1200 killed, many more injured in Israeli attacks in Gaza

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby Izawwlgood » Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:07 am UTC

Didn't he also claim that there were no gays in Iran? And his presidency result in an increase of human rights violations within Irans borders, including clamping down on women in 'improper garb'?

But I'm sure Ales remarks have something to do with Mahmoud's repeated comments pertaining to 'wiping Israel off the map'. Very diplomatic. And holocaust denial...

I mean, really, do I even need to pull up the wiki on him?
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
3.14159265...
Irrational (?)
Posts: 2413
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:05 am UTC
Location: Ajax, Canada

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby 3.14159265... » Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:28 am UTC

"Wiping Israel of the map" - I would do some research into that.

"Holocaust denial" - I would do some research into that, I think it's more "can a few of our scientists check out this stuff, because we like science". I find the laws against "questioning the holocaust" in Europe to be stupid.

"No gays in Iran" - Having been there, I can tell you more people have a homosexual experience there than in the west. I am quite sure he wouldn't have denied that as it would be stupid. My guess is that he was talking about the cultural movement for civil unions and marriages for same sex couples. This is non-existent but that is a stupid point because people are afraid to express those views when they are not given the liberty to express them. That is a stupid political statement like "Mission Accomplished" rather than evidence for evil.

I have lived in Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan. Ask me questions, I can tell you the cultural equivalents. The view people have of the region is extremely skewed because everything is much more polarized there.

New thread?
"The best times in life are the ones when you can genuinely add a "Bwa" to your "ha""- Chris Hastings

++$_
Mo' Money
Posts: 2370
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 4:06 am UTC

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby ++$_ » Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:32 am UTC

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4529198.stm
Mr Ahmadinejad said he did not believe six million Jews had died at the hands of the Nazis last century... "They have created a myth today that they call the massacre of Jews and they consider it a principle above God, religions and the prophets," he said.
This does not sound like "Let's do some research because we like science."

User avatar
3.14159265...
Irrational (?)
Posts: 2413
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:05 am UTC
Location: Ajax, Canada

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby 3.14159265... » Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:48 am UTC

I need the Persian quote, "wipe Israel off the map" was clearly and deliberately mistranslated so I have no reason to believe this is correct. I think it may depend on the word that has been translated as "myth".

The above is good reason to think he is denying rather than asking for investigation, which is a stupid stance.

I am looking for the quote myself.
"The best times in life are the ones when you can genuinely add a "Bwa" to your "ha""- Chris Hastings

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7357
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby The Great Hippo » Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:52 am UTC

3.14159265... wrote:The above is good reason to think he is denying rather than asking for investigation, which is a stupid stance.


Asking for investigation is a stupid stance, too. I don't intend to turn this into a 'Classic Tactics of the Holocaust Denier' thread, but just as an aside: People who call for investigations into the Holocaust are not asking for 'good science' to be applied. Many people already make their careers by applying 'good science' to the study of the Holocaust. More dialogue is always welcome--and there are certainly a few pervasive myths to dispel--but there's no widespread campaign of misinformation afoot.

User avatar
ameretrifle
Vera
Posts: 814
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 6:32 am UTC
Location: Canada (the flat bit)

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby ameretrifle » Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:57 pm UTC

One of the reasons I'm loath to take a side in this debate is that I am growing more and more certain with each post that they ALL did it.

Both sides have lied, and cheated, and murdered, for reasons that seemed perfectly reasonable to them at the time. There are good people on both sides, and lunatics on both sides. They've both been wronged, and they've both cheerfully paid that back with further wrong. Instead of trying to pick through a million stories (half a million, with two sides to each) to try to weigh which side has been marginally less evil, I would really prefer there to be a third side. For them both, or against them both; there's hardly much difference. This ought to be what the UN is for, except it seems they're patently useless in this situation (and possibly many others as well, but that would be another thread). This ought to be what the US is doing, except (apparently contrary to the situation in Europe, if half of you are to be believed) all the politicians here seem to be fervently pro-Israel, and also someone seems to have gotten all our military stuck in a bunch of other situations in roughly the same region. Rather negligent, if you ask me. So, there might be no third faction to support-- but I refuse to believe that leaves me stuck with one of the other two.

Long story short, I won't support any of those stubborn idiots above the others. Not going to try to stop you guys, though. So carry on.

