94 year old Palestinian grandmother killed in Intifada

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by paiktis22
Crap. The title is really ignoble.

You can always ask for it to be changed.

[Bereta_Eder]

Can I ask you to change it? Since you're here.

Write whatever your wish.

More civilian casualties in the Middle East,
for example.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Yeah, I'll come up with something bland and half-assed, since it's 3:30 am here and the caffeine's wearing off.

[Gangerolf]

informative... well maybe but it's not very pleasant.

so it's ok to post topless pics?

[MichaeltheGreat]

I didn't say that.

[Edan]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


There are plenty of non-lethal means of response

And I said if you've exausted every other option. (And sometimes those non-lethal options aren't practical military options in a warzone - like going and spanking the kid like someone suggested. And besides, when police in the US are found not guilty by a Jury (you know, the people who actually look at all the evidence) after shooting unarmed people, I have to think that automatically finding someone guilty cause he shot at someone throwing stones at them might be premature when you don't know all the details. What is needed is a proper inquiry, not n immediate foregone conclusion based on a picture (Which is possibly why some of these kids are encouraged to throw stones in the first place. Even if a soldier doesn't shoot, and only fires warning shots or bluffingly points it at a kid to get them to think twice, thats incredible PR.

Let's assume the Israelis who killed the kids did receive fire and respond. Did they do so effectively? Obviously not, on two counts - those kids clearly weren't the shooter(s),

Cause kids obviously never handle guns

My son just turned two. I guarantee you if there was some armed force in my neighborhood who killed my son, I would hunt those mother****ers down relentlessly as long as I drew breath, and I would kill them by any and every means at my disposal.

I trust you wouldn't allow your son to throw rocks at soldiers. I also trust that you would direct your anger at the soldier, not at civilians going to a cafe?

Personally, if someone starts throwing stones at me and I felt threatened, I would probably use any means to get them to stop, which might include shooting them (if I owned a gun and happened to have one on me and knew how to work one - the barrel is pointed away from you, right? ) I'd probably try not to shoot to kill, but under circumstances like that I don't
really know if I could guarantee that.

The Israeli soldiers who hit those kids obviously either

I question the use of the term obviously. Surely an investigative body should determine what is "obvious"?
I would have thought that shooting someone 41 times would have been obvious overkill....

Same with the "prohibited road" - if it's prohibited, put up ****ing barriers.

They said troops opened fire on the van the woman was riding in when it tried to bypass rubble that Israeli forces had used to block the road between Ramallah and her home village of Atara.

Engaging and killing Palestinians (more civilians than terrorists are being killed)

Take a look at the stats I posted earlier from AP:

"It can also be difficult to categorize those killed in what Israel calls "targeted attacks," which Palestinians label assassinations. Israeli forces have killed at least 82 militants in targeted attacks - and 52 bystanders."

Simply looking at the total #'s of dead Palestinians is a waste of time, as that doesn't tell you how many of them were: Suicide Bombers, Gunmen, Terrorists, innocent Palestinians killed by suicide bombers, innocent Palestinians killed by palestinian terrorists as intimidation, etc.

isn't effective at stopping the bombing. Offensive sweeps into PA areas isn't creating border security and preventing all bombers, etc. from getting across.

There were something like 25+ successful suicide bombings back in April. How many were there this month? 2-3? And one of those was done by Al Qaeda in a different country. How many suicide bombings were stopped? From my understand, dozens. IIRC, there were a couple of planned of major planned attacks (on the Azrieli towers with a truckload of explosives, as well as a fuel depot) that could have had deaths in the hundreds or thousands that was prevented by intelligence gathered in those raids.

How many (illegal) weapons factories and bomb making factories has israel found during it's incursions?

Do you think Israel was really better off when 100+ Israelis were killed in suicide bombings in a one month period?

Neither side is engaging in effective tactics, unless the goal is simply to perpetuate the status quo.

So why have a few Palestinians in the PA (as well as some of the other terrorist organizations) beginning to question the choice of starting the intifada? Could it be that they're discovering that their terrorist infrastructure is being destroyed around them?

