UN - Israel’s Unlawful Use of White Phosphorus in Gaza

[M.Dancer]

I'm interested to know why there's no issue with Human Rights Watch and their claims about Hamas' violations of human rights, but all of their claims about Israel are false - especially when the follow the exact same methodology when compiling their reports.

Never seen one

[dub]

There is debate and soul searching from within Israel about alleged war crimes and the number of Palestinian casualties.Has there been any similar reaction among Palestinians regarding the consequences of their own actions toward Israelis?I have seen nothing in the papers I read concerning this.Does this show just how much of a gulf there is between Israelis and Palestinians?This speaks volumes about attitudes on both sides.

during the latest attack:

3 israeli civilians were killed.

over 600 palestinian women and children were killed.

there is nothing "similar" about this scenario so it doesn't really warrant the same concerns. don't you think?

To be fair,any Palestinian that supports non-violence will likely meet his end from AK-47,so perhaps it's best to keep quiet.

to be fair, eh? you are talking out of your ass again.

[dub]

Pallywood again. Why trust liers?

i don't trust you. this is why i'm here. you can keep coming back with your usual replies, but in the real world:

- human rights organizations have investigated some of the allegations and they have come to the conclusion that israel has committed war crimes

- israeli soldiers have admitted in being involved in and have witnessed some of the allegations, personally

you're a dishonest person DoP.

[dub]

Never seen one

it's there but you choose not to acknowledge it.

This 71-page report provides witness accounts of the devastating effects that white phosphorus munitions had on civilians and civilian property in Gaza. Human Rights Watch researchers in Gaza immediately after hostilities ended found spent shells, canister liners, and dozens of burnt felt wedges containing white phosphorus on city streets, apartment roofs, residential courtyards, and at a United Nations school. The report also presents ballistics evidence, photographs, and satellite imagery, as well as documents from the Israeli military and government.

[M.Dancer]

it's there but you choose not to acknowledge it.

This 71-page report provides witness accounts of the devastating effects that white phosphorus munitions had on civilians and civilian property in Gaza. Human Rights Watch researchers in Gaza immediately after hostilities ended found spent shells, canister liners, and dozens of burnt felt wedges containing white phosphorus on city streets, apartment roofs, residential courtyards, and at a United Nations school. The report also presents ballistics evidence, photographs, and satellite imagery, as well as documents from the Israeli military and government.

Sorry, where in there is the condemnation of Hamas?

I'm interested to know why there's no issue with Human Rights Watch and their claims about Hamas' violations of human rights...

71 pages for 12 accidental deaths....

[M.Dancer]

- israeli soldiers have admitted in being involved in and have witnessed some of the allegations, personally

Incorrect.

[dub]

Sorry, where in there is the condemnation of Hamas?

you didn't even bother to read. you could have at least the description of the report.

this report is about the use of WP. hamas did not use WP.

71 pages for 12 accidental deaths....

war crimes does not acknowledge limits in numbers killed.

whether you indiscriminately kill one person or 20 people, you're still guilty. it's a simple logic.

maybe if i use zionist analogy, you might understand:

whether you are responsible for gassing 1 jew or 20 jews, you're still guilty.

[GostHacked]

whether you are responsible for gassing 1 jew or 20 jews, you're still guilty.

That is actually a good point. The scale of it does not matter. The fact it was used is the key here.

M Dancer

Speaking of half wits Cash, the HRW report said 12 people were killed.

EOS

The report shows 12 people killed by WP. Which you deny. I am sure we can all debate the scale in which WP was used. But we can agree on that it was used.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/2...osphorus-shells

Israel has admitted – after mounting pressure – that its troops may have used white phosphorus shells in contravention of international law, during its three-week offensive in the Gaza Strip.

Now you can facetiously make the claim that they 'may' have used WP. But if the Israel military admits that the possibility is there, they are basicly admitting to the fact that it has been used.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle5575070.ece

After weeks of denying that it used white phosphorus in the heavily populated Gaza Strip, Israel finally admitted yesterday that the weapon was deployed in its offensive.

