Israel Testing Nasty Weapons in Gaza, claims Medic.

Mr Penny, we are discussing Israel and its actions not the history of the World as you know it. Fighting wars to win land does not make that action right and never will and does not give the conquerers the right to commit crimes against humanity.

Once again as seen here with some of the recent comments ignorance reigns supreme Israel has rights but the indigenous people do not, what a double standard. Its ok for Arabs to die but not Israelis. How about stating that we should not condone war or genocide no matter who is committing it. How about we say it is not right to take the land and property of others by force.

This thread is not about "all the worlds children" it is about what is happening in Gaza. But right now I will state - I think it is disgusting for all the atrocities committed in the world and in history to children is terrible!

Now that I have stated it is disgusting for any child to have been hurt - lets go to your other statement:

That alone shows where you stand, so you are now condemning the people of Gaza for the fact that a child was sickeningly burned and killed - which words can not even discribe it fully........and a photographer was there and took a picture.

Oh, so I assume, you think it would be better to just describe what happened, instead of God forbid, show the world what has happened to a child and all the people of Gaza?

Yeah, lets only allow a description of what is happening, lets ban any pictures and if pictures are taken, lets condemn the people who are showing them and allowing them to be taken!

reply to post by boaby_phet

---

Indians probably feel the same way about Americans stealing their land, but I don't see them launching rockets or blowing themselves up. About the only thing they launch is advertising ads for their casinos.

They want the world to see the genocide that Israel is inflicting upon them!

Sorry you dont like that photo,no one here does either-but most of us here and in the real world want Israel to stop this bloody war and let the media in!Why wont they allow the media in?
The only reason I can think of is there enjoying killing arabs,no matter the age of them

Jam, just because that has not happened does not mean it wont. The native Indians of America are still fighting for their land rights and compensation. And you may have forgotten that the Indians did fight for their land and their people so the example you have used actually supports the Palestinian view. That os a murderous invading force killing the indigenous population and stealing their land.

There you go....eventually I knew someone would let the bigotry out of the closet. They're Jewish, so they must be enjoying the Arab killin', huh?

Can you provide a link where the minimum distance you can utilize WP from civilians, or where it says in the Convention that it's totally illegal in a city? I think if you read a little more closely, you'll see that the actual stipulation is that WP is okay as long as it's not intentionally or directly targetted at civilians(in a City or not).

The US never denied using WP. The US did deny using WP on civilians, or using it in a manner that violated the Convention.

Can you provide a link showing where cluster bombs are illegal? The only stipulation is that the bomblets should have self-destruct/self-deactivation devices on them.

Is Israel a signatory to this Convention? If not, then this is a non-issue in the first place, as they're not bound by the convention. The US only signed off on 2 of the 5 stipulations, which was the minimum for signatory purposes.

And just like here in the United States....it's a done deal. For crying out loud, even the Native Americans realized at a point that continuing to fight and revolt simply resulted in more dead people.

When do people start to realize that the innocent Palestinians in Gaza are being used as puppets by other Arab states, and specifically Hamas in Damascus.....yeah, that's where the leadership of Hamas is right now.

I find it sickening the focus on this conflict....like somehow the participants give it a special 'gravitas'.....it's a big bunch of empty heads jumping on a bandwagon and writing what they think the audience wants to see....not what is real and concrete.

"Ooooohhh....I'll express how horrible the Israelis are and how sad it is for the Palestinians.....oooooh, yeah, that makes me feel better as a human....hmmmmmm, wonder what's on VH1 tonight?"

Don't give me your high and mighty fluffiness. Get in the middle of the fence with me where the picture is much less clear cut and certainly more confusing.

I'd just like to point out the "FACT" Dense Inert Metal Explosives (DIME) are designed to reduce collateral damage...
A HE bomb/shell will cause much more damage over a far greater distance.
There is also nothing illegal about using WP as a weapon. There are only guidlines on how to use it if you are part of the UN.

That statement right there is what is wrong about this focus......look how badly you mangled what I said....all in some sad attempt to boost your rhetoric.

Now I condemn you for suggesting that I've "condemned" the people of Gaza for a child's horrific death.....you're sick. You so completely warped what I said that now I see your real agenda.

reply to post by BlueRaja

---

Israel did not sign, so you are correct about it being a non-starter. As for the safe distances:


However, none of that makes it right. Using WP on a densely populated city is just indiscriminate and wrong.

LOL whatever!I aint going down that road but thanks for writing that complete tosh!to me it certainly looks like they enjoy killing arabs,and theres nothing racist in saying that?
If they start killing lots of us brits I would say they must enjoy killing brits!
there is nothing racist in my post so please dont think there is.thank you

You're right....nothing racist....bigoted. I said "bigot".

The non-bigoted, non-biased terminology, accepted by most reasoning people, is "killing people"....regardless of ethnicity or culture.

Let's play "Fill in the Blank...!!" again....

mortars
rockets
suicide bombers
vehicle bombs

Would you agree it works both ways?

reply to post by jam321

---

how flawed is that argument ? .. your comparing things thats happened for 100's of years, with 2 completly sides, on the other side of the planet, with completly different sets of beliefs... Oh and thats ignoreing the fact that they dont have rockets to fire! .... im fairlyu sure they tried to fight back though,... where did all these cowboy vs indian storys come from ? thin air.

thats like comparing it to the the farmers Vs bunnys from watership down ..!

ive yet to hear a good excuse that does not involve the palestinian people defending themselfs from a tyranous country. that doesnt bring up them trying to free their own country...

let me ask any american this, as you all have the laws in place and many people with the beliefs of taking arms ect..

if canada took over america, and claimed it, and had much bigger armys, super hi tech weapons, and all you had was your millita groups and a few rockets... what would you do do claim your country back ?

[edit on 13-1-2009 by boaby_phet]

Nuttin' honey....the beer is better and so's the hockey. They also have prettier money.

reply to post by boaby_phet

---

Seeing that I have learned from Hamas stupidity, I would not go on a suicide mission. I would buy my time, live under their law, until I was sure that I could accomplish the goal of getting America back.

No, we'll ignore suicide and vehicle bombs for a minute because those are not weapons used by a well-equipped military force.

Mortars - use many different types of munition, relatively localised
Rockets - are a 'precision' weapon, localised damage

WP - widespread, indiscriminate weapon that is heavily affected by weather. Choking fumes and capable of burning flesh to the bone... when you have such a large choice of arms and wish to take out targets in a civilian area do you:

a)Chose something that minimises collateral damage
b)Chose something that will annihilate the whole area

Applying your logic then there is no difference between a sidearm and a nuclear warhead when it comes to combat. Your argument is invalid and misleading.


[edit on 13-1-2009 by Goathief]