[Sirotnikov]

Edan - thanks.

And get on ICQ laddy

[MRT144]

she was 94, she had a long life...i dont feel bad

[Viking Berserk]

so it's ok to post pictures of dead kids, while ****, **** and **** are censored. and no nipples please

I totally agree, cencur is a *****d up thing!
Remove the Cencure!!!

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Edan
And I said if you've exausted every other option.

Point being there's very little stated anywhere about IDF attempts to avoid lethal response to stone throwers.

(And sometimes those non-lethal options aren't practical military options in a warzone - like going and spanking the kid like someone suggested.

I don't give a damn about the moronic suggestions of some people here - I was talking about specific forms of militarily employable non-lethal response, and you shuffle over to spanking kids.

And besides, when police in the US are found not guilty by a Jury (you know, the people who actually look at all the evidence) after shooting unarmed people, I have to think that automatically finding someone guilty cause he shot at someone throwing stones at them might be premature when you don't know all the details.

I have to think that one is irrelevant to the topic - which is the specific approach of the IDF to dealing with stone throwers. And police in the US do get convicted of using excessive force.

Even if a soldier doesn't shoot, and only fires warning shots or bluffingly points it at a kid to get them to think twice, thats incredible PR.

Probably not near as globally newsworthy as say, a pair of two or three year old dead kids at their own funeral.

Cause kids obviously never handle guns

Show me a gun a kid that size could pick up and handle, let alone fire. Ducking the issue, are we?

I trust you wouldn't allow your son to throw rocks at soldiers. I also trust that you would direct your anger at the soldier, not at civilians going to a cafe?

We're talking about the pair of two or three year olds, who couldn't throw a stone two feet. Let's not duck and evade, here, we're talking the specifics of the killing of two small kids.

If there was a reason to be fighting, I'd more likely teach my son useful skills like being able to splatter their brains across the street from 400 meters with a .30-06, but that's just me.

And if I perceived that the military force which killed my son unjustifiably was supporting the invasion by those foreign civilians, I wouldn't be too concerned about them either, although I wouldn't specifically target non-combatants.

Personally, if someone starts throwing stones at me and I felt threatened, I would probably use any means to get them to stop, which might include shooting them (if I owned a gun and happened to have one on me and knew how to work one - the barrel is pointed away from you, right? ) I'd probably try not to shoot to kill, but under circumstances like that I don't
really know if I could guarantee that.

Personally, I'd tend to opt for flash-bang and using dropping a gas grenade right on 'em. When their ears stop ringing, they stop rubbing their eyes, and they realize now that they crapped their pants, their motivation will probably be a little less. If they are in a position to seriously threaten you with rocks, then anyone who shows up on the scene with a Kalashnikov would own your ass, so I'd be inclined to consider redeploying.

I question the use of the term obviously. Surely an investigative body should determine what is "obvious"?
I would have thought that shooting someone 41 times would have been obvious overkill....

I'd say so - 5 or 6 should have been effective, tops, and that on a moving target.

They said troops opened fire on the van the woman was riding in when it tried to bypass rubble that Israeli forces had used to block the road between Ramallah and her home village of Atara.

Put up more rubble and channelize the vehicles better. I'm sure IDF combat engineers are adequately trained.

Take a look at the stats I posted earlier from AP:

"It can also be difficult to categorize those killed in what Israel calls "targeted attacks," which Palestinians label assassinations. Israeli forces have killed at least 82 militants in targeted attacks - and 52 bystanders."

Simply looking at the total #'s of dead Palestinians is a waste of time, as that doesn't tell you how many of them were: Suicide Bombers, Gunmen, Terrorists, innocent Palestinians killed by suicide bombers, innocent Palestinians killed by palestinian terrorists as intimidation, etc.

It doesn't matter whether it's a waste of time. It's the same arguments that get applied to collateral damage and FUBAR's when the US goes into action. It's the perception of neutrals and the will of those you're fighting that counts more than an objective determination of the causes and justification of body count. People will remember photos of 94 year old ladies and little toddlers for a lot longer than they'll care about the number of *******s being taken out.

