Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Murphy's Law in Action Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Why It's Easy To Hate Israel
SYSOP    5/29/2012 5:34:08 AM
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3
swhitebull    Palestinian Casualties   6/6/2012 8:24:53 PM
Havent posted in a really long time, but this needs responding to.
 
Israeli casualties have disproportionately fallen upon the civilian population, as the various Arab terrorist groups by nature seek out women, children and the more vulnerable portions of Israeli demographics. The bulk of Hamas, Hizbollah etc casualties are predominantly among young males between the ages of 17 and 30, precisely those who stupidly go up against a trained military.
 
Innumerable studies have time after time shown this. EG -
 
 
 
 
With the advent of PGWs since 2002, the numbere of civilian casualties among Palestinians have declined even moreso.
And What the Geneva Protocols Really Say:
 
 
 
swhitebull -  would be very happy to discuss stats and international law - anytime 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

HeavyD    OK, I'll bite.   6/7/2012 8:57:46 PM
Bull...
 
Let's talk about civilian casualties over the last 10 years.  Israel never gets a black eye when they kill militants setting up a rocket or whatever, and the relevant topic here is why it's easy to hate on Israel.
 
Civilian Casualties are a large part of this, so what are the stats?  How many Israeli civilians have been killed since 2002, and how many civilians has the IDF killed during the same time period.  Remember to add Lebanon to the tally.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

swhitebull    Questioning Hizbollah's Lebanese Civilian Claims   6/7/2012 9:47:54 PM

I question the difference between Hizbolah fighter and civilian casualties, and how Hizbollah claims there is a difference, in general.

Hizbollah/Hamas has a vested interest in exagerating civilian casualties, especially to a sympathetic Westeren press that goes out of its way to cast the Israelis in a negative light. Keep in mind that there are many, many documented cases of Hizbollah stationing rockets and/or troops in civilian homes, in violation of the Geneva Protocols, to which they can be subject to war crimes. In addition, since they wear no uniforms, how can a Hizbo or Hamas fighter be told apart from a civilian? In the grand scheme of things, any civilian casualty that is caused due to such stationing of Hizbo or Hamas forces in the heart of civilian territory is SOLELY the responsibility of Hizbollah or Hamas. The Geneva Protocols are very clear about this, as I posted yesterday.

Here is the best analysis Ive seen on the breakdown of Lebanese casuaties.:

http://www.camera.org/index.as...

 

swhitebull - more to come
 
Quote    Reply

swhitebull    Now we Look at Gaza   6/7/2012 10:03:09 PM
This is from Wiki, so take it with a grain of salt, but it seems well-documented. Note especially the British military authority's assessment, which sent the Left into apoplectic fits, for daring questioning their anti-Israel dogma:
 
 
 
swhitebull  --  more to come 
 
Quote    Reply

swhitebull    Colonel Kemp's Assessment   6/7/2012 11:29:22 PM
Colonel  Richard Kemp... , former Commander of British Forces in Afghanistan, spoke in 2011 about Israeli operations in the Gaza War. He said that a study published by the United Nations showed "that the ratio of civilian to combatant deaths in Gaza was by far the lowest in any asymmetric conflict in the history of warfare." He stated that this ratio was less than 1:1, and compared it favorably to the estimated ratios in NATO operations in Afghanistan (3:1), western campaigns in Iraq and Kosovo (believed to be 4:1), and the conflicts in Chechnya and Serbia (much higher than 4:1, according to anecdotal evidence). Kemp argued that the low ratio was achieved through unprecedented measures by the IDF to minimize civilian casualties, which included providing warnings to the population via telephone calls, radio broadcasts and leaflets, as well as granting pilots the discretion to abort a strike if they perceived too great a risk of civilian casualties. He also stated that the civilian casualties that did occur could be seen in light of  Hamas... ' tactical use of Gazan civilians "as human shields, to hide behind, to stand between Israeli forces and their own fighters" and strategic use of them for exploitation of their deaths in the media. [39]...
 
swhitebull  - more to come 
 
Quote    Reply

HeavyD    "yeah, but..." is beyond weak   6/10/2012 2:36:17 AM
Ah, so you looked up the civilian casualty numbers and found them to be grossly disproportional, so you resorted to the "year but" argument:  "Yeah, but the other guys are worse...yeah but in other conflicts a greater proportion of casualties were civilian..."  Doesn't hold water
 
And for those of you keeping score at home, there were approx. 1000 civilian casualties in Lebanon II, compared to 44 Israeli civilians.  Oh, and the million-plus unexploded cluster bomb submunitions (of the 4.6 million cluster bomblets dropped on Lebanon in the final days of the conflict) have killed or injured 200+ civilians since the war ended.
 