Now if we look at some history of Israel's use of WP we might find this interesting morsel.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/777549.html

Israel has acknowledged for the first time that it attacked Hezbollah targets during the second Lebanon war with phosphorus shells. White phosphorus causes very painful and often lethal chemical burns to those hit by it, and until recently Israel maintained that it only uses such bombs to mark targets or territory.

It was used in Lebanon against Hezbollah.

[moderateamericain]

That is actually a good point. The scale of it does not matter. The fact it was used is the key here.

M Dancer

The report shows 12 people killed by WP. Which you deny. I am sure we can all debate the scale in which WP was used. But we can agree on that it was used.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/2...osphorus-shells

Now you can facetiously make the claim that they 'may' have used WP. But if the Israel military admits that the possibility is there, they are basicly admitting to the fact that it has been used.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle5575070.ece

Now if we look at some history of Israel's use of WP we might find this interesting morsel.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/777549.html

It was used in Lebanon against Hezbollah.

Its illegal to use Willey pete against Civilian as an offensive weapon. If a civilian wanders into a combat zone where Willey Pete is being deployed as a screening tool. Then its tough noogies. 12 people dead just tells me theres 12 less dumb people in the world. Who the hell wanders in front of a military combat zone. Gee I better get out of the way of those incoming soldiers.

[M.Dancer]

M Dancer

The report shows 12 people killed by WP. Which you deny.

No I don't. I do question if it is accurate, given the history of inflating body counts....but even so, such a small number is indicative of the care used. Far more civilians were killed by normal artillery rrounds...and contrary to HRW, if the israelis wanted to used an icindeary there are better availablke that would have really racked up the body count.

I am sure we can all debate the scale in which WP was used. But we can agree on that it was used.

I have no issues with its use. Legal weapon.

It was used in Lebanon against Hezbollah.

So? Legal weapon.

[GostHacked]

Its illegal to use Willey pete against Civilian as an offensive weapon. If a civilian wanders into a combat zone where Willey Pete is being deployed as a screening tool. Then its tough noogies. 12 people dead just tells me theres 12 less dumb people in the world. Who the hell wanders in front of a military combat zone. Gee I better get out of the way of those incoming soldiers.

The whole Gaza strip is a combat zone. And since it is one of the most densly populated areas on the planet. There is really no where to run when the WP gets thrown down. The dense population is one reason you see more collateral damage in Gaza than you would see in Israel. Every time Israel strikes, there will be collateral damage. It's not like the IDF will scream .. "HAY WE ARE GONNA USE WP .. innocents please get out of the way!!!".

You might have a point about wandering into 'war zones'. If they were clearly marked so innocents would not get caught up in the fight. But since the militaries don't tell you where the zone is (for obvious intelligence reasons) then you can't know you are in one or not.

The only thing here is that Israel is not a signatory to any treaty that considers WP to be an illegal weapon. Eventhough the general agreement on WP by the UN and the treaty signatories considers it a banned weapon Isreal never signed on to it. Technically, it can be used.

In the end almost anything can and will be used as a weapon or WMD. War is hell, expect rules to be broken. I think that is why war exists, because people always break the rules. Even if they never signed on to them.

[M.Dancer]

It's not like the IDF will scream .. "HAY WE ARE GONNA USE WP .. innocents please get out of the way!!!".

Actually itis like that.

The army has continued its policy from the Second Lebanon War of dropping leaflets over civilian areas notifying them of their intent to bomb the area.

The IDF dropped leaflets on Gaza City on Saturday, amid heavy aerial bombing, warning of a wider offensive.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1054539.html

It was a phone call Ibrahim Mahmoud says he'll never forget.

The woman on the other end, speaking in Hebrew-accented Arabic, accused the appliance store owner of being a member of Hamas and informed him the IDF would bomb his house. Hours later, after he had already moved 20 relatives out of the four-story building, she called back to tell him she had made a mistake.

"Be safe," she said and hung up, according to Mahmoud.

