Lebanon: We will sue Israel in Hague

[Scurrilous]

Lebanese minister of justice states that Israel's attacks constitute war crimes, crimes against humanity, and wonders how pictures of Qana did not bring about ceasefire. Red Cross publishes that 28 corpses evacuated from Qana, contrary to Lebanese reports that 57 people were killed

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3284627,00.html

<snip>

"Lebanon is planning to file a lawsuit against Israel in the International Criminal Court. Tuesday, Lebanese Minister of Justice Charles Rizk made a written petition to the Lebanese Prime Minister, Fouad Siniora, asking him to bring up the issue in the next meeting of the Lebanese cabinet, so that the prime minister will be able to collect witnesses in preparation before filing of the complaint.

The minister wrote to the prime minister: "The repeated Israeli attacks on Lebanon, on its infrastructure, its citizens, women and children, since July 12 are a grave breech of international law and international agreements. As such, they clearly constitute war crimes and crimes against humanity."

"In preparation for the pursuit of the Israeli enemy in the relevant international courts, and in a bid to punish these crimes and to bring them to justice, the Lebanese government must prepare a comprehensive case that will include and detail all the attacks and crimes committed. This is with the intent that Israel pay restitution on all the physical and moral damages that she caused Lebanon and her citizens," he wrote.

"Accordingly, I request of you to present the issue in the cabinet meeting so that the decision can be made to assign the mission of performing a comprehensive survey of damage caused and of gathering proof of crimes committed to the Defense Ministry or the Ministry of the Interior. This will be done with legal oversight so that it may be passed on at the right moment in order to go after the perpetrators of these crimes," he added.

In addition, Minister Rizk expressed his regret that the "Qana massacre did not horrify the conscience and did not bring about a UN decision for a ceasefire."

[Poll_Blind]

1. They, as they say, have one hell of a case against Israel. n/t

PB

[IthinkThereforeIAM]

2. The Lebanese are so civilized...

... to take their disagreements to a court instead of bombing buses and children.

[BeHereNow]

13. Truly, they are-

I used to work in a band that played up in SF
every year for the American Lebanese association.
They held a large convention every year at a
great hotel, and I have to tell you- it was my favorite gig.

The people were so well educated and genuinely
warm. They were so articulate and gracious and
capable of stimulating conversations on just
about any topic that arose.

It is disgraceful to think that such wonderful
people are being indiscriminately murdered.

BHN

[Totallybushed]

15. That's because, militarily,

they haven't got a pot to piss in.

Besides, they haven't done anything to stop the instigator of the violence, Hezbollah.

[ixion]

20. the instigator of the violence, Hezbollah

yeah, right.

:rofl:

Poor little Israel, just sittin' there minding there own business. Yeah, that's it. That's exactly it. :eyes:

[Totallybushed]

21. Yep, pretty much so n/t

[ThomCat]

44. You can only believe that if you have idealogical blinders on.

The only way to think Israel is innocent is if you happen to like that particular illusion.

[Totallybushed]

50. Yeah,

all I can see is the innocent Arabs of Hamas and Hezbollah, and their human shields (for whom I do feel some angst) playfully firing rockets into Israeli cities and crying when the big neighborhood bully, Olmert, tries to beat the humor out of them.

Let them return the soldiers. Let them disarm and surrender themselves to the Lebanese government. Let Lebanon sign a peace treaty with Israel.

Either Hezbollah is at war with Israel, or they are not. If not, then they must cease their attacks. If they are, let them suck it up and quit the bitchin'. And stop causing civilian casualties by hiding behind their women's skirts.

[funnymanpants]

52. False

Israel is attacking Lebanon, not Hezbollah. Human Rights Watch has already deemed Israel's attacks a war crime.

Regarding the "hiding in woman's skirts," there was an article in Haaretz noting that Israel is now backing off of its claim that there was firing in Quana.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/745185.html

By the way, Israel regularly kidnapps people, and has 10,000 Palestinian prisoners, most held without charge, a practice condemned by human rights groups. Should Israel be attacked and destroyed like Lebanon was? After all, Israel is 10 times more guilty (at least) than Hezbollah.

[ThomCat]

60. Well said.

:hi:

[LostinVA]

120. Why did you make a point of mentioning "Arabs"

when referring to Hamas and Hezbollah? Except for some trolls, I haven't once seen any DUer say "The Jews of IDF."

Hmmm.... why is that?

I have seen more than a few anti-Arab posts on DU lately....

(concerning the rest of your post: I'll let other people handle that)

[Totallybushed]

123. Hezbollah

consists of ARabs of the Sh'ite persuasion. Hamas consists of ARabs of the sunnit persuasion. Duh. There are numerous arab organizations, and most Arab governments are technically at war with Israel, if I remember correctly. I might be wrong about that, so don't bother to correct me.

It's a convenient short-hand. Don't be so quick to see racism in everything someone you disagree with says. None was intended.

[LostinVA]

127. DUH -- guess you just proved my point for me

And many other posters'. Thank you!

As Kelso would say: BURN.

"Duh," forsooth.

[Totallybushed]

132. Don't think so.

Look. When you say something about the Israeli sides and say, "Israelis", are you talking about ALL Israelis or just the government, and perhaps those that support its actions?

Good way to avoid facing facts, though. Accuse your opponent of bigotry and discussion ceases.

AS it does now.

[Threedifferentones]

61. Both sides are equally guilty

The Israelis have as much right to that land as those darned "Indians" have to mine. On the other hand they, like Native Americans, do deserve a homeland if they want one.

Israel's Arab neighbors have every right to be pissed that a bunch of white people kicked some of them of their land and created the state of Israel there. On the other hand, constantly killing innocent Israelis is the poorest of responses.

Both Israel and its Arab enemies have shed so much blood in the past decades that peace now seems like a pipedream until the people on both sides just can't stand the killing anymore and find peace for themselves.

[manic expression]

71. I disagree

Zionists deserve a homeland as much as the Tutsis, Gypsies, Black Sudanese people, Zoroastrians, African animists, Indian Buddhists and other persecuted groups (read: they don't).

IMO, it's basically the fault of the side which is guilty of ethnic cleansing and murder, as well as instigating the problem in the first place. That side is Israel.

[IntiRaymi]

75. Agreed!

Israel is one of the best examples of colonialist mismanagement by the european powers.

[BeHereNow]

25. Yeah, poor little Israel that just sent 20,000 troops across the border...

After killing god knows how many innocent civilians.
Uh-huh.