 
Moving over to Cast Lead:
 
Ari Shavit, a leading columnist on the newspaper, 'Haaretz', was a fervent proponent of the "just war" at the outset. By Friday, he was writing: "Shelling a United Nations facility is something not to be done at any time, but doing it on the day when the UN Secretary-General is visiting Jerusalem is beyond lunacy. The level of pressure the Israel Defence Forces have been exerting on Gaza may be squeezing Hamas, but it is destroying Israel. Destroying its soul and its image. Destroying it on world television screens, destroying it in the living rooms of the international community... " 
 
 
 
Again Israel is free to do whatever it wants, but don't wonder why it's status is in the shitter internationally...
 
Quote    Reply

Heorot    Heavyd   6/10/2012 11:15:11 AM
It's pointless trying to debate with Whitebull. He's a paid apologist for Israel and can post a lot of articles in support of Israel's  policies. Unfortunately, he doesn't mention that they are written by Zionists.
 
Quote    Reply

swhitebull       6/10/2012 1:10:19 PM
Actually, that is YOUR interpretation, since it appears that no matter what evidence is presented in a clear and dispassionate manner, you have already come to your own predjudicial conclusions.  Just because you say its a "yes, but"argument" doesnt make it so. Says more about your prejudices and frame of mind than anything else. I made no "tu quoque" argument here, just presented evidence.  
 
Actually,  I was writing about casualties and NOT just  looking them up, years ago on these boards.  If you fervently find Israel is so easy to hate, please explain  - rather than complain, which you do so easily without hard core evidence but with opinion only - how Israel should respond to terror and other attacks. Maybe they should get out their comfy chairs, and play Sesame street songs over the loudspeakers?
   
I will quote no other an authority of international law on proportional response than President Barack Hussein Obama - whose extrajudicial use of unrestricted drone attacks on terrorists is surely raising as much a stink about civilian casualties in the world as Israel's attacks on civilians - quoting noted Chicago law enforcement expert Jim Malone:
 
"They bring a knife to a fight, we bring a gun."
 
I prefer to defer to our president's expertise and moral authority on this. Who am I to argue with the President of the United States when he so succinctly outlines the use of disproportional force to deal with his enemies?
 
Bottom line?  
 
Been there, seen that, heard your same arguments many times before on these boards. BORING:
 
 http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/36-21516.aspx#startofcomments" href="http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/36-21516.aspx#startofcomments">http://www.strategypage.com/mi...
 
http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/36-21341/page1.aspx#startofcomments" href="http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/36-21341/page1.aspx#startofcomments">http://www.strategypage.com/mi... 
 
swhitebull -  no more needs be said on this subject. You fight to win, NOT  to play nice with your enemies. Unless you think Israel has on right to ever defend itself under any conditions, but that's another subject.
 
Quote    Reply

HeavyD       6/10/2012 4:13:43 PM
We're discussing two different points here:  This is a thread under an article that points out Israel's 21% favorable rating in a recent BBC international poll, remember? 
 
So on this thread I've been consistent that I'm merely presenting the reason why Israel is in the shitter here, and several of you are instead trying to argue right or wrong.
 
Ever heard the phrase "Perception IS Reality"?  The simple fact, borne out in the opinion poll, is that Israel cannot take aggressive military action that results in mass civilian casualties and still claim to be the victim.  Yes I agree that MANY if not most Israelis, Jews and Fundamentalist Christians may have the perception that Israel is the victim and has no choice and is acting responsibly.  But the perception, and therefore the reality of the majority of the rest of the world is otherwise, is it not?
 
None of the arguments presented here - whether attacking me or the 'yeah but...', or anything else has even remotely addressed the core issue and topic of why Israel has a mere 21% approval rating in the global BBC poll. 
 
 I'm arguing WITH you that Israel is free to do what it wants.  But I'm connecting the dots of my argument back to the article, are you?
 
Finally, why does World Opinion of Israel matter?  Here's a newsflash:  If Israel wants support for military action against Iran, it would help the Israelis if they were seen in a more favorable light.
Peace OUt.
 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3



 Latest
 News 		  Most
 Read 		  Most
 Commented		  Hot
 Topics