🚨 Watch the video for 911 🚨

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Israel - Palestine Conflict Discussion Thread

hmm

If destroying their homes is in accord with international law

 

Generally curious, but is it in allowable under international law? 

 

Not that Israel is one to follow international law, but it still seems strange that the international community considers that form of punishment "ok".

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
EXCXSXE

Generally curious, but is it in allowable under international law? 

 

Not that Israel is one to follow international law, but it still seems strange that the international community considers that form of punishment "ok".

 

I also meant that as a genuine curiosity.  :sweat: I don't know either, so if someone wants to fill us in that would be great! 

I think the lines are blurry between that and collective punishment, but when you have a government encouraging suicide bombers to attack your citizens, I think international law takes the back seat. Not that I think any of this is OK.  :sweat:

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dolev

B20o3mbCEAIiU5Q.jpg

Israeli Druze mother mourn for her killled son, who was killed yesterday by Palestinian terrorists in the Jerusalem attack.

 

NYDailyNews cover

B20aUOLCAAE8OD7.jpg

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
lego

Photos are the weakest receipt to prove something. You can never see the full picture. In your case, you'd probably want to.  :hehe:

racist ppl really be like “so just because I’m a racist that makes me racist ??? wow”

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
EXCXSXE

 

 

 

This. Come on Dolev. That second post was weak and cheap. Don't stoop to the level of other members!

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
lego

Generally curious, but is it in allowable under international law? 

 

Not that Israel is one to follow international law, but it still seems strange that the international community considers that form of punishment "ok".

I also meant that as a genuine curiosity.  :sweat: I don't know either, so if someone wants to fill us in that would be great! 

I think the lines are blurry between that and collective punishment, but when you have a government encouraging suicide bombers to attack your citizens, I think international law takes the back seat. Not that I think any of this is OK.  :sweat:

It's not.

Article 33. No persons may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.

Pillage is prohibited.

Reprisals against persons and their property are prohibited.

Under the 1949 Geneva Conventions, collective punishment is a war crime.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Commentary to the conventions states that parties to a conflict often would resort to "intimidatory measures to terrorize the population" in hopes of preventing hostile acts, but such practices "strike at guilty and innocent alike. They are opposed to all principles based on humanity and justice."

Additional Protocol II of 1977 explicitly forbids collective punishment. But as fewer states have ratified this protocol than GCIV, GCIV Article 33 is the one more commonly quoted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention

Article 75. Fundamental guarantees

1. In so far as they are affected by a situation referred to in Article 1 of this Protocol, persons who are in the power of a Party to the conflict and who do not benefit from more favourable treatment under the Conventions or under this Protocol shall be treated humanely in all circumstances and shall enjoy, as a minimum, the protection provided by this Article without any adverse distinction based upon race, colour, s-x, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national or social origin, wealth, birth or other status, or on any other similar criteria. Each Party shall respect the person, honour, convictions and religious practices of all such persons.

2. The following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever, whether committed by civilian or by military agents:

(a) violence to the life, health, or physical or mental well-being of persons, in particular:

(i) murder;

(ii) torture of all kinds, whether physical or mental;

(iii) corporal punishment; and

(iv) mutilation;

(b) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, enforced prostitution and any form of indecent assault;

© the taking of hostages;

(d) collective punishments; and

(e) threats to commit any of the foregoing acts.

racist ppl really be like “so just because I’m a racist that makes me racist ??? wow”

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
hmm

It's not.

Article 33. No persons may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.

Pillage is prohibited.

Reprisals against persons and their property are prohibited.

Under the 1949 Geneva Conventions, collective punishment is a war crime.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Commentary to the conventions states that parties to a conflict often would resort to "intimidatory measures to terrorize the population" in hopes of preventing hostile acts, but such practices "strike at guilty and innocent alike. They are opposed to all principles based on humanity and justice."

Additional Protocol II of 1977 explicitly forbids collective punishment. But as fewer states have ratified this protocol than GCIV, GCIV Article 33 is the one more commonly quoted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention

Article 75. Fundamental guarantees

1. In so far as they are affected by a situation referred to in Article 1 of this Protocol, persons who are in the power of a Party to the conflict and who do not benefit from more favourable treatment under the Conventions or under this Protocol shall be treated humanely in all circumstances and shall enjoy, as a minimum, the protection provided by this Article without any adverse distinction based upon race, colour, s-x, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national or social origin, wealth, birth or other status, or on any other similar criteria. Each Party shall respect the person, honour, convictions and religious practices of all such persons.

2. The following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever, whether committed by civilian or by military agents:

(a) violence to the life, health, or physical or mental well-being of persons, in particular:

(i) murder;

(ii) torture of all kinds, whether physical or mental;

(iii) corporal punishment; and

(iv) mutilation;

(b) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, enforced prostitution and any form of indecent assault;

© the taking of hostages;

(d) collective punishments; and

(e) threats to commit any of the foregoing acts.

 

Thanks for clearing that up :yes:

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
EXCXSXE

It's not.

