It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Israel 'admits' using white phosphorus munitions

page: 13
21
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by breakingdradles
 

I don't read the Jerusalem Post, nor am I Jewish, nor am I Israeli, nor do I currently have any friends or relatives that are either Jewish or Israeli.

Blonde hair, blue eyes, ancestors came from Scotland, then went to Ireland, then the US, where I also am part Native American. No Jewish/Israeli connections at all. Fortunately, no pansy blood either.

Just for the record, I never had any problem defending my position. In combat or out.

You too, embrace the erroneous concept of "like kind."

"Tell you what. You go ahead, start the fight, kill all mine you want to, and when you're done, it will be our turn, so we'll count heads to see how many you killed, and we'll kill the same number of yours."

This is what you folks imply when you suggest the fight is somehow lopsided, or you don't like the weapons being used are really saying.

You want "fairness."

That is one braindead concept, never, ever used in the history of mankind.

This too, takes its roots from civic virtues. "To take a life will not bring one back." What crap!

War and conflict is not a tit for tat endeavor.

War and conflict is not a punishment. It's the destruction of one's enemies.

When two sides decide to fight, it will end the day one side is unable to kill further, or unwilling to die further.

Bottom line.

Interference between sides, until such an instance happens, is to prolong the killing, continue the suffering, as it will continue without a final resolution.

You don't have to like it. That's just the way it is.

Come on, NoHead, think for a change.

And look into the events in the months leading up to the 1967 Six Day War. Israel was to be wiped out.

Once you get your basic facts, the rest falls into place rather nicely.


[edit on 23-1-2009 by dooper]




posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by breakingdradles
Not WP??

israel admits it #%$!*!!!!!


[edit on 23-1-2009 by breakingdradles]


Where? I didn't see an admission anywhere. The thread title is quite misleading.

BTW, why don't you enlighten us with your extensive knowledge of artillery munitions and explain to us why you think you know more about them than the guy that says he's seen it before.

Be careful how you answer. Something tells me there are some real artillery folks in here.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by budski
reply to post by BlueRaja
 


OK, so we have the UN, various humanitarian agencies and news reporters the world over saying this WP is being used on civilians - all of whihch has been posted in this thread.

Show some evidence to prove it ISN'T.

In other words, put up or shut up.





The distinction I'm making is- is WP being fired indiscriminately into civilians intentionally, which is a violation, or......is WP being fired at Hamas targets where civilians are in near proximity? I agree it's unfortunate that non-combatants have been injured/killed. On the other hand you have yet to provide a source proving that the Israelis are intentionally firing WP directly at non-combatants, since you're asking me for proof.

Aside from whatever political differences we have, the main issue where we differ, as I see it is this(and correct me if I mischaracterize your view).

You- attacking targets in cities where civilians are nearby is inherantly indiscriminate, due to the likelihood of collateral damage. Is this an accurate representation of your views?


Me- Article 51 clearly states that the presence of civilians nearby, doesn't make a military target off limits. If a combatant force intentionally sets itself up in a location near civilians, in the hopes that their presence will offer them protection, this is a clear violation, and the civilian casualties are their sole responsibility. Additionally- any protected site that is used improperly loses its protected status, and is also a clear violation.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by dragonridr
reply to post by breakingdradles
 




In combat people get hurt mistakes are made and people die. If Israel wanted to kill every last Palestinian it wouldn't take more than 12 hours. They have the ability luckily that is obviously not there intention.
Now i don't believe they should have gone in to Gaza that was tactically stupid. They are under the impression if they make the people in Gaza miserable and inflict enough damage to hamas that what they don't finish the people will. This strategy is misguided to say the least.
I will tell you the Israelis are attacking Hamas infrastructure arms manufacturing ,storage, communications and supplies. Any army in the world would approach it the same way. Now in an urban setting you blow up a fuel depot it tends to cause explosions in surrounding areas and innocent people will die. Id say in urban combat better then 50 percent of deaths is caused by secondary explosions.
This conflict wont end until Hamas is destroyed or they stop attacking Israel. I don't believe either of these 2 scenarios is plausible so I see a peace for maybe a year and this all starts over again history has proved it again and again



I agree with your outlook on the conflict. Entering Gaza has done nothing but employee a new generation of freedom fighters who lost family in Cast Lead.

