The face of Israeli justice

[laughing dog]

Funny with how that IDF minimization, the Palestinian civilian casualties still vastly outnumber the Israeli ones.

To my knowledge, the IDF does not use Israeli civilians as human shields. Hamas persistently turns against its "own people" in the Gaza by using them as human shields. Further Hamas controls who will benefit of the NGOs humanitarian services in the Gaza. Their policies can only produce more victims and helpless dire poverty stricken Palestinians in the Gaza no matter how much the IDF attempts to concentrate their fire on locations where they have identified the presence of Hamas militants/combatants. No matter how much Israel had relaxed its embargo allowing for more humanitarian based goods to come into the Gaza.

While it is true that the IDF does not have a policy of using civilians as shields, the IDF has enough territory to indirectly accomplish that goal. Hamas does not have the luxury of territorial expansion, but that does not excuse their policy. Regardless, the effect is that despite the IDF efforts, they do end up killing more civilians than the Palestinians which plays into the hands of propagandists, extremists and terrorists. None of which does not help the cause of peace.

The infantile tit for tat mentality of both sides exacerbates the tensions and violence. I hope for the day when the leaders of all parties in this conflict decide to act like mature adults. I don't expect to happen until a large majority of the relevant populations will not tolerate the violence any longer.

Hamas is extremely toxic to the Gaza population.

No doubt about it. And so are the Israeli extremists who seem to have inordinate sway of Israeli politics and public opinion.

 

[Derec]

Funny with how that IDF minimization, the Palestinian civilian casualties still vastly outnumber the Israeli ones.

Well for one Israel is not using their citizens as human shields and as fodder to manipulate international media with.
Besides, just because Israel is more effective in defense than Hamas is in aggression doesn't make them in the wrong.

Now Hamas says they have targeted an Israeli nuclear reactor.
Hamas: We attempted to hit the nuclear reactor in Dimona

the wishes of the terrorists and extremists for more bloodshed and war is being realized.

The only solution is to eliminate the terrorists (Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Popular Committees etc.)

 

[laughing dog]

Well for one Israel is not using their citizens as human shields and as fodder to manipulate international media with.
Besides, just because Israel is more effective in defense than Hamas is in aggression doesn't make them in the wrong.

Once again you missed the point. There is no wrong or right here. The minimization of Palestinian civilian casualties still leaves a substantial difference in the number of innocents killed.

Now Hamas says they have targeted an Israeli nuclear reactor.
Hamas: We attempted to hit the nuclear reactor in Dimona

I was wondering when that would happen. It would make an excellent target for a terrorist.

The only solution is to eliminate the terrorists (Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Popular Committees etc.)

Until you realize that there terrorists on both sides, your solution cannot possibly work.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Israel Warns Gaza Targets by Phone and Leaflet
Israel is going out of their way to minimize civilian casualties. On the other hand, Hamas and other terrorist scum want to maximize civilian casualties, both Israeli and Palestinian, by deliberately placing people on buildings targeted by Israel. v

Funny with how that IDF minimization, the Palestinian civilian casualties still vastly outnumber the Israeli ones.

Because Hamas is very good at causing civilian and quasi-civilian (for example, the human shield case we just saw) casualties. Furthermore, Hamas has neither the ability nor the desire to keep casualties low.

Besides the tragedies of the brutal murders of 4 innocents, there is an additional tragedy: the wishes of the terrorists and extremists for more bloodshed and war is being realized.

And the left doesn't help matters by keeping wanting Israel to make concessions for peace. That just encourages war to get those concessions.

 

[Jayjay]

And the left doesn't help matters by keeping wanting Israel to make concessions for peace. That just encourages war to get those concessions.

What concessions? Israel hasn't conceded an inch of land in West Bank, and the population of the settlements are only growing. The Palestinians, Hamas included, have all but given up fighting in West Bank (few rock throwers here and there notwithstanding) and what has that peace brought them? More settlements!