There were something like 25+ successful suicide bombings back in April. How many were there this month? 2-3? And one of those was done by Al Qaeda in a different country.

Terrorist acts vary in intensity. That's part of the whole nature of the beast. Unless the IDF is prepared to maintain this level of engagement indefinitely (which will be great for Palestinian propaganda), can you honestly say that any change in the rate of attacks is permanent?

Or are they right back in business the moment you back off? My point was that increased physical isolation and securing of borders would be as effective, with lower levels of IDF and Palestinian casualties. Sharon thinks offensively, he proved that in the Sinai.

How many suicide bombings were stopped? From my understand, dozens. IIRC, there were a couple of planned of major planned attacks (on the Azrieli towers with a truckload of explosives, as well as a fuel depot) that could have had deaths in the hundreds or thousands that was prevented by intelligence gathered in those raids.

How many (illegal) weapons factories and bomb making factories has israel found during it's incursions?

It ain't how many you got, it's how fast can new ones crop up?

Do you think Israel was really better off when 100+ Israelis were killed in suicide bombings in a one month period?

I think Israel would have been better off establishing better physical security and physical isolation of the Palestinian population from the Israeli population centers they target. You can't do much about Israeli arabs, but they don't make these attacks often.

So why have a few Palestinians in the PA (as well as some of the other terrorist organizations) beginning to question the choice of starting the intifada? Could it be that they're discovering that their terrorist infrastructure is being destroyed around them?

The PA has lost credibility on all sides, so I'm sure they're not fond of the tactic. When the best interpretation from the outside view is incompetence or impotence, and the worst complicity, you really undermine your own PR. Arafat is largely interested in his own agenda and aggrandizement, so having to play toady and go through the motions of condemning Hamas, etc., doesn't appease anyone, and just makes him look like the hypocritical toady he is. Meanwhile, Hamas and other organizations, and the younger, more radical leaders have picked up significant support.

It's naive to think their infrastructure is being destroyed, it doesn't take much to make insurgent/terrorist style bombs and weapons, nor does it take long to reestablish them elsewhere. The Intifada may eventually get called off, but that will just be in preparation for the first round. Meanwhile, I don't know how old you are, but I remember the 1967 war on TV, I remember the Munich Olympics, Beirut, etc. This fight in one theater or another, one level of intensity or another, has been going on for a long time, and shows no particular signs that it's going away any time soon.

[Edan]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Point being there's very little stated anywhere about IDF attempts to avoid lethal response to stone throwers.

Well, that's rarely front page news material, but here is a haaretz article about stone throwers from today, if you'd like.

I have to think that one is irrelevant to the topic - which is the specific approach of the IDF to dealing with stone throwers. And police in the US do get convicted of using excessive force.

My point isn't that sometimes they do get off of what may appear to unknowledged and uninformed people such as ourselves (and they do), but that when someone does get off, it could be that they deserved to get off - we don't posses all the evidence and testimony to make a fair judgement.

Show me a gun a kid that size could pick up and handle, let alone fire. Ducking the issue, are we?

Try looking at the link I posted way back on the first or second page.

Here are some more such pictures (from an admittedly very hate-filled site) I would avoid viewing it if you have a weak stomach.

We're talking about the pair of two or three year olds, who couldn't throw a stone two feet. Let's not duck and evade, here, we're talking the specifics of the killing of two small kids.

Who said we're talking about 2-3 year olds? Most of the kids I see on tv or in photos are about 6-12 years old, or even older.

I'd say so - 5 or 6 should have been effective, tops, and that on a moving target.

Tell that to the jury that found the (3-4?) cops not guilty after they shot an unarmed and innocent Amadu Diallo 40-someodd times before stopping.

Put up more rubble and channelize the vehicles better. I'm sure IDF combat engineers are adequately trained.

What do you want them to do, build a brick wall?