However, I still do not believe that just because enemy infrastructure is located next to civilians, that their deaths are ok.

There are other ways of taking out infrastructure then dropping bombs next to appartment buildings knowing there will be civilian casualties and thinking its ok.

If israel is going to show the world they are different then the terrorists, they have to start acting like it first.

Thank you for being civil with your response.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by fnIrish

Originally posted by breakingdradles
Not WP??

israel admits it #%$!*!!!!!


[edit on 23-1-2009 by breakingdradles]


Where? I didn't see an admission anywhere. The thread title is quite misleading.

BTW, why don't you enlighten us with your extensive knowledge of artillery munitions and explain to us why you think you know more about them than the guy that says he's seen it before.

Be careful how you answer. Something tells me there are some real artillery folks in here.


Please reread the OP, they admit to using it, but in a legal mannor.

Two lines.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:11 PM
link   
Here are some of his sillier statements:



I don't care if my enemy hides behind the Pope. I'll blow a hole right through the Pope to kill my enemy if that is the only way.





Don't get hung up too much on the technicalities. When you have an indentified enemy, you are able to kill the hell out of them, and if some unfortuanate is standing nearby, it just too bad.




There is no proportionality in conflict! There is no proportionality at any point in history in conflict!

Saying it's OK to kill civilians.



You use the weapons at hand to inflict the maximum destruction on you enemies, killing them in the greatest number, as efficiently as you can, in the greatest concentrations, as quickly as you can.

Complete disregard for fellow human beings - maybe it's that brown skin.



And don't come with the Northern Ireland BS. That's no comparison at all.

In Ireland, like kind fighting like kind.

Not the same animal in Gaza.

Complete and utter rubbish, as has been proved by myself and another poster who is actually FROM NI.



immediately after declaring independence, Israel was hit

Completely ignoring the Balfour declaration, and the UN partition of Palestine into 2 states.



You better believe that Korea and Vietnam showed our commanders were dumbasses. And we still have the same, dull, BS mentality at the head of our military here in the US.

Our noble warrior edits his posts after being caught out - strange eh?
He think his commanders are dumbasses - presumably because they make people like him follow the rules.
Yes, he'd win the "hearts and minds" all right.



And no, you may have had some experience with the Northern Ireland bit, but I fail to recall either side taking outsiders "captive" and cutting off their heads, while still alive.

There are 2 responses to this - both of which show he has absolutely no idea what went on in NI.



You are one day, 24 hours away at any time, from becoming that which you seem to detest. And that you will become when required of you, or you won't survive.

And that's how nature culls the species.

That's how he justifies bloodlust and violence, and his attitude to "the enemy"



And this "gas" effect is crap. You're talking about open areas in Gaza, and there is this thing called an atmosphere. It's big, and concentrations of any gas in the great outdoors are quickly dispersed.

Concentrations of ANY gas?
So all those soldiers in WW1 choked on fish bones then?
And tear gas can't affect rioters?
More rubbish.



Even in combat, we had two types. Those that did, and those who were always a bit late "being there" or those who found a reason to be "covering" another sector.

And yet he revers bush - who's daddy got him into the ANG by jumping the queue, where he subsequently never showed up.
Yep his hero is some hero all right - despite being what he professes to despise.



WP has a very short life in the presence of oxygen. It's not a persistent agent by any stretch of the imagination.

It's not persistent, it just burns down to the bone - which is persistent enough if you are on the recieving end.



WP does not act as a gas agent

Despite mountains of evidence to the contrary - just because it doesn't kill, he seems to think this means it is not a gas agent.



There really never were too many of us.

And you had to be very bright, just to get in.

Referring to his (ahem) special forces experience - it seems so far that judging from his posts this is not true.



I think it's clear you have an agenda to ignore what even the Geneva Accords allow.

I think it's clear that he enjoys seeing people killed and that he will use any excuse to justify the slaughter of civilians.
This despite UN and humanitarian organisations condemning Israel for their use of WP, and many governments as well.



