Israel 'admits' using white phosphorus munitions

Originally posted by dooper
reply to post by budski

 

I'm sorry, and I'm not being a smartass, but I don't think NI is or was the same thing. It was bad enough to be sure, but nothing on the scale of hatred we see all Arabs of all nationalities hold against the Israelis.

You're quite wrong there - you see, this is something I have personal experience of, and the level of hatred was truly sickening, and yet through perseverance, diplomacy and restraint the UK managed to find a lasting peace, along with the other sides in the conflict.

It took an awfull lot of talking and give and take, but it was done.

This is what separates the modern world from the ancient - we are no longer bloodthirsty barbarians, and given the chance peace CAN prevail if people of good conscience persist in pursuing it.

reply to post by budski


Well, I don't know where you get that, but we aren't civilized. We are just as crude and barbaric as any group in history. When it comes to the killing, I'd really like someone to show me an improvement.

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.

No. We aren't any more civilized. It's just a veneer. And if you doubt it in any degree, you let the luster of that veneer dull, and you'll see that we are just as barbaric as Ghengis, Attilla, or any other personal favorites.

Hell, we now have actually added a religious justification for killing Jews and Christians, and Buddists, on and on.

Nothing like that religious justification to slaughter like a SOB.

Just wait. Coming to your homeland in a few years. And you'll see all the Irish banded together to fight their common enemy.

A blind man could see it.

reply to post by dooper

Well, I don't know where you get that, but we aren't civilized. We are just as crude and barbaric as any group in history.

You may be - but don't include me or hundreds of millions of others in your fantasy bloodlust.

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.

No, they just put sacks over their heads, and then beat them to death, like they did with a captured DET officer.
Then there were the bullets through the back of the knees, elbows and hands - much better to leave someone crippled for life eh?
Not to mention the routine torture of "touts" and the killings of political enemies.

Just wait. Coming to your homeland in a few years. And you'll see all the Irish banded together to fight their common enemy.

It will happen in your homeland before it happens in mine.

Violence is sometimes necessary, but the violence by Israel borders on genocidal tactics.

A few fireworks does not give them the right to kill and maim thousands, destroy homes, starve them, cut off power and drive them from their homes.

I suspect that if you were in the same situation, you would call yourself a freedom fighter, and yet the people in gaza (by virtue of your extreme right wing politics) are terrorists.

reply to post by budski


No fantasy bloodlust. Man hasn't changed.

Oh, he dresses a bit nicer, he lives a bit better in places, he's polite in polite company as a rule, but he's still the same old, barbaric animal at heart.

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.

Personally, I just as soon 99% of the population be gentlemen and hold pacifist values.

When the thing goes tits up, it makes it easier for folks like me to get through.

It's no fantasy. Right now we're living in the fantasy.

And all dreams end eventually.

reply to post by dooper


Oh please, that's claptrap.

You seek to tar us all with your brush.

People want peace - in Israel, in Gaza and throughout the whole world, apart from a tiny minority of extremists.

What holds peace back is gung-ho macho types more interested in their testosterone levels and how big a "gun" they have - it's called compensating and indicates deep seated insecurity, and in some cases delusions, paranoia and psychosis.

i was in lebanon in july 2006 they used them over beirut

"Israel 'admits' using white phosphorus munitions"

I'm starting to believe those inside Israel who say "we believe Hassan Nasrallah more that we do believe our politicians"..

What Hassan Nasrallah has been saying: "Israel is on the verge of collapse"..

It's truly happening!

What Israel is going through now is unprecedented!

I'm really looking forward for the results of the UN investigators

reply to post by budski

No claptrap. Fear. It still has the same effect.

Ever see a bit of anarchy in recent times? Pitiful.

Look into the genocide that has been occurring in Africa. Examine it closely, and tell me that we've made advances.

Consider just sixty odd years ago.

You my friend are a dreamer, or you're so isolated from reality that you've conjured up a different world.

Look around.

reply to post by dooper


"What? You think we should give Arkansas back to France?"

That comparison is absolutely ridiculous. Arkansas was BOUGHT from France at the price of 3 cents per acre. The total purchase of the Louisiana Purchase cost a sum twice the amount of Jefferson's budget. It was the largest land deal in history. Israel was GIVEN to the Israelis and they weren't satisfied. They have taken more and more ever since.

Lets try to keep it in the context of the discussion.
For now, I'm going to dig for some maps from 1950 onwards showing Israeli occupation.
Remember, the Israelis are fighting and TAKING, not purchasing.


