Latest Middle East Thread

[Kidlicious]

Amnesty accuses Israel of crimes over

white phosphorus


Reuters
By Luke Baker
Monday, January 19, 2009

Human rights group Amnesty International accused Israel of war crimes on Monday, saying its use of white phosphorus munitions in densely populated areas of Gaza was indiscriminate and illegal.

White phosphorus is a high-incendiary substance that burns very brightly and for long periods. It frequently is used to produce smoke screens, but can also be used as a weapon, producing extreme burns if it makes contact with skin.

"Such extensive use of this weapon in Gaza's densely populated residential neighbourhoods is inherently indiscriminate," Donatella Rovera, a Middle East researcher with Amnesty International, said in a statement.

"Its repeated use in this manner, despite evidence of its indiscriminate effects and its toll on civilians, is a war crime," she said.

Use of white phosphorus is not prohibited under international law, but the indiscriminate use of any weapon in an area crowded with civilians could be used as the basis to make war crimes charges, legal experts have said.

Israel said last week all weapons used during its three-week offensive in Gaza complied with international law, but said it would carry out an internal investigation into white phosphorus following claims of its use by rights groups.

"In response to the claims ... relating to the use of phosphorus weapons, and in order to remove any ambiguity, an investigative team has been established in southern command to look into the issue," the Israeli army said.

In response to Amnesty's accusations, a military spokesman said on Monday the army "uses weapons in compliance with international law, while strictly observing that they be used in accordance with the type of combat and its characteristics."

Amnesty is not the first group to accuse Israel of using white phosphorus -- Human Rights Watch made the accusation on Jan. 10, in the midst of the fighting, and the United Nations also said it believed the munition had been used.

But Amnesty's accusations were made on the basis of an on-the-ground study by a British weapons expert following the ceasefire put into force by Israel and Hamas on Sunday.

Weapons expert Chris Cobb-Smith, who visited Gaza as part of a four-person Amnesty team, said he had found widespread evidence of the use of the incendiary material.

"We saw streets and alleyways littered with evidence of the use of white phosphorus, including still-burning wedges and the remnants of the shells and canisters fired by the Israeli army," he said in a statement.

"White phosphorus is a weapon intended to provide a smokescreen for troop movements on the battlefield. It is highly incendiary, air burst and its spread effect is such that it should never be used on civilian areas," he said.

Among the places worst-affected by use of white phosphorous was the U.N. Relief and Works Agency compound in Gaza, Amnesty said. Israel shelled the compound on Jan. 15, causing widespread damage. The U.N. at the time accused Israel of using white phosphorus, but the Israeli army refused to comment.

Israel faces potential claims in international courts for its actions in Gaza, where it launched an attack against Hamas on Dec. 27, with the stated aim of stopping the Islamist group from firing rockets and mortars into Israel.

Israel's foreign minister, Tzipi Livni, said on Monday she was "at peace" with the actions Israel had taken during the conflict, but also said the nation should be prepared to fend off international accusations of war crimes.

[MOBIUS]

God, now I'm reminded why I can't be bothered wasting my time on Poly when it is infested with so many stubbornly thick people...

Why don't people support the assassination policy? Do you expect the Palestinian police forces to extradite terror suspects? What would you have Israel do?

Israel had a ceasefire with HAMAS, if it starts killing Hamas people during this ceasefire (through assassinations), you can pretty much expect Hamas to consider this a breaking of the ceasefire. Israel broke the ceasefire by killing Hamas personnel - they replied with rocket fire.

It's not exactly 'rocket' science...

Oh, and losers don't get to make demands.

This occurred BEFORE Israel's destruction of Gaza - FFS!

Well, here you made some outrageous claim that Hamas was winning. I suppose winning means something else in a country that's been a English royal heirloom for 700 years. Still, Siro was right. Hamas is getting beaten to a pulp, and Israel is not afraid of them.

Hamas 'won' by preventing Israel from achieving its objectives. Maybe it lost lots of fighters in Gaza, but Israel 'won' millions of new enemies across the world! Just because you have no more imagination further than the physical destruction wrought by Israel is not my problem...

That's reasonable. I found one mention of a Hamas request for cease-fire in December, but it predated the campaign.

Yeah, BEFORE the campaign - sheesh just how thick are you!!?