Indiscriminate targeting? If the Israelis wanted to engage in indiscriminate killing, which would intentionally include civilians, there would be 100,000 dead. At least. That alone is proof enough that civilians weren't intended targets, nor indiscriminate targets.

What else would he call it?
We know already that he would "shoot through the pope to get his enemy"
What are a few hundred women and children to him?
Perhaps with his extensive military knowledge he can tell us why WP was used even before troops started to move in.



If I have a building full of turds, and I have an artillery piece or aircraft overhead, I'm going to do the identical same thing you would do.

Blow it.

The whole thing.

I am gobsmacked by this - really.
Of course he would think that we'd all do exactly the same as him - but some of us have a soul and some humanity.



There is no concept of parity in war. If you can kill 1,000, or even 10,000 for every loss of yours, then this is definitive proof of your efficiency and success.

And this is exactly what Israel has been doing - I can see why he likes them so much.



The thing is, you don't start a shooting war, and then whine about your casualties.

Unless you're a girly-man Hamas-hide-my-face and shake-my-weapon-while-hiding-behind-women-and-children.

Cry, cry.

Pullllease!

And yet his own namesake, does exactly that.
He conveniently ignored it when I pointed out that his compatriots have done nothing BUT whine about vietnam for the last 40 years or so.
You got beat, get over it, and stop whining
Pullllease!



Besides, Hamas dresses in civilian clothes, so how is one to really tell the difference?

In other words, kill everyone, and then we'll sort out the innocents later.
Bit late by then though.



ex, how, I ask you can minor tendrils of burning WP somehow, "GAS" someone on the ground?

You tell me how this works.

Because what you propose violated all known experience, and in fact, would violate all known physics pertaining to gases.

And yet we've seen the pictures, that there is, in fact quite a lot of gas on the ground - how does he explain this with all his laws of physics?
He doesn't - he just ignores it.



Do not try that stealing land crap back in 1967.

You know not what you're talking about.

Do some homework, son. It helps you keep from making completely false statements.

Stealing land since 1948 I think you'll find - and of course, not even a bit patronizing.



The bursts so high above the ground almost are subject to opinion as to whether this really constitutes "use." Hell, it's almost all burned up it's so high up.

And yet posted images show something completely different - guess he must have missed them.
Again.



Yours is an ongoing misconception. Folks wanting to apply civic virtues and behaviors to the arena of conflict and war.

Civic virtues are polar opposites of military virtues.

Police are not soldier. Soldiers are not police.

The civic hostage situation is generally one isolated incident at a time. Micro in nature.

A military conflict is generally widespread, and more macro.

The military has no need to read a combatant their rights.

The police are to use minimum force to facilitate an arrest, for trial.

The military are to use maximum force to inflict as much damage, death, and destruction as possible

And again, to justify the fact that Israel targetted civilians.
It really is astonishing - and not a little worrying.
Thank god the armed forces don't REALLY think like this.

People with sociopathic tendencies and Walter Mitty types get weeded out at a very early stage - of course he really should know that.

edit to add:
Israeli use of WP against civilain area and medical personnel, against the GC
Thanks to harlequin for the image.

Israel bombs UN compound in Gaza




[edit on 23/1/2009 by budski]



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueRaja
 


Please re-read the post you quoted and answer the questions - you'll find that the evidence I speak of has been posted already.

Now YOU provide evidence that civilians WEREN'T deliberately targetted, instead of hiding behind pedantic statements.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:16 PM
link   
Originally posted by breakingdradles


Well in 1967 israel stole thier land, when the land they were GIVEN by Arabs in 1948 was no longer enough. That was wrong, Hamas fights and asks for the boarders to be returned to 1967, when israel says no, they get rocketed. But since israel did it first, is Hamas allowed to commit a wrong doing as well?



[edit on 23-1-2009 by breakingdradles]

So after Israel was attacked in '67 and they won, they were then supposed to just hand back the territory where they were attacked from? Throughout the history of warfare, I'd love to see some examples where the loser got to make any demands, especially when they were the aggressor to start with.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by budski
reply to post by BlueRaja
 


Please re-read the post you quoted and answer the questions - you'll find that the evidence I speak of has been posted already.

