• commentary
  • SUNDAY OCTOBER 22 2006 2:00 PM

Israel Admits Using Phosphorous Weapons

Submitted by legionnaire

Edited by legionnaire

Tags: Israel, phosphorous, geneva conventions, Hezbollah

During Israel's fight against Hezbollah troops in southern Lebanon this past summer, the Israeli army faced the daunting task of trying to pinpoint military targets that were peppered within civilian areas. The result was incredible carnage as collateral damage claimed the lives of civilians on both sides of the conflict, with Hezbollah indiscriminately attacking areas with civilians and Israelis killing Lebanese where Hezbollah troops were operating. Despite claims that the army worked to pinpoint strictly military targets, Israel now admits to having used white phosphorous based weapons, incendiary devices capable of inflicting massive burns during the conflict, raising the question of how strictly their counterassaults were directed against military centers of operation.

Cabinet minister Jacob Edery confirmed the bombs were dropped "against military targets in open ground".

Israel had previously said the weapons were used only to mark targets.

Phosphorus weapons cause chemical burns and the Red Cross and human rights groups say they should be treated as chemical weapons.

The Geneva Conventions ban the use of white phosphorous as an incendiary weapon against civilian populations and in air attacks against military forces in civilian areas.

Mr Edery says he confirmed during a parliamentary session last week on behalf of Defence Minister Amir Peretz that the weapons were used in fighting.

"The Israeli army made use of phosphorous shells during the war against Hezbollah in attacks against military targets in open ground," he said.


The usage of phosphorous in warfare against civilian targets is restricted by the 1980 UN Convention on Certain Conventional weapons, to which Israel is a signatory party, in an attempt to minimize the significant collateral damage these weapons are capable of creating.

The Israeli government is insisting that while the weapons were used, they were operating within the allowable treaty guidelines. Certainly the nature of the military operations against Hezbollah made it exceedingly difficult to distinguish between military and civilian targets (is an apartment building with a Hezbollah sniper inside a military or civilian structure?) However, the civilian recipients of these bombs might have argued for a more judicious use of these munitions.

  • PERMALINK
  • PRINT
  • Digg This
  • Email To A Friend
 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

 ... 10

Next

Comments
BlastProcessing

BlastProcessing

USA
OLD SKOOL

OCT 23, 2006 12:16 AM

So did the real "Israel Can Do No Wrong" camp ever show up?

MetaTag

MetaTag

United Kingdom
September 2002

OCT 23, 2006 03:57 AM

Dead_Ringer said:
Would that be the same UN that funded the oil for food program and permitted Saddam to plot 9/11 for 12 years?



Saddam is guilty of many things, but he had no part in the 9/11 plot.

We should make it clear that there are exactly two ways to operate in this world - you either give everything, and I mean EVERYTHING, you have to help the U.S. and Israel help fight the Islamofascists, or don't complain when your babies are melted alive by WP when said Islamofascists hang out in your villages. Simple. There is no moral gray area here.



This is a false dilmma. Firstly, your view on how to fight Islamofascists is just that, your view. What's more, I think that your view on how to prosecute that war is actually what the Islamofascists want you to have and to follow. They desire this because their popularity grows in extreem circumstances.

When you argue to fight the war on terrorism without restaint, you are helping to promote terrorism by giving ammunition to people who need the means to convice moderate people that they need to follow extreem people.

Let us remember that war has been called "diplomacy by other means" and the object of diplomacy is to find solutions that allow people to live together in peace. That aim is best served by reasonable behaviour, by people who posses compasion.

don't complain when your babies are melted alive by WP

... or when our heros blow off some steam by killing Muslim taxi drivers in Iraq



Again, with the moral equivalences. I'm beginning to think you are on the side of the Islamofascists with your offensive comparisons of America and those who shoot missles into Jerusalem



Do you not see a comparison between people who shoot missiles into Jerusalem and people who are indifferent to the suffering of civilans or people who actively promote killing civilians as a means of recreation?

LittleFierceOne

LittleFierceOne

Durham, NC
July 2005

OCT 23, 2006 07:40 AM

This situation is far too complicated for me to attemept to comment on herein -- I'm studying the History of the Modern Middle East this semester -- but I'll leave a few points:

- I highly recommend everyone read the main text for the aforementioned class. It will only complicate your understanding of the Middle East, but in doing so will offer you that "ooooooohh! so that's why..." sort of understanding. No one is innocent (civilian targets notwithstanding).

- I don't understand why anyone nitpicks over the sort of weaponry used to kill someone. WP is bad, yes, but what makes it worse than anything else Israel would be dropping? "Oh, you can kill them with this horrilbe method but not that one!" It's a stupid argument. Dead is dead.

- Funny story about WP: back in the day when I was a mindless drone for Uncle Sam, a drill instructor once pointed out to us new recruits why it is that ground troops don't often employ WP grenades; he instructed us that the blast radius for a WP grenade was approximately 30 meters ... and that the average joe can chuck a grenade about 20 meters. heh.
He was wrong, of course.
...more about WP.

cmdrfire

cmdrfire

United Kingdom
December 2005

OCT 23, 2006 09:23 AM

Stop saying Islamofascist!


/got nuthin'

RudieCantFail

RudieCantFail

Baton Rouge, LA
January 2006

OCT 23, 2006 09:36 AM

As long as they continue the ban on joke warfare, then I have no objections.

NickFaust

NickFaust

USA
April 2004

OCT 23, 2006 10:09 AM

skeptik said:
Hey, I want to be an academofascist too! What do I hafta do?

Besides dirty-bombing the stock market, 'cause I could never do that. Where else could I trade my shares of Halliburton?



Apparently all you have to do is to be an academic and say something that one of several people on this thead disagree with.