Article 33. No persons may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.

Pillage is prohibited.

Reprisals against persons and their property are prohibited.

Under the 1949 Geneva Conventions, collective punishment is a war crime.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Commentary to the conventions states that parties to a conflict often would resort to "intimidatory measures to terrorize the population" in hopes of preventing hostile acts, but such practices "strike at guilty and innocent alike. They are opposed to all principles based on humanity and justice."

Additional Protocol II of 1977 explicitly forbids collective punishment. But as fewer states have ratified this protocol than GCIV, GCIV Article 33 is the one more commonly quoted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention

Article 75. Fundamental guarantees

1. In so far as they are affected by a situation referred to in Article 1 of this Protocol, persons who are in the power of a Party to the conflict and who do not benefit from more favourable treatment under the Conventions or under this Protocol shall be treated humanely in all circumstances and shall enjoy, as a minimum, the protection provided by this Article without any adverse distinction based upon race, colour, s-x, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national or social origin, wealth, birth or other status, or on any other similar criteria. Each Party shall respect the person, honour, convictions and religious practices of all such persons.

2. The following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever, whether committed by civilian or by military agents:

(a) violence to the life, health, or physical or mental well-being of persons, in particular:

(i) murder;

(ii) torture of all kinds, whether physical or mental;

(iii) corporal punishment; and

(iv) mutilation;

(b) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, enforced prostitution and any form of indecent assault;

© the taking of hostages;

(d) collective punishments; and

(e) threats to commit any of the foregoing acts.

 

This is rather vague and common sense... Do we have any sources that specifically mention this practise? 

What's protocol when the other government is encouraging the murder of civilians? 

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dolev

This. Come on Dolev. That second post was weak and cheap. Don't stoop to the level of other members!

Let's not act like they're not known for doing such stuff.  :coffee:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMOZvbYJMvU

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
lego

I think you misinterpreted my post. I didn't mean to say that the lack of punishment is acceptable for hate crimes, but those rates are probably not that far off of what happens everyone else in the world,

You cannot just say probably, back this up with something.

I cannot think of any democratic state where for the same or similar crime invenstigation and punishment depends from religion or ethnicity you belong to. And this is exactly the case, if you compare and look at the statistics.

albeit the hate crimes there are far worse and of a very different type. My point was rather that Hamas praised the attack of innocents in a synagogue the other day, calling it divine justice, while the Israeli government condemns attacks committed by Israeli terrorists time and time again. When you're constantly talking about incitement, you have to consider that Hamas is radicalizing its civilians openly. The violence is unacceptable in both cases, but you have to admit there's a massive issue with Hamas praising its civilians who glorify terrorists. That is just as bad as those who believe Goldstein is a hero.
Again, they're not the same. Also being unequal under the law is one of the reasons these things are happening. I should remind you that this wasn't even ordered or inspired by Hamas, the two attackers belonged to secular group created by Palestinian Christian George Habash. What other things happened before: Israeli forces injured 454 Palestinians 10/28-11/10, most in East J'lem; shot & blinded child on 11/13, fractured child's skull on 11/14

They see Palestinian civilians getting killed almost every day, they see that their blood is cheap, and their murderers are walking free. The retaliation always follows. And it comes from both sides.

Only one side is always labeled as "terrorist", while others just "defend themselves".

If you don't follow this closely, you will not know about every Palestinian victim, media will not inform you.

I don't even post about every victim, because it would take pages and pages, and I see that users here just skip over them. One of these active users even had problem to say RIP or anything similar for Palestinian 5yo girl, while only Israeli child mattered.

Israel is the occupier, they can ban doctors, building equipment, human rights organizations from entering Gaza, so how is even Hamas in charge?

You can't label everyone who supports the Gaza war as an extremist... You should review the definition of that word.
Yes I can and I will. What happens every few years in Gaza is a collective punishment against unarmed civilians in densely populated area, blocked both from land and the sea. I will not forget over 500 butchered children and videos of some groups of Israelis chanting "no school in Gaza, no more children left".

You should also look up the definition of the words terror and terrorist. Israeli state-sponsored terrorism is what Palestinians suffer from for decades. Just because it's government and army doing the killing, it doesn't make it justified.

If destroying their homes is in accord with international law, I see no reason why they can't do it. It's a way to deter the terrorist attacks. The perpetrators know they're putting their families at risk and choose to do it anyway; its a choice they make. It's very difficult to reason with people who are willing to commit suicide while killing as many civilians as possible, in case you didn't realize. It's a sad situation in any case. When the neighbours are suffering as well, however, I think it loses its proportionality and it shouldn't be done.

That is a valid point about Goldsteins family members. :yes: That does not seem right, but there are far fewer incidents involving Israeli terrorist attacks than Palestinian terror attacks. There's no reason for Israel to demolish houses other than to deter attacks; I don't think it's about "an eye for an eye".