Even George W. Bush wouldn't have newly recruited police stand around a parade ground while the IDF is attacking. Sounds like Hamas is stupider than our soon to be former President.

POLICE you ****ing imbecile!!! In a war they shouldn't even be targets - certainly not new recruits mass murdered in a passing out parade!!!

One of the objectives of Allied air campaigns during World War II was to destroy Axis industry. They flew tens of thousands of sorties and at the end they had not fully destroyed the Axis war industry. However, they did beat the crap out of it.

Total 100% victory is not necessary or even feasible. Damaging severely, making it more costly for the enemy to continue than it is for you to beat them, that is victory.

You have absolutely no idea...

Nobody told Hamas to be there. They're just cowards with no respect for the laws of war.

And in most cases they weren't. Israel used that as a useful lie knowing that they had already prevented independent observers (the press) from verifying these claims. The first school one was proved to be a lie by the UN and Israel quickly changed its story to it being an accident...

Israel's modus operandi is to lie, lie and lie again. It lied about using WP, it lied about how it was using WP - it is constantly found over and over again to be lying through its teeth...

Prove that it's not true. I've heard what Siro says from multiple sources.

Remember that Israel can claim credit for destroying munitions dumps just as easily as killing people. And it gets a lot of heat in the press whenever civilians die. So it really is in their best interests to give civilians warning, if only to keep their international lifelines open.

Stop for a second and think what you are saying!!!?? If you are actively trying to kill someone - you don't ****ing warn them you are coming!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

****ing idiot!

This fallacy has already been corrected. Artillery is not as accurate as a guided missile. Expecting it to be is a sign of ignorance.

Hence why all those civilian targets were hit - thanks for proving my point to Siro. At the start of the conflict he was claiming everything was precision guided - then he was using the excuse that tank and arty shells weren't guided. He can't have it both ways.

Apparently one in six buildings in Gaza has been destroyed in this wanton voilence perpetrated by Israel - out of a population of 1,500,000...

Nice one.

Except now, less and less people are believing Israel's lies - least of which Obama, of whom Israel's armed forces are scuttling back out of Gaza in time for his inauguration, that scared they are of pissing him off.

[MOBIUS]

In response to Siro's picture...

Last image edited by Ming
Mobius, check out the posting rules. No death, or grossly injured people pics are allowed.

Ming, you didn't have to delete the link to the story out as well - IT wasn't an image of 'death' or 'grossly injured people' in itself...

Just goes to show what side your bread is buttered on in terms of how far your censorship goes - i.e. beyond the terms of the posting rules.

What's the matter Ming, don't like to actually see the dirty work of actions you agree with?

THIS IS A LINK TO THE STORY ABOUT A 14 YEAR OLD BOY WHO WAS PERMANENTLY BLINDED BY ISRAELI WHITE PHOSPHOROUS WHICH WAS USED AS A WEAPON AND THEREFORE A WAR CRIME UNDER THE GENEVA CONVENTION - WARNING THERE IS A PICTURE OF THIS BOY IN THE ARTICLE

[Felch]

God, now I'm reminded why I can't be bothered wasting my time on Poly when it is infested with so many stubbornly thick people...

Since you're wasting your time here, this is clearly false.

Israel had a ceasefire with HAMAS, if it starts killing Hamas people during this ceasefire (through assassinations), you can pretty much expect Hamas to consider this a breaking of the ceasefire. Israel broke the ceasefire by killing Hamas personnel - they replied with rocket fire.

It's not exactly 'rocket' science...

The way your sentence was structured didn't make this meaning clear. It seemed as though you were referring to demands that Hamas has made recently, such as the "get out in one week" nonsense. Perhaps you should shift your studies away from diction and towards syntax.

This occurred BEFORE Israel's destruction of Gaza - FFS!

Again, this isn't remotely clear from what you were saying. BOLD and is no substitute for clear writing.

Hamas 'won' by preventing Israel from achieving its objectives. Maybe it lost lots of fighters in Gaza, but Israel 'won' millions of new enemies across the world! Just because you have no more imagination further than the physical destruction wrought by Israel is not my problem...

The same people who hate Israel now, hated Israel in November. Seriously, do you think that the average Arab opinion of Israel could be any lower?

Yeah, BEFORE the campaign - sheesh just how thick are you!!?