Meanwhile, the asshats in Gaza are more interested in their own rocket stockpiles and freeing their own fighters from jail than they are about ending the occupation. Israel should reoccupy Gaza (military occupation only, keeping civilians out by force if necessary) or at least take over the Rafah crossing.

 

[Bomb#20]

Presumably the same would be true of the seven or so Palestinians who have been lynched by Israelis in revenge attacks, and the defiant approval of these actions from the Israeli settlers?

Yes, quite so. (With the qualification that you are unjustifiably broad-brushing the Israeli settlers. Some of them have defiantly approved revenge lynchings and some of them haven't.) What's your point?

My curiosity was raised by the idea that you're agreeing to label members of the settler community with 'the customary word the world has for that special type of fascist who has a taste for murdered Jews', a position some might find a bit odd. The alternative, using a jewish-specific term for one side and not another, implies that you're not treating the deaths as equal and opposite. Hence my curiosity.

Oh, you're focused on the label part; I assumed you were focused on the war crimes tribunal part. My bad. Yes, using that word on settlers who defiantly approved revenge attacks would be a bit odd. If you have a problem with the one-sided character of the terminology, take it up with the English language, which could make good use of a word for fascists with a taste for murdered Arabs.

The emphasis on war crimes also seems a little odd, considering how much of Israeli action in the West Bank would fall under that term. Where does this leave the punitive bombing carried out by the IDF in the wake of the murders, or the demolition of major local businesses, despite no obvious connection to the crime? Or indeed, the settlements themselves?

And? Are you saying it's okay to support war crimes if the other side commits them too? Or did somebody in the thread defiantly approve Israeli war crimes against Palestinians?

 

[Bomb#20]

There was nothign patently ridiculous what I wrote. There was a boring, non-public investigation, which had no indication of being solved quickly (as it had been going on for a while), and the statements by Israeli officials and the victim's family make it seem as if the investigation would be swept under the rug. Sure in retrospect I was wrong, and you can hammer that in my head all you like... but at the time with the evidence at hand, it was a reasonable conclusion.

No, it was not. A boring non-public investigation is precisely what police lifting a finger normally looks like. Maybe if there were no results in three months there'd be reason to make such an accusation, but three days? Get real!

Your hypothesis that this is motivated by malice would likewise be a reasonable conclusion, if you could point out that I would be making different conclusions if the victims were Jews or perpetrators were Arabs.

Well, was there any sign of the PA investigating the original kidnapping and murder of the three children? Did you complain that the PA weren't lifting a finger to solve that case?

Not being privy to the internal workings of the Israeli police means you don't know if they're lifting a finger, which is a reason to say you don't know if they're lifting a finger.

And what evidence did you have that they were lifting a finger?

Are you bleeding serious? Did I write a post claiming they were lifting a finger back when you and I had no evidence one way or the other?

A legitimate target is a legitimate target, regardless of the motivations of who targets them.

Very true. Tautologies usually are. Do you feel that that tautology implies either that children going home from school are legitimate targets, or that when you've kidnapped legitimate targets and they're helplessly in your power it's still legitimate to shoot them?

 

[Sarpedon]

Well for one Israel is not using their citizens as human shields and as fodder to manipulate international media with.

False. What do you call a settlement? You conquer territory, you plant a colony there, you put your civilians there, and if the natives attack the outpost, you shriek about their brutality against civilians. The civilians in the settlements are human shields for Israel's military conquests.

Look what's happening now. Three israeli settlers get killed, and Netanyahu gets a new lease on life as PM.

 

[laughing dog]

Funny with how that IDF minimization, the Palestinian civilian casualties still vastly outnumber the Israeli ones.

Because Hamas is very good at causing civilian and quasi-civilian (for example, the human shield case we just saw) casualties. Furthermore, Hamas has neither the ability nor the desire to keep casualties low.

For some reason you feel those observations are relevant to the fact that the IDF minimization still means substantially more civilian deaths than Hamas terrorism.

And the left doesn't help matters by keeping wanting Israel to make concessions for peace. That just encourages war to get those concessions.

