% civilian deaths?

[Denver Dave]

I was just curious, I've heard that Israel does not target civilians and Hezbollah does, but not sure the numbers bear this out. what is the ratio of Hezbollah caused civilian deaths to total in the current conflict compared to those caused by Israel?

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RSMS9999]

2. re

hezbollah does not report it's casualties, and the people who fit under the term "civilian" range anywhere from innocent bystanders and children to hezbollah supporters who harbor terrorists and rockets in their homes.

In these types of war, its truly impossible to answer your question.

[newyorican]

3. *sigh*

The megaphone responses aside:

In Lebanon, here's what "precision" bombing seems to mean. "On Saturday, an Israeli offense consisting of more than 250 air attacks dropped 4,000 bombs within seven hours… The total death toll from the attacks is approaching 1,000. One third of those deaths are from children under 12."

Red Cross ambulances, governmental emergency centers, UN peacekeeping forces and observers, media outlets, and mobile phone towers have all been bombed, each a violation of international law. Mosques and churches have been hit; illegal weapons such as cluster bombs and white phosphorous used; and, as far as can be told at this early point, over 90% of the victims killed have been civilians.

As of this writing, the Lebanese government had already announced at least 900 deaths, and that number is now certainly well over 1,000. At least 60 Israelis are also dead from Hezbollah rocket attacks on Israel and fierce fighting inside Lebanon.

Link

Here is a rather detached discussion of percentage with a historical viewpoint:
Lebanon/Israel - "Disproportionality" in Perspective (Stuart Elliott)

IBTL!

[msmcghee]

4. If only one in four of those bombs . .

. . is even killing one civilian or Hizbollah fighter - and only one in 12 is killing a child - then that kind of wipes out the claims of many here that Israel is out to "genocide" Lebanese civilians.

That seems like pretty careful targeting to me.

[newyorican]

5. Okay, read that 4x...

...and still makes no sense to me.

*Scans thread looking for mention of genocide*

Nope, not mentioned. Except by you. Not sure what you're fishing for with that...

But, it's crystal clear that having 1/3 of the casualties being 12 years old or under is just fine with you. Very revealing and sad.

[msmcghee]

6. Doing a quick search in I/P - 83 posts have "genocide" in them . .

I have heard no-one here claim that Hizbollah's rockets are an act of genocide.

I have read many clains that Israel's attempts to stop the Hizbollah missiles is an act of "genocide" against Lebanon. Read the posts yourself.

"But, it's crystal clear that having 1/3 of the casualties being 12 years old or under is just fine with you. Very revealing and sad."

I have never claimed that any civilian casualties are good. That's why I support Israel's attampts to neutralize Hizbollah. That is the only thing that will prevent thousands of civilian deaths the next time Hizbollah gets enough missiles stocked up to pursue their stated intentions of destroying the state of Israel.

I won't alert the mods on your claim that I think it's fine that hundreds of children have died as a result of this conflict. But I won't sit here and let you spew that crap either.

[newyorican]

7. Alert away

I stand by my words as they appear.

I'll even elaborate using your own terms:

1/3 of casualties 12yo & under = "seems like pretty careful targeting" - To me, that appears you're just peachy with those results. If I were 'spewing' such hatred for Arabs, I would be way overdue for some serious self-examination.

As to these "83 posts" that mention genocide...would it not be best to address that topic where it is raised? Raising it in this thread appears to be a strawman.

[msmcghee]

12. Let me make this clear for you.

I hate to see any dead civilians. That's why I thoroughly condemn the Hizbollah scum who attacked Israel and forced her to defend her civilian's lives by trying to take out the Hizbollah missile launchers and infrstructure.

Your defense of Hizbollah is pathetic. Such simple-minded "morality" is the cause of all the civilain deaths - Isreali and Lebanese.

[newyorican]

21. Well I only read that 2x...

...as I didn't want to just flush time down the crapper. Still no sense animating from the words.

"Your defense of Hizbollah is pathetic."

*Scans thread looking for my "defense of Hizbollah", comes up empty* - Here we agree, my, "defense of Hizbollah" is pathetic. In fact it is non-existent.