What are you talking about? You told Siro to prove that Hamas requested a cease-fire in the first week of the conflict. I looked it up, and only found a mention of a request before the conflict. I mentioned this, I even in a moment of temporary insanity said that your request was "reasonable." Since you're clearly irrational, I withdraw that statement.

POLICE you ****ing imbecile!!! In a war they shouldn't even be targets - certainly not new recruits mass murdered in a passing out parade!!!

Why aren't they targets? These aren't bobbies armed with flashlights and harsh language, they're Hamas gunmen.

You have absolutely no idea...

Either edify me, or don't. But that crap makes me wonder. . .

And in most cases they weren't. Israel used that as a useful lie knowing that they had already prevented independent observers (the press) from verifying these claims. The first school one was proved to be a lie by the UN and Israel quickly changed its story to it being an accident...

Israel's modus operandi is to lie, lie and lie again. It lied about using WP, it lied about how it was using WP - it is constantly found over and over again to be lying through its teeth...

According to the UN? **** the UN. They've got a Human Rights Council with Saudi Arabia, Cuba, Russia, and a host of other vile regimes on board. And this new Human Rights Council is a replacement for an even worse organization that was around a few years ago.

Stop for a second and think what you are saying!!!?? If you are actively trying to kill someone - you don't ****ing warn them you are coming!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

****ing idiot!

Well I thought about it and your s and your abuse of punctuation convinced me. Clearly I'm a "****ing idiot! "

Hence why all those civilian targets were hit - thanks for proving my point to Siro. At the start of the conflict he was claiming everything was precision guided - then he was using the excuse that tank and arty shells weren't guided. He can't have it both ways.

Apparently one in six buildings in Gaza has been destroyed in this wanton voilence perpetrated by Israel - out of a population of 1,500,000...

Nice one.

Except now, less and less people are believing Israel's lies - least of which Obama, of whom Israel's armed forces are scuttling back out of Gaza in time for his inauguration, that scared they are of pissing him off.

One in six building were destroyed and out of 1.5 million people, fewer than 1,000 civilians were killed. That's stupendous. Imagine if the RAF mass murder of German civilians during their nighttime raids were that humane.

[Sirotnikov]

The Israeli's are so evil that we can't show what they are doing to people on this website.

There are enough pictures of Gaza devastation you can post, without resorting to deformed and scorched bodies.

Do you really think that showing gore has a place in an argument?
Do you really think that I lack gore pictures, that are result of Hamas attacks to post in response?

I can send you a number of links to pictures of utterly destroyed Israeli houses, or bleeding and deformed Israeli children. Except for provoking disgust it serves no purpose, so I don't do that.

The only time I posted a destroyed house was in response to someone's descriptions of Hamas rockets as a mere nuissance.

[Dr Strangelove]

Chapparal is a limited use AA system. Israel does not use it's chapparal for engaging surface targets, nor would it be any use in providing cover to ground forces in urban combat, or unearthing booby traps and IED's in the scenario in which artillery was used.

I'm using the wrong name for the system then. I'm talking about 155mm howitzers shells using a laser guidance system. They've been in use since before Gulf War 1.

Copperhead is the name of the system.

[Sirotnikov]

Amnesty accuses Israel of crimes over
Human rights group Amnesty International accused Israel of war crimes on Monday, saying its use of white phosphorus munitions in densely populated areas of Gaza was indiscriminate and illegal.

[...]

"Such extensive use of this weapon in Gaza's densely populated residential neighbourhoods is inherently indiscriminate," Donatella Rovera, a Middle East researcher with Amnesty International, said in a statement.

[...]
Use of white phosphorus is not prohibited under international law, but the indiscriminate use of any weapon in an area crowded with civilians could be used as the basis to make war crimes charges, legal experts have said.

[...]

"In response to the claims ... relating to the use of phosphorus weapons, and in order to remove any ambiguity, an investigative team has been established in southern command to look into the issue," the Israeli army said.

In response to Amnesty's accusations, a military spokesman said on Monday the army "uses weapons in compliance with international law, while strictly observing that they be used in accordance with the type of combat and its characteristics."

[...]Weapons expert Chris Cobb-Smith, who visited Gaza as part of a four-person Amnesty team, said he had found widespread evidence of the use of the incendiary material.
[...]

"White phosphorus is a weapon intended to provide a smokescreen for troop movements on the battlefield. It is highly incendiary, air burst and its spread effect is such that it should never be used on civilian areas," he said.

[...]