BHN

[BeHereNow]

22. No, it's because they are, as a rule, extemely educated and cultured

as a people.

They are the most gentle people as a culture
that I have ever met.

Uneducated populations are the the first
to resort to violence.
Take a look at our society if you don't believe me.

BHN

[Totallybushed]

26. Extremely educated, cultured,

gentle, and getting their asses kicked, first by Hezbollah, and now by Israel. Not to mention Syria.

OK, that's a great endorsement for culture.

In a brutal world, you have to be able and prepared to defend yourself and your society, no matter how gentle and cultured it is. Otherwise, well you can see the consequences.

[BeHereNow]

27. And HOW exactly was Hezbollah "kicking their asses?"

Apparently you have information that I do not-
Please provide me with some details of
how Hezbollah was kicking Lebanese ass?

BHN

[Totallybushed]

34. Well, it seems

pretty well established that the Lebanese government does not control the South of Lebanon. That is controlled by Hezbollah. Or was until a few weeks ago. Don't think anyone is in control just now.

Why didn't it control the south? A government that has NOT established control of its territory has had its ass kicked by the organization that has. Either militarily or politically. Or they are cowards and moral lepers. Take your pick.

[BeHereNow]

36. Perhaps you should research the history of Hezbollah

in Lebanon before you type?
Respectfully,
BHN

[Totallybushed]

37. Tell you what.

Why don't you tell me what your point is and I'll respond.

do you deny that Hezbollah, not the Lebanese government was in control? If so, do you deny that syria controlled Lebanon for years and years, of that Israel is tearing aross their country right now, and, so far as I have heard, the Lebanese army has done diddly-squat about it.

what is your definition of 'getting your ass kicked'?

[BeHereNow]

41. Certainly not your definition- Please read the following:

This is an excerpt from a piece by Robert Fisk,
the journalist who has lived in and covered the
ME for thirty years-
And for your records, Hezbollah came about as a response to
Israeli/US hegemonic aggression in the area.
Given Israel's latest neocon backed actions, are you
really surprised?
The US has created far more guerrilla armies than any
country in the world...
BHN

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0817-03.htm
Excerpt:
"As Bush's regional enemies grew in number to include not just al-Qa'ida but Iraq and Iran and their allies, a fabric of stories began to be woven. Last June, for example, we had Donald Rumsfeld spinning tales about Iran. At a press conference in Qatar – these lies can be spun, please note, just as well in the Arab world as in the West – Rumsfeld told us that Iranians "are engaging in terrorist activities and transporting people down through Damascus and into the Bekaa Valley. They have harbored al-Qa'ida and served as a facilitator for the movement of al-Qa'ida out of Afghanistan down through Iran."

Now the implication of all this is that al-Qa'ida men were being funneled into Lebanon with the help of Iran and Syria. Yet we know that Iran, far from "transporting" al-Qa'ida men to Syria, has been packing them off to Saudi Arabia for imprisonment and possible death. We know that the Syrians have locked up an important al-Qa'ida official. The Americans have since acknowledged all this. And, save for 10 Lebanese men hiding in a Palestinian camp – who may have no contact with al-Qa'ida – there isn't a single Osama bin Laden follower in Lebanon.

So Hezbollah had to be lined up for attack. The Washington Post did the trick with the following last month: "The Lebanon-based Hezbollah organization, one of the world's most formidable terrorist groups, is increasingly teaming up with al-Qa'ida on logistics and training for terrorist operations, according to US and European intelligence officials and terrorism experts." This tomfoolery was abetted by Steven Simon, who once worked for the US National Security Council and who announced that "there's a convergence of objectives. There's something in the 'zeitgeist' that is pretty well established now." Except, of course – zeitgeist notwithstanding – it is simply untrue."

[Totallybushed]

47. Very interesting, and

not at all to the point.

On edit: I'm still not sure what your definition of "getting your ass kicked" is. It might clear up some misunderstandings here.

on second edit: Also, what particular point of Hezbollah's bloody history were you wanting me to read up on?

You do not seem willing to answer direct questions. Hard to debate like that.

[LostinVA]

124. Why are you so proud to show off both your ignorance of the history

of this whole thing and your warmongering??? WTF is gleeful about innocent people "getting their ass kicked"????

You got your marching papers in order, alright.

[Totallybushed]

128. LOL!

Nobody is "gleeful" about innocent people getting their asses kicked.

[funnymanpants]

55. well, it seems you are wrong

As I stated before, Lebanon could not disband Hezbollah because there would be a civil war. Israel fomented that civil war by its illegal invasion in 1982.

[Totallybushed]

68. Excuse me.

What does that have to do with it.

Failure to disband Hezbollah means that Lebanon is not fulfilling its obligations under UN resolutions. Spare me the talk about Israel not doing the same. I don't care about UN resolutions a whole lot for either side.

But they are also not fulfilling their obligation to prevent attacks on countries with which the are not at war originating on their territory. As they have not done so, Israel is entitled to do it.

Civil war or invasion. The choice was Lebanon's, and they chose wrong.

[manic expression]

72. Excuse you

Lebanon is not responsible for Hezbollah.

It's quite simple:

Hezbollah does not = Lebanon

Get it?

Israel has NO right to punish an entire nation, an entire people because of the actions of one group. Lebanon is not at fault, and Israel escalated the situation and attacked Lebanon because they wanted to assert their superiority and hurt the Lebanese people. Israel has done nothing but commit atrocities and aggression upon a country that is innocent. Therefore, Israel is at fault for the situation, as well as being guilty of murder.

Peace or injustice. The choice was Israel's, and they chose injustice, just as they always have.

[Totallybushed]

82. Sorry, you're wrong.

Lebanon is responsible for controlling Hezbollah. They have failed to do so. Israel, having been attacked by Hezbollah, has the right, and even a moral obligation, to wage war upon them. No one is being punished. They are simply in a war zone.

You know, civilian deaths are always tragic. But they are not always atrocities. First, mistakes CAN be made, which is different from targeting civilians on purpose, as Hezbollah does. TRagic, but not a war crime. Second, "collateral damage" is acceptable under international law if it is not "disproportionate" to the military value of the intended target.

Sorry. You've swallowed the Kool-Aid. God help you.

[manic expression]

92. No, you are misled and in denial

Lebanon is not responsible for what Hezbollah does. Hezbollah is responsible for what Hezbollah does. When Hezbollah does something, Lebanon is not at fault for that. Therefore, it is wholly without any shred of justification or reason to attack Lebanon and its people because of Hezbollah. Furthermore, the people of Lebanon ARE being punished and targeted by Israel, Israel has shown NO respect for innocent life and have been guilty of mass murder. A war that one wages for no reason is no excuse for atrocities committed during that unjustified war.