User avatar
westcydr
Posts: 156
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 7:20 pm UTC
Location: By my computer
Contact:

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby westcydr » Thu Jan 08, 2009 1:38 pm UTC

OK, to the Farsi expert who claims that "death to Israel" is not literal because he says similar things in a non death-meaning manner to his buddies.. When you are joking around, do you scream it like you mean it, or say it in a joking manner? I am sure if you screamed it at the top of your lungs to your friend, he'd be more concerned than if you said it in a joking manner....
If you were to say "fuck you" jokingly, it's not going to sound like a death threat.... But if you say it with fist in the air, and start a chant in a crowd... I might want to lean towards taking it a little more literal..
---------------------------
ICQ/AIM 5683738
יששכר
"Who needs a quote in a signature, anyways?"

something math related
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2008 10:00 am UTC

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby something math related » Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:20 pm UTC

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTGbP55HGi8

Hey, guys, I'm not usually very active in these discussions, for good reason (i, kind of, really hate conflict and arguments). but i thought this may give people some food for thought about the Palestinians. i am not claiming that they are all like this. but some are, and that's not very good.

User avatar
fjafjan
THE fjafjan
Posts: 4766
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:22 pm UTC
Location: Down south up north in the west of eastern west.
Contact:

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby fjafjan » Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:21 pm UTC

westcydr wrote:OK, to the Farsi expert who claims that "death to Israel" is not literal because he says similar things in a non death-meaning manner to his buddies.. When you are joking around, do you scream it like you mean it, or say it in a joking manner? I am sure if you screamed it at the top of your lungs to your friend, he'd be more concerned than if you said it in a joking manner....
If you were to say "fuck you" jokingly, it's not going to sound like a death threat.... But if you say it with fist in the air, and start a chant in a crowd... I might want to lean towards taking it a little more literal..

You've never been a protest, or anything like that have you? football game? People scream "fuck you" while waving arms in the air all the time without meaning they want to kill them.
//Yepp, THE fjafjan (who's THE fjafjan?)
Liza wrote:Fjafjan, your hair is so lovely that I want to go to Sweden, collect the bit you cut off in your latest haircut and keep it in my room, and smell it. And eventually use it to complete my shrine dedicated to you.

User avatar
westcydr
Posts: 156
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 7:20 pm UTC
Location: By my computer
Contact:

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby westcydr » Thu Jan 08, 2009 2:28 pm UTC

fjafjan wrote:
westcydr wrote:OK, to the Farsi expert who claims that "death to Israel" is not literal because he says similar things in a non death-meaning manner to his buddies.. When you are joking around, do you scream it like you mean it, or say it in a joking manner? I am sure if you screamed it at the top of your lungs to your friend, he'd be more concerned than if you said it in a joking manner....
If you were to say "fuck you" jokingly, it's not going to sound like a death threat.... But if you say it with fist in the air, and start a chant in a crowd... I might want to lean towards taking it a little more literal..

You've never been a protest, or anything like that have you? football game? People scream "fuck you" while waving arms in the air all the time without meaning they want to kill them.

Well, if they used the word "kill" in any way in that forum, I'd worry.. and I have been to sporting events and protests.. and seen the violence that ensues when opponents meet up in those environments..
Those are supposed to be peaceful.. how much worse at events not meant to be would such hatred be? Sure, people say to friend jokingly, "I'm gonna kill you", but when a footie match has fans screaming about death to the other team of fans, the cops don't see it as "harmless"....
---------------------------
ICQ/AIM 5683738
יששכר
"Who needs a quote in a signature, anyways?"

User avatar
aleflamedyud
wants your cookies
Posts: 3307
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 7:50 pm UTC
Location: The Central Bureaucracy

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby aleflamedyud » Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:02 pm UTC

3.14159265... wrote:I need the Persian quote, "wipe Israel off the map" was clearly and deliberately mistranslated so I have no reason to believe this is correct. I think it may depend on the word that has been translated as "myth".

The above is good reason to think he is denying rather than asking for investigation, which is a stupid stance.

I am looking for the quote myself.

Oh, it was mistranslated -- by the Iranian news agency that put out the story. The correct translation would have been "erase the Zionist Regime from the pages of history", an equally nasty curse drawing from Judeo-Islamic religious ideas. Seriously, please stop defending this obvious douchebag and go back to defending the Palestinians. At least some of them actually need defending!

This ought to be what the UN is for, except it seems they're patently useless in this situation

The UN is worse than useless, it is unabashedly biased and openly used as a tool of the Palestinian cause by the Arab-Muslim voting bloc in the General Assembly. Some people say the USA needs to stop voting in Israel's favor in the Security Council. I say Israel needs to be allowed full membership in the UN.
"With kindness comes naïveté. Courage becomes foolhardiness. And dedication has no reward. If you can't accept any of that, you are not fit to be a graduate student."

