Israel at war

[Frankfooter]

Ok. But it doesn't have to be in 4000px font size, essentially yelling at me something that I never denied.

I'm trying to back up what I post with links to direct sources, I suppose I could try to reformat what are large font headlines but then they also won't look like headlines and the not very savvy types like rich will assume I'm just upset and using a red font.

And yet when I pointed out one of your links was fake propaganda and the video wasn't what it purported to be, your response was to argue with me on details but ignore that the video does not show what it claims to.

The Amnesty video did appear to show four phosphorus shells off to the left side of the video. You're positive those aren't phosphorus?

The last sentence is the one I'll address. "The protocol defines incendiary weapons as ones 'primarily designed' to set fires and burn people, excluding uses of incendiary weapons for other purposes, including as smokescreens." It's a close summary, but the last bit of it is wrong. It says, "excluding uses of incendiary weapons for other purposes, including as smokescreens." When I read that, it sounds like they are saying the use in the moment determines if a weapon is restricted or not. "Yeah, I'm dropping this napalm, but I'm doing it to make a huge smokescreen". From the Amnesty summary, that seems fine. It's "use" was not incindiary. But that's not actually what the CCW says.

Here is exactly what CCW Article III has to say, verbatim:

"(b) Incendiary weapons do not include:

(i) Munitions which may have incidental incendiary effects, such as illuminants, tracers, smoke or signalling systems;"

I assume you see the difference there? It's subtle, but significant. And because of that, it should give you pause to question Amnesty and HRW. Surely it a peon like me can see the glaring issue, it's been pointed out to them by others. And yet they leave it on their website and in their reports. Why? Because they have an agenda to push. And while I don't necessarily disagree with their agenda, I go back to what I said to you about pushing fake propaganda. I personally tend to give very little attention to either organization because of stuff like this.

I don't think their summary is as far off as you argue. Saying that a device's 'primary use' is close to what the CCW says, they just call it 'incidental effects'. That's a tomato/tomato differentiation. The question in this case would be is the use of phosphorus bombs 'primary use' to burn things on the ground or is it 'primarily designed' to as illumination. Is the illumination an 'incidental effect' to burning things and people or is that what its 'primarily designed' to do?

Anyway.....

White phos is primarily an illuminant and a smoke system and only has incidental incindiary effects. Militaires have deployed it as an incindiary, but they used weapons designed for smoke and illumination to do so only relying on this incidental effect. No munitions manufacturer produces a white phos munition that is explicitly an incindiary because it actually performs very poorly when compared to other incindiaries. Therefore under CCW Article III, it is not an incindiary. It doesn't matter what "use" it's employed for, it does not meet the criteria for incendiary munitions. Article I is non-detectible fragments, article II is mines and booby traps, IV is blinding lasers, V is explosive remnants of war. It falls under none of those categories either. It's also non-nuclear, so it doesn't fall under any of those treaties. You can go through the chemical weapons convention if you want, but you'll want to look at Article II paras 1, 2, and 9(c) for why white phos doesn't fit there either. If you know of other conventions regarding classifications of munitions and limiting their use, I'm all ears.

White phos is a conventional munition with no specific restrictions in the laws of war including the CCW and the CWC. It's use is governed solely by Hague, Geneva and Rome.

Can you find a legit source that backs up your claim that white phosphorus is not considered incendiary? And in airburst?
Both HRW and Amnesty say it is. As far as I know there is no official ruling, so you can claim it isn't but it isn't but there is nothing to back claim up.
Though HRW says there are loopholes and have been campaigning to have it reclassified on 'effect' as compared to 'primary design'. Otherwise you can drop it on people and claim you were using for its primary designed purpose to just light them up.

There was a 2013 Israeli ruling on Israel's use in 2008, where Israel promised they wouldn't use it again in populated areas. Goldstone also reported that Israel was using it on populated areas.