Your little lecture on "tragic" civilian deaths is empty and worthless. The fact is that Israel has taken NO steps to help minimize innocent deaths, Israel has done nothing to follow any standard of decency, Israel has not discerned civilian from combatant (because to Israel they are all the same). Not only have far more civilians died during this little display of oppression, but Israel has targeted infrastructure, the infrastructure that civilians depend on and need. Furthermore, when 60 innocent people are murdered, and even the AIF admitted that NO ROCKETS WERE FIRED FROM THE TOWN, the ONLY reasonable conclusion can be that Israel is at fault for mass murder. To add to all of this, Israel has no justification for attacking Lebanon or its people, they are decidedly without reason for their aggression.

Oh, you might like to know that UN officials accused Israel of using excessive force. Have fun reading:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,251-2283898,00.html

Now according to the international law you specified, Israel is guilty. Why? Because the ratio of civilians to combatants killed is outrageous. Oh, and look at what happened just recently; 60 people were murdered when there was NO MILITARY VALUE OF THE INTENDED TARGET. Let me paint a little picture (since you seem to be incapable of comprehending this otherwise): the ratio of innocent deaths to the total military value of the intended target was around 60:NOTHING. Apologist arguments have never worked, and yours do not work now.

This isn't too hard to understand, but unfortunately facts don't get in the way of people who blindly support Israel.

[Totallybushed]

96. Have another

glass of Kool-Aid. Repeat the lies till you believe them yourself. Lebanon is responsible for Hezbollah having the ability to attack another country.

But even if every thing you said was true (LOL), Israel would still have the right and duty to protect its citizens. Even if some inadvertent damage to Lebanon occurred.

You are hopeless and a Hezbollah enabler.

[manic expression]

108. Keep those pathetic comments coming

it doesn't help your argument and shows you to be without support.

Is the Indian government responsible for the crap going on in Kashmir? What about the dacoits? Is the government of Mexico responsible for everyone crossing the border? No, they aren't. Thanks for playing.

Hezbollah does what it does, Lebanon is not at fault for that. Your insistence on what is obvious fallacy is laughable. Added to this is the fact that Hezbollah exists precisely because of Israeli aggression. Yet you stay in denial of these facts.

Israel does not have any right to pound an entire nation into oblivion, as it is doing. Israel is not defending itself at all, it is only trying to assert its dominance and punish the people of Lebanon. Again, Israel is not defending, it is only attacking and attacking with no justification, and its atrocities only underline their lack of respect for innocent life.

"Even if some inadvertent damage to Lebanon occurred."

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

What? "...some inadvertent damage"? What? Are you serious? The damage is very intended and more than "some". Actually, far more civilians have been killed than combatants, showing that Israel has no intention of discerning between the two. You really have no clue.

[Totallybushed]

112. No, I

think the Pakistani government is responsible for a lot of it.

OK, I give up. Your superior logic and reasoning ability, and the fact that ALL the facts are on your side :sarcasm: have convinced me.

So I am waiting for how you are peacefully going to protect the Israeli civilians do they don't have to go to war.

I'm sure someone who sees the world as clearly as you do has a plan.

[manic expression]

117. The difference

is that the Pakistani government is actively equipping and supporting those groups, which is not what Lebanon is doing, making your comparison inaccurate and invalid. My comparison, on the other hand, compared two governments which have nothing to do with independent groups operating inside their borders. That is valid.

Ask yourself why the rockets started being fired. Ask yourself why the Palestinians started fighting prior to this specific incident (which led to the first kidnappings). Ask yourself why Hezbollah was formed in the first place. When you find out the answers to those questions, the solution will become much clearer.

[Totallybushed]

69. Excuse me

What does that have to do with it.

Failure to disband Hezbollah means that Lebanon is not fulfilling its obligations under UN resolutions. Spare me the talk about Israel not doing the same. I don't care about UN resolutions a whole lot for either side.

But they are also not fulfilling their obligation to prevent attacks on countries with which the are not at war originating on their territory. As they have not done so, Israel is entitled to do it.

Civil war or invasion. The choice was Lebanon's, and they chose wrong.

[fooj]

78. At the risk of getting my head handed to me.....

The Israeli's illegally OCCUPIED So. Lebanon for 12 years and couldn't or wouldn't disband Hezbollah. Now it's Lebanon's responsibility? It's THEIR fault? A country that doesn't even have so much as a helicopter or an Air Force jet? That makes a whole lot of sense to me. Huh?

[Totallybushed]

83. The are the government.

It's their responsibility. If they lack the power, it's still their responsibility. If they cannot do it, they could ask for international help.

What they lack, however, is not just the power, but the will. They don't want a "civil war". But why should Israel suffer for that?

[fooj]

107. You've completely ignored the fact that Israel ILLEGALLY occupied

So. Lebanon for 12 years and COULDN'T or WOULDN'T disarm and dismantle Hezbollah. Why then, was it necessary to ILLEGALLY occupy a country and NOT be held accountable for it?

Almost 1000 Lebanese have died to date. That death toll doesn't count the civilians that are still buried underneath the rubble throughout Lebanon. The stench of rotten corpses fills the air. Tell me again...WHO IS SUFFERING?

As far as "responsibility" goes...will Israel take any responsibility for the crimes that they are perpetrating against INNOCENT civilians? I'm sure that you are familiar with the saying "People in glass houses..."


Wrong is wrong. Crimes against humanity are just that. Crimes. Period.

[LostinVA]

122. You do need to educate yourself about some things

Specially, the South of Lebanon and Israel's role in that, Hezbollah and its formation, and the reason why Lebanon has a weak military and fragile government.

If you truly had the answers and used critical thinking along with that knowledge, you could never write the above post.

Oi.

[Totallybushed]

126. Wrong.

I do know the facts.

I don't care why Lebanon cannot control Hezbollah. The fact that they can't is the only significant fact in moral or international law.

[Chulanowa]

38. Defining the worth of a culture exclusively on their military might

...Is not the best measure to take

[Totallybushed]

48. And yet, that is not what I did.

I merely pointed out that that is not enough to survive in the world we live in.

[lastliberalintexas]

43. Wow

It might be a good time to read up on some proponents of non-violence. Not everything is about who has the biggest d*ck.