Terrorist acts vary in intensity. That's part of the whole nature of the beast. Unless the IDF is prepared to maintain this level of engagement indefinitely (which will be great for Palestinian propaganda), can you honestly say that any change in the rate of attacks is permanent?

Well, so far they've kept it low. In my mind, there are a number of things the Israeli government should do:

Maintain their presence for the time being.
Build a barrier (as is currently being built -though very slowly)
Gather intelligence.
Destroy the terrorist infrastructure (the bombing and weapons factories, the leaders of the various groups)
Follow the money trail and stop the source from reaching the terroist groups (be it external from Iraq and SA, or internal from Arafat or whomever).
Maintain the destroying of suicide bombers homes (that ha already caused 2-3 suicide bombers to turn themselves in rather than commit the terrorist act), and the moving to gaza those relatives that have been shown to have been part of the planning of the terrorist attacks.
Maintain total control over any strategic location (ie, places where a terrorist could fire a missile at Israeli towns, etc)
Negotiate, provided the other side is willing to work at stopping the terroism.
A build up of the Palestinian economy, with accountability so that Arafat doesnt start funneling money to terrorist groups or his bank account...
Accountability in the Palestinian schools.
Train their policeforce so that they will be able to prevent the terroristinfrastructure from being ressurected, stopping the money trail, etc), and slowly withdraw the presence once the police force is capable able to prevent the terrorism from their side as well as able to share intelligence - with accountability.
And then a withdrawl to something simmilar to the Clinton proposals.

Or are they right back in business the moment you back off?

Actually, if the recent history has shown us anything, it's that the terrorism begins to increase when Israel pulls out after having made "security agreements" with the Palestinian leaders. Indeed, numerous times, the Israelis have told their Palestinian counterparts exactly who was planning to carry out an attack and asked that they be arrested - the Palestinians did nothing.

My point was that increased physical isolation and securing of borders would be as effective, with lower levels of IDF and Palestinian casualties.

Fine, suppose they do that. And then the terrorists plan an attack on the oil refinery or the towers - it only takes a few of them to get through to set that up if Israel is less prepared (because it has less direct intelligence about the planned attacks). Do you honestly think if the attacks on thos elocations were carried out, there would be less casualties?

Sharon thinks offensively, he proved that in the Sinai.

True, but he has also shown in the past that he is perfectly willing to work for peace, provided that the security is guarenteed.

You can't do much about Israeli arabs, but they don't make these attacks often.

Actually, a number of them have been involved in these atrtacks (iirc, 1 was a suicide bomber, and maybe 10-15 were actively assisting the suicide bomber, or passing information about where to hit the most civilians, etc. However, I will agree that the overwhelming majority just want to live in peace because they know they're better off.

Meanwhile, Hamas and other organizations, and the younger, more radical leaders have picked up significant support.

Actually, Hamas is doing very poorly at the moment. There was an artical in Time article recently about how seriously Hamas had been hit - something like 80-90% of the military side of Hamas had been arrested or killed, iirc. Why do you think they were actually willing to talk about a temporary ceasefire agreement a month or two ago? I don't think it's because they had an epiphany.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Thanks for the Haaretz link.

Originally posted by Edan
My point isn't that sometimes they do get off of what may appear to unknowledged and uninformed people such as ourselves (and they do), but that when someone does get off, it could be that they deserved to get off - we don't posses all the evidence and testimony to make a fair judgement.

I'm not talking about making fair judgments. I'm talking about limiting responses to non-lethal threats and not doing stupid stuff like getting photographed flipping off the photograper, things like that, which have great propaganda value. It's not like Israel has a surplus of allies.

Try looking at the link I posted way back on the first or second page.

Here are some more such pictures (from an admittedly very hate-filled site) I would avoid viewing it if you have a weak stomach.

I've seen most of those on other sites - although it looks like the Pals in the one photo are holding a piece of lung and liver, not intestine and liver.

Photos of casualties are a lot less impacting than the real thing, so photos don't phase me.

Who said we're talking about 2-3 year olds? Most of the kids I see on tv or in photos are about 6-12 years old.