User avatar
Lumpy
I can has morbid obesity?
Posts: 1450
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 2:19 pm UTC

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby Lumpy » Thu Jan 08, 2009 7:39 pm UTC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel,_Pa ... ed_Nations

In 2007, the countries actively involved in the Israeli-Arab conflict and hosts of Palestinian refugees (Palestine, Israel, Lebanon, Syria), which represents 2% of the 192 member states and 0.5% of the world's population, were the subject of 76% of country-specific GA resolutions,


Yeah, they do spend a lot of time on Israel and its neighbors compared to, say, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda's problem with the Tutsi rebels and the Hutu rebels, but to be fair, I think it's mostly because they hardly care at all about any part of Africa not bordering the Mediterranean.

In a lecture at the 2003 UN conference on anti-Semitism, Anne Bayefsky said:

There has never been a single resolution about the decades-long repression of the civil and political rights of 1.3 billion people in China, or the more than a million female migrant workers in Saudi Arabia being kept as virtual slaves, or the virulent racism which has brought 600,000 people to the brink of starvation in Zimbabwe.


I think that's because of China's seat on the UN Security Council, Saudi Arabia's relationship with the United States, and that China and Russia are both supporters of Mugabe. I think Israel is closer to the U.S. than it is to Russia, and thus third parties like Hugo Chavez become biased toward Palestinians as part of an anti-America imperialism tirade, so Israel becomes some kind of bizarre proxy for left over Cold War feelings for them?

User avatar
segmentation fault
Posts: 1770
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 4:10 pm UTC
Location: Nu Jersey
Contact:

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby segmentation fault » Thu Jan 08, 2009 7:48 pm UTC

3.14159265... wrote:I need the Persian quote, "wipe Israel off the map" was clearly and deliberately mistranslated


yes. theres no such idiom in farsi.

aleflamedyud wrote:Oh, it was mistranslated -- by the Iranian news agency that put out the story. The correct translation would have been "erase the Zionist Regime from the pages of history", an equally nasty curse drawing from Judeo-Islamic religious ideas. Seriously, please stop defending this obvious douchebag and go back to defending the Palestinians. At least some of them actually need defending!


its an equally nasty regime...
people are like LDL cholesterol for the internet

User avatar
3.14159265...
Irrational (?)
Posts: 2413
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:05 am UTC
Location: Ajax, Canada

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby 3.14159265... » Thu Jan 08, 2009 9:37 pm UTC

Oh, it was mistranslated -- by the Iranian news agency that put out the story. The correct translation would have been "erase the Zionist Regime from the pages of history", an equally nasty curse drawing from Judeo-Islamic religious ideas. Seriously, please stop defending this obvious douchebag and go back to defending the Palestinians. At least some of them actually need defending!
I didn't say it was mistranslated, I said I wanted to see the word.

Do some more research on the origin of "eras the zionist regime from the pages of history". I think Zionism is racist by definition and should be gotten rid of. Take that and make it "Israel should be wiped off the map". Then take that and make it "I want to kill all Jews". Then call me anti-semetic.

I don't mean to be attacking you, but it's annoying to be called an anti-semite when you are speaking for human rights. Much like Ahmadenejad must be feeling.

This "obvious douchebag" happens to be the president of a country. Democratically elected with good ties with a lot of countries except Europe and the US. He is also the strongest leader in the Muslim world.

westcydr I am not a Farsi expert, please don't patronize. I do speak Farsi though.

I repeat: "Death to ..." is a phrase in Persian, the opposite of which is "... Zenda baad". When people protest against a political leader, they say "Death to ...". It can even be used for movements. Such as "Marg bar terrorism", I saw at a recent protest.

Please watch the following: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBTmX-xH ... re=related

What do you think they are saying? "Death to diktator" (dictator). Are they calling for his death or for his removal?

Of course he is asking for the remapping of the region in a way that would be significantly unfavorable to Israel. Yet it is a far cry to the degree with which the US holds an unfavorable position towards Palestinians.

yes. theres no such idiom in farsi.
There is but I doubt he used "Afsaana". Without the Persian I have to trust the same people that told me he asked for "wiping Israel off the map"?

Do you realize that media deliberately changed the words of a foreign leader?
"The best times in life are the ones when you can genuinely add a "Bwa" to your "ha""- Chris Hastings

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby Dream » Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:31 pm UTC

While this little linguistic tete a tete is just fascinating, other events continue regardless of whether Farsi has a word for "wipe". Rockets have fallen on Northern Israel, doubtless the work of, or closely related to Hezbollah. The UN has withdrawn its staff from Gaza after one of them was killed by an Israeli tank round while in a marked vehicle on a pre-arranged route.

