Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forumMissiles Everywhere
The next Israeli-Hezbollah conflict will be awful
JUN 20, 2016 | By WILLY STERN
Hezbollah has a nasty collection of more than 130,000 rockets, missiles, and mortars aimed at Israel. This is a bigger arsenal than all NATO countries (except the United States) combined. Why, a reasonable person might wonder, does Hezbollah need an offensive arsenal bigger than that of all Western Europe? “You don't collect 130,000 missiles if you don't intend to use them," says Matthew Levitt, a counterterrorism expert at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Hezbollah is a well-funded, violently anti-Israel terrorist organization based in Lebanon and a puppet of the Iranian regime.
In Hezbollah's arsenal are about 700 long-range, high-payload rockets and missiles with names like Fateh-110 and Scud D. They are capable of taking down entire buildings in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem, wreaking havoc at Israel's major military bases, killing thousands of Israeli civilians, shutting down the nation's airports and ports, and taking out the electric grid. And that's just in the first week.
Former Israel Defense Forces (IDF) major general Yaakov Amidror is talking about the M-600 missile. It's a fairly accurate ballistic missile that weighs more than a Hummer H2 and carries a formidable warhead. The M-600 can also deliver chemical weapons. A single M-600 could wipe out a good chunk of Times Square and maim and kill people four football fields away from the point of impact. Hezbollah has a lot of M-600s. Amidror, Israel's former national security adviser, is asked what the next war between Israel and Hezbollah will look like. "We are not looking for war," says Amidror. "But suppose Hezbollah launches an advanced missile like the M-600 at the Kirya, the IDF military headquarters in Tel Aviv, or a large apartment complex in Jerusalem. Our defense technology quickly finds the launcher. It is right under a 22-story residential building in Beirut. We can now see in real time the launcher being moved back under the building to reload."
"We have just minutes to act," explains Amidror. "The IDF will have to take out the launcher because the next missile can cause enormous damage in Israel. But to take out the launcher means the 22-story building may fall. We would try to use precision-guided missiles to protect civilians but the target is hard to reach. We will try to warn the residents but the timing is tight. That building will almost certainly be hit. And the images in the international media will almost certainly be awful." But, asks Amidror, today a senior fellow at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, "What alternative do we have?" No good one, since the building in the scenario described would be a legitimate military target. So say a bevy of international military law experts, including Geoff Corn of the South Texas College of Law in Houston, who has studied IDF targeting policies: "After exhausting all feasible efforts to reduce civilian risk, IDF commanders must resolve the decisive question: Is the potential for civilian harm excessive in comparison to the advantages the attack would provide? When you talk of an M-600 in the hands of an enemy that targets vital military assets or the civilian population—even if that apartment building is full—launching the attack will be necessary to mitigate the threat."
more...
http://www.weeklystandard.com/missiles-everywhere/article/2002770
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Response to shira (Original post)
6chars This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to shira (Original post)
6chars This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)Jews accused of war crimes once again for daring to defend against Assad's animals.
But this time I'd imagine Israel sending a few planes into Iran in order to send a message. It won't be pretty.
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)It made an unpopular terror group without purpose into the heroes who successfully defended Lebanon against Israeli agression. While I don't think that an estimate based on Iranian bluster is necessarily correct, it's most probably true that Hezbollah has considerable firepower.
However, the suggestion in the OP that it's OK to target civilians is sheer insanity.
shira
(30,109 posts)Hezbollah got their clocks cleaned.
Now that you read the OP, what should Israel do when Hezbollah is firing rockets at Israel from underneath apartment buildings, hospitals, or schools that can take down Israeli skyscrapers & kill thousands?
Looking forward to your most humane answer to that one.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Why not leave them alone until they do? Maybe they will never get around to it, and then you don't have to suffer all that unfair criticism.
shira
(30,109 posts)So long as Hezbollah fucks off there won't be a war.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)But it's good to know Bibi won't start anything, because like you say it won't be pretty.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Israel bombing incoming missile shipments, Hezbollah trying to kidnap a few soldiers, etc. But it's clear nobody wants to heat things up. Wise on both sides. Syria is plenty close enough without trying to be like it, and Putin would get very annoyed.
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)Israel has never, at least to my knowledge, had to choose between killing enemy civilians or refrain and risking the death of Israeli civilians. If it actually did happen, international law states quite clearly that civilians can't be targeted.
