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 'wantonly destroyed Gaza'

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Accusing Israel of "breaching laws of war"


Well heck, it's about freaking time. I wish more people would find the courage to do so.




posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 09:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by walsbg22
reply to post by Lazyninja
 


"What is the status of WP under international law?

WP used as weapons are considered incendiaries. Incendiary weapons are not prohibited under the laws of war. However, the use of WP against military targets is regulated under Protocol III of the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW). ...Israel is not party to this treaty..."

www.hrw.org... Not illegal to Israel. And your analogy does not apply to military operations.


If it's not illegal in Israel, why would they need to investigate it's improper use? They have been charged with using the weapon illegally, and forced sham investigations into it. Also, a country can't avoid international law merely by refusing to sign up to it, that's hilarious. Complying to international law is one of the conditions of being a member state of the UN.

When WP is used as a smokescreen, that is when it is legal, and only then. Unfortunately, the US in Iraq, and Israel have used WP countless times illegally, using them to carpet bomb areas and kill people. Of course every time they do that, they claim they were using them properly.

It's all a big "well what'cha gonna do, take me to court?" They know they can get away with it, so they do so.

Also, I dug around on site you linked from, since you didn't provide the correct page from the quote, I had to google it. Here's the whole quote, how come you didn't include the second half of it?


www.hrw.org...

WP used as weapons are considered incendiaries. Incendiary weapons are not prohibited under the laws of war. However, the use of WP against military targets is regulated under Protocol III of the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW). Although Israel is not party to this treaty, customary laws of war prohibit the anti-personnel use of incendiary weapons so long as weapons less likely to cause unnecessary suffering are available.



[edit on 6-7-2009 by Lazyninja]



posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 10:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Lazyninja
 


The rest of quote does not prove anything. And wheres the source that says all UN member nations are bound by CCCW. Every country has broke international law and breaking it in the way Israel has is not as bad as you think.

[edit on 6-7-2009 by walsbg22]



posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 11:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by walsbg22
reply to post by Lazyninja
 


The rest of quote does not prove anything. And wheres the source that says all UN member nations are bound by CCCW. Every country has broke international law and breaking it in the way Israel has is not as bad as you think.

[edit on 6-7-2009 by walsbg22]


You cherry picking the part of the quote you deem relevant and leaving the rest out shows exactly what kinda person you are. You're not a member of the JDL (Jewish defense league) by any chance are you?

The rest of the quote proves something extremely important, that using WP as anti personnel rounds in Israel is indeed illlegal. You either lied about, or are ignorant of that fact.



posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 11:27 PM
link   
A nuclear bomb is a weapon of war too. Doesnt mean we shouldnt take umbrage when someone decides to use one. Further, while a country might have a right to persue killers, that in NO WAY gives it the right to rampantly go about killing innocents, or even a single one. This is especially skewed when the rates of murder are 2 or 3 "terrorists" and 40 innocent bystanders.



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 03:12 AM
link   
As the OP I expected the usual suspects to show up. The point of the thread is that Amensty have to a degree shown some, but not enough bottle in telling it as it was during the Gaza conflict.

For those who question all the usual evidence sources, I say your wasting your time. Amnesty have the creedence that you cant debunk as far as their report goes.

As for Al Jazeera being the source, try looking at the other sources quoted in the post, or, just google search the .er text.

I dont know about anyone else but the questioning of source credibility is waring a bit thin nowadays. We have all seen it before and see it for what it is.

Fact ! We in many corners of the world witnessed the Israeli bombardments....Do we say our own eyes are a source not to be trusted.

I say " Good for Amnesty", but think they could have gone much further with their condemnation of the Israeli army.



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lazyninja

Originally posted by walsbg22
reply to post by Lazyninja
 


The rest of quote does not prove anything. And wheres the source that says all UN member nations are bound by CCCW. Every country has broke international law and breaking it in the way Israel has is not as bad as you think.

[edit on 6-7-2009 by walsbg22]


You cherry picking the part of the quote you deem relevant and leaving the rest out shows exactly what kinda person you are. You're not a member of the JDL (Jewish defense league) by any chance are you?

The rest of the quote proves something extremely important, that using WP as anti personnel rounds in Israel is indeed illlegal. You either lied about, or are ignorant of that fact.


Don't use personal attacks. Just because most don't do that does not make it so horrible. Every war, people break some part of international law but only when Israel or the US do it do you get mad. Even if they did why should Israel be the only ones to be punished, don't pick and choose who to punish. They would need to punish every country who had a war.



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 11:59 PM
link   

Every war, people break some part of international law but only when Israel or the US do it do you get mad.


Are you talking about me personally or the entire planet? Cuz I don't know you. And you have no idea when or what I get mad about. Don't make assumptions.


don't pick and choose who to punish. They would need to punish every country who had a war.


War? The last proper war was WW2. Everything since then has been just a bunch of cold blooded murder, lies, stealing, raping and pillaging. Invasion of overwhelming force, is a better way to describe modern war. Breaking international law has just become part of the routine.

So I ask you. If war crimes "aren't as bad as I think" Tell me, why do we bother having international laws and courts, for trying war criminals? You talk about picking who to punish and who not to punish. Saddam swung by his neck. Milosovich is in jail. And Bush is walking free. Something aint right there.

I get the impression that you have absolutely no concept of the value of human life. You are part of a desensitized war nation, war on tv, in movies, in videogames. You really should get out there and see some REAL corpses before you go around telling people that innocent people getting killed by the shedload is not important.



[edit on 8-7-2009 by Lazyninja]



posted on Jul, 8 2009 @ 11:46 AM
link   
If it wasn't for the U.S., Israel would be nothing. And if it wasn't for Christian-Zionist political extremists, the U.S. would not be involved with Israel. Just for the record, I'm not blaming it on "the jews", I blaming it on religious extremism. From both sides of the table.



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by captiva
 


No they don't. Amnesty International has a clear obsession with demonizing Israel, its a trendy topic so they can raise money. The white phosphorous "weapons" were perfectly legal smokescreen and marker shells produced in the good 'ole United States of America. Really you're trusting Al Jazeera on something like Israel.

Source: Amnesty International's Anti-Israel Obsession



posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by captiva
 


Amnesty International should change their name to "Against Israel", it describes their stance and keeps the same initials. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch started out good but now they have become tainted with bias towards Israel. Did anyone notice how Amnesty International ramped up protests for Burma once the riots occurred then never followed through with another protest? Strange how they drift between all the topics in the spotlight...



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join