Everything quoted so far is clearly ignoring the distinct division made in international law between WP smoke rounds, and WP incinerating weapon. In the contrary, several persons are intentionally using unclear language to obfuscate the difference.

Smoke rounds are perfectly legal and reasonable to use in civilian environment. The Geneva CD says so, and the ICRC says so.

The fact that out of hundreds of smoke shells fired, there are only a dozen people injured just strengthens the argument that it is not attack-grade WP weapon that is being used, but a legal, internationally accepted means for smoke screen.

Yes, in some cases in can hurt civilians. Still doesn't make it illegal.



ICRC statement from a week ago regarding Israeli use of WP smoke screen ammunition:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j2vQ8GynRSG8lBEQir4RtXL9Ib2AD95MLHHG0

ICRC: Israel's use of white phosphorus not illegal

By BRADLEY S. KLAPPER – 6 days ago

GENEVA (AP) — The international Red Cross said Tuesday that Israel has fired white phosphorus shells in its offensive in the Gaza Strip, but has no evidence to suggest the incendiary agent is being used improperly or illegally.

The comments came after a human rights organization accused the Jewish state of using white phosphorus, hich ignites when it strikes the skin and burns straight through or until it is cut off from oxygen. It can cause horrific injuries.

The International Committee of the Red Cross urged Israel to exercise "extreme caution" in using the incendiary agent, which is used to illuminate targets at night or create a smoke screen for day attacks, said Peter Herby, the head of the organization's mines-arms unit.

"In some of the strikes in Gaza it's pretty clear that phosphorus was used," Herby told The Associated Press. "But it's not very unusual to use phosphorus to create smoke or illuminate a target. We have no evidence to suggest it's being used in any other way."

In response, the Israeli military said Tuesday that it "wishes to reiterate that it uses weapons in compliance with international law, while strictly observing that they be used in accordance with the type of combat and its characteristics."

Herby said that using phosphorus to illuminate a target or create smoke is legitimate under international law, and that there was no evidence the Jewish state was intentionally using phosphorus in a questionable way, such as burning down buildings or consciously putting civilians at risk

[..]

The following statements by Amnesty Intl. are clearly not supported by ICRC, or the Geneva CD:

""White phosphorus is a weapon intended to provide a smokescreen for troop movements on the battlefield. It is highly incendiary, air burst and its spread effect is such that it should never be used on civilian areas"

""Such extensive use of this weapon in Gaza's densely populated residential neighbourhoods is inherently indiscriminate,"
As well as this nugget:
"the indiscriminate use of any weapon in an area crowded with civilians could be used as the basis to make war crimes charges"


Wired.com also has a good article on this issue:

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2009/01/white-phosphoru.html

nternational watchdogs are calling the Israeli use of white phosphorus shells in Gaza a "war crime." Could they be right?

Calls for an international war crimes investigation in Gaza are getting louder, especially over the issue of white phosphorus (WP) shells. A senior United Nations source tells the Guardian newspaper that they were compiling evidence of war crimes. The Israeli Defense Forces are pulling together counter-evidence -- and standing by their use of WP. On Tuesday, the Israeli military spokesman said that it "wishes to reiterate that it uses weapons in compliance with international law, while strictly observing that they be used in accordance with the type of combat and its characteristics."

White phosphorus was first used as a weapon by Fenian terrorists in the 19th century. Although it can be used as an incendiary, these days WP is more commonly used to produce smokescreens as it produces very thick white smoke. (A notable exception was in the 2004 action in Fallujah, where U.S. artillery carried out "shake and bake" fire missions using a mixture of WP and high explosive shells to drive insurgents out of cover and kill them.)

In Gaza, even the Red Cross accepts that the intention is probably to use WP to create smoke rather than to deliberately injure; the Associated Press quotes the ICRC's Peter Herby as saying: "It's not very unusual to use phosphorus to create smoke or illuminate a target. We have no evidence to suggest it's being used in any other way."

WP causes terrible injuries, burning right through skin and flesh. It is not classed as a chemical weapon, and as Jason Sigger points out, WP smoke rounds are not classed as an incendiary weapon either. This is because the 1980 Geneva Protocol on Incendiary Weapons specifically does not cover "Munitions which may have incidental incendiary effects, such as illuminants, tracers, smoke or signaling systems."