So, go for it. Everyone should have some kind of label.

legionnaire

legionnaire

Belgium
November 2003

OCT 23, 2006 10:56 AM

<3 Dead_Ringer.

Painbearer - how is Israel's admittance of their usage of banned weapons during the Lebanon attacks not news?

If you bothered to read the article I wasn't exactly giving Hezbollah a pass either - they pretty callously based their attacks from areas high in civilian population to try and minimize how much Israel could do to retaliate. I guess they overestimated the Israeli military's restraint.

malkav11

malkav11

Saint Paul, MN
July 2003

OCT 23, 2006 01:54 PM

LittleFierceOne said:
- I don't understand why anyone nitpicks over the sort of weaponry used to kill someone. WP is bad, yes, but what makes it worse than anything else Israel would be dropping? "Oh, you can kill them with this horrilbe method but not that one!" It's a stupid argument. Dead is dead.



Because some weapons kill someone swiftly and/or relatively painlessly, and are relatively unlikely to cause severely crippling permanent injuries if the person survives...and some cause you to die in slow, lingering agony and/or permanently disable you if you survive. There's also the question of how discriminate the weapon is (i.e., how likely you are to cause unintended damage), and lingering aftereffects.

Suffice it to say, there is a world of difference in methods of killing.

MisterGone

MisterGone

Minneapolis, MN
March 2006

OCT 23, 2006 03:14 PM

RudieCantFail said:
As long as they continue the ban on joke warfare, then I have no objections.



You rock, I love that sketch, its right up there with their dead parrot piece.

SirPsychoSexy

SirPsychoSexy

Ridgewood, NJ
January 2004

OCT 23, 2006 03:17 PM

NickFaust said:

skeptik said:
Hey, I want to be an academofascist too! What do I hafta do?

Besides dirty-bombing the stock market, 'cause I could never do that. Where else could I trade my shares of Halliburton?



Apparently all you have to do is to be an academic and say something that one of several people on this thead disagree with.

So, go for it. Everyone should have some kind of label.


Braniacs on the Nerd Patrol

Westley

Westley

Vatican City
April 2004

OCT 23, 2006 03:21 PM

MetaTag has got to be the most patient person in the history of internet message boards.

brett54

brett54

Australia
November 2004

OCT 23, 2006 03:25 PM

Face facts, the supposed intelligent, democratic, civilized nation of Israel targeted peace keepers and used Reconnaissance by Fire - walk into an area, shoot massive amounts in all directions, wait and see who shoots back - oh, yeah, they just killed lots of kids.

Dead_Ringer

Dead_Ringer

I'm lost
September 2004

OCT 23, 2006 03:54 PM

MetaTag said:

Dead_Ringer said:
Would that be the same UN that funded the oil for food program and permitted Saddam to plot 9/11 for 12 years?



Saddam is guilty of many things, but he had no part in the 9/11 plot.


LOL Al Guardian is your source?! Next you'll be quoting Michael Bin Moore at me.

We should make it clear that there are exactly two ways to operate in this world - you either give everything, and I mean EVERYTHING, you have to help the U.S. and Israel help fight the Islamofascists, or don't complain when your babies are melted alive by WP when said Islamofascists hang out in your villages. Simple. There is no moral gray area here.



This is a false dilmma. Firstly, your view on how to fight Islamofascists is just that, your view. What's more, I think that your view on how to prosecute that war is actually what the Islamofascists want you to have and to follow. They desire this because their popularity grows in extreem circumstances.


What's dichotomy mean?

When you argue to fight the war on terrorism without restaint, you are helping to promote terrorism by giving ammunition to people who need the means to convice moderate people that they need to follow extreem people.


Right, the old we're causing the Islamofascists to decapitate Jews argument. Am I the only sane one here? Why don't you try, you know, blaming the Islamofascists for their actions?!

Let us remember that war has been called "diplomacy by other means" and the object of diplomacy is to find solutions that allow people to live together in peace. That aim is best served by reasonable behaviour, by people who posses compasion.


You realize that by quoting Carl von Clausewitz, you immediately forfeit a "peace" argument, right.

don't complain when your babies are melted alive by WP

... or when our heros blow off some steam by killing Muslim taxi drivers in Iraq



Again, with the moral equivalences. I'm beginning to think you are on the side of the Islamofascists with your offensive comparisons of America and those who shoot missles into Jerusalem



Do you not see a comparison between people who shoot missiles into Jerusalem and people who are indifferent to the suffering of civilans or people who actively promote killing civilians as a means of recreation?


Yes. The difference is that America is on the side of all that is good in the world, and the Islamofascists are a rabid death cult intent on committing mass genocide and forcing my wife to wear a veil. Not on my watch. If it takes melting some "civilians" in Lebanon in order to send the message to the Islamofascists not to mess with Christians in America and whomever they have in Israel, then so be it.

/spit

Andvari

Andvari

Calgary, AB
April 2005

OCT 23, 2006 04:10 PM

Dead_Ringer said:
What's dichotomy mean?



It was at this point that I realized I have a boy crush on Dead_Ringer.

MetaTag

MetaTag

United Kingdom
September 2002

OCT 23, 2006 05:02 PM

Dead_Ringer said:
Right, the old we're causing the Islamofascists to decapitate Jews argument. Am I the only sane one here? Why don't you try, you know, blaming the Islamofascists for their actions?!



The islamofascists are completly responsible for their own actions, but the problem of managing them is another matter. It has proven hard to do that with force alone and there is an important battle of "hearts and minds". The UK saw this with our troubles in Ireland. The more extreem our measure were to combat the IRA and other Irish terrorists, the more support they received.

You may feel righteous indignation and anger, but those feelings will not serve you well.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

 ... 10

Next

featured interviews