Reality check: peace will require concessions by everyone. The infantile thirst for revenge by both parties makes peace more difficult to achieve. And the extremists, terrorists and their dupes make matters worse with their encouragement of infantile reactions and bloodshed.

 

[Jayjay]

No, it was not. A boring non-public investigation is precisely what police lifting a finger normally looks like. Maybe if there were no results in three months there'd be reason to make such an accusation, but three days? Get real!

Within three days of the previous kidnapping, thousands of troops were deployed and Netanyahu and other officials were already pointing the finger at Hamas. None of that wishy-washy "well it could have been anyone really" nonsense that Israeli police sources and officials were feeding even after the arrests.

Your hypothesis that this is motivated by malice would likewise be a reasonable conclusion, if you could point out that I would be making different conclusions if the victims were Jews or perpetrators were Arabs.

Well, was there any sign of the PA investigating the original kidnapping and murder of the three children? Did you complain that the PA weren't lifting a finger to solve that case?

I would not assume PA to have means or will to do anything about it to begin with. The issue here is only what the Israeli police does.

Not being privy to the internal workings of the Israeli police means you don't know if they're lifting a finger, which is a reason to say you don't know if they're lifting a finger.

And what evidence did you have that they were lifting a finger?

Are you bleeding serious? Did I write a post claiming they were lifting a finger back when you and I had no evidence one way or the other?

I did not mean that you made such claims, but if you had, what evidence would you have had at hand? The appearance of the investigation was indistinguishable from there being no investigation at all, so to speculate either way would have been fair game. But it's also understandable why the relatives of the kid would want to make public noise about it to pressure Israel into doing something, if they weren't already.

A legitimate target is a legitimate target, regardless of the motivations of who targets them.

Very true. Tautologies usually are. Do you feel that that tautology implies either that children going home from school are legitimate targets, or that when you've kidnapped legitimate targets and they're helplessly in your power it's still legitimate to shoot them?

That school had no reason to be there, and the kids had no reason to be enrolled there, except as part of the Jewish nationalist expansion scheme. Hamas's motivation for kidnapping and shooting the kids was less than noble, but murderers and fanatics seem to be the only thing Palestinians have to fight back.

 

[Arctish]

Well, was there any sign of the PA investigating the original kidnapping and murder of the three children?

Yes, there was. Initial news reports of the kidnapping were quickly followed by reports the PA was assisting the IDF in the search. Those reports were followed by the additional information that the kidnapping happened in a part of the West Bank exclusively under Israeli control, where the PA has no presence and no authority. Nevertheless, the PA fully assisted the IDF wherever possible, and we in the West heard about it almost immediately.

 

[laughing dog]

Does anyone think that the homes of the 3 Israelis charged with burning a Palestinian to death will be bulldozed by the Israeli gov't in order to provide disincentives for that behavior?

 

[Derec]

Does anyone think that the homes of the 3 Israelis charged with burning a Palestinian to death will be bulldozed by the Israeli gov't in order to provide disincentives for that behavior?

Unlike the Palestinian Authority, Israeli government does not give monetary payments to captured terrorists. The destruction of their homes is meant to act as a counterbalance to this incentive to commit acts of terrorism.
By the way, those payments are financed by the "aid" US and EU are giving the PA. Both need to stop any "aid" to the PA until PA sheds itself from even the smallest hint of cooperation and aid to terrorists. That includes these terrorist rewards and also means PA must never cooperate, much less bring into the government, the likes of Hamas.

 

[Derec]

False. What do you call a settlement?

How many settlements are there in Gaza?

In any case, there is nothing sacred or even special about the "green line". It's merely the armistice line after the 1948-49 Israeli war of independence. There is no reason to insist that it follow exactly whatever the final border between Israel and Palestine (if that ever happens) ends up being.

 

[laughing dog]

Does anyone think that the homes of the 3 Israelis charged with burning a Palestinian to death will be bulldozed by the Israeli gov't in order to provide disincentives for that behavior?