The weapons involved are likely to be U.S.-supplied M825A1 155mm artillery rounds, each of which scatters a hundred and sixteen wafers of WP-infused felt over a wide area. Using felt rather than pure WP ensures slower burning over several minutes rather than just a cloud of instant smoke that rapidly disappears. The M825A1 scatters its payload over an area between 150 and 250 meters in diameter.

So, by this logic, there are no incendiary weapons being used and no case to answer. However, the case put forward by Human Rights Watch and others is not that WP is an incendiary, but that its use "violates the requirement under international humanitarian law to take all feasible precautions to avoid civilian injury and loss of life." This looks like a reference to a different treaty, the 1949 Geneva Protocol, which has a section on "General protection against effects of hostilities":

(ii) take all feasible precautions in the choice of means and methods of attack with a view to avoiding, and in any event to minimizing, incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians and damage to civilian objects;

There are strong indications that the WP rounds are causing civilian injuries. The L.A. Times reported one dead and dozens injured in Southern Gaza by what appears to have been a white phosphorus attack. Witnesses describe a shell bursting and scattering burning objects: "One landed on Mayar, my baby daughter. It was like a block of fire, a piece of plastic on fire. When I knocked it off her, it exploded and out came this heavy white smoke with a very bad smell."

[...]

[Sirotnikov]

I'm using the wrong name for the system then. I'm talking about 155mm howitzers shells using a laser guidance system. They've been in use since before Gulf War 1.

Copperhead is the name of the system.

I am not aware whether we have it.

Again, we have alot of guided ammunition. Most of the missiles we use have mounted cameras on them as well, and can be directed in flight.

But IDF tank and artillery fire are not guided, nor can they be controlled after the shot was made.

Destroying targets using laser marking is done on known targets. It is not possible or effective to do as part of cover fire.

Israel is aware of the fact that tanks and artillery fire is not as exact as guided missiels are. Of the ~10 IDF soldiers killed, most were killed by friendly fire from tanks, either due to poor identification or due to other errors. The chief armor officer has called for increasing control over tank fire, and no doubt this issue will be put on the table of tank engineers.

But then again, such errors have always been part of war. I would like to remind people how bad NATO guided missile systems did in the Yugoslavia campaign. They bombed embassies, refugee convoys, media vehicles, zoos etc.

[Sirotnikov]

another good wired article:

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2009/01/its-still-not-c.html

Reporters and bloggers are fiercely engaged in discussions over Israel's alleged use of white phosphorus artillery shells in Gaza. "Atrocities!" the usual suspects shout -- with little-to-no-evidence to back up their cries. The fact is, there are both legitimate and illegitimate uses for white phosphorous rounds. And right now, we don't know what the Israelis did with those munitions.

Smart money is that this is an American-designed M825A1 White Phosphorus 155-mm artillery round, designed to place quick or immediate smoke on a target for either screening enemy forces or for marking a target for further artillery bombardments. It can also be used (incorrectly) as a device to flush combatants or noncombatants out of an urban area, as the white phosphorus fumes are noxious and slightly toxic. During the Fallujah campaign in 2005, U.S. artillery units did this -- and wrote about it afterward. The question being debated is, are the Israelis (and the U.S. troops) deliberately using incendiary chemical weapons to indiscriminately burn and maim civilians? I think it's unlikely.

As I noted during the Fallujah fight, the 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Incendiary Weapons outlines what is and what is not an incendiary device.
"Incendiary weapon" means any weapon or munition which is primarily designed to set fire to objects or to cause burn injury to persons through the action of flame, heat, or combination thereof, produced by a chemical reaction of a substance delivered on the target.

(a) Incendiary weapons can take the form of, for example, flame throwers, fougasses, shells, rockets, grenades, mines, bombs and other containers of incendiary substances.

(b) Incendiary weapons do not include:

(i) Munitions which may have incidental incendiary effects, such as illuminants, tracers, smoke or signaling systems;

(ii) Munitions designed to combine penetration, blast or fragmentation effects with an additional incendiary effect, such as armour-piercing projectiles, fragmentation shells, explosive bombs and similar combined-effects munitions in which the incendiary effect is not specifically designed to cause burn injury to persons, but to be used against military objectives, such as armoured vehicles, aircraft and installations or facilities. [emphasis mine]

It's a fine line, but pretty clear that WP munitions are not, primarily, incendiary weapons; they do have "incidental incendiary effects."