[Totallybushed]

49. When people are trying to kill you,

is not the time to practice non-violence. In such a case it is fight or flight.

I don't like it, but that is the way the world is in the current times. No pacifist philsophy will succeed against a bullet to the brain or a bomb up the ass.

Wish it were different.

[Zhade]

53. Huh. Seemed to work for Ghandi.

I guess the IDF lacks the will needed to solve problems with nonviolence.

Thankfully, the rest of the world rightfully doesn't agree with your opinions on this conflict.

[Totallybushed]

64. All right. Let's assume that you are right.

Then why shouldn't the Muslim militias make the first move towards non-violence? Either way, the violence would end, according to you. So why not press them?

[Zhade]

77. Press them how, is the question.

I submit that Israel is not moving in the right direction. A cease-fire might be a good start!

And please stop with the "Muslim militias" stuff. Not all Muslims support Hezbollah, which a statement like this makes appear (even if unintentionally).

[Totallybushed]

84. Well,

demonstrations against Hezbollah instead of Israel might be a start.

What kind of militias are they? Only a fool would say they are "secular" or "jewsih" or "christian" militias.

Sorry, I really am, if my phraseology offended you. But careful reading of what I wrote shows that I was describing the militias, not all the Muslims, or even Arabs, in the world. You saw what you wanted to see, and I cannont apologize for stating the facts, as I see them.

[funnymanpants]

57. Why?

Israel started the war. They kidnapped a doctor and his brother on June 24, thus starting the round of kidnapping. They also choose war over a tatical response or negotiations. So they are to blame for the violence.

[Totallybushed]

65. Kidnapped?

or arrested?

Did they demand a ransom or a trade? No. Then they are not hostages.

[manic expression]

73. Arrested? No

Kidnapped. If someone abducts someone and doesn't demand a ransom or trade, it's still a kidnapping.

"To seize and detain unlawfully and usually for ransom."
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/kidnap

Not necessarily for ransom. Thanks for playing.

[Totallybushed]

85. But did

Isrel act lawfully, or not?

I would say that they probably did. Hezbollah, and Hamas did not.

[manic expression]

91. It might be helpful to recognize that

kidnapping someone for no real reason is not lawful by anyone's standards. If this is the case, Israel violated a host of laws. However, since when did mere laws matter to Israel?

On Hamas, they acted in response to blatant murder on the part of Israel. Hamas was observing a ceasefire, and Israel shelled a family on a beach, and so obviously Hamas responded. That is not unreasonable. On Hezbollah, if it is true that Israel kidnapped someone, both parties are not without fault, but Israel is very much responsible and guilty of escalating the situation, as well as murdering countless innocents.

[muryan]

97. There is no proof

of that being an Israeli shell. Infact the best evidence points to it being a weapon fired by Hamas that failed.

[manic expression]

105. That's simply incorrect

The IDF even gave their obligatory empty apology, but then tried to lie about it later.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06/09/mideast/

They even found fragments of the shell which matched Israeli munitions. The Israeli Channel 10 even corroborated this.

I think you are confusing this recent occurance to the explosion in the crowd which Hamas later took responsibility for. If not, you are simply deranged.

[funnymanpants]

59. Wow! what a mean post

Talk about an inflamatory post. This sounds like the words of a raging Alcoholic nutcase.

They are getting their asses kicked so their culture is inferior? Are you serious? The mind absolutely reels.

I know, and we are supposed to take your defense of Israel serious, too. I suppose if Einstein had gotten brutally beaten up and killed in the middle of his career, you would have said "Well, that goes to show how good his theories was. Huh!"

[Totallybushed]

67. I have begun to notice that

some people on DU, especially on Israel/Arab posts do not read what is posted.

I never said a word about the relative inferiority of superiority of their culture. I simply tried to make the point that culture is not enough. You need to be able to defend yourself.

Go back and re-read the post.

edit: to correct HTML

[funnymanpants]

54. Lebanon not to blame

As almost every commentator noted at the outbreak of the war, if Lebanon tried to disband Hezbollah, there would have been a civil war. You defeat Hezbollah politically, not militarily. Because of Israel's action, 87 percent of Lebonese support Hezbollah.

Did Israel really think that indiscriminate bombing of Lebanon--bridges, the airport, a TV station *hostile* to Hezbollah--would really turn the population against Hezbollah?

By the way, Hezbollah was the result of the illegal invasion by Israel in 1982.

[Totallybushed]

86. It's Lebanon's responsibility

to controll Hezbollah and prevent attacks on a neighboring country from originating on its soil. If it takes a civil war, it takes a civil war. Otherwise, the neighboring country HAS THE FUCKING RIGHT to invade, under international law. Which is what they have done.

[manic expression]

70. Get a clue

Israel escalated the conflict and massacred people while bombing an entire country into oblivion, and further Lebanon and its people are not responsible for Hezbollah.

[Totallybushed]

87. Certainly Lebanon

is responsible for Hezbollah. They are the Government, God damn it. What's wrong that you can't understand that. A government has a responsbility to govern. Which means controlling violence originating on its own teritory.

Let them renounce sovreignty if they like and establish the Islamic Republic of Hezbollah. Then you might have a serious point. But, of course, they aren't going to do that because the goal is not to stop the killing but to destroy Israel.

[manic expression]

93. You are without a clue

No, the Lebanese government is not Hezbollah, and so they are not responsible for what they do. By that logic, the US government is responsible for the actions of the minutemen, or the actions of the Kansas City bombers, or the actions of.... Basically, your attempt to equate the two is utterly ridiculous and shows the fallacy of your position. Since Lebanon is not responsible for what an independent group does, Israel's actions are wholly irresponsible, unjustified, atrocious, terrible, without reason, wrong and worse.

No, under your snide and insipid hypothetical, your points might be valid, because an Islamic Republic of Hezbollah would be responsible for what its military wing does, whereas the government of Lebanon does not. Nice try.

[Totallybushed]

95. Well, the minutemen

Haven't, insofar as I have heard, broken any laws yet.

And the US government did track down the KC bombers and executed one. The other is serving life withut parole.

So the US government did take responsibility. Also, can you imagine the "New Confederate Army" taking control of the Deep South states without the Federal government slapping them down? No, you can't. That is what I mean aabout being responsible.

People without a clue should not accuse other of the same. Lebanon is OBLIGATED to control the non-governmental organizations in its territory, even if it has to use force and ignite a civil war.

Learn to think.

[muryan]

99. But that would mean Israel is justified

and no matter what logic and reason tell you, the worst possible conclusion is that israel would be justified so it must be wrong. :sarcasm:

[Totallybushed]

104. I think you're beginning

to get the picture.