Dozens of other Palestinians have recently received similar phone calls, many of them on target, in a new tactic the army said is meant to reduce civilian casualties in its monthlong offensive in Gaza. Palestinian officials dismissed the army's claim that the phone calls are meant to reduce deaths.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pag...d=1153292011238

[DogOnPorch]

The whole Gaza strip is a combat zone. And since it is one of the most densly populated areas on the planet. There is really no where to run when the WP gets thrown down. The dense population is one reason you see more collateral damage in Gaza than you would see in Israel. Every time Israel strikes, there will be collateral damage. It's not like the IDF will scream .. "HAY WE ARE GONNA USE WP .. innocents please get out of the way!!!".

You might have a point about wandering into 'war zones'. If they were clearly marked so innocents would not get caught up in the fight. But since the militaries don't tell you where the zone is (for obvious intelligence reasons) then you can't know you are in one or not.

The only thing here is that Israel is not a signatory to any treaty that considers WP to be an illegal weapon. Eventhough the general agreement on WP by the UN and the treaty signatories considers it a banned weapon Isreal never signed on to it. Technically, it can be used.

In the end almost anything can and will be used as a weapon or WMD. War is hell, expect rules to be broken. I think that is why war exists, because people always break the rules. Even if they never signed on to them.

Better look hard at Google Maps before making such a statement. There's plenty of open area for civilians to flee to if that's what was desired...or allowed.

[M.Dancer]

Better look hard at Google Maps before making such a statement. There's plenty of open area for civilians to flee to if that's what was desired...or allowed.

Manhatten is almost 3 times as dense as the Gaza strip.

[DogOnPorch]

Manhatten is almost 3 times as dense as the Gaza strip.

Many places have much higher densities. There's less than the population of metro Calgary in the Gaza Strip.

[dub]

Actually itis like that.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1054539.html

actually it is not like that dancer.

the bombings are different than the WP use. the UN compound which was bombed had people taking refuge in it from israel's bombings. israel had been told several times and they knew exactly where the UN compound was and knew that civilians were taking refuge. yet, they still shot the WP. that's not the only incident of illegal use of WP.

israel "denied" using them at first. then after too much evidence, they changed their stance and said, "oh yeah, it was used, but it was used legally".

The army’s use of white phosphorus – which makes a distinctive shellburst of dozens of smoke trails – was reported first by The Times on January 5, when it was strenuously denied by the army. Now, in the face of mounting evidence and international outcry, Israel has been forced to backtrack on that initial denial. “Yes, phosphorus was used but not in any illegal manner,”

now, the human rights organization, after a full investigation has said that WP was used illegally. try reading the report by the experts documenting that israel used WP illegally. that's if you're interested in facts instead of being a war crime apologist.

Edited March 30, 2009 by dub

[M.Dancer]

now, the human rights organization, after a full investigation has said that WP was used illegally. try reading the report by the experts documenting that israel used WP illegally. that's if you're interested in facts instead of being a war crime apologist.

I did. I found them to be quite jejune. They make a pronouncement, bully for them. It won't mean a thing as they have no real eveidence what so ever, only their amatuerish opininion.

the bombings are different than the WP use.

Correct. Regular artillery is much more lethal and devasting.

Now, in the face of mounting evidence and international outcry,

Who internationally gives a shit?

[dub]

I did. I found them to be quite jejune.

i suppose you read it after making the comment about hamas not being condemned in this report when the report was on the use of WP. right?

They make a pronouncement, bully for them. It won't mean a thing as they have no real eveidence what so ever, only their amatuerish opininion.

no. you're wrong again. they have evidence of illegal use.

they are experts in these matters. i'm sorry to say, but your amateur opinion does not count on this issue. especially when you refuse to acknowledge the rules of engagement and the mounting evidence of illegal use of WP.

Correct. Regular artillery is much more lethal and devasting.

if it's illegal, it's illegal. as said before, international law does not care whether a nazi commander gassed 1 jew or 1000 jews.

this is why hamas' rocket attacks were illegal even though only 3 israeli civilians were killed.

Who internationally gives a shit?

israel is signatory to the international law. this is not about you and how you don't care for international law.