Perhaps I am being cynical, but I reckon Hezbollah might still be on a high after 2006, and might have been waiting for a peace initiative before they weighed in with their own rockets, in order to prolong the war and get a chance at humiliating Israel again. However, it is also possible that they just had enough of inaction, perhaps on a leash from Iran, and finally just opened fire anyway.

I must say, I expected nothing less than the killing of a UN worker by Israel. They have a track record of killing non-combatants.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby Malice » Fri Jan 09, 2009 12:48 am UTC

Dream wrote:I must say, I expected nothing less than the killing of a UN worker by Israel. They have a track record of killing non-combatants.


It's a regrettable incident, and I'd be interested to know what fuck-up led to it. But saying "they have a track record of killing non-combatants" is like saying "they have a track record of wearing uniforms". Any war is going to involve killing non-combatants, and will until WW6, which will be fought with robots. Until then, when humans are in front of the target and behind the gun, mistakes and imprecisions and misidentifications are going to be made. By everyone everywhere, not just Israel.
Image

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby Dream » Fri Jan 09, 2009 1:18 am UTC

ie.net wrote:In an earlier attack last Friday, the ICRC reported that two clearly marked ambulance medics from the PRCS, evacuating the dead and wounded from an earlier Israeli attack, were targeted by Israeli army fire.

The paramedics were wearing fluorescent jackets and their ambulances had flashing lights visible from a considerable distance.

"I have no doubt that one missile was aimed at us. I do not know for certain whether it was meant to kill us or warn us to keep away, but it was definitely aimed in our direction," said Palestinian ambulance driver Khaled Abu Saada.

Sammy Hassan, a spokesperson from al-Shifa Hospital, said in the last week that four ambulance personnel had been killed in Israeli strikes. "One was a doctor and the other three were medics. We are very worried about our ambulance staff," Hassan told IPS.
The Independent wrote:The UN driver was the third to be killed during Israel's offensive. The UNRWA said a second convoy seeking to recover the body of another UN casualty during yesterday's ceasefire was also fired at but no one was hurt.

The point is that these people are clearly marked and coordinated vehicles. These are not mistakes, nor are they part of the collateral damage of unrelated military activity. This is not new, as the attack on a Lebanese ambulance in 1996 shows.
From an abstract to and article by Robert Fisk wrote:An Israeli attack helicopter used an American-made air-to-ground missile to blow up an ambulance in Lebanon, killing six innocent people, including three children. A fragment from the missile was taken to the US headquarters of its manufacturer, where executives were told of how it was used.

Adapted from "Is This Some Kind of Crusade?" by Robert Fisk, in the May 18 issue of The Sunday Review, the magazine of the London Independent.
And here is the full article, with witness descriptions of that attack. The IDF regularly attacks marked non-combatant vehicles.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

yoni45
Posts: 2123
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 9:16 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby yoni45 » Fri Jan 09, 2009 1:24 am UTC

Dream wrote:The point is that these people are clearly marked and coordinated vehicles. These are not mistakes, nor are they part of the collateral damage of unrelated military activity. This is not new, as the attack on a Lebanese ambulance in 1996 shows.

... And here is the full article, with witness descriptions of that attack. The IDF regularly attacks marked non-combatant vehicles.



Yet somehow, the IDF still manages to achieve one of the best civilian:non-civilian ratios within similar operations. Fascinating.
I sell LSAT courses and LSAT course accessories. Admittedly, we're still working on the accessories.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby Dream » Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:21 am UTC

yoni45 wrote:
Dream wrote:The point is that these people are clearly marked and coordinated vehicles. These are not mistakes, nor are they part of the collateral damage of unrelated military activity. This is not new, as the attack on a Lebanese ambulance in 1996 shows.

... And here is the full article, with witness descriptions of that attack. The IDF regularly attacks marked non-combatant vehicles.



Yet somehow, the IDF still manages to achieve one of the best civilian:non-civilian ratios within similar operations. Fascinating.

Doesn't that strongly argue against these being accidental? If the IDF is so good at not killing civilians, (which I disagree with, but you said it, not me) surely that makes it much more likely that these attacks were deliberate? Clear markings, co-ordinated routes and IDF approval to travel, yet still attacked. But the IDF doesn't make this kind of mistake very often, so...
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

yoni45
Posts: 2123
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 9:16 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby yoni45 » Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:26 am UTC

Dream wrote:Doesn't that strongly argue against these being accidental? If the IDF is so good at not killing civilians, (which I disagree with, but you said it, not me) surely that makes it much more likely that these attacks were deliberate? Clear markings, co-ordinated routes and IDF approval to travel, yet still attacked. But the IDF doesn't make this kind of mistake very often, so...