In what twisted view of this conflict does bringing attention to the fact that 1/3 of all Lebanese casualties are children 12 and under equate to "defense of Hezbollah"? I get the distinct impression you are responding, rather poorly, to statements made by others, elsewhere that have struck a nerve.

[idontwantaname]

8. there definitely is some sort of spewing going on

lets say that theres no political history here. judging by the numbers if i were to tell you:

side A has killed 700 people. 600 of them civilians. 1/3 being 12 and under. side A has destroyed much of side Bs country and continues to push its way into side B's territory, continuing its offensive with tanks, f16s, sea artillery and land artillery.

side B has killed 60 people. 30 of them civilians. side B currently is not on side As territory. side B does not have tanks nor do they have jets.

---

now if i were to say i support side A continuing its offensive because i am against civilian deaths, does this make sense?

[msmcghee]

11. In what school of ethics did you discover that . .

. . . right and wrong is based on how many civilians die on each side of an armed conflict?

If the cops kill ten armed bank-robbers who only killed one bank teller and one customer - does that make the cops immoral and the bank robbers the good guys? Your sense of morality is farcical. I'd laugh except that you are a member of DU and that makes me want to cry.

Is there some number of dead Israeli's that would make their defense OK for you? Is it 500? One-thousand?

Just how does one calculate how many Israelis Hizbollah gets to kill before Israel gets to stop them without being accused of genocide?

Such thinking is childish. The side that is wrong is the side that attacks its neighbor and forces it to retaliate to prevent the further killing of its citizens. That's the side that is the cause of all the dead civilians on both sides. Fuzzy minded thinking like your's guarantees never-ending war that will kill many thousands of innocent civilians. The vast majority of those will be Arab Shiites. I don't think that's what you want. I know it's not what I want.

Your ridiculous "morality" of counting dead civilians on each side would guarantee that outcome.

[idontwantaname]

14. such thinking is childish

however in your analogy above i would assume it is side A that are the bank robbers correct?

perhaps if all this conflict started 5 weeks ago i would agree that it is wrong for one side to attack its neighbor. im sure you and i both could sit here all night writing about which came first, the chicken or egg, however do you deny israels actions prior to this conflict. thos actions being repeat violations of lebanons airspace, refusal to release maps to landmines planted in southern lebanon, release of lebanese prisoners from (as galloway said it) israeli "dungeons", withdraw from land taken in 67 and israels own demilitarization of the border.

let me also remind you, as you scream about attacking neighbors, that this all started as a guerrilla force attacking a legitimate military target. how did the IDF react? they bombed civilian infrastructure, roadways and created a blockade. israel escalated this conflict to this level.

[msmcghee]

16. Where do I start?

First, if by saying this "didn't start five weeks ago" you are saying that it's OK to attack another nation if you have some grievance from the past that you can claim as justification - then you are way beyond reason.

Certainly, you realize that what you have just done is guaranteed a never-ending cycle of war and the death of civilians stretching out for many centuries into the future.

Anyone, with any sense must understand that when two nations (or kids) are not fighting with each other and one outright attacks the other - that is an act that must be condemned and punished. Well, maybe you don't. That might be too complex for your sense of right and wrong.

A "Guerrilla force attacking a legitimate military target"?

This is clear evidence of a complete lack of morality or sense on this issue. You simply have no idea what you are talking about.

No military force is a "legitimate military target" if they are not engaged in hostilities. This military force was patrolling its borders on its side of the blue line. To attack them is a gross violation of all international laws governing relations between nations. It is the worst of all possible war crimes - because it is the crime that causes wars. It is the crime that causes all the dead civilains on both sides.

This is beyond ridiculous. You people don't have any idea what these ill-founded, immoral notions do. They ultimately result in the deaths of innocent people - at the hands of those who think you will condone their actions - because more Lebanese civilians died than Israeli. How utterly absurd.

[idontwantaname]

18. dude,

do you know anything of the IDFs activities in the west bank and gaza?

israel is the aggressor in palestine and now the aggressor in lebanon.

