Indeed. This is an obvious exercise in futility; I mean even when they (Israeli officials, IDF) clearly give a bullshit “explanation” and then have to backtrack to the apologies you speak of, it’s the Fog Of War that’s at fault. :rolleyes:
As I said earlier, the brain-washing of many Americans on this issue is simply staggering. Israel simply can’t do any wrong. Period. End Of Story.
From the BBC:
I read your article and noticed the following:
Just yesterday, an Israeli friend told me that the M825A1 is actually a smoke round. This would seem to be correct.
Do you agree with this?
Oh yes, obviously bullshit. Why, the UN hasn’t deliberately covered up a terrorist presence at their facilities for, like, at least a couple of years now.
Well, yes, honest interpreters of the data will admit that, especially right after an event, the fog of war prevents an accurate analysis. Of course, as the only cite you’ve provided for any backtracking is a proven liar who’ll most likely go to prison after his term is up, you’re kinda showing what you’ll use for your partisan screed and what you’ll disregard. I take it that you’re not just rationalizing your bias, and you’ll accept Olmert as a 100% interlocutor of Israeli actions for all other issues, right?
Or is this that ‘selective’ epistemology?
Why don’t you provide first hand cites from IDF C&C showing any “backtracking”. Any at all.
Or are we still stuck on trying to get you to retract your absurd bullshit about youtube videos while you hem and haw and throw up strawmen to avoid admitting that, no, at no point did any IDF member release an outdated youtube video, but you just like the sound of it so you parroted it?
Ah, of course, Americans don’t share your agenda because they’re been brainwashed. That makes it clear. Not that you’re someone who actually is upset when Jews object to being told they should commit suicide to highlight how nasty the Nazis were, or that you will not allow any Israeli self defense unless they use magic ninja commandos who can operate with impunity in the middle of freaking Gaza.
Nope, it’s brain washing.
Of course, I wish you’d stop spewing your perennial dodge of “Ayieeee, them brainwashed folks say Israel can do no wrong!” when you know full well that even people on this board have indeed taken Israel to task. Or your disgusting GD legal flaming echoing perennial anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about traitorous Jewish fifth columnists… But then again, if we’ve already established that some really rippin’ rhetoric tops the truth for you, eh?
By the way, there are rumors that Israel has been making use of a chemical agent known as DHMO which can cause severe tissue damage, burns, and frequently causes death if inhaled.
Hydric acid now?
Will the atrocities never cease?!?
If it’s alright by you, I have a question or two directed your way as well as some personal reflections on this tragic situation, Finn:
Do you honestly think that this carnage will do the Israelis any good? Or are they not fostering and perpetuating the very things they want to kill?
Think about it. That’s all I ask.
BTW, I believe I made my position on Gandhi’s world-view quite clear upthread. Including the fact that I disagreed with his ‘suggestion’ and why. Alessan appears to have understood me, not sure why you’re having so much trouble yourself – other than to continue to try and smear anyone who opposes your “Hammer of Yahweh” posting style. By now I’ve had ample time to realize you’re offensive and condescending without even trying to anyone who disagrees with you, but still, if you dialed it down a notch or two, perhaps there’s a chance for real dialog. Otherwise what we’re doing here is what “they are doing there” only without the bloodletting. Rather comforting that, but still as pointless as the real bloody affair.
Finally, if you have the time, read the following two articles as they both speak to the problem I (and most of the world) have with your nation’s blind support for Israel. From where I’m standing neither one is gaining much of anything from said alliance.
Self-Deception and the Assault on Gaza
I truly hope you get some sense of perspective as to where I’m coming from and the obvious fact that I am hardly alone in my views – even if we agree to disagree you need to realize that hatred of anyone is far from being a motivator for my stance.
Don’t believe me? Not much I can do then.
Enjoy your evening.
The two statements are not mutually exclusive. It is a smoke round and it uses white phosphorus to produce the smoke.
Using it in a manner to produce smoke for cover in a clear military application is legit. Using it in a manner in which it is clear that a significant number of civilians may be exposed to concentrations strong enough to produce chemical burns is not as kosher. The charge against the IDF is that they are doing the latter.
You are right. I have noticed this dilemma before, which is common in the voices of Israel inhabiting the US. They’ve sunk their stock into falsehood, when the age of information is in full swing. That is probably not a good move.
What to do, what to do? There are 2 options:
Having taken option 2 there is a critical mass building up day by day. How will it end?
Not according to the Red Cross’ head of their mines-arms unit.
[
](Satellite News and latest stories | The Jerusalem Post)
Now, see, ironically enough if I wasn’t too busy dealing with the avalanche of ‘selective epistemology’, factual errors and empty rhetorical spew that you provide, a discussion of that sort might be possible. While I’m pretty much forced to relentlessly correct your distortions, that’s going to be the meat of my argument by necessity. Don’t like it?