Let me just get this straight:

The fact that Israel has one of the top civilian:non-civilian ratios in the world, makes it *more* likely that they deliberately go out of their way to target civilians?

The logical leaps and bounds used to vindicate certain beliefs never cease to amaze me.
I sell LSAT courses and LSAT course accessories. Admittedly, we're still working on the accessories.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby Dream » Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:31 am UTC

yoni45 wrote:
Dream wrote:Doesn't that strongly argue against these being accidental? If the IDF is so good at not killing civilians, (which I disagree with, but you said it, not me) surely that makes it much more likely that these attacks were deliberate? Clear markings, co-ordinated routes and IDF approval to travel, yet still attacked. But the IDF doesn't make this kind of mistake very often, so...


Let me just get this straight:

The fact that Israel has one of the top civilian:non-civilian ratios in the world, makes it *more* likely that they deliberately go out of their way to target civilians?

The logical leaps and bounds used to vindicate certain beliefs never cease to amaze me.

How did you understand that from my post? My point is very simple, so it shouldn't be so hard to understand: You claim the IDF is very good at avoiding civilian casualties. They killed a UN worker in a marked food aid convoy. If they're so good, and we can assume, can recognise the huge "UN" and flag on the sides of each vehicle in the convoy, it is unlikely to have been a mistake. So it remains that it was more likely a deliberate act.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

yoni45
Posts: 2123
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 9:16 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby yoni45 » Fri Jan 09, 2009 3:05 am UTC

Dream wrote:How did you understand that from my post?


Your post: "Doesn't that strongly argue against these being accidental?"

If it's not accidental, then it's deliberate. Ie, "...[this] makes it *more* likely that they deliberately go out of their way to target civilians?"

Dream wrote:If they're so good, and we can assume, can recognise the huge "UN" and flag on the sides of each vehicle in the convoy, it is unlikely to have been a mistake. So it remains that it was more likely a deliberate act.


Or, instead of making assumptions that clearly require quite a bit of mental gymnastics, you can simply account for the obvious fact that while being more careful will result in lower numbers of such incidents, such incidents will still occur.
I sell LSAT courses and LSAT course accessories. Admittedly, we're still working on the accessories.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby Dream » Fri Jan 09, 2009 3:30 am UTC

yoni45 wrote:
Dream wrote:How did you understand that from my post?


Your post: "Doesn't that strongly argue against these being accidental?"

If it's not accidental, then it's deliberate. Ie, "...[this] makes it *more* likely that they deliberately go out of their way to target civilians?"

Dream wrote:If they're so good, and we can assume, can recognise the huge "UN" and flag on the sides of each vehicle in the convoy, it is unlikely to have been a mistake. So it remains that it was more likely a deliberate act.


Or, instead of making assumptions that clearly require quite a bit of mental gymnastics, you can simply account for the obvious fact that while being more careful will result in lower numbers of such incidents, such incidents will still occur.

We're not talking about a missile going awry here. We are talking about levelling the sights of a tank cannon on a clearly marked convoy and firing. Unless the IDF is in the habit of accidentally discharging its cannons left right and centre, this was deliberate. The only way it might not be is the possibility that the IDF is really just so incompetent that they can do that and it can really be a mistake. You claim that they are not that incompetent, and in fact they are very good at discerning targets correctly. Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by stupidity. This was not stupidity, it was malice.

And please stop dismissing this as mental gymnastics. The IDF fired on a clearly marked convoy that they had arranged safe passage for. No gymnastics are necessary for this to be blamed on the IDF, and deliberately.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

yoni45
Posts: 2123
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 9:16 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby yoni45 » Fri Jan 09, 2009 3:45 am UTC

Dream wrote:We're not talking about a missile going awry here.


Evidence?
I sell LSAT courses and LSAT course accessories. Admittedly, we're still working on the accessories.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby Dream » Fri Jan 09, 2009 3:51 am UTC

yoni45 wrote:
Dream wrote:We're not talking about a missile going awry here.


Evidence?

Wow. You're arguing this, and you don't even know what the details of the incident are. Tank fire.

It seems to not matter to you what the actual facts are. You just defend the IDF regardless of the circumstances, without reference to the event you're commenting on. You really just assume that because it's the IDF, they must not have killed civilians. How sad that you are so naive.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

yoni45
Posts: 2123
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 9:16 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby yoni45 » Fri Jan 09, 2009 3:59 am UTC

Dream wrote:Wow. You're arguing this, and you don't even know what the details of the incident are.