[manic expression]

100. Now,

if they did, would the US government be responsible? It is simply wrong to think that any government should be condemned for the actions of an independent group. With the bombers, the deed was done, and if anyone turned around and said the US government was responsible they are insane. Likewise, if you blame the Lebanese government for something they didn't do, you are far more insane.

Can you imagine Mexico occupying a very large part of the US? No, you can't. That's what I mean about you being insane. Furthermore, the reason that Hezbollah was even formed was because of Israel's occupation of that very region, Hezbollah was one of the many militias that were formed in defense of Lebanon. Get a clue.

Lebanon is not to be put to the sword because one group did what they did. That is collective punishment, a mockery of justice and a crime in itself. To say they are obligated to control such an organization is stupid and without perspective. It is Israel that must control itself instead of carrying out unjustified aggression time and again.

Furthermore, if you knew anything, you'd know that Hezbollah's main operations in the south are not too unlawful, they are oriented around services and the like. But, you don't know anything, don't you?

[Totallybushed]

106. Still, under international

law, Israel has the right to attack Hezbollah becasue Lebanon has failed to do so.

Look, isn't a government responsible for order in its territory?

Ata any event. Neither I, nor international law, see any reason that Israel should just sit back and take it. Lebanon is responsible to protect its civilians, too.

Also, you seem to have no idea what the concept of collective punishment is. If Israel rounded up 100 Lebanese and shot them every time Hezbollah shot off a rocket, that would be collective punishment. But an attack on a military target that happens to kill civilians is not collective punishment. Neither is attacking infrastructure that can be used militarily.

The objective is victory, not punishment. That makes a considerable difference.

[manic expression]

110. Now you're just ignoring facts

Israel has no right to attack Lebanese civilians, which it has done extensively. Israel has no right to carry out collective punishment, which it has done intensively. Israel has no right to destroy infrastructure, which is has done completely. Israel has no right to do what it is doing, that much is decidedly clear.

A government is responsible for its actions, not the actions of an independent group. What you are suggesting is that any action of a group automatically makes the government part-and-parcel to that action, which is simply not true. Face it: the Lebanese government is not Hezbollah, and cannot be blamed for any of Hezbollah's actions.

Israel should try to not bomb a nation off the map. They have no reason or right to do so. It is not in protection of anything to go after a country and the people who live there, and anyone who has looked at the situation with any sort of objectivity can tell you that Israel has done that, and that is wrong.

If Israel killed 380 civilians as of July 25th and used the actions of Hezbollah as some sort of attempted justification, that is collective punishment. If Israel pounded a country into the ground because of something one group did, that is collective punishment. If Israel killed 60 people in a town where no rockets were fired, that is worse than collective punishment. Israel has done all of those things.

The objective is an assertion of supremacy and the oppression of an entire people. The objective is to injure the Lebanese people as much as possible. That is the objective, and that objective is without justification, that objective is wrong.

[Totallybushed]

111. Actually,

Israel's response has been very restrained. civilians are not targeted. Perhaps is Hezbollah stopped keepingcivilians from leaving areas where they are operating, there would be less civilian casualties? Hmm?

No Lebanon is not responsible for what Hezbollah does. They are responsible for keeping them from continuing to do it. A reasonable solution would be to arrest those responsible and turn them over to Israel for trial.

Ii is not I that is ignoring facts. I'm not making up my own facts either, like certain people, or swallowing the Kool Aid like certain other people.

[manic expression]

114. Actually, you're wrong

Actually, Israel has done nothing but level an entire country. Need I even point out the destruction and total annihalation that Israel has been carrying out? It is without restrainment or responsiblity, it is madness, and that is what Israel seems to be content with.

Show how Hezbollah is somehow responsible for innocent people dying. Go ahead, give me something solid.

Right, Lebanon is not responsible for what Hezbollah does. So it is unjustified for Israel to do what it is doing: going after a country and its people because of the actions of a group. It is the epitome of injustice and aggression and anyone who looks at the situation will tell you that.

A reasonable solution would be to just exchange prisoners and stop the whole mess. That counts for the large amounts of Palestinians being held in prison without trial as well.

You are ignoring the entire situation, your claims of Israel's nonexistent "restraint" only shows this further.

[Totallybushed]

121. Ok, I;ve tried and tried.

Obviously you are impervious to reason.

We'll just have to agree to disagree about this. See you on some other thread.

[manic expression]

133. Reason?

You've shown no reasons, you've only shown unsupported assertions.

See you then.

[Name removed]

137. Deleted message

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

[jpkenny]

3. Israel will no doubt win the miltary war but will lose its soul.

What price victory? No peace for Israel ever is the likely outcome of this attack on Lebanon.

[Scurrilous]

4. Welcome to DU ...

...jpkenny. :thumbsup:

[ShockediSay]

5. likewise jpk; welcome aboard n/t

[jonnyblitz]

6. what soul? nt

[manic expression]

74. Too true n/t

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

9. Or both.

I think they've got about as much chance of winning in Lebanon as they do winning in Iraq.

[mom cat]

10. Welcome to DU "jpkenny"

:hi:
Does the "jp" in your screenname refer to Jamaica Plain? That is where I live :hi:

I think that Isreal has made more enemies with this one than they thought they would. I am glad to see so many Israelis and Jews here calling for this maddness to stop!

[Mandate My Ass]

11. welcome, jpkenny

I agree. It seems to be what happens whenever righter wingers take over a country. They're soul destroyers. :-(

[Vidar]

39. Welcome to DU. Have to agree.

[Zhade]

51. I don't know, they lost last time and were driven out.

I wouldn't assume anything at this point. I mean, we spend half our budget on the military, more than the rest of the planet *combined* (to the detriment of so many essential things), yet we're bogged down in Iraq.

Frankly, as much as I detest terrorist groups (be they Hezbollah or the IDF), I don't really want Israel to win. That would mean further escalation in the Middle East, I'm afraid. That, and they'd get away with their current war crimes, which can't be allowed any more than Hezbollah can be allowed to kill innocent people.

[Kagemusha]

7. If Lebanon's still technically at war with Israel this is a very hard case

I'm not sure what the status of that is but, Israel can probably argue that the war has a grandfather clause...

[sinkingfeeling]

8. They should also sue to recover the reconstruction of their country. It

will run into the tens of billions of dollars.

[Totallybushed]

16. And what happens if

Israel refuses to recognize the authority of the Court? who enforces these decisions?