Even if, as you argue, its a poor choice as an incendiary weapon that doesn't mean when its not behaving like an incendiary weapon when you drop it on people's homes.

 

[Klatuu]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719404979109416979

 

[Frankfooter]

Seems the Israeli response isn't really having the desired effect then, is it? Is this the situation you think Israel should be happy with? Getting bombed every few years and then killing a bunch of Gazans in retaliation?

I get Hamas could try something new. I wish they would. I wish Hamas would try realizing their strategy is illegal and just results in a bunch of dead civilians and then they'd just give up and Hamas would disappear. That would be great.

But I also wish Israel would try something new too because Israel's strategy so far has also just resulted in a cycle of death.

I'm not sure why so many people think Israel is perfectly fne to continue full speed ahead with their strategy in this cycle of death. "Because Hamas are terrorist cunts and should be eliminated." Yeah, agreed. But this clearly isn't accomplishing that and expecting the terrorist cunts to somehow change seems like a pretty ridiculous position to take.

Like... Do you just want to see more dead people? Is that the result you're hoping for? More dead Gazans and more dead Israelis?

They have tried other things.
One good example is the Great March of Return in 2018.

They tried protesting and got the same result, Israel killing people.

Gaza’s Great March of Return protests explained

Here’s the backstory of the Great March of Return protests and the conditions that have brought Gaza to this point.

www.aljazeera.com

 

[bggolfingmaniac]

Seems the Israeli response isn't really having the desired effect then, is it? Is this the situation you think Israel should be happy with? Getting bombed every few years and then killing a bunch of Gazans in retaliation?

I get Hamas could try something new. I wish they would. I wish Hamas would try realizing their strategy is illegal and just results in a bunch of dead civilians and then they'd just give up and Hamas would disappear. That would be great.

But I also wish Israel would try something new too because Israel's strategy so far has also just resulted in a cycle of death.

I'm not sure why so many people think Israel is perfectly fne to continue full speed ahead with their strategy in this cycle of death. "Because Hamas are terrorist cunts and should be eliminated." Yeah, agreed. But this clearly isn't accomplishing that and expecting the terrorist cunts to somehow change seems like a pretty ridiculous position to take.

Like... Do you just want to see more dead people? Is that the result you're hoping for? More dead Gazans and more dead Israelis?

Disclaimer - I Hate Bibi

I agree with this in principle but that's just not facts on the ground. The most casualties Israel has experienced via terrorism the last 60 years all PALED in comparison with what happened on Oct 7. I'd call killing 1400+ civilians execution-style as a Hamas declaration of war - Bibi is absolutely right that this is a time for war. They are not people that can be reasoned with nor will Hamas even sit at the same table - so who the hell does Israel talk peace with? Netanyahu warned Biden right away that they would have to go in, so it's not like this is shocking. War is Hell and Israel is hellbent on finishing the one Hamas started.

 

[Frankfooter]

Correct.

And every time that Hamas resorts to violence, they get punished and they and Gazans end up in worse position. And since Oct. 7. the same thing is happening again.

That has been a poor strategy to the point where one can only assume that Hamas is stupid and/or is insane and/or don't care about Gazans. As you said above, they know what's going to happen yet keep repeating the same strategy.

So of those 3 which do you think it is? Just one or a combination of any or all of the 3?

So this has also been a poor strategy of Israel, since they are the ones in control.
Palestinians get a worse situation every year, regardless of whether they do anything or not. More apartheid, more settler colonization and more dead.

You'd have to assume that Israel is also insane to keep doing the same thing over and over again when they are the only ones with the power to change the situation. Only the military occupying power can end an occupation. Only an apartheid state can end apartheid.

Which are the Israeli leadership?
Insane?
Stupid?

 

[shack]

You keep admitting that Israel is apartheid by forcing Palestinians to live as stateless refugees with zero human rights.
There is no country of Palestine, so Palestinians are living under apartheid rule with as you admit, different rights from Israeli Jews.

