hear it.


(COMMENT)

May be you should reconsider your position.

There is the argument that the UN Security Council has insisted on the rules of "Occupation" be applied. In which case, the firing of rockets by Hamas into Israel would fall under Article 68, GCIV as previously mentioned. If the argument is that Gaza is not occupied, then the current incursion is covered under Chapter VII of the UN Charter:

Article 1

Aggression is the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations, as set out in this Definition.

Explanatory note: In this Definition the term "State":

(a) Is used without prejudice to questions of recognition or to whether a State is a member of the United Nations;
(b) Includes the concept of a "group of States" where appropriate.​

Article 2

The First use of armed force by a State in contravention of the Charter shall constitute prima facie evidence of an act of aggression although the Security Council may, in conformity with the Charter, conclude that a determination that an act of aggression has been committed would not be justified in the light of other relevant circumstances, including the fact that the acts concerned or their consequences are not of sufficient gravity.​

SOURCE: A/RES/29/3314 14 December 1974

The argument, in the case of Gaza is, that Gaza was considered by the 1949 Armistice, to be territory occupied by Egypt. A temporary result of the 1948 Arab Invasion (Aggression) which initiated the 1948/49 War of Independence for Israel. In 1967, the territory occupied by Egypt was taken over by Israel in a conflict that was initiated by Egypt when it made an incursion demilitarized and UN supervised area with a large military force.

2. Within this line Egyptian forces shall nowhere advance beyond their; present positions, and this shall include Beit Hanun and its surrounding area] from which Israeli forces shall be withdrawn to north of the Armistice Demarcation Line, and any other positions within the line delineated in paragraph 1 which shall be evacuated by Israeli forces as set forth in paragraph 3.

SOURCE: UN Treaty Series #654 Egyptian-Israeli 1949

The end result being that the current conflict is merely an extension of the 1948/49 War of Independence which the Palestinians never resolved that ongoing dispute with a permanent treaty as the Egyptian did in 1979 or the Jordanians did in 1994. Thus, Chapter VII of the Charter Applies (Self-Defense).

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

When will all the loonie lefties understand that if you don't threaten or attack Israel, you won't get attacked??

They didn't attack Israel.

They got attacked by Israel.

Israel is not the victim you fuck!

Well not anymore,no....

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

If you believe that, then you have no business 'debating' in this forum.

An occupational force cannot claim self defense. Ergo, any action by Hamas, is not an attack, it's resistance. Once the occupation has ended and Hamas shoots a rocket at Israel, then and only then, does it become an "attack".

Do you know what an occupation is?

Do you know what obligations the occupying power has, according to the "laws of occupation"?

Do you know what is prohibited (by the occupying power), according to those laws?​

A 'no' answer on any of those, means, you're the one who shouldn't be in this debate.

Resist away then..
But that begs the question. Hows that resistance thing working out so far?

 

[MJB12741]

Now over 1300 dead Palestinians. LONG LIVE THE "RESISTENCE!!"

If you believe that, then you have no business 'debating' in this forum.

An occupational force cannot claim self defense. Ergo, any action by Hamas, is not an attack, it's resistance. Once the occupation has ended and Hamas shoots a rocket at Israel, then and only then, does it become an "attack".

Do you know what an occupation is?

Do you know what obligations the occupying power has, according to the "laws of occupation"?

Do you know what is prohibited (by the occupying power), according to those laws?​

A 'no' answer on any of those, means, you're the one who shouldn't be in this debate.

Resist away then..
But that begs the question. Hows that resistance thing working out so far?

 

[MJB12741]

And all Israel requested to prevent any of this was for the rocket missile attacks to cease. Oh well, just goes to prove that Palestinians will be Palestinians.

Now over 1300 dead Palestinians. LONG LIVE THE "RESISTENCE!!"

An occupational force cannot claim self defense. Ergo, any action by Hamas, is not an attack, it's resistance. Once the occupation has ended and Hamas shoots a rocket at Israel, then and only then, does it become an "attack".

Do you know what an occupation is?

Do you know what obligations the occupying power has, according to the "laws of occupation"?

Do you know what is prohibited (by the occupying power), according to those laws?​

A 'no' answer on any of those, means, you're the one who shouldn't be in this debate.

Resist away then..
But that begs the question. Hows that resistance thing working out so far?

 

[Phoenall]

Let us all join together & pray Hamas will keep those rocket missiles coming so Israel can finally do what is necessary to put this conflict to an end.

Finally Israel is beginning to effectively communicate with Palestinians in the only language they understand. Don't stop now. Put this conflict to end like Jordan did with their Palestinians during Black September & then LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!

AOL.com Article - Israel hits symbols of Hamas power in Gaza war

How do you think Israel will "end this conflict". Killing everyone in Gaza? If they don't the surviving Palestinians will be more dangerous than Hamas is to Israel. They all have someone murdered by a Jew in their family. Kind of like every Jew had a member of their family murdered by a Nazi a few generations ago.

Israel will have to do to the Palestinians what the Nazis tried to do to them, or there will be no peace. Unless, of course, Israel ends the occupation and siege.

Or the UN steps in and places massive sanctions on the Palestinians, in effect starving them to the negotiation table. Just like they did to S.A. and we all saw what happened there.........................

 

[Phoenall]

When will all the loonie lefties understand that if you don't threaten or attack Israel, you won't get attacked??

They didn't attack Israel.

They got attacked by Israel.

Israel is not the victim you fuck!

Of course they aren't as they crept into gaza with 1,000 rockets and launchers, erected them on gazan civilians property and fired them into Israel during a ceasefire. Then they kidnapped 3 Israeli boys and brutally murdered them and blamed the gazan muslims for the murders.

What a moron you are turning into believing the shit force fed to you by the ISLAMONAZI's

 

[fanger]

No one forces you to eat shit, you are full of it, by your own choosing

 

[MJB12741]

HUH??? Will you be so kind as to tell us what he said that is not true?

No one forces you to eat shit, you are full of it, by your own choosing

 

[MJB12741]

Here is the statement made that you so crudely objected to in your reply. Why is that?



Of course they aren't as they crept into gaza with 1,000 rockets and launchers, erected them on gazan civilians property and fired them into Israel during a ceasefire. Then they kidnapped 3 Israeli boys and brutally murdered them and blamed the gazan muslims for the murders.

What a moron you are turning into believing the shit force fed to you by the ISLAMONAZI's

HUH??? Will you be so kind as to tell us what he said that is not true?

No one forces you to eat shit, you are full of it, by your own choosing