It is illegal under international law and you even quoted part which says they stopped this practice since it was counterproductive. And of course it is! Those people's only crime was that they were blood related or lived nearby. No one should ever be punished for other person's crime.

By your logic, that Israeli politician was right, the one who said knowledge of raping potential suicide bomber's sister and mother would prevent attack. How vile. Hamas called for abandoning suicide bombings in 2006, so I don't know why you keep bringing them up. Since this last case, Israeli government doesn't seem to think they're doing anything wrong, and they're only creating more hate and adding fuel to the fire.

And I disagree with "far fewer Israeli terrorist attacks", when you look up definition of terrorism you'll see.

racist ppl really be like “so just because I’m a racist that makes me racist ??? wow”

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
lego

Let's not act like they're not known for doing such stuff.  :coffee:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMOZvbYJMvU

http://youtube.com/watch?v=4hHDKsA0KMo

http://youtube.com/watch?v=sZ5-91kUu98

http://youtube.com/watch?v=FnR9EYDjRXc

racist ppl really be like “so just because I’m a racist that makes me racist ??? wow”

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dolev

Israel is the only democratic state facing Islamic world directly. Don't let anyone fool you with false comparsion.

 

Israel is not the only country bordering Gaza as Egypt sits on its southren borders. If someone wish to enter Gaza he could just pass through Egypt. Israel has every right to decide who is to enter Israel.

 

"Hamas called for abandoning suicide bombings in 2006"... Gurl, the fact is that Palestinans are killing Israeli civilians in terror attacks for decades now and you seem to ignore that part.

Whether its the PLO, Hamas or even individuals, it's still their own culture that educated them to believe they're going to heaven to get 72 virgins if they'll kill people.

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
lego

 

Gurl, the fact is that Palestinans are killing Israeli civilians in terror attacks for decades now and you seem to ignore that part.

 

And vice versa.

 

 

Israel is the only democratic state

 

:deadbanana:

racist ppl really be like “so just because I’m a racist that makes me racist ??? wow”

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
EXCXSXE

You cannot just say probably, back this up with something.

I cannot think of any democratic state where for the same or similar crime invenstigation and punishment depends from religion or ethnicity you belong to. And this is exactly the case, if you compare and look at the statistics.

 

 

Again, they're not the same. Also being unequal under the law is one of the reasons these things are happening. I should remind you that this wasn't even ordered or inspired by Hamas, the two attackers belonged to secular group created by Palestinian Christian George Habash. What other things happened before: Israeli forces injured 454 Palestinians 10/28-11/10, most in East J'lem; shot & blinded child on 11/13, fractured child's skull on 11/14

They see Palestinian civilians getting killed almost every day, they see that their blood is cheap, and their murderers are walking free. The retaliation always follows. And it comes from both sides.

Only one side is always labeled as "terrorist", while others just "defend themselves".

If you don't follow this closely, you will not know about every Palestinian victim, media will not inform you.

I don't even post about every victim, because it would take pages and pages, and I see that users here just skip over them. One of these active users even had problem to say RIP or anything similar for Palestinian 5yo girl, while only Israeli child mattered.

Israel is the occupier, they can ban doctors, building equipment, human rights organizations from entering Gaza, so how is even Hamas in charge?

 

Yes I can and I will. What happens every few years in Gaza is a collective punishment against unarmed civilians in densely populated area, blocked both from land and the sea. I will not forget over 500 butchered children and videos of some groups of Israelis chanting "no school in Gaza, no more children left".

You should also look up the definition of the words terror and terrorist. Israeli state-sponsored terrorism is what Palestinians suffer from for decades. Just because it's government and army doing the killing, it doesn't make it justified.

 

It is illegal under international law and you even quoted part which says they stopped this practice since it was counterproductive. And of course it is! Those people's only crime was that they were blood related or lived nearby. No one should ever be punished for other person's crime.

By your logic, that Israeli politician was right, the one who said knowledge of raping potential suicide bomber's sister and mother would prevent attack. How vile. Hamas called for abandoning suicide bombings in 2006, so I don't know why you keep bringing them up. Since this last case, Israeli government doesn't seem to think they're doing anything wrong, and they're only creating more hate and adding fuel to the fire.

And I disagree with "far fewer Israeli terrorist attacks", when you look up definition of terrorism you'll see.

 

 

My post was in reference to Hamas celebrating the attacks, which they continue to do, not whether they order them.  :shrug: Their official stance is very important. Also notice I used the word terrorist in both cases, Israeli and Palestinian... Both have employed terror. One government has done so openly and admitted to targeting civilians, something that no other government in the world has gotten away with. Now tell me you don't see a problem with that, without mentioning "an eye for an eye". 

 

Y'all (you and Dolev) both need to stop using isolated civilian extremists as examples. Especially when you complain of Palestinians being painted as savages. It is so hypocritical! THE EXTREMISTS ARE MINORITIES. Now recall the post you just made on collective punishment, and how absolutely against it you are. It really bothers me how often you complain about dehumanization and then use the exact same tactics to serve your own purpose.  

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...