I was talking about these kids, posted by Paiktis.

http://www.apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?postid=1508758#post1508758

As for the older kids, they're products of what they're taught. Kill the teachers, not the kids.

Tell that to the jury that found the (3-4?) cops not guilty after they shot an unarmed and innocent Amadu Diallo 40-someodd times before stopping.

Juries in the US look for excuses to let cops walk, especially if the issue at trial relates to an arrest, and prosecutors often don't push real hard. Considering the range and ammo types used by police, one or two shots should have been enough. I know a cop in San Diego who has been involved in two shootings - he fired twice, once in each shooting, and was hit once. Both were close range altercations with armed suspects who engaged Derek first - he responded with one shot in each case. 40 is just OK Corral BS, but I'm not surprised a jury bought into it.

What do you want them to do, build a brick wall?

Just a proper vehicle barrier. If they can't figure out dragon's teeth, I'm sure there's plenty of rubble available in Ramallah and Jenin. The point of a road barrier is to channelize a vehicle, and make it perform sharp, very low speed turns to be able to navigate through, so that there's no possibility of trying to floor it and take off. Along the side, there's all sorts of simple things from boards with nails and a little concertina. A brick wall is a little more elaborate than necessary.

Well, so far they've kept it low. In my mind, there are a number of things the Israeli government should do:

Maintain their presence for the time being.
Build a barrier (as is currently being built -though very slowly)
Gather intelligence.
Destroy the terrorist infrastructure (the bombing and weapons factories, the leaders of the various groups)
Follow the money trail and stop the source from reaching the terroist groups (be it external from Iraq and SA, or internal from Arafat or whomever).
Maintain the destroying of suicide bombers homes (that ha already caused 2-3 suicide bombers to turn themselves in rather than commit the terrorist act), and the moving to gaza those relatives that have been shown to have been part of the planning of the terrorist attacks.
Maintain total control over any strategic location (ie, places where a terrorist could fire a missile at Israeli towns, etc)
Negotiate, provided the other side is willing to work at stopping the terroism.
A build up of the Palestinian economy, with accountability so that Arafat doesnt start funneling money to terrorist groups or his bank account...
Accountability in the Palestinian schools.
Train their policeforce so that they will be able to prevent the terroristinfrastructure from being ressurected, stopping the money trail, etc), and slowly withdraw the presence once the police force is capable able to prevent the terrorism from their side as well as able to share intelligence - with accountability.
And then a withdrawl to something simmilar to the Clinton proposals.

Some of these I agree with, some are obvious, some are inconsistent with the current Palestinian political reality. The retaliatory destruction of family's homes is a violation of laws of land warfare, and probably pisses off far more people than it deters.

Actually, if the recent history has shown us anything, it's that the terrorism begins to increase when Israel pulls out after having made "security agreements" with the Palestinian leaders. Indeed, numerous times, the Israelis have told their Palestinian counterparts exactly who was planning to carry out an attack and asked that they be arrested - the Palestinians did nothing.

Of course. Don't mistake me for being either pro-Palestinian or a PA or Arafat apologist. At the same time, it's a tough nut to be one of those Palestinian security types who really wants to crack down on terrorism (assuming there are any). Your own liver might be on display next.

Fine, suppose they do that. And then the terrorists plan an attack on the oil refinery or the towers - it only takes a few of them to get through to set that up if Israel is less prepared (because it has less direct intelligence about the planned attacks). Do you honestly think if the attacks on thos elocations were carried out, there would be less casualties?

I think if you had a double barrier border with about a 100 meter wide kill zone in most places, some form of more limited double-barrier security in congested urban areas, and strict searches, access control and monitoring of authorized crossers, not that many would get through with the equipment to do their jobs.

True, but he has also shown in the past that he is perfectly willing to work for peace, provided that the security is guarenteed.

Here, though, I'm referring more to his choices of tactics (yeah, I know he's not micromanaging, but there's an implied approval at least)

Actually, a number of them have been involved in these atrtacks (iirc, 1 was a suicide bomber, and maybe 10-15 were actively assisting the suicide bomber, or passing information about where to hit the most civilians, etc. However, I will agree that the overwhelming majority just want to live in peace because they know they're better off.