[tritsofme]

30. As neither Lebanon nor Israel are parties to the Rome Statute

I don't see how the ICC could touch this mess even if it wanted to.

[Totallybushed]

35. A good point.

Of course, that probably won't sstop them from trying.

[muriel_volestrangler]

12. ynetnews is out of date about the number killed

The initial Red Cross statement said, on the 30th July (ie Sunday):

At the time of writing, the Lebanese Red Cross Society and the Lebanese Civil Defense have extracted 28 bodies from the rubble, 19 of whom are children.

http://www.icrc.org/Web/Eng/siteeng0.nsf/html/Lebanon-news-300706!OpenDocument

But AP reported, also on Sunday:

An Israeli airstrike killed at least 56 people, including at least 34 children, in a southern Lebanese village Sunday, the Lebanese Red Cross said. It was the deadliest attack in 19 days of fighting. Lebanese security officials put the toll at 57 dead. Security officials said the toll rose dramatically after 18 people from two families were found in a single room of the building, where dozens of people had been taking refuge from the fighting.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=2253175

So ynetnews is reporting information over 2 days old, that has long been superceded, as if it's new.

[Scurrilous]

18. Yeah..

...ynetnews has been disappointing.

Look at what they were trying to peddle yesterday:

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3284514,00.html

[MrPrax]

28. Pretty bad...

not only is Hezbullah using children, but crippled children to boot. Wonder what happened to the other excuse about the buildings collapsing hours after the bombs...that was a sad attempt which should have put anyone on notice that Israel is only shovelling war propaganda at this point.

Noxious hate literature that would appeal to only the most rabid racists.

I would like to see Israel and it's defenders prove these contentions in a court of law -- take their 'defense argument' seriously for a single second and then lay out a case based on specifics dealing with this particular action. You look at the bombing map and one is hard pressed to figure out how bombing targets up near the border with Turkey would be remotely operational against the 'terrorist' threat.

It would be nice if Israel had to defend some of the bombing targets within the rationale that they present -- for instance, Israel immediately bombed the Beirut airport. Maybe Israel could provide an explanation as to why that would have be necessary if they were only stopping rockets and retrieving kidnapped soldiers?

Let's assume Israel is right -- they shouldn't have any problem laying the case out that it's actions were strictly in keeping with international legal conditions of 'threat'.

[IntiRaymi]

76. Israel is committing ethnic cleansing.

According to reports, they are destroying all infrastructure south of the Litani.
This is ethnic cleansing of the worst sort, and it is double disgusting to:
(a) See the specious arguments pro-israel posters use,
(b) Witness the venality of our (american) politicians,
(c) Have to observe first hand bullying of this sort.
Israel lost me.

[muryan]

102. edit double post.

[muryan]

103. It just so happens that the militia

they are fighting are all of the same ethnicity. That really cant be helped.

[LostinVA]

135. OMG

[Demeter]

14. Good Idea!

Now who can we get to sue the US?

[Mr. Mojo Risin]

17. The Hague is only for the losers......winners don't have to go (n/t)

[Totallybushed]

24. That is the truth.

As I have stated before.

Otherwise, why are only decrepit rw dictators tried there instead of GWB, or some commie monster from the last century?

[Binka]

63. How Old Are You?

Commie?

[LostinVA]

129. I prefer to call myself "Commie Pinko"

How are you doing, Binkster?

[fshrink]

136. Yes but that's the only mature move available.

The rest is middle-school recess behaviors articifially elevated to the rank of "politics".

[European Socialist]

19. Don't worry Israel--Uncle Sam will pick up the check.

[Little Star]

23. Good! Now if only Iraq will do the same to the US. n/t

[tritsofme]

29. IIRC Lebanon would have no standing at the ICC

as neither Israel nor Lebanon are parties to the Rome Statute.

[iverglas]

31. confusion: International Court of Justice or International Criminal Court?

Two completely different things.

The ICC, operating under the Rome Statute, deals with prosecutions of crimes committed by individuals -- war crimes, the crime of genocide, crimes against humanity. (The US and Israel have both signed but not ratified the Rome Statute.)

The ICJ ("World Court"), operating under the United Nations Charter and the Statute of the ICJ, adjudicates claims by one state against another relating to breaches of the international law that applies between states.

One doesn't "file a lawsuit" in the ICC. States refer situations to the prosecutor and request investigation, after which there may be prosecutions of an individual or individuals.

Conversely, one doesn't prosecute in the ICJ, which is essentially a civil court. It doesn't try or punish individuals; it decides disputes between states and can award compensation.

It looks like the Lebanese minister is asking that both things be done:

"... a bid to punish these crimes and to bring them to justice ..."

"... with the intent that Israel pay restitution on all the physical and moral damages that she caused Lebanon and her citizens ..."

"... to assign the mission of performing a comprehensive survey of damage caused *and* of gathering proof of crimes committed ..."

-- which seems wise.

Just another note in case of confusion: "moral damages", referred to in the article in the opening post, is an expression used in European civil law for what we might call "non-material damages", i.e. harm that can't be measured in dollars and cents but for which someone is entitled to compensation.

And I'd love to see an Iraqi government go after the US sometime in future, too, in particular in the ICJ for violations of international law, i.e. the illegal invasion and occupation.

Of course, the US withdrew from compulsory jurisdiction of the ICJ in 1986. The US lost in the case brought against it by Nicaragua for the mining of its harbours by the US. Withdrawing from compulsory jurisdiction is an appalling affront to the world, and destabilizing and decivilizing influence on international relations. Declarations by other nations regarding compulsory jurisdiction:
http://www.icj-cij.org/icjwww/ibasicdocuments/ibasictext/ibasicstatute.htm
Website of the ICJ: http://www.icj-cij.org

[Atmashine]

32. Are you kidding? This is the 90's! We're gonna sue you!

I forgot what movie that was from. Suburban Commando or something with Hulk Hogan. Okay, back to real life.

[Marie26]

33. How are they going to do this?

Neither Lebanon nor Israel has ratified the International Criminal Court. I believe that Israel has committed war crimes in Lebanon, but this seems like a move to express the Lebanese government's outrage over Qana.

[iverglas]

46. read my post 31

For the civil aspects of the situation, the International Court of Justice, not the International Criminal Court, has jurisdiction.