Thanks for admitting that the Palestinians in Gaza are not living in the state of Israel and are not citizens and are not entitled to the same rights given to all citizens of Israel.

In S. Africa, citizens of S. Africa were treated differently due to skin colour. That's the definition of apartheid. The legislature passed laws that dealt with, and only with their own citizens. S. Africa invented the term for their policy for their country. You or anybody else cannot change the definition. Discrimination of CITIZENS based on race. It is a historically documented and specific term.

Apartheid, (Afrikaans: “apartness”) policy that governed relations between South Africa’s white minority and nonwhite majority for much of the latter half of the 20th century, sanctioning racial segregation and political and economic discrimination against nonwhites. Although the legislation that formed the foundation of apartheid had been repealed by the early 1990s, the social and economic repercussions of the discriminatory policy persisted into the 21st century.

Blacks were stripped of their South African citizenship and thereby excluded from the South African body politic.

Blacks were CITIZENS yet got treated differently. That, sir, is apartheid. Gazans may well be under Israeli control and may be oppressed (due to the policies of THEIR OWN government), but since they are not citizens it does not meet the definition of apartheid as defined by the people who actually designed and enacted that policy. Using that term is 100% incorrect and simply a hot-button buzzword used to turn people against Israel/Jews in the propaganda war.

Apartheid | South Africa, Definition, Facts, Beginning, & End | Britannica

From Encyclopaedia Britannica. I didn't read the entire thing but from what I saw I didn't see anything other than discriminatory policy towards citizens of different skin tones. Gazans are not citizens of Israel.

 

[bggolfingmaniac]

So this has also been a poor strategy of Israel, since they are the ones in control.
Palestinians get a worse situation every year, regardless of whether they do anything or not. More apartheid, more settler colonization and more dead.

You'd have to assume that Israel is also insane to keep doing the same thing over and over again when they are the only ones with the power to change the situation. Only the military occupying power can end an occupation. Only an apartheid state can end apartheid.

Which are the Israeli leadership?
Insane?
Stupid?

Who does Israel even negotiate with? It's pretty clear that there are no back channels between Israel and Hamas, so your guess is as good as mine on who sits at the table with the Israelis. As an aside, every senior member of the current Israeli government should have resigned over their intelligence failures. That's a lot of their own blood on their hands.

 

[Frankfooter]

Thanks for admitting that the Palestinians in Gaza are not living in the state of Israel and are not citizens and are not entitled to the same rights given to all citizens of Israel.

There is no state of Palestine.
Israel wiped it off the map.

So all Palestinians are living in Israel as stateless refugees on what should be their homelands and with no human rights.
Which is, as you confirmed, apartheid.

Israel's apartheid against Palestinians

Palestinians are systematically subjected to home demolitions and forced evictions, and live in constant fear of losing their homes. For more than 73 years, Israel has been forcibly displacing entire Palestinian communities. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians’ homes have been demolished...

www.amnesty.org

A Threshold Crossed

The 213-page report, “A Threshold Crossed: Israeli Authorities and the Crimes of Apartheid and Persecution,” examines Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. It presents the present-day reality of a single authority, the Israeli government, ruling primarily over the area between the Jordan River and...

www.hrw.org

Apartheid

The Israeli regime enacts in all the territory it controls (Israeli sovereign territory, East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip) an apartheid regime. One organizing principle lies at the base of a wide array of Israeli policies: advancing and perpetuating the supremacy of one group –...

www.btselem.org

Israel’s occupation of Palestinian Territory is ‘apartheid’: UN rights expert

Calling on the international community to accept and adopt the recent findings in his report, an independent human rights expert said on Friday that “apartheid is being practiced by Israel in the occupied Palestinian territory”.

news.un.org

 

[Frankfooter]

Who does Israel even negotiate with? It's pretty clear that there are no back channels between Israel and Hamas, so your guess is as good as mine on who sits at the table with the Israelis. As an aside, every senior member of the current Israeli government should have resigned over their intelligence failures. That's a lot of their own blood on their hands.