At least one, from Haifa, IIRC. My concern with them is the security context - you can't isolate them outside the way you can isolate the Pals, because they're already in the country.

Actually, Hamas is doing very poorly at the moment. There was an artical in Time article recently about how seriously Hamas had been hit - something like 80-90% of the military side of Hamas had been arrested or killed, iirc. Why do you think they were actually willing to talk about a temporary ceasefire agreement a month or two ago? I don't think it's because they had an epiphany.

It is a rare ceasefire indeed which is proposed from anything other than a desire for tactical advantage. Killing 100% of Hamas wouldn't break my heart, but it's the general concept, not the specific organization, that's the concern. How long or how hard is it for another similar organization to pop up?

[Edan]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
I was talking about these kids, posted by Paiktis.

Except that, AFAIK, those kids weren't throwing stones. They may have been killed as a result of "colateral damage" or a "triggerhappy soldier", but I seriously doubt they could be considered combatants. When I was talking about kids throwing stones being considered combatants, I was refering to the older kids that I had knowledge of.

Kill the teachers, not the kids.

Well, just get them to stand next near to a wanted terrorist...

Juries in the US look for excuses to let cops walk, especially if the issue at trial relates to an arrest, and prosecutors often don't push real hard.

Sometimes, the opposite is true (especially when it involves racial issues and follows a history of police abuse). Personally, I know I would try to be as neutral and open minded as I can if I were on such a Jury, but if anything, I would be harsher on "bad apples" in the police force, because they are supposed to know the rules and are the ones that are supposed to be enforcing them.

40 is just OK Corral BS, but I'm not surprised a jury bought into it.

Well, I was, but ultimately, I put my faith in juries who comprise of a dozen individuals who have access to all the evidence, than in my own uninformed opinion.

At the same time, it's a tough nut to be one of those Palestinian security types who really wants to crack down on terrorism (assuming there are any). Your own liver might be on display next.

True, but ultimately, thats a challenge they're going to have to face and make if they want democracy - it's a challenge others have faced before and succeeded.

I think if you had a double barrier border with about a 100 meter wide kill zone in most places, some form of more limited double-barrier security in congested urban areas, and strict searches, access control and monitoring of authorized crossers, not that many would get through with the equipment to do their jobs.

Well, they are building an electronic fence, but not even the great wall of china was built in a day. And even if you have such a barrier, it won't be 100% effective - nothing is. And it won't stop missile attacks. What's needed is a Palestinian government that actively works against the terrorism.

My concern with them is the security context - you can't isolate them outside the way you can isolate the Pals, because they're already in the country.

Yeah, but ultimately, I don't think Israel has to be that worried about security issues from Israeli Arabs - unlike their Palestinian counterparts, they're not fed hate and garbage in schools they're allowed to talk freely and openly, they have political leaders that listen to them, etc.

It is a rare ceasefire indeed which is proposed from anything other than a desire for tactical advantage. Killing 100% of Hamas wouldn't break my heart, but it's the general concept, not the specific organization, that's the concern.

Well, sure, Hamas is only considering a "ceasefire" (perhaps they mean that the Israeli's cease and Hamas fires? ) because they're trying to regroup and rebuild.

How long or how hard is it for another similar organization to pop up?

Can't the same thing be said of Al Qaeda?

[Az]

they have political leaders that listen to them, etc.

sadly, no. The corruption on the local level in the arab local authorities is ****ing mind-boggling. The arab population is misrepresented, and I can tell you that the positions of the arab population are different from the ones that are presented by their politicians, mostly.

[Edan]

Originally posted by Azazel

sadly, no. The corruption on the local level in the arab local authorities is ****ing mind-boggling.

Still, it can't be mindboggling compared to the corruption in the PA.

The arab population is misrepresented, and I can tell you that the positions of the arab population are different from the ones that are presented by their politicians, mostly.

In what particular issues? and which way?