[...]

However, the use of WP munitions in an urban setting continues to be a controversial tactic, given the potential impact on civilians and their homes. As one of my more learned colleagues noted, the repulsion here is not that noncombatants become casualties during war, it's that nations make war on each other for the wrong reasons.

[Sirotnikov]

Just to make sure a lie is not passed as truth:

IDF indeed made warning phone calls to houses that were not purely military targets, but also contained civilians. I know this for a fact, and it has been confirmed in Israeli and world press, including a story in NYT.

I can't guarantee that the Hamas leader was indeed warned, but the press reported that his household was warned twice, and I know for a fact that such a policy does exist and was employed in regards to all not purely military targets.

Israel has also been intentionally dropping duds on the roofs of civilian homes that contained weapons, to make civilians who were left to guard the building to flee. This I also know for a fat, and was covered by Israeli press as well as NYT.

[notyoueither]

In the hands of the right people artillery can be as precise as bombs, artillery rounds can even be laser guided, i.e., the Chapparal system. The typical bomb has much more blast power than the typical artillery round though. A 500 pound bomb has about 200 pounds of explosive in it - that's more explosive than the HE version of a WW2 16 inch naval shell. A 155mm round generally has only 8 to 10 pounds of explosive in it. Anti-artillery radar can locate the position of the gun firing a round within 50 feet. If a surveillance drone were available to monitor that position it could be marked with a laser by the drone. Laser guided ordinance would land within 4 inches of the site. Laser guided ordinance would generally have somewhat less explosive, but certainly enough to destroy a few rocket launchers.

Support of infantry is under discussion.

Artillery called in by infantry in combat is not going to be accurate or have great target selection compared to what can be done by special weapons used in limited circumstances and quantities, like guided munitions deployed on an air craft.

The original question was why use air power in an urban combat zone. The answer is that air power can be more specifically targetted and can result in fewer civilian casualties to obtain the objective of destroying a specific enemy position.

Oh. and from what I've read, the Israelis were not using typical bombs. They used underpowered munitions to limit collateral damage.

[notyoueither]

My use of the word is the correct usage. The whole etymology of the word 'decimate' is literally 'to take a tenth'. If the morons of the world want to mangle its usage through wholesale ignorance, then I suppose at least you expose yourselves as such...

There are tons of far more appropriate words to describe what Siro was trying to get across (wrongly, because it is likely that they have only decimated about 10% of Hamas' rocket stockpiles!): Annihilate, exterminate, destroy, or devastate.

Fight with the OED over it.

http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/decimate?view=uk

USAGE The earliest sense of decimate was ‘kill one in every ten of’, a reference to the ancient Roman practice of killing one in every ten of a group of soldiers as a collective punishment. This has been more or less totally superseded by the sense ‘kill or destroy a large proportion of’, although some traditionalists argue that this later sense is incorrect.

Congratulations. You are a conservative.

Meanwhile, you are also a first class ass for criticising a ferrigners English when they were clearly correct in their usage. I might point out that 'decimation' meaning near destruction of a force is a common military usage. Hmmm, I wonder where Siro would have picked it up?

At any rate, your ignorance of English is not his problem, and I believe you owe him an apology.

[Ming]

I guess people don't understand the concept of NO PERSONAL INSULTS

DISCUSS THE TOPIC AND NOT THE POSTERS!
Or I guess I have to start banning people if it continues.
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

[Sirotnikov]

Support of infantry is under discussion.

Oh. and from what I've read, the Israelis were not using typical bombs. They used underpowered munitions to limit collateral damage.

from the NYT:

The Israelis say they are also using new weapons, like a small-diameter smart bomb, the GBU-39, which Israel bought last fall from Washington. The bomb, which is very accurate, has a small explosive, as little as 60 to 80 pounds, to minimize collateral damage in an urban area. But it can also penetrate the earth to hit bunkers or tunnels.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/world/middleeast/11hamas.html?pagewanted=1&_r=3&hp

[OneFootInTheGrave]

if you are born as a Palestinian, what do you have to live for?

If this was Roman empire, they'd just build a big stand on the border, and would be periodically letting lions and tigers into the area... you could watch the ensuing spectacle for years and earn a fortune for ticket sales... more fun and better business than the current periodical bombing massacre that we watch over the TV... with similar inevitable consequences....

does it mean we are soft today?