Why do they have to negotiate?
Its not like the two state solution is possible.
All they need to do is end apartheid.

Israel just killed 400 Palestinians living in a refugee camp in Gaza.
Gaza is a death camp.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719362980284915733

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719387139022995558

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

You don't see any torture that people are stripped naked, and dragged around, hands and feet bound, apart from that one boot to the face?

So I guess according to you this is not torture either:

View attachment 270849

It is not just the Hamas that are the barbarians

If those are terrorists who raped, murdered, and set babies on fire they get very little sympathy from me

 

[shack]

This has been covered over and over again.
There was never a legit two state peace plan offered, the closest was Olmert, but even he refused to put it in writing.

Israel has been the military occupying power for 75 years, ending the occupation is up to them, not the victims of the occupation.

When you say "a legit peace plan, what is your definition of "legit"?

 

[shack]

Or what is a legit source.

Some people don't care if the source they use is legit or propaganda bias.

 

[shack]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719305501224194108

Nice.

 

[Leimonis]

Why do they have to negotiate?
Its not like the two state solution is possible.
All they need to do is end apartheid.

Israel just killed 400 Palestinians living in a refugee camp in Gaza.
Gaza is a death camp.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719362980284915733

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719387139022995558

Sounds legit

 

[Frankfooter]

When you say "a legit peace plan, what is your definition of "legit"?

A full offer with defined borders written and delivered.

I note that you refuse to denounce killing 400 civilians, mostly women and children.
You are a terrorism supporter now.
A defender of genocide.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719413810094584055

 

[Frankfooter]

Sounds legit

Just posted this in another thread that there would be a sequence of replies to this atrocity.
You hit the first one in minutes.
Well done.

If you doubt the numbers I suggest you head over there to count the bodies and pieces of bodies.
You might get lucky and find some decapitated babies.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719362980284915733

 

[shack]

Seems the Israeli response isn't really having the desired effect then, is it? Is this the situation you think Israel should be happy with? Getting bombed every few years and then killing a bunch of Gazans in retaliation?

Israel should not be happy but it is reacting in response. Should they do nothing instead?

But I also wish Israel would try something new too because Israel's strategy so far has also just resulted in a cycle of death.

I think they are trying something different this time. They're going after the head of the snake this time. Remove Hamas from the equation to break the cycle. Gazans deserve to have a regime that will help them live in peace instead of attacking Israel every few years.

Like... Do you just want to see more dead people? Is that the result you're hoping for? More dead Gazans and more dead Israelis?
[/QUOTE]No. Of course not.

Do you think that Hamas controlling Gaza is good for Gazans? They keep the humanitarian aid meant for the citizens to buy weapons and build tunnels instead, there are no elections and they keep initiating conflicts with Israel that they lose every time and the citizens are the ones that pay the price.

Do you think that Hamas truly wants peace with Israel and will negotiate in good faith.

If your answers are no (that's how I'd answer), then Israel has no option other than to destroy Hamas.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Its long established, that they were just civilians who were mistreated. You know who did all those things? American soldiers. But this is ancient history now

I was referring more to the video in the tweet Katuu posted

 

[Klatuu]

In the entitled and equally infantile world of these unrestrained murderers, they actually believe this.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719424111804297234

 

[shack]

A full offer with defined borders written and delivered.

Unilaterally? It has to be negotiated.

I note that you refuse to denounce killing 400 civilians, mostly women and children.
You are a terrorism supporter now.
A defender of genocide.

I note that you keep changing the topic and put words in other people's mouths.

If so, then I can say that you support genocide. You support the Oct. 7 attack. You knew what the result would be. Hence you support the death and suffering of Gazans, who are collateral damage in Israel's attempt to destroy the perpetrators of the Oct. 7 terrorism, because Hamas uses them as human shields.

I just proved that you, frank, support terrorism and genocide.