Play fair.
For instance:
You claim you want rational discussion, and then drop such obviously false-to-facts rhetorical garbage that I don’t feel I can let it go without comment. The US has a history of supporting Israel, it also has a history of opposing specific Israeli actions. When the distortions of your argument force me to constantly stop and try to make you play straight, it’s unreasonable to expect me to then treat your argument as a good faith rational analysis of the facts rather than a deceptive bit of distortion.
I’d happily discuss long term strategy with, say, DSeid, even though he and I disagree on his ‘snapping turtle’ strategy. That’s largely because he’s dedicated to busting myths on both ‘sides’, rather than propagating myths that help his ‘side’.
Play straight, and maybe then you can have your wish of an actual, honest debate.
But for that, it requires honest debating.
No, I’m sure you have absolutely nothing against those brainwashed, dual loyalty having fifth columnists.
Of course.
See, this is part of what I mean. You can’t talk about how those who have differing views are “brainwashed” and use charges which echo classic anti-Semitic conspiracy theories of traitorous dual loyalty while you accuse people of treason punishable by death… and then claim that your argument isn’t hateful and you just want a rational discussion of strategy and tactics.
This stikes me as a pretty de minimis allegation. There is no evidence it is not being used for its intended purpose.
The reason white phosphorus is “bad” is because it burns people, when used as an anti-personnel weapon. A smoke round may use white phosphorus, but it isn’t, from the information provided, used in such a manner as to kill people running across it.
From your link, it states that the purpose of a smoke round is that it “obscures enemy vision or screens maneuvering elements” [emphasis added]. In short, it is expected that your own soldiers will be running through the area seeded by the smoke round.
From the allegation:
In short, HRW isn’t arguing that Israel is using an “illegal weapon” and it isn’t arguing that Israel is deliberately using an admittedly legal weapon for the wrongful purpose of roasting civilians.
What it is arguing is that any use of this device is “wrongful” in its opinion because its use may endanger civilians in such a densely populated area, and any risk to civilians is “wrongful” if it can be “feasibly” prevented. The key words in their statement are “believes” and “feasible precautions”.
This is just another re-iteration of the notion that waging war at all in Gaza is “wrongful”. Surely using any weapon under those circumstances is just as “wrongful”, if not moreso, than using a signalling device designed for use in proximity to one’s own soldiers that “may” have a “significant, incidental, incendiary effect”.
Indeed it may be that WP is being used in a completely appropriate manner. I have my identified biases and believe that the usage is legit unless proven otherwise. But if they are using it then they should be forthcoming about it. And about how it is being used and where.
I don’t really agree. Why should a military force be expected, beyond a bare rebuttal of allegations of illegal acts, to go into any detail about ongoing military actions?
What Israel said, allegedly, was as follows:
Which, as it turns out, appears to be quite correct.
As a matter of ethics you may be right. But Israel is foolish to completely discount the importance of appearances. They have allowed it to be spun as a denial of use of the agent at all. If it turns out that instead they were using it, but using it completely appropriately, the focus will be instead on the fact that they were using it at all after having “denied” it. The fact that its use was appropriate will be lost by mostly all.
Be straightforward to begin with and the opportunity to spin appropriate WP use into a “war crime” is diminished.
Let’s be real. If an Israeli official really said this, then my credulity is strained.
And stating this
sets you up for looking guilty if and when legitimate use of WP is proven.
The first I’d have to question, as it’s an unnamed spokescritter. It sounds more like a reporter cornered an IDF soldier/officer and grilled them and they lied rather poorly.
The second at least has a specific attribution and does sound like he should have added “… as an anti-personnel weapon”.
You’re right, denials of that sort end up sounding flimsy and play into the hands of the ‘Ayieee, atrocities!’ folks. “No comment” would have been a much better response, or even “we won’t comment on details of ongoing military actions” or even “none of our ongoing military actions have violated the laws of international combat, but we will not comment on their specifics while the war is still ongoing.”
To be fair (I don’t have the cites right now, but I’ll try to track them down), some IDF spokescritters have said pretty much that, that they’re not giving any specific information but that they’re denying they’ve violated the laws of war.
I basically agree with this, but it seems like the the issue is basically the same old story which folks like Finnagain have been complaining about, which is that at the end of the day, Israel’s detractors would basically deny Israel the right of self-defense.
Israel to probe phosphorus claims
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7841999.stm
Includes a very interesting image:
And just to expand on something mentione din that story:
A bit more detail about the status of the probe.
This thread seems the best place to put this. Acknowledged - biased source and unconfirmed information.
An update on the above story.