I was actually working under the 1996 Lebanon incident, but sure. Evidence that this wasn't a misfired shell? Human error? Miscommunication?
I sell LSAT courses and LSAT course accessories. Admittedly, we're still working on the accessories.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby Dream » Fri Jan 09, 2009 4:13 am UTC

yoni45 wrote:
Dream wrote:Wow. You're arguing this, and you don't even know what the details of the incident are.


I was actually working under the 1996 Lebanon incident, but sure.

No, you were ignoring everything I said about it being a UN aid convoy, marked with UN flags and blithely imagining we are discussing a Lebanese ambulance, just because I cited it as a previous example of a similar incident. That demonstrates that you are just mouthing preconceived responses to generic "IDF incidents."
Evidence that this wasn't a misfired shell? Human error? Miscommunication?

No, the facts are clear. If you disagree, you can provide evidence that this is not deliberate. I have cited above other incidents of the IDF doing this, and witness reports agree that this was no accident.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

yoni45
Posts: 2123
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 9:16 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby yoni45 » Fri Jan 09, 2009 4:23 am UTC

Dream wrote:No, the facts are clear...witness reports agree that this was no accident.


If it's "clear", then provide the evidence requested. If you're relying on 'witness reports', then provide the evidence they provided you with, that prove what you're claiming.

Specifically: evidence that this wasn't a misfired shell? Human error? Miscommunication?
I sell LSAT courses and LSAT course accessories. Admittedly, we're still working on the accessories.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby Dream » Fri Jan 09, 2009 4:50 am UTC

yoni45 wrote:If it's "clear", then provide the evidence requested. If you're relying on 'witness reports', then provide the evidence they provided you with, that prove what you're claiming.

Specifically: evidence that this wasn't a misfired shell? Human error? Miscommunication?

With respect to asking me to prove a negative, in relation to a hypothesis you dreamed up yourself: That's impossible. However...

Misfired shell: It scored a direct hit on a truck in a convoy. It is very unlikely to have been misfired. That said, maybe it's before breakfast, and you're still believing impossible things. Have there then been three misfires that have killed UN workers, and more that have been near misses? Is that likely?

Human error: Clearly marked vehicle, in a convoy. This is like gunning down a uniformed cop in the street and claiming you mistook him for a burglar robbing your house. It is not believable in the slightest.

Miscommunication: "Hey, are we shooting the UN, or what?" "Sure, why not?" Bang.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby Malice » Fri Jan 09, 2009 5:23 am UTC

Dream wrote:Misfired shell: It scored a direct hit on a truck in a convoy. It is very unlikely to have been misfired. That said, maybe it's before breakfast, and you're still believing impossible things. Have there then been three misfires that have killed UN workers, and more that have been near misses? Is that likely?


That depends entirely on how many tank shells have been fired throughout the whole of the conflict. I have no idea but would guess: many. 3 misfires during a war does not strike me as unlikely. That does not mean it wasn't malicious. I just don't think you can reasonably argue from incredulity here. Strange things happen in armed conflict.
Image

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby Dream » Fri Jan 09, 2009 5:29 am UTC

Malice wrote:
Dream wrote:Misfired shell: It scored a direct hit on a truck in a convoy. It is very unlikely to have been misfired. That said, maybe it's before breakfast, and you're still believing impossible things. Have there then been three misfires that have killed UN workers, and more that have been near misses? Is that likely?


That depends entirely on how many tank shells have been fired throughout the whole of the conflict. I have no idea but would guess: many. 3 misfires during a war does not strike me as unlikely. That does not mean it wasn't malicious. I just don't think you can reasonably argue from incredulity here. Strange things happen in armed conflict.

Three misfires that killed UN workers? That's how many are dead, in separate incidents. More that attacked their convoys? Misfires are not the likely cause every time. And as I said before, the IDF has fired on non-combatants deliberately before.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

yoni45
Posts: 2123
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 9:16 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby yoni45 » Fri Jan 09, 2009 7:31 am UTC

Dream wrote:With respect to asking me to prove a negative, in relation to a hypothesis you dreamed up yourself...


I'm asking you to prove your claim, specifically, that the IDF did it deliberately. If you can't prove it, then you shouldn't be claiming it.

Dream wrote:Misfired shell: It scored a direct hit on a truck in a convoy. It is very unlikely to have been misfired.


Because there haven't been countless cases of friendly fire incidents scoring 'direct hits'.