[edit on 21-1-2009 by Jay-in-AR]

reply to post by budski


I agree with what you say except when you say that the only folks that don't want peace are the "fanatics"...
In reality, the only thing that holds back peace are te MONEY driven elitists who sow the seed of chaos across the globe.
But I digress. I have given up trying to debate anything here. "Dooper" has already given himself the title of psychopath.
No point in arguing it. I could be right as rain, but it doesn't matter. This person desires conflict.
Enough said.
I guess it is on to the next fool that will argue for Israel. Thing is, the list of folks willing to is becoming shorter by the day, as the world is starting to see this rogue element for what it is and what it stands for.
I can only hope that the Israeli leaders find themselves in a front row seat in hell right next to George Bush and Dick Cheney.

reply to post by Jay-in-AR

When you're busy looking at maps, be sure and look at the net gains after Israel was attacked in 1948, 1956, 1967, and again in 1973.

Each time they were attacked, they gained land. And by the way, a lot of Israelis were property owners, and a lot of Israelis bought their land.

reply to post by dooper


"You my friend are a dreamer, or you're so isolated from reality that you've conjured up a different world."

You may say, I'm a dreamer.
But I'm not the only one.
I hope someday you'll join us.
Then the world can live as one.

- John Lennon

reply to post by dooper


Oh, okay. Well, I had given up on looking as I'm obviously dealing with some sort of sociopath, but since you acknowledge it. I'll take the point.

Conflict - Israel takes land.

More Conflict - Israel takes MORE land.

And thus it has been since approx. 1950.


Thanks for the concession.

PS - Furthermore, I'm quite sure that in a few years time, the History books will be written in such a way to reflect that Israel was attacked THIS TIME ALSO. However, it isn't the case. They started the hostilities by breaking the cease-fire and then they played the martyr role. History repeats.

And watch, they'll take more land this time, too.


[edit on 21-1-2009 by Jay-in-AR]

reply to post by Jay-in-AR


Marginalizes them? Special Forces are Irregular and they are far from marginal. I call Hamas irregular because they are irregular. They are not conventional forces.

It relgates them to being irregular military forces using asymetric warfare. Your reading far too much into my posts.

There isn't a 3rd option involving Israel's destruction. It just doesn't exist. It is a pipedream. In the worst realistic and I emphasize realistic scenario where a UN/NATO coalition turns Gaza into Kosovo part 2, Israel will still be around. Serbia didn't go anywhere after the messes in Bosnia and Kosovo.

Why are you so confrontational? I am not excusing Israel. I am not excusing the US. I am not excusing Hamas. I am presenting an objective view. I am not giving you a lesson on protocol. You asked about phosphorous use and I answered. The fact that you asked when you should already know the answer to the question shows a confrontational agenda. I am simply saying peace is the only way out of this.

I hope you will find the BBC as a credible news source.


US general defends phosphorus use
news.bbc.co.uk...

[edit on 21/1/09 by MikeboydUS]

reply to post by MikeboydUS


Maybe I am misunderstanding your posts. But I don't think so.

My evidence for this - "There isn't a 3rd option involving Israel's destruction. It just doesn't exist. It is a pipedream. "

I never said a single word about Israel ceasing to exist.
You are putting words in my mouth.

"Why are you so confrontational?" I just explained why. I like to tackle
intellectual dishonesty head on.

And in the question of the phosphorous use, as I said previously. Israel has NO NEED TO USE IT. They are obviously superior in military strength.
No need to break the law and terrorize innocents to prove they are powerful.
No, they are using terror tactics.
Sorry, I'm not as apathetic as some. I don't like criminals.

Not only all of that jazz, but I don't give two damns about what the US says on the issue of moral authority. I would rather stick with the expressively forbidden tactics of using phosphorous in populated areas.

By the way, any luck on the phosphorous use in Fallujah?

PS - Mike, I really enjoy your posts. Normally I tend to agree with you on nearly every situation. However, you have been asked to back up two specific claims that you have made. You haven't done either.
1) Support for the idea that ANY groop of Arabs has gone in violation of UN sanctions more often than Israel. (I would add to this that this is a bullsnap argument, as the last time I checked (and it has been several years) Israel was second behind only the good ole' US of A in UN sanction violation.)

2) You claimed that the US military used phosphorous in Fallujah, Iraq.
I don't believe it. Show me wrong.


[edit on 21-1-2009 by Jay-in-AR]

[edit on 21-1-2009 by Jay-in-AR]

reply to post by Jay-in-AR


Were even then, I put words in your mouth and vice versa.

What is your 3rd option then, if not the destruction of Israel?

When have I been intellectually dishonest?

Again, I am not defending or excusing the use of WP.

If you don't like criminals, I challenge you to not like Hamas.

If by luck you mean effective, No.

reply to post by MikeboydUS


Alright, alright.
I don't want to fight about it (hypothetical fight)...
My charge of intellectual dishonesty stems from the fact that you put words in my mouth.
I don't remember putting words in your mouth though. If you can find me doing so in this thread, I'll apolgoize for that also.