There are no circumstances where it's alright to target civilians, and this is why Tzipi Livni should be tried for war crimes.
shira
(30,109 posts)The scenario is real.
Again, suppose Hezbollah is firing very deadly rockets at Israel (from underneath apartment buildings, from schoolyards, or mosques) that can kill many civilians.
What should Israel do in defense?
If you fail to answer this again, I can only assume you expect Israel to surrender, take the civilian losses, cry for mercy...
Something no other nation on the planet would do.
=============
Why start with Livni for "war crimes" when Obama, Cameron, Hollande, and Putin are far more guilty?
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)but there are no instances that I know of where it has saved Israeli lives.
If you know of any incidents where Israeli lives have been saved by killing Palestinian civilians, please let me know...
Besides, targeting civilians is a war crime, that's why Tzipi Livni should be tried. While all of those you mentioned have blood on their hands, Putin is the only bona fide war criminal, IMHO.
Are you suggesting that Obama is a war criminal, BTW?
shira
(30,109 posts)It is not a war crime to defend a nation's civilians under direct threat by then targeting those rocket launchers. Those using human shields are the war criminals, and yet I never see you condemning them.
As to Obama...
Nearly 90 Percent Of People Killed In Recent Drone Strikes Were Not The Target
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/civilian-deaths-drone-strikes_us_561fafe2e4b028dd7ea6c4ff
If that's not a war crime, then what Livni did to defend Israel is not a war crime either.
=================
ETA:
Finally, any rocket launchers aimed and fired at Israel pose a threat to Israel's civilians. Iron Dome isn't 100% fullproof. It is the fault of Hamas, Hezbollah by deliberately placing those launchers within civilian strongholds. The fact that Israel's civilian to combatant kill ratio is better than any other western nation goes to show how UNLIKELY it is that Israel committed war crimes, given what they were up against. Note that no other western nations since WW2 has had its own civilian population targeted and hit by rockets or missiles. If they did, their civilian to combatant kill ratio would be far higher than it has been, which is still way worse than Israel. Israel's better numbers WRT civilians proves that Israel is more careful than any other western nations. It's clear they're going after combatants, not civilians.
Meanwhile, pretending Israel is worse and that only its leaders are war criminals is vile.
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)them after a rocket launch.
Israel targeted hospitals, schools, shelters and mosques, and the fact that most of the dead were civilians, many of whom were killed inside or close vicinity to their homes does seem to indicate systematic targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure. Israel can't invent their own laws of war - civilians shouldn't be targeted, and all the talk of human shields is complete BS. That's why there is an ICC war crimes inquiry about Gaza.
While I think that the civilian casualty rate from drone strikes is much higher than the Obama administration lets on, there are attempts to minimize civilian casualties, unlike Israel.
shira
(30,109 posts)....is an attempt to minimize civilian casualties, unlike bad Israel whose rate is around 50% while its populace is under constant rocket attack. 90% civilians killed under Obama is better than Israel's 50% under Livni. Wow.
In addition, talk of human shields is complete BS, despite all the video evidence proving it.
That's willful blindness. Identical IMHO to fanatical fundamentalist religious belief in which all facts & logic are thrown out the window in favor of some cherished narrative. There's a reason BDS isn't catching on. People don't like being lied to. Most people aren't fanatics who so easily buy into false hate propaganda. They see the truth, they reject the lies - especially lies based on hate. That's why BDS is failing miserably now and why HRC, Obama, and Bernie oppose it.
=========
ETA: Over 150,000 civilian deaths in Iraq since 2003....
http://qz.com/724452/there-are-at-least-three-totally-different-estimates-of-how-many-civilians-died-in-the-iraq-war/
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)It's not always best to use official figures, especially when there's a reason to fudge them a little bit. In the wikipedia article on the 2014 war in Gaza, there are two different estimates of the number of civilian dead: "The Gaza Health Ministry, UN and some human rights groups reported that 69–75% of the Palestinian casualties were civilians; Israeli officials estimated that around 50% of those killed were civilians." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Israel%E2%80%93Gaza_conflict#Palestinian) I would say that the higher estimate is the correct one - it's independently investigated and confirmed on the ground. The other one seems to be compiled without being on the ground and with secret sources that cannot be verified.