[msmcghee]

20. Right n/t

[Little Star]

9. Neutralize Hizbollah? Do you really think

that is what they are doing? This whole thing is beyond gross. I feel bad that fear allows anyone to justify killing others so they can feel safe. Maybe the only way both can really be safe from each other is to separate them like you would children who fight. I truly do not know the answer but I know for sure this killing is not it. Sometimes people need to face their fear with kindness. Violence just begets more violence. Maybe I am bias against Arabs because I expect more from the Israelis. They have the military might plus the USA as staunch allies. Maybe its because I have been brainwashed that the Israelis are civilized just like us Americans. Maybe that is why I expect more from them. Right now I'm not enamored with the way Israel is behaving any more than I am with the way our government is behaving in Iraq. There are better ways to handle this that have not been tried before.

Peace to all on both sides.

[msmcghee]

10. If that's not what they are doing . . .

.. then why has Israel said they will leave Lebanon as soon as a multi-national force is in place to help the Lebanese army assure that no more missiles will be fired into Israel and to help disarm Hizbollah - as UN resolutions demand?

Are you one of the irrational mob here who believe that Israel is out to "genocide" Lebanese civilians - or maybe you're one of those who think israel wants to occupy and "colonize" Lebanon.

Both of those notions are created by Israeli haters who have no concept of history in the region nor any concept of how international relations work.

What's so hard to understand about a nation trying to prevent another nation from firing missiles at its citizens? Oh, I get it. That doesn't fit with the Fasco-Jewish baby-killer scenario so popular among the hate-Israel faction here at DU.

[breakaleg]

13. Why is it that someone who disagrees with Israel's policy is

an Israeli hater? Why must you insult those who don't agree with your opinion by saying those same people who disagree with you "have no concept of history in the region..."

I challenge you to name some of the "hate-Israel faction here at DU". You are sadly mistaken.

And how dare you quote UN resolutions when Israel has routinely ignored resolutions themselves. Either you respect the UN or you don't. And Israel certainly does not.

[idontwantaname]

15. the war on... ?

though israel may state they have intentions to leave lebanon once their demands are met (currently holding a nation hostage) all they have to do is make the request so time consuming and convoluted that there is no way to meet that demand. something like a terrorist saying 'give me 10 billion dollars or else'

by their actions youd never know the israelis have any intention to withdraw

also if israels true intentions are to 'disarm' hezbollah than they should go after the suppliers, not the users. there will always be more users... btu NOT if you cut off the suppliers. dont you agree?

[msmcghee]

17. Please go bring someone here who can . .

. . present a coherent argument. I can't continue this discussion with you.

[idontwantaname]

19. i accept your defeat.

[Spinoza]

22. I've wondered

how the press knows that a number of Lebanese 'civilians' were killed or hurt without any Hizbollah also killed or hurt? After all, Hizbollah doesn't wear uniforms. At least in respect to male adults, how does the press know who is a'civilian' vs a full or part-time Hizbollah member? Naturally, Hizbollah (and Lebanese civilians sympathetic to Hizbollah) will lie on this matter both to make Israel look worse in world opinion and to show Hizbollah is not 'losing'.

The IDF tries to do everything possible to protect Israeli civilians whereas the Hizbollah deliberately fires missiles from within heavily populated civilian areas, builds its bases next to or under schools, hospitals, large apartment buildings, etc and does everything in its power to force Israel to kill Lebanese civilians in order to strike back at Hizbollah. It is Hizbollah that deliberately uses human shields and makes no effort to prevent Lebanese civilian casualties. All the blood is on Hizbollah hands.

[idontwantaname]

23. i suppose you may also argue all the iraqi blood is on saddams hands then?

hezbollah deliberately fires missiles, i agree with you there. however once that rocket leaves the ground thats it. no control from there.

however the israeli army has a great deal of control and say where their ammunitions go, and so far theyve gone over 60% civilians. the blood is on the israeli hands.

[mtice]

24. You're kidding me

"hezbollah deliberately fires missiles, i agree with you there. however once that rocket leaves the ground thats it. no control from there."

So once the rocket is loosed, Hezbollah is absolved of all responsibility for the people killed when it lands and explodes? If you meant something different please clarify.

"however the israeli army has a great deal of control and say where their ammunitions go, and so far theyve gone over 60% civilians. the blood is on the israeli hands."