Still yet, aside from the Who-Did-It-And-What-For game, I have actually asked three specific questions in this thread. Two of them to you, and one to the sociopath.
So, I would like to see any one of them answered. If any can be answered satisfactorially.
The third question that I haven't repeated yet is: "How can anyone sit with a straight face and tell people on the one hand, they are sure that the "insurgents" are hiding amongst civilians... Then they use Phosphorous to try and get average citizens to turn them in. Here in America, the action on this simple fact alone constitutes entrapment.
Not to mention that several hundreds of men women and children have been killed in this short power-grabbing-excursion.

So, once again, they tell people that they, AT THE SAME TIME, both know and DON'T KNOW who these "terrorists" are.
I guess Rumsfeld said it best when he said there are "known unknowns."
Or when he said "That statement is totally false because it has the luxury of being true.

Oh, and the third option would be that Iran, or someone else, ANYONE ELSE, jumps in on Israe and drives them back without killing them.

I'm sure I could probably find many more other options than the black and white you paint.

reply to post by Jay-in-AR


www.nctimes.com...

Bogert is a mortar team leader who directed his men to fire round after round of high explosives and white phosphorus charges into the city Friday and Saturday, never knowing what the targets were or what damage the resulting explosions caused....

....."Gun up!" Millikin yelled when they finished a few seconds later, grabbing a white phosphorus round from a nearby ammo can and holding it over the tube.

"Fire!" Bogert yelled, as Millikin dropped it.

The boom kicked dust around the pit as they ran through the drill again and again, sending a mixture of burning white phosphorus and high explosives they call "shake 'n' bake" into a cluster of buildings where insurgents have been spotted all week.

White phosphorus use in Iraq
en.wikipedia.org...

White Phosphorus (WP)
www.globalsecurity.org...

The Battle of Fallujah was conducted from 8 to 20 November 2004 with the last fire mission on 17 November. The battle was fought by an Army, Marine and Iraqi force of about 15,000 under the I Marine Expeditionary Force (IMEF). US forces found WP to be useful in the Battle of Fallujah. "WP proved to be an effective and versatile munition. We used it for screening missions at two breeches and, later in the fight, as a potent psychological weapon against the insurgents in trench lines and spider holes when we could not get effects on them with HE. We fired “shake and bake” missions at the insurgents, using WP to flush them out and HE to take them out. ... We used improved WP for screening missions when HC smoke would have been more effective and saved our WP for lethal missions."

TF 2-2 IN FSE AAR:
Indirect Fires in the Battle of Fallujah
By Captain James T. Cobb,
First Lieutenant Christopher A. LaCour
and Sergeant First Class William H. Hight

9. Munitions. The munitions we
brought to this fight were 155-mm highexplosive
(HE) M107 (short-range) and
M795 (long-range) rounds, illumination
and white phosphorous (WP, M110
and M825), with point-detonating (PD),
delay, time and variable-time (VT)
fuzes. For the 120-mm mortars, we had
HE, illumination and WP with PD, delay
and proximity fuzes. We also carried
81-mm HE with the same fuzes.


b. White Phosphorous. WP proved to
be an effective and versatile munition.
We used it for screening missions at
two breeches and, later in the fight, as a
potent psychological weapon against
the insurgents in trench lines and spider
holes when we could not get effects on
them with HE. We fired “shake and
bake” missions at the insurgents, using
WP to flush them out and HE to take
them out.

sill-www.army.mil...

I cannot get any clearer than that.

I make it a point to not make stuff up on ATS. Thats not me. It has never been my modus operandi on ATS to disinform or deflect. I don't spread propaganda. I just try to point out what other people seem to be missing.

I'll just refer to a couple of the sections :

Originally posted by budski
reply to post by dooper

 

...


4. Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited. Indiscriminate attacks are:

(a) Those which are not directed at a specific military objective;

(b) Those which employ a method or means of combat which cannot be directed at a specific military objective; or

(c) Those which employ a method or means of combat the effects of which cannot be limited as required by this Protocol; and consequently, in each such case, are of a nature to strike military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction.

5. Among others, the following types of attacks are to be considered as indiscriminate:

(a) An attack by bombardment by any methods or means which treats as a single military objective a number of clearly separated and distinct military objectives located in a city, town, village or other area containing a similar concentration of civilians or civilian objects; and

(b) An attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.

.......
2. Attacks shall be limited strictly to military objectives. In so far as objects are concerned, military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military of advantage.

That would only apply if you are using WP as a weapon. Nowhere in your post does it outright ban the use of WP in areas where there are civilians and combatants. Please show me the where it outright bans WP. If you use WP in an area as illumination or a smokescreen, it is a valid use, even if there are civilians in the area. If you are using WP to just burn a whole area where there are civis and military targets, then it would be being used as a weapon and would be a banned way of using it. Technically, you could use it to just burn up a nest of fighters though. Sorta like a flamethrower in that respect. Almost every modern army in the world has WP in their bag of tricks, why is that if it is banned?


As Dooper pointed out you sure have your underwear in a bunch over this but seem to ignore Hamas indiscriminate rocket attacks on totally civilian areas.....I'm pretty sure that IS a no no in the section you quoted.

Is it not?