Now YOU provide evidence that civilians WEREN'T deliberately targetted, instead of hiding behind pedantic statements.



So your solution is that I have to disprove a negative? Typical response when your argument can't be defended with concrete evidence.

Are the UN(and other agencies) saying that civilians have been directly targetted, or are they saying that civilians have been hit with weapons that were targetted at others? That's what I want to know. There's an important difference.

[edit on 23-1-2009 by BlueRaja]



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:25 PM
link   



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by breakingdradles
Please reread the OP, they admit to using it, but in a legal mannor.

Two lines.


Reread complete. You are correct - I read it wrong.

Thanks for the correction.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by budski
 

Civilians do get killed in warfare. Too bad. Nature of the beast.

Your comment "complete disregard for human beings - must be that brown skin" is something only a pompous,**SNIP**would say.

This is NOT the same as **SNIP** Get over it. You and one other poster is not proof of anything. All supposition.

No, it's nothing like you suggest. Our generals were and are politicians in uniform. Stars shouldn't be determined by your success at conflict avoidance, pristine performance reports, schools attended, time in grade, success working the Washington cocktail circuit, or your ability to pucker up and smootch the right political puckers.

We did on occasion, discourage a visit now and then from generals and Colonels when they may interfere with our work. Since they hated gunfire (odd for a military man), if we were busy and didn't want to be bothered, we'd just have a few men with tracers "welcome" the approach of the helicopter, which would peel off and abandon the visit. It was always good for a few laughs, and saved a lot of time.

I don't revere Bush. If his dad was able to get him into the Guard, then more power to him. I found that those who didn't want to be in combat were worthless anyway.

WP doesn't burn to the bone unless you're pumping oxygen into the wound. Just immerse under water, seal the wound from air, cover with a sopping wet rag, or dig it out. I've gotten bitten a couple times, and the best part? It's self-cauterizing!

Again, you're flat-out wrong! WP is not a gas agentl HE is not a gas agent. Napalm is not a gas agent. CS is a gas agent.

You're certainly bold all of a sudden. You have a building where Hamas ran into, and you're going to go in and eliminate them one by one? Is that what you're saying?

I never whined about Vietnam. What's with the bug up your butt over Vietnam?

Look, you've picked your side, and clearly, history, physics, nor reality has no bearing on your posture.

Willful ignorance.

And **SNIP** , if I were a sociopath or Walter Mitty as you suggest, then as you likewise suggest that they would get weeded out at a very early stage, then apparently your logic if fractured.

I'm still here. Volunteered three times for combat, and extended my tours twice.

**SNIP**

[edit on 23-1-2009 by dooper]

attack the post, not the poster.

Mod Edit: Profanity/Circumvention Of Censors – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: General ATS Discussion Etiquette – Please Review This Link.


Mod Note: Warnings – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 23-1-2009 by Crakeur]



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Originally posted by budski



Israel Uses WP in civilian area and aginst medical personnel
Thanks harlequin


So when US medical personnel enter an area that's under fire to evacuate casualties, we can expect the hostile fire to stop? That picture doesn't tell us what happened prior to the attack, nor does it prove that Israel was "targetting" medics. It merely shows medics trying to evacuate casualties at a site under attack. It also doesn't tell us who the others are in the picture(are they Hamas, or some hapless bystanders?)



Israel bombs UN compound


Israel apologized for accidently hitting the compound. There's zero evidence that the UN compound was intentionally hit.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by dooper
 




This is NOT the same as NI. Get over it. You and one other poster is not proof of anything. All supposition.

yes it is - if you had any understanding of what happened you would now this.



We did on occasion, discourage a visit now and then from generals and Colonels when they may interfere with our work.

Of course you did - what you have just shown is that you are in no way connected to the military, which works on discipline rather than psycopathic tendencies.



I don't revere Bush. If his dad was able to get him into the Guard, then more power to him. I found that those who didn't want to be in combat were worthless anyway.

And yet your posts in other threads give the lie to this - what, you didn't know that anyone can look at your profile and see every post, in every thread you have made?