[dub]

getting back to the topic, from the UN report:

In incidents investigated by Human Rights Watch, Israeli forces used white phosphorus munitions in an indiscriminate or disproportionate manner in violations of the laws of war. In these incidents, even if the intended use of the white phosphorus was as an obscurant, it had the effect on the ground as a weapon. The rationale for an obscurant seems doubtful because there were either no Israeli forces in the vicinity to screen or such forces were for a considerable period in a stationary deployment. And if the purpose was to obscure military maneuvers, the IDF could have achieved similar obscuring effects through use of smoke artillery without causing the same degree of civilian harm. Israel has not asserted that it used white phosphorus as a weapon, but the apparent absence of nearby Hamas fighters in cases investigated by Human Rights Watch, as well as the legal limitations placed on the use of white phosphorus weapons in populated areas, would not justify its use in this manner. That would remain true even if Hamas forces were deployed among civilians or using civilians as “shields,” as Israel has asserted, because Israel would still have a duty to attack Hamas in a more discriminate way so as to minimize civilian casualties.

Edited March 30, 2009 by dub

[M.Dancer]

getting back to the topic, from the UN reportreport:

That is not from the UN.

[M.Dancer]

The rationale for an obscurant seems doubtful because there were either no Israeli forces in the vicinity to screen or such forces were for a considerable period in a stationary deployment. And if the purpose was to obscure military maneuvers, the IDF could have achieved similar obscuring effects through use of smoke artillery without causing the same degree of civilian harm.

That's what I'm talking about, amatuerish opinions.

[GostHacked]

I did. I found them to be quite jejune. They make a pronouncement, bully for them. It won't mean a thing as they have no real eveidence what so ever, only their amatuerish opininion.

So even when the IDF admits to using WP, you will still deny it?? You can't argue that they did not use it, you can only argue the legality and scope it was used.

[M.Dancer]

So even when the IDF admits to using WP, you will still deny it?? You can't argue that they did not use it, you can only argue the legality and scope it was used.

Where did I deny they used WP. Gosh I hope they used lots of it. I can't think of too many ways to obscure your movements, confund the enemy and to create mayhem better than WP.

There is no limit or scope on how much can be used...as far as using it legally, the fact that only 12 were killed using it is testament that it was used properly. If it were to be used as a weapon....

1) Why use WP when there are real incediaries available?

2) The death toll would be far greater.

[GostHacked]

Where did I deny they used WP. Gosh I hope they used lots of it. I can't think of too many ways to obscure your movements, confund the enemy and to create mayhem better than WP.

Because you have changed your stance on this topic several times in this thread.

It's a fact eh? Actually it's an accusation. A weak on...that someone pulled out of the arse.

then...

Speaking of half wits Cash, the HRW report said 12 people were killed. EOS

but then...

First off, under international law (GC) it is legal to attack the enemy even if there may be civilian casualties. That's a fact.

Secondly, there is zero evidence that WP was used as a weapon or used against civilians....the extremely small number of dead ascribed to WP bears that out.

Get your flip flops on!!!

There is no limit or scope on how much can be used...as far as using it legally, the fact that only 12 were killed using it is testament that it was used properly. If it were to be used as a weapon....

I don't understand your logic.

And I shall give it to you M.Dancer and DogonPorch that Gaza is not THE most densly populated area on the planet, but I did say it is one of the most densely populated areas. And I am sure you can always find a most densly populated area somewhere on this planet.

Again, we can debate on the scope of the use of WP, but as far as the question of the use, we find that it was used.

[M.Dancer]

Because you have changed your stance on this topic several times in this thread.

Not in the least. Try reading when you are sober.

It's a fact eh? Actually it's an accusation. A weak on...that someone pulled out of the arse

That is a response to Dub who said it was a fact Israel had used WP illegally. It is not a fact it is an accusation. I never denied they used it. I challenge they used it illegally. I find it mystifying there is fake outrage over WP when regular artillery killed 20 times the number of civilians....I just assume the unwashed masses get all flustered when they here phosphorous and run screaming....

Again, we can debate on the scope of the use of WP, but as far as the question of the use, we find that it was used.

So what if it was used...read carefully and slowly......WP is not a restricted weapon...use as needed.