Israel at war

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
30,422
4,633
113

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
51,557
10,025
113
Toronto
Rarely, they rarely prosecute.
Moving the goalposts, are we?

Your little buddy made an unqualified statement that "claiming Israel would prosecute one of their own soldiers was a lie (nose getting longer").

You now say Israel rarely prosecutes. FYI, it's still more than Hamas' NEVER EVER prosecute their own. And news alert, it's not because Hamas are angels and never uses human shields. It's because Hamas applauds and encourages this type of activity. They dance in the streets. It's a main tactic in their war strategy.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,665
22,194
113
You need to stop. You're out of your depth and being foolish. You're clearly just trying to make any changes you can to get Israel charged with as many war crimes as possible. It's unreasonable and would have repercussions that echo far beyond this conflict.

It shouldn't be a war crime. That's insanity. There are too many legitimate, useful uses of WP to make it's use a war crime. If Israel used it deliberately on civilians or used it where proportional proportionality didn't apply, or used it where a proportional proportionality case couldn't be made, then they've already committed a war crime (and not because they used WP, it still would've been a war crime if they'd used something else). Wanting to get the use of WP designated as a war crime are the actions of people who do not understand the rules of war or the tactical uses of WP. There's a reason it was excluded.

Having Article III amended wouldn't reduce the use of WP or incindiaries. It would just have 95% of the countries that are currently signatories to the CCW withdraw from it. Do you think that's better? Have no one follow or bound by any part of the CCW just because you wanted to be able to accuse Israel of committing a war crime while committing a different war crime? If they've committed a war crime you don't need WP made a war crime too. It's just getting silly now.

AOC called for a policy, not for it to be made a war crime. And I doubt it will pass because the US government themselves signed the CCW with the stipulation that they reserve the use of incindiary munitions (which WP isn't even) in civilian areas when appropriate and when proportionality applies.

As for the Amnesty international tweet... If they dropped conventional bombs indiscriminately on civilians it would be a war crime too. Calling out the use of white phos is a red herring and irrelevant, especially since they have such a horrendously flawed understanding of it.
I'm a peacenik. I'd be happy if landmines were really banned, if cluster bombs were banned, that nukes were dismantled and yes, if weapons that are being used as incendiary like WP (going by injury reports in Gaza they are being used as incendiary weapons) were all banned. Even after Ukraine, weapons that kill civilians after wars and during wars should be banned. And yes, I know that WP is not listed as incendiary or chemical and you say its a bad incendiary weapon. But if its being used that way it should be stopped.

People argue there are legitimate uses for AR15's in the states as well, but they should be banned for civilians. Fewer people are killed by guns in places with fewer guns.

I know you've disagreed with Amnesty and HRW reports here, but they are still the international standard.

For the most part I'm agreeing with your posts and listening to what you say. But things need to change.

This is being reported as WP deaths in Gaza, but don't look if you're squeamish.
 

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
26,830
4,938
113
Find and shut off the ventilation systems for the tunnels. They won't last long after
Or just hook up hoses to tank exhausts and flood the tunnels with carbon monoxide
 
Last edited:

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
30,422
4,633
113
Or just hook up hoses to tank exhausts and flood the tunnels with carbon monoxide
1. Good chance hostages are in the tunnel.
2. Um, gas atrack? Ya, thats never a good idea.

I figure there is a chance they trade hostages for surrender. Some may go for it.
 

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
26,830
4,938
113
1. Good chance hostages are in the tunnel.
2. Um, gas atrack? Ya, thats never a good idea.

I figure there is a chance they trade hostages for surrender. Some may go for it
Whats the difference from what you're proposing, shutting off ventilation systems for the tunnels??
Either way you're suffocating them, arent you??

But I agree that many hostages are probably in the tunnels.
So maybe thats not a good idea
 

richaceg

Well-known member
Feb 11, 2009
13,914
5,695
113
Yes, and the answer is obvious.
The occupation hasn't ended.
Apartheid hasn't ended.
It never ends because as soon as ceasefire is in place...Hamas just schemes another plan to inflict damage again...then more damage goes to palestinians but they welcome those because it makes them "martyrs"...the ultimate sacrifice....as long as Hamas kills some jews....lather rinse repeat...
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
30,422
4,633
113
Whats the difference from what you're proposing, shutting off ventilation systems for the tunnels??
Either way you're suffocating them, arent you??

But I agree that many hostages are probably in the tunnels.
So maybe thats not a good idea
Its a slow process, with plenty of time to get out if the fans are off. Im presuming they are smart enough to have air quality detection in place.
 

Klatuu

Well-known member
Dec 31, 2022
5,712
3,336
113
It never ends because as soon as ceasefire is in place...Hamas just schemes another plan to inflict damage again...then more damage goes to palestinians but they welcome those because it makes them "martyrs"...the ultimate sacrifice....as long as Hamas kills some jews....lather rinse repeat...
The ramblings of the racist brainwashed.
 
Toronto Escorts