Re the ICC:
http://www.iccnow.org/?mod=urc0206
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE180102004?open&of=ENG-LBN

When ratifying the treaty, the government will need to enact legislation allowing the Lebanese courts to exercise their primary responsibility to investigate and prosecute crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes and to provide full cooperation with the International Criminal Court. Amnesty International and the CICC are urging the government of Lebanon to begin the process of implementing legislation as soon as possible.

In the past half century, millions of victims of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes have been denied justice, truth and full reparations. The Rome Statute creates a new system of international justice to send a clear message to those planning such horrific crimes that they will no longer enjoy impunity for their actions.

The International Criminal Court requires the support of the whole international community. Amnesty International welcomes the work of civil society groups in Lebanon, and a number of Lebanese MPs, in accelerating the movement for support of the International Criminal Court in Lebanon. Amnesty International and the CICC are encouraging the people of Lebanon and all people in the Middle East to take part in this action calling on Lebanon to accede to the Rome Statute as soon as possible. In doing so, they will be joining the struggle to end impunity for these horrific crimes forever.

Rather obviously, there would be elements within Lebanon opposed to ratification ... like the Phalangists responsible, jointly with Israel, for the atrocity of Sabra and Shatila.

There is a bit of a campaign under way to get the ICC to investigate without a complaint by Lebanon:

http://www.terrorism.plus.com/

The Court advises on its website "In addition to State Party and Security Council referrals, the Chief Prosecutor may also receive information on crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court provided by other sources, such as individuals or non-governmental organisations. The Chief Prosecutor conducts a preliminary examination of this information in every case. If the Chief Prosecutor then decides that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation, he will request the Pre-Trial Chamber to authorise an investigation."

It is also the practice of the Court to reply giving decisions.

The organiser of this web site, Janine Roberts, has already faxed her appeal to the Court. Please join her by faxing or posting your own.

(copy of letter follows at site, about halfway down page linked)

[Marie26]

56. It's a war crime, but can it be prosecuted?

This case could be brought before the ICJ, but the article states that the Lebanese gov. wants to bring it before the International Criminal Court, and I don't think that can be done by Lebanon because the country wouldn't have standing to bring a complaint. I'll sign the petition, but even if the prosecutor initiates an investigation on her own, I don't see how Israel could be charged under the ICC since Lebanon & Israel never approved the treaty.

For the ICC prosecutor to investigate it on her own, the ICC first needs to have jurisdiction. And the ICC only has jurisdiction if either the suspected criminal, or the place where the crime took place, is a State Party to the ICC. Neither is the case here. Even if Lebanon ratifies the treaty now, it'd be a tough sell to argue that it should apply retroactively to actions Israel did on Lebanese land before the treaty was ever ratified there.

There is one exception, though. If the case is referred to the ICC by the UN Security Council, the ICC always has jurisdiction to investigate. But, the US will probably veto any attempt by the Security Council to refer this to the ICC. It seems like the civil ICJ is the best way for Lebanon to seek redress here.

http://www.icc-cpi.int/about/ataglance/jurisdiction.html

[iverglas]

62. confusion -- and some learnèd opinion

I think our understanding of the situation is about the same. And I'd love to see the ICJ used more to seek redress for violations of international law in situations like this. But it seems somebody's confused!

The article quoted in the opening post refers to *both* prosecution for war crimes *and* a claim for damages.

A claim for damages can only be adjudicated by the ICJ, and that action would be completely separate from any effort to have a war crime prosecuted in the ICC.

I'm not entirely sure that the Lebanese minister in question isn't confused himself, but it's possible that there are some problems occurring in the translation.

"Lebanon is planning to file a lawsuit against Israel in the International Criminal Court" just makes no sense at all. The ICC doesn't deal in lawsuits. But "lawsuit" could be a bad translation of something else, like "complaint". (edit: or the obvious one, duh: poursuite, which is the French for both prosecution and civil action.)

Likewise, "This is with the intent that Israel pay restitution on all the physical and moral damages that she caused Lebanon and her citizens" doesn't make any sense in the context of the ICC, which doesn't deal in damages or adjudicate against states.

In the ICC, the accused is an individual, and the prosecutor is not representing a party, and the court determines guilt on charges laid. States are not involved, and no decision for or against a state is made.

In the ICJ, the parties are states, and the court adjudicates between them, on a claim by one of them, based on the applicable international law/treaties. The issue is liability for a breach of a law/treaty, and the court may issue injunctions and make binding orders, as a civil court does. Guilt, and individual responsibility for actions generally, are not in issue.

Anyhow, here's some learnèd opinion on the ICC aspect, following up on your comment about jurisdiction on referral by the Security Council -- some of the victims of the Israeli bombing have been UN workers, and it is possible that there would be jurisdiction in that case as well.

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumy/2006/07/qana-war-crimes-and-pending-un.php
(I haven't investigated the author or his biases at all, just thought this was worth noting -- what follows is a single paragraph that I've broken up for ease of reading.)

It is worth pausing a moment to falsify the oft-stated claim that Israel’s leaders need not worry about war crimes because there is no international court that has the jurisdiction to prosecute them.

First, a strong argument can be made that the International Criminal Court itself has jurisdiction over the attack on the U.N. peacekeepers even though neither Israel nor Lebanon are parties to the Court. For although the Statute of the Court says nothing about crimes committed against the United Nations or its personnel, the International Court of Justice (an organ of the United Nations) issued an advisory opinion on April 11, 1949 known as the “Reparation for Injuries” case. The ICJ recognized an “international personality” in the United Nations. If one were to make a constructivist interpretation of the ICC’s statute (an endeavor perhaps less familiar to Continental than common-law attorneys), the ICC might well find that it has jurisdiction over states that attack UN personnel.

Second, European nations are beginning to assert jurisdiction over war crimes committed abroad even if their own citizens are not involved. Last year a former Israeli military chief cancelled his trip to London upon being warned that he could be prosecuted for war crimes that he had allegedly committed in Gaza. The concept of “universal jurisdiction” for war crimes and crimes against humanity is catching on in country after country.

Third, although the Israeli Prime Minister and Defense Minister are immune from war-crimes prosecution anywhere while they are in office (under a recent ruling by the ICJ), they lose their immunity when their term of office expires.

Fourth, they would have no immunity at all from prosecution in Israel. This is extremely unlikely, of course, but the country could later turn against them the way that Chile has decided to prosecute its former ruler Augusto Pinochet for crimes against humanity committed during his dictatorship.

[Vidar]

40. It's the right thing for the Lebanese to do, though I doubt Israel would

abide by any verdict.