WP doesn't burn to the bone unless you're pumping oxygen into the wound. Just immerse under water, seal the wound from air, cover with a sopping wet rag, or dig it out.

Actually, the way to do it is to pour water over it very slowly, and then use the point of a knife to flick it away from the wound it causes.
Again, a lack of knowledge.
And if you leave it, it keeps burning until exhausted - and gets down to the bone quite easily. You see air contains oxygen so you don't have to "pump oxygen into the wound"
And just how would a civilian in Gaza be expected to know this?



Again, you're flat-out wrong! WP is not a gas agentl HE is not a gas agent. Napalm is not a gas agent. CS is a gas agent.

WP gives off gas, and whilst it's primary role is not as a gas agent, it can still act as one in confined spaces, or when there is little air movement.



I never whined about Vietnam. What's with the bug up your butt over Vietnam?

You're the one wo brought up vietnam.
You're also the one who spoke about hamas whining when they started a war they couldn't win, and said anyone else who starts a war they can't win should shut up and get on with it.
Your compatriots have been whining about vietnam for so long it's become tedious - therefore you think your compatriots are whiners.



Look, you've picked your side, and clearly, history, physics, nor reality has no bearing on your posture.

Oh but it does - bloodlust has not blinded me - and nor do I find fun or joy in the slaughter of my fellow human beings.



if I were a sociopath or Walter Mitty as you suggest, then as you likewise suggest that they would get weeded out at a very early stage, then apparently your logic if fractured.

And this is why I don't believe any of your special forces bullplop.
REAL SF do not glory in the wanton destruction and slaughter of innocents as you do.



[edit on 23/1/2009 by budski]



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 02:21 PM
link   
double post


[edit on 23-1-2009 by breakingdradles]



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlueRaja

So after Israel was attacked in '67 and they won, they were then supposed to just hand back the territory where they were attacked from? Throughout the history of warfare, I'd love to see some examples where the loser got to make any demands, especially when they were the aggressor to start with.


No, they had no right to the land in the first place.

Why can a group of people push THEIR belief, that THEIR god gave them the disputed land THOUSANDS of years before.

I didn't realize fairy tales hold up in court.


I have a book that says Australia was given to the Mexicans because of the atrocities caused durring the Spanish conquest.

Lets start setting up Mexican only settlements thoughout Austrailia, then pull a false flag operation, over and over gaining more and more territory.

You all must realize, that you have to belive in the Christian or Jewish god to think israel has a right to ANYTHING.

This belief is dwindling and will soon leave israel in s*it creek w/o a paddle.

[edit on 23-1-2009 by breakingdradles]



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by breakingdradles
 


How does religious beliefs have anything to do with Israel defending itself in '67, and ending up with additional territories when the Arab forces lost?



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlueRaja
reply to post by breakingdradles
 


How does religious beliefs have anything to do with Israel defending itself in '67, and ending up with additional territories when the Arab forces lost?


Read the first sentence of my post again.

Respond to what I asked, not what you want to answer.

[edit on 23-1-2009 by breakingdradles]



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueRaja
 


religion, or more specifically, the jewish religion was the whole basis for the original zionist movement and the creation of the state of Israel.

frankly, I'm surprised you don't know this.

Read the Balfour Declaratiion, and the role of the Rothschild's in how it came about.

Quote from A. Burg - Ex World Zionist Leader:
"All is compared to the Shoah, dwarfed by the Shoah and therefore all is allowed – be it fences , sieges ... curfews, food and water deprivation or unexplained killings. All is permitted because we have been through the Shoah and you will not tell us how to behave."

Shoah = Holocaust, this is the zionists or extremists excuse for evrything that Israel does.



[edit on 23/1/2009 by budski]



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by breakingdradles

Originally posted by BlueRaja
reply to post by breakingdradles
 


How does religious beliefs have anything to do with Israel defending itself in '67, and ending up with additional territories when the Arab forces lost?


Read the first sentence.

Respond to what I asked, not what you want to answer.


That's an entirely different discussion. The discussion was the '67 war, not whether Israel has any right to exist in the first place.



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join