Nonsense. Israel has control over where its weapons go but it has no control over where Hezbollah fires them from, and no way to know whether there's a bunch of civilians in the area from where they are fired. The most Israel can do is warn people to get off the battlefield before the munitions fly, which they have done. Israeli civilians, in contrast, get no warning, unless you consider the routine promises of genocide to be a warning.

[idontwantaname]

25. nope

im not absolving hezbollah of anything, however im not placing blame of lebanese civilians israeli strikes killed on hezbollah either.

as you stated above israel has control over its weapons and it should take responsibility for innocents they killed.

if you wish to play the game "The most Israel can do is warn people to get off the battlefield before the munitions fly" than the same rules should apply toward israeli civilians dont you think?

they along with the rest of the world know the range of the rockets and while some families can go to tel aviv for safety, all of lebanon is a battle zone, thanks to the IDF destroying beirut airport runways.

[mtice]

26. Not all of Lebanon is a battle zone

Only the Hezbollah-controlled areas. The rest of Lebanon is completely untouched. If you are to argue that the mere presence of the rockets constitutes adequate warning, then would you also agree that the mere existence of the IDF constitutes adequate warning to the Lebanese, and that the dropping of the leaflets is unnecessary? Do you think no one's life was spared because he was informed that Israel would attack certain places ahead of time, and was given the opportunity to evacuate?

[idontwantaname]

27. leaflets are only dropped before major ground operations

which follow after intense, not heavy, but intense bombardment.

most of the 30 or so other area get shells and airstrikes without warning.

additionally, the christian area which was recently bombed was not hezbollah controlled. they are not only bombing hezbollah controlled areas.

[Spinoza]

28. Oceans of blood are on

Saddams hands. But Iraq was not firing missiles into the U.S, over a period of years, or kidnapping American soldiers on American soil.

[idontwantaname]

29. thats right

and let me remind you, it was israel who started the aerial bombardment campaign, not hezbollah.

the israeli soldiers were 'kidnapped' on (i argue) lebanese territory. i saw it on CNN. the israelis argue it was their territory, but we all know it was the 'disputed' area and of anyones territory it probably not israels.

so 2 soldiers get kidnapped, israel bombs multiple areas of lebanon, hezbollah retaliates, and here we are today.

[newyorican]

30. It is that simple...

...but too many who are blind in their support must deny this or their heads will explode.

[Spinoza]

31. Pure bullshit.

The listing of the hundreds of Hizbollah violations since 2000, including killings of Israelis, starting immediately after Israel left Lebanon has been posted on this board before. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Terrorism/hizattacks1.html

Katusha rockets have been fired on Israel, by Hizbollah, on numerous occasions prior to the kidnappings. And we KNOW that Hizbollah's goal is the total destruction of Israel. It is evident both from their actions and their public statements that they are after extermination, not liberation which--in Lebanon--was achieved since 2000.

"Hezbollah attacks on civilian targets prompted the United States to label the group a terrorist organization. In 1985 three members of the group hijacked a TWA flight and killed Navy diver on board. The group also was involved in the 1992 bombing of the Israeli embassy in Argentina that killed 29 and the 1994 bombing of a Jewish community center that killed 85, according to the U.S. State Department. Hezbollah denied involvement in the 1994 attack. In June 1996, the group bombed a U.S. military housing complex in Saudi Arabia, killing 19 U.S. servicemen and wounding 370. Fourteen Hezbollah operatives were later indicted for that attack."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...


For Israel, a nation of refugees, the kidnapping of the soldier was the straw that finally broke the camels back. It is obvious to any unbiased observer that their re-entry into Lebanon is being done with furious reluctance. They don't want to go back. They want the fucking violence against them to fucking stop. (Remember, when they left Lebanon, to insure there was no misunderstanding they asked the United Nations to verify the correct borders for withdrawal. Israel complied. So much for the Sheba Farms bullshit which was NEVER Lebanese territory.)

And read Pelsars many explanatins why it was IMPOSSIBLE, WHY IT MADE NO MILITARY SENSE IN ANY CONTEXT, for the kidnapped soldiers to be on Israeli soil. (In summary Hizbollah was infested right up to the border. For a bunch of Israeli reservists to enter Lebanon in a Humbee was obvious suicide.)

EOM