Unlike the Palestinian Authority, Israeli government does not give monetary payments to captured terrorists. The destruction of their homes is meant to act as a counterbalance to this incentive to commit acts of terrorism.

No, the Israeli gov't subsidizes and defends settler terrorists. So, is your answer a "yes" or a "no"

By the way, those payments are financed by the "aid" US and EU are giving the PA. Both need to stop any "aid" to the PA until PA sheds itself from even the smallest hint of cooperation and aid to terrorists. That includes these terrorist rewards and also means PA must never cooperate, much less bring into the government, the likes of Hamas.

The sincerity and force of your argument would be enhanced if it were not so completely one-sided in its focus.

 

[Arctish]

Unlike the Palestinian Authority, Israeli government does not give monetary payments to captured terrorists. The destruction of their homes is meant to act as a counterbalance to this incentive to commit acts of terrorism.

No, the Israeli gov't subsidizes and defends settler terrorists. So, is your answer a "yes" or a "no"

I don't suppose for a moment that Israel will treat Jewish terror suspects the same as non-Jewish terror suspects. It hasn't in the past, and anyway, if it was going to this time those houses would already be rubble.

By the way, those payments are financed by the "aid" US and EU are giving the PA. Both need to stop any "aid" to the PA until PA sheds itself from even the smallest hint of cooperation and aid to terrorists. That includes these terrorist rewards and also means PA must never cooperate, much less bring into the government, the likes of Hamas.

The sincerity and force of your argument would be enhanced if it were not so completely one-sided in its focus.

The PA doesn't fund Hamas. In fact, the PA was hoping Hamas would wither and die so the PA could regain influence in Gaza and take a stronger position at the bargaining table.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And the left doesn't help matters by keeping wanting Israel to make concessions for peace. That just encourages war to get those concessions.

What concessions? Israel hasn't conceded an inch of land in West Bank, and the population of the settlements are only growing. The Palestinians, Hamas included, have all but given up fighting in West Bank (few rock throwers here and there notwithstanding) and what has that peace brought them? More settlements!

Concessions can be things other than territory.

For example, removing the buffer zone they had around the border fence. That means a lot more attacks on the fence.

Meanwhile, the asshats in Gaza are more interested in their own rocket stockpiles and freeing their own fighters from jail than they are about ending the occupation. Israel should reoccupy Gaza (military occupation only, keeping civilians out by force if necessary) or at least take over the Rafah crossing.

Why?

Egypt has cracked down on the smuggling.

And what good would occupation do? Israel pulled out because being close means more attacks.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Because Hamas is very good at causing civilian and quasi-civilian (for example, the human shield case we just saw) casualties. Furthermore, Hamas has neither the ability nor the desire to keep casualties low.

For some reason you feel those observations are relevant to the fact that the IDF minimization still means substantially more civilian deaths than Hamas terrorism.

Comparing the deaths only makes sense if it's a sporting event.

And the left doesn't help matters by keeping wanting Israel to make concessions for peace. That just encourages war to get those concessions.

Reality check: peace will require concessions by everyone. The infantile thirst for revenge by both parties makes peace more difficult to achieve. And the extremists, terrorists and their dupes make matters worse with their encouragement of infantile reactions and bloodshed.

Concessions for true peace, yes.

The problem is permanent changes in policy in exchange for a temporary cease fire is a bad thing.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Does anyone think that the homes of the 3 Israelis charged with burning a Palestinian to death will be bulldozed by the Israeli gov't in order to provide disincentives for that behavior?

Why would they? Nobody's going to pay them because their kids became martyrs.

 

[Arctish]

Does anyone think that the homes of the 3 Israelis charged with burning a Palestinian to death will be bulldozed by the Israeli gov't in order to provide disincentives for that behavior?

Why would they? Nobody's going to pay them because their kids became martyrs.

So if somebody takes up a collection for the families of the accused, you believe Israel will demolish their houses? And that this would be justice?