Dream wrote:Human error: Clearly marked vehicle, in a convoy. This is like gunning down a uniformed cop in the street and claiming you mistook him for a burglar robbing your house. It is not believable in the slightest.

Miscommunication: "Hey, are we shooting the UN, or what?" "Sure, why not?" Bang.


Setting up a bunch of straw-men isn't going to amount to much of an argument.

Human error: fire on coordinates X, Y. Whoops, I meant 248.
Miscommunication: Fire on coordinates X, Y. Confirmed, firing on those coordinates (X, Y+10).

Still awaiting evidence any of the above 3 didn't happen, a requirement to proving deliberation.
I sell LSAT courses and LSAT course accessories. Admittedly, we're still working on the accessories.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby Dream » Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:21 am UTC

yoni45 wrote:
Dream wrote:Misfired shell: It scored a direct hit on a truck in a convoy. It is very unlikely to have been misfired.


Because there haven't been countless cases of friendly fire incidents scoring 'direct hits'.

And those were not misfires. The weapon did not malfunction causing the wrong target to be hit, the target was misidentified and the weapon worked fine. This means that it was not an accident, it was something much more culpable. Calling it a misfire is literally saying that the gun went off half cocked. That's the idea you put forward, and the reason it is rubbish is that the odds of it happening several times are very, very low. If you want this one to fly, you'll have to show some reason beyond blind chance. (Note, not proof, just something that narrows the odds a fair bit.) Of course if you want to rehash your point into being target misidentification and "friendly fire," see below.
Dream wrote:Human error: Clearly marked vehicle, in a convoy. This is like gunning down a uniformed cop in the street and claiming you mistook him for a burglar robbing your house. It is not believable in the slightest.

Miscommunication: "Hey, are we shooting the UN, or what?" "Sure, why not?" Bang.


Setting up a bunch of straw-men isn't going to amount to much of an argument.
Neither are strawmen, because neither distort your position.

The first is an apt analogy. The convoy was every bit as conspicuously itself as a police officer in a street, and claiming that it might have been mistaken for anything else is ridiculous. Being, as I've already had to point out once, a tank shell, there is no space here for "human error". The tank commander and gunner would have been able to distinguish the "cop" from the "robber". No matter what you assume about coordinates maybe being wrong, the tank crew still had to sight on the target and fire, without realising it was a marked UN aid convoy. That is impossible for me to believe, as UN markings are fairly unmistakable, and HAMAS is not noted for touring battlefields in unarmed convoys under the muzzles of Israeli guns.

The second is clearly sarcasm, and if you claim not to have been able to tell, I can only wonder at your comprehension skills. The point was that when a miscommunication amounts to "shoot that UN marked truck," it might be advisable to question the order. Because it is well known that UN trucks are not for shooting by anyone who presumes to abide by any principles of civilised warfare.

I honestly can't believe you won't let go of this. An Isreali tank destroys a UN truck, killing a man whose only purpose being there was to save people from starving, and you make excuses for it.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

yoni45
Posts: 2123
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 9:16 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby yoni45 » Fri Jan 09, 2009 9:09 am UTC

Dream wrote:And those were not misfires.


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.h ... A96F958260

Yup.

Dream wrote:Calling it a misfire is literally saying that the gun went off half cocked.


Are you completely ignorant of how these things work? Of the fact that otherwise minor imperfections in the turret can easily cause significant shifts in trajectory?

Dream wrote:Neither are strawmen, because neither distort your position.


Except they are, as they don't respond to an argument I've made, but to an argument you made up. In fact, they do indeed distort my position. Specifically, you assume human error can only be caused by visual misidentification, and that miscommunication is limited to something as silly as your analogy. Neither is actually the case.
I sell LSAT courses and LSAT course accessories. Admittedly, we're still working on the accessories.

dic_penderyn
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 9:29 am UTC
Location: Merthyr Tydfil, Wales

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby dic_penderyn » Fri Jan 09, 2009 9:57 am UTC

yoni45 wrote:Are you completely ignorant of how these things work? Of the fact that otherwise minor imperfections in the turret can easily cause significant shifts in trajectory?


.

I am certainly no expert, but if the equipment used in a civilian area is not accurate enough to do the job, then I would not advocate its use.
In my opinion the equipment IS good enough but this is a simple example of human error and/or complacency.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby Dream » Fri Jan 09, 2009 11:49 am UTC

yoni45 wrote:
Dream wrote:And those were not misfires.


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.h ... A96F958260

Yup.

Dream wrote:Calling it a misfire is literally saying that the gun went off half cocked.