[lastliberalintexas]

42. Good for them

Regardless of whether you agree with Lebanon's arguments or believe it should win at The Hague, it is following the procedures of international law that are in place to address such situations. Indeed, the US and Israel should take note.

[countryjake]

45. Here's a relevant lawsuit....

Peretz sued for war crimes
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,19992660-26697,00.html

~snip~

From correspondents in Rabat
August 02, 2006

THREE Moroccan lawyers are suing Israeli Defence Minister Amir Peretz for war crimes and crimes against humanity over the Israeli army's attacks on Lebanon and Gaza, they said today.

They said they filed the criminal suit with the royal prosecutor at the Rabat Appeal Court because Mr Peretz, the head of Israel's left-of-centre Labour Party, was born in Morocco and has dual Israeli-Moroccan nationality.

The lawyers, Khalid Soufiani, Abderrahmane Ben Amrou and Abderrahim Jamaie, also accuse Mr Peretz of premeditated crimes against civilians including women and children, unlawful use of arms and forming a criminal gang.

[PCIntern]

58. I heard tell that they're

gonna hire a Jewish lawyer from Philly here.

:scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared: :scared:

:rofl:

[GAPeace]

66. THAT'S how you handle terrorism

Lebanon actually plays by the rules.

[Totallybushed]

90. LOL! n/t

[rman]

79. Survivors of 1996 Qana Massacre Sue Israel Military Chief For War Crimes

Democracy Now
Tuesday, August 1st, 2006
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/01/1434249

In April of 1996 the Israeli Defense Force shelled Qana's U.N compound, killing 106 civilians who had been seeking refuge inside. Initially, the Israeli government denied responsibility for the deaths but after a United Nations investigation condemned Israel's actions, the Israeli government changed their story. In December of last year, the Center for Constitutional Rights filed a class-action lawsuit against former IDF Chief of Staff and head of intelligence, Lieutenant General Moshe Ya'alon. The suit alleges that Ya'alon commanded the attack and is guilty of war crimes, extrajudicial killings and crimes against humanity. Ya'alon is currently a “Distinguished Fellow” at the U.S based think-tank – the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

* Maria LaHood. She is an attorney on the case and is with the Center for Constitutional Rights.

<more>

[Zhade]

80. Hey, I just noticed something odd about the headline.

"Lebanon: We will sue Israel in Hague" - okay, so the headline is "quoting Lebanon", or in other words the Lebanese government.

So why did they leave out the word "the" before Hague? To make a subtle jab about the Lebanese speaking broken English, like they're uncivilized? "Caveman Og say we will sue in Hague, ock ock!" :wtf:

Maybe just me, but that headline is kinda insulting to the Lebanese.

[Marie26]

88. No.

There probably wasn't enough space for a full headline. The copy editor will get a story like this & have to create a headline w/only 37 spaces. Most stupid headlines are just the result of a space crunch.

[DoYouEverWonder]

81. Did anyone see the Lebanese Official on the News Hour last night?

OMG, the poor man. He was desperate. Begging for US/Israel to stop destroying his country. To stop using his country has an excuse for their bigger war.

I hope the International Court or someone takes action soon, before there is no more Lebanon.

[Totallybushed]

89. What kind of action can they take

without a military force to back it up?

[Amonester]

94. The NeoCon Croissant have a top-notch machine-gun ready in...

your name. All you've got to do is to fly over there and tell them you R ready to enlist so you can show these ingrates who is the toughest one by helping them murder a few more hundreds of human beings, especially if they wear dresses and/or like to play with their peaceful toys.

R u Ready?

Umm... We thought so... :scared:

[Totallybushed]

98. delete

[Totallybushed]

101. What the Hell are you talking about?

I'm not Jewish. I'm not Israeli. Not my war. Besides, I'm way over military age. But I can support the side that is right, even so. ( I did, in my youth, serve in the Army, so shove it where the sun don't shine)

Are you really so simple-minded that the only reason you can find for people to fight is the love of murder? What excuse do you give for Hezbollah, then?

I thought so.

[fooj]

109. Since when is collective punishment against innocent civilians right?

Wow. Some people never cease to amaze me.

[Totallybushed]

113. What collective punishment?

None has taken place. They are being killed in a military action, which is a different thing altogether.

[fooj]

115. No. It is NOT a different thing altogether.

Collective Punishment
No general penalty, pecuniary or otherwise, shall be inflicted upon the population on account of the acts of individuals for which they cannot be regarded as jointly and severally responsible.

Laws and Customs of War on Land (Hague IV); October 18, 1907, Article 50

No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.

Pillage is prohibited.

Reprisals against protected persons and their property are prohibited.

Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Part III : Status and treatment of protected persons, Section I : Provisions common to the territories of the parties to the conflict and to occupied territories, Article 33

Any destruction by the Occupying Power of real or personal property belonging individually or collectively to private persons, or to the State, or to other public authorities, or to social or cooperative organizations, is prohibited, except where such destruction is rendered absolutely necessary by military operations.

Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Part III : Status and treatment of protected persons, Section III: Occupied Territories, Article 53

International law also prohibits an occupying power from imposing collective punishment on the occupied population.

Amnesty International

[Totallybushed]

118. Thank you for making my point n/t

[fooj]

130. Which is?

[Amonester]

116. Thank you for your service.

That said, ever asked yourself just who decides who is Right or Wrong?

For example: What If That Had Happened To You??
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Amonester

Who do you think would be right? The "Terrorists" or the rightful owners of Their Sacred Land?

[Totallybushed]

119. For myself,

I decide what is right or wrong. If I have a disagreement with the lawful authorities aobut it, I will probably suffer for it.

OK. Regardless of the justice of their cause, no one is entitled to target innocent civilians. This is what Hezbollah and Hamas do, simply because they cannot win militarily. But that's not Israel's problem, and Israel does not have to play by rules that equalize the military playing field for them.

[Amonester]

125. Israel, like every (supposedly) civilized country, must respect the..

LAW, because military actions, for years, decades, and more, never worked, do not work, and will never work (ain't that clear enough for all intelligent human being?).

There are other ways that may work, then.

Why not try any of them

[fooj]

131. Why doesn't Israel have to play by the rules?

WTF? Did you miss my post#107?

Oh right. EVERYONE else in the collective universe must take responsibility for their actions with the exception of Israel. My bad.

[Amonester]

134. Yeah. But it seems breaking the law is the "New" way...

as "brilliantly" shown by Ave Bu$h, Goebbels Gonzo, Darth Chenious, and Herr Rumsfailed (to "find" bin Forgotten) since 2000.