It's the same thing with the civilian casualties from US drone strikes. The HuffPo article you refer to is describing the findings in a report from the Intercept (https://theintercept.com/drone-papers/) which implies a huge numbers of civilian casualties from US drone strikes. The implied figure is at least partially refuted by other groups that put the total number of civilian casualties between 200-800. (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/04/world/middleeast/drone-strike-statistics-answer-few-questions-and-raise-many.html?_r=0) It's worth mentioning that the official number from the same article is between between 64 and 116 civilians (or non-combatants) which is an absurdly low figure. I'll go with the 200-800 figure, which seems reasonable - 90% seems a bit too high and unconfirmed.
The Iraq war body count is a tricky one - there's barely any consensus on anything about how many people have died in the Iraq war since 2003. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War) It's certain though that a lot of people have died, and that it can be blamed on an unecessary US-led invasion. However, there are few indications that war crimes have been committed by US military forces (private military companies excluded), but if it comes out that they've been using the same targeting practices as Israel, it would possibly constitute a war crime as well.
Interestingly, the alleged use of human shields has been investigated by HRW, and it found no evidence of Hamas using human shields, but there was plenty of evidence of the IDF using Palestinians as human shields. (https://www.hrw.org/report/2010/04/11/turning-blind-eye/impunity-laws-war-violations-during-gaza-war) I suppose you either use different sources or just hope that if you repeat an unfounded statement it will be seen as a fact.
shira
(30,109 posts)Why do you trust Hamas' Gaza Health Ministry? They can't report anything unless it's filtered through Hamas first. So you trust Hamas over the IDF. That's really disgusting, based on the fact Hamas calls for genocide against the Jewish people. Did you know that in Cast Lead 2008-09, the Gaza Health Ministry claimed over 80% civilian casualties while the IDF claimed around 50%? Turns out Hamas admitted the IDF's figures were accurate:
Hamas Admits 600-700 of Its Men Were Killed in Cast Lead
http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/hamas-admits-600-700-of-its-men-were-killed-in-cast-lead-1.323776
So why do you trust Hamas propaganda over the IDF now?
============
As to the 90% US drone strike numbers, that's from a sample of just a few months. Read that article again. The claim isn't that 90% is the overall civilian casualty rate, but that percentage is still very damning and shows Israel is far more careful WRT civilians than the US.
============
There's actual video evidence of Hamas human shielding that you're deliberately ignoring. Why?
shira
(30,109 posts)Last edited Tue Jul 12, 2016, 10:22 PM - Edit history (1)
....with respect to civilians than the US military (which came to Israel in order to learn from the IDF how to prevent civilian casualties):
I don't ever want to see any more bullshit from you about how the US is more careful WRT civilians during war than Israel or that Israel is more likely to be guilty of war crimes than America, etc...
Now are you finished promoting that view or will you keep repeating it for some reason? Just curious.
Little Tich
(6,171 posts)Source: Amnesty International/USA, JULY 8, 2016
Tomorrow, July 8, 2016, marks the second anniversary of the start of a 50-day Israeli military offensive which brought unprecedented death and destruction to the Gaza Strip.
In a new briefing issued today, Amnesty International asks why no genuine criminal investigations have been launched, and why no one has yet been held to account for atrocities in spite of war crimes being committed by both sides.
“During 50 days of attacks, Israeli forces wreaked massive death and destruction on the Gaza Strip, killing close to 1,500 civilians, more than 500 of whom were children,” said Philip Luther, Amnesty International’s Middle East and North Africa Program Director.
The only criminal charges resulting from Israel’s military investigations were brought against three soldiers for the relatively minor abuses of looting and obstructing an investigation. Meanwhile, more serious crimes, some of which are likely war crimes, have gone unpunished.
Read more: http://www.amnestyusa.org/research/reports/time-to-address-impunity-two-years-after-the-gazaisrael-war
You have your sources, I have mine...
shira
(30,109 posts)That's an admission that the US does not go as far to protect civilians.
And yet you maintain the US is better.
As to Amnesty International, they defend Hamas despite all evidence of their war crimes....
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=127658
The same Hamas dedicated to the genocide of all Jews, using Palestinian children as child militants & human shields.
shira
(30,109 posts)35 children.
Where are all the war crime allegations and investigations against the Obama administration?
You mentioned impunity?