Are you completely ignorant of how these things work? Of the fact that otherwise minor imperfections in the turret can easily cause significant shifts in trajectory?
If you're going to cite, and simultaneously claim to know how these things work, it might help if you find a cite of a time that a tank cannon, as opposed to an air launched missile, missed its intended target and hit a non-combatant vehicle, as opposed to fell from the sky into a civilian area. You might also want to find one that doesn't have a defence department official saying that "The errant missile was fired from one of the F-15's, the officials said. The missile, which carries a 2,000-pound bomb, could have misfired because of human or mechanical error." So, it could actually have been human error, and not mechanical at all.

So, in light of the IDF having fired on non-combatants before, I'm still going with the simplest, most complete explanation: That they intended that target.
In fact, they do indeed distort my position. Specifically, you assume human error can only be caused by visual misidentification, and that miscommunication is limited to something as silly as your analogy. Neither is actually the case.
Not at all. I said that any human error should have been caught by the fact that the humans concerned had to verify and identify their target before they fired. I find it vanishingly unlikely that they would be unable to identify a UN aid convoy, so I dispute that the human error explanation makes any sense. I do not say that only misidentification is possible, I say that it is necessary, unless you believe that the gun went off half cocked or the shell mysteriously spun away from its intended target and just happened to repeat a war crime that has been perpetrated by Israel in the past.

The miscommunication bit you are aware now was sarcastic, but that its point was clear. It is not my fault that you couldn't, or refused to follow the argument. It still did not take your position, distort it, attribute the distortion to you and claim triumph in attacking it.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
westcydr
Posts: 156
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 7:20 pm UTC
Location: By my computer
Contact:

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby westcydr » Fri Jan 09, 2009 12:09 pm UTC

Depending on the technology used to ID targets, it's very easy to improperly ID a target.. If they are using IR or non-visual spectrum scanning systems, and simply see heat sources indicating vehicles in a place they were told there should be no traffic, this sort of thing can happen. Maybe they were informed incorrectly that there would be no vehicle traffic there.
Seriously, in combat, even the best trained troops, due to communication issues, have "friendly fire" incidents.. and theses are between two people with the ability to directly communicate, in theory.
Another issues the Israelis have had to deal with in the past is militants using UN and ICRC symbols and vehicles to move weapons and troops. If they were not told of UN agents in the area, they may have assumed it was a ruse. That would be an entirely different issue, where the UN should have arranged for a way to radio on a monitored frequency their location, direction, and intentions, to ALL troops in the area.
All of this assumes that the report is accurate, and not like the "rocket hole" in an ambulance, or the picture of the Israeli soldier protecting an American Jew that was captioned as if he were attacking a defenseless Palestinian civilian.
---------------------------
ICQ/AIM 5683738
יששכר
"Who needs a quote in a signature, anyways?"

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby Dream » Fri Jan 09, 2009 12:40 pm UTC

I agree about such targeting methods, they can be unwieldly. But in this case, it was daytime, and I'd imagine that the crew shouldn't have been using a non-visual spectrum scope. As you said, the UN should have communicated with the IDF to ensure their movements would be expected. The thing is, they did that.

westcydr wrote:Another issues the Israelis have had to deal with in the past is militants using UN and ICRC symbols and vehicles to move weapons and troops.
While I would not put this past various Palestinian organisations in the slightest, I'd still like a cite, as I've never heard of that happening. I would absolutely believe it, I just honestly have never heard of it.

westcydr wrote:and not like the "rocket hole" in an ambulance,


If we're thinking of the same ambulance, the eminent journalist Robert Fisk brought a piece of the missile back to its American manufacturer, who admitted its provenance. I've linked the article, in annoyingly unparagraphed from, somewhere above.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
lesliesage
Posts: 1729
Joined: Thu May 31, 2007 8:07 pm UTC
Location: Washington, DC
Contact:

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby lesliesage » Fri Jan 09, 2009 1:17 pm UTC

nectarine
Last edited by lesliesage on Sun Oct 10, 2010 9:59 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

Fett42
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 1:52 pm UTC

Re: 200 killed, 700 injured in Israeli air attack on Gaza

Postby Fett42 » Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:57 pm UTC

Dream wrote:So, in light of the IDF having fired on non-combatants before, I'm still going with the simplest, most complete explanation: That they intended that target.


So clearly when Israel killed three of its own soldiers with freindly tank fire they intended to do so.

As someone in the military who has actually been in the position of gunner on a tank, used the targeting and firing system,and who knows many people who have been deployed I can tell you that positively IDing and hitting a target in a chaotic urban environment filled with militants who wear civilian clothing is no simple task.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests