Phosphorus and cluster bombs, very moral, very righteous
I may be old fashioned, but I still don’t get how the use of millions of cluster bombs aimed at civilian areas dropped in the last hours of the war by Israel AND NOW the revelation that they used Phosphorus bombs on civilians as well can be justified in any shape or form.
Phosphorus used in shelling Lebanon
JERUSALEM - Israel confirmed it had used phosphorus shells, a controversial munition condemned by many human rights groups, during its war against Hizbollah guerrillas in Lebanon.
The International Red Cross and other human rights organisations have urged a world ban on the munitions, saying they cause undue suffering through severe burns.
An Israeli military spokesman confirmed a report in Israel's left-leaning newspaper Haaretz. "The army made use of phosphorus shells during the recent conflict with Hizbollah in Lebanon for the purpose of attacking military targets located in open areas," the Israeli military said in a statement.
"According to international law, the usage of phosphorus ammunition is permitted and the army conforms to international regulations and standards."
The United States has acknowledged using incendiary white-phosphorus munitions in a 2004 assault against insurgents in the Iraqi city of Fallujah.
posted by Bomber @ 3:18 pm
20 comments
20 Comments:
So...Hesbollah use rockets loaded up with ball bearings...whats the difference really?
Both sides have no excuses for what was done during the recent war and I deplore the actions from both sides, but Bomber your biase really shows mate.The article makes no mention of Phosphorus use directed at civilians...
Anon 5.21pm - You don't get it - to Bomber Hizbollah ARE civilians.
Anon 7.00pm - so by your logic Israel should be able to send out as many sucide bombers as it takes to even up that score?
and
Those poor innocent Lebanese they were just sitting there minding their own business as they have for years and then.... BOOM.... out of nowhere Israel attacks. Hmmm I feel a Tui billboard coming on.
Just a quick question bomber. Why are majority of your posts about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Or something in relation to it. I noticed your interest in the Middle East, or at least that region of the world. If so, why not more about the assaults on Chechnya? The growing conflict and horrendous poverty in Afghanistan? Not saying what you have focused on isn't important, but if you're advocating for justice and articulating the suffering of people of that region, you should look at others. I find it has become almost a fashion amongst the left movement to focus on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
-Anti-Flag.
Anti-Flag.
One reason for focusing on the Palestinian conflict is that it is pivotal to all else. It has been going on for over sixty years, Israel has defied 246 Security Council resolutions and more than twice that number of General Assembly resolutions. Still the genocide goes on in the full sight and with the implicit cooperation of the West.
This gives the Muslim world a huge grievance and justification for their deeds. It also sets the moral tone that allows other predator nations such as those you mention an example to follow and prevents criticism and sanctions. In other words, the West cannot come down hard on others when their own house is in such disorder.
Heat Seeker.
Your comments betray such a profound ignorance of the history and facts of the region that I barely know where to begin.
Suggest you follow up some of these links:
http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery/1152991173 Uri Avnery
www.pchrgaza.org
http://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/publish/article_684.shtml
http://www.btselem.org/English/OTA/
http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0494/9404015.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/06/world/middleeast/06tyre.html?ex=1312516800&en=91688477437e1ee0&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
Here are some quotes to put Israeli's criminality into perspectve:
"The UN Mine Action Coordination Center South Lebanon (UNMACC) has estimated that Israel fired as many as four million submunitions into Lebanon during the conflict in July and August 2006. For comparison, Coalition forces used about 1.9 million submunitions in Iraq in 2003, and the U.S. Air Force used about 248,000 submunitions in Afghanistan in 2001-2002."
Comparing the size of Lebanon vs Iraq or Afghanistan, you can clearly see the widescale use of these nasty bombs.
"A soldier who fired 155mm artillery shells delivering cluster bombs told Haaretz that he was ordered to "flood" the area with these bombs, without having a specific target. A commander of a Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS) told Haaretz that his order was to "saturate the area."
This is testimony of indescriminate use of cluster bombs.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/762427.html
"What we did was insane and monstrous," one Israeli commander admitted to the newspaper Haaretz. "We covered entire towns in cluster bombs."
If only his morality stopped him using these bombs.
Heat seeker, your comments do betray your ignorance, or perhaps your high exposure to poor media / information?
Bomber (pun not intended), I think you cover many important national and international topcs. Good on ya.
Good on you too Karlos. Your comments are consistently the best on this site.
- Nobody.
Hisbollah, Hamas & other arab terrorist organisations are very good at one thing...complaining.."...oh, they've got cluster bombs and we only got exploding devices loaded with ball bearings, it's not fair!! boo hoo" .they provoke Israel and then cry foul when they get hit hard. Good on Israel for giving them a good spanking. If they decide to fire their rockets from civilian populated areas, then they take full responsibility.
Thanks for the feedback - Nobody
Anon,
Even if your analysis was accurate, it would be grossly unfair and immoral. Let’s say, for your sake, that Hizbollah’s kidnapping of the two soldiers was unprovoked. Does that really justify the Israeli actions which your are defending?
Good on Israel for giving them a good spanking.
Perhaps you lack any sense of morality. This wasn’t a good spanking, this was a violent rape.
I don’t condone the kidnapping, but the decimation of Lebanon was massively disproportionate.
Now, we know that the kidnapping of the soldiers was in fact provoked. Israel has been violating Lebanese sovereignty by land, sea and air for decades. It has also been kidnapping Lebanese civilians for decades. It’s treatment of the Palestinian population is also a huge provocation.
Aside from its brutality (cluster bombs, phosphor bombs, attacks on civilian infrastructure), it also contravened International Law. Israel had no right to attack Lebanon as Israel itself was no longer under attack. The kidnap operation had ended and they were under no further aggression. Their course of action should have been to refer the issue to the UN Security Council.
However Israel wanted an excuse to attack Lebanon. Hizbollah unwittingly gave the pretext on a silver platter.
One more thing anon. I haven’t heard any Arab organisation complaining.
"refer the issue to the UN Security Council"
Karlos, are you serious? Hizbollah have not even bothered to disarm in accordance with a previous UN resolution!!...what makes you think they would listen now? Lets be clear on the fact that not all Lebanese support Hizbollah...in fact there was a huge anti-Syrian, anti-Hizbollah demonstration after the hostilities ceased, and after a "victory" speech by the Hizbollah leader. Some Lebanese were hoping that the Israeli would have done a better job and wiped out hizbollah altogether. If the Lebanese government had the balls, they would have confronted the hizbollah terrorists a long time ago.
"If the Lebanese government had the balls, they would have confronted the hizbollah terrorists a long time ago."
This is not a sound piece of analysis. (1) Hizballah is part of the Lebanese government. (2) Disarmament has never been on Hizballah's agenda. Since they are in government, their opinion on this matter needs to be taken into account. (3) The Lebanese polity is best characterised as weak state, weak government, weak internal security and weak defense. These are severe pratical constraints on the ability of the government to 'confront' Hizballah. (4) The armed forces recruits are drawn heavily from Lebanon's Shia population who will not disarm Hizballah under any circumstances. (5) The Lebanese armed forces are trusted less by Lebanon's Shia, than Hizballah to deliver security. The image of a Lebanese general serving tea and hummus to Israeli soldiers in his barracks at the height of the campaign will have done nothing to diminish this view.
Before you get too excited about a massive anti-Hizballah backlash, I think you should take a look at the crowds for the pro-Hizballah rally. Really, it was absolutely unprecedented in terms of size and cross-sectarian support, including secular support. Walid Jumblatt may have been stewing, but the reality is, that at this moment Hizballah has never been more popular.
Israel has proven yet again that wiping out Hizballah by force is an impossibly high aim. Israel spent 18 years in south Lebanon and patently did not wipe out Hizballah, even with the help of a proxy militia. I understand that 'wiping out' Hizballah is an alluring prospect, but if you look at the evidence, it strongly suggests that Israel is incapable of doing this.
Some good points from anon 1:29am.
I would add though that Hizbollah has hinted at disarming several times. They have stated they are willing to discuss disarming only when the last parcel of Lebanese land is free of Israeli occupation (Shebaa Farms) and when Lebanon has an army capable of defending the country. There is some degree of rhetoric in this. Hizbollah should integrate into the Lebanese army to increase its strength.
Interesting thing about the pro / anti rallies. Hizbollah has constantly espoused Lebanese unity (mostly), where as the Christian ex-militia leaders like Samir Geagea have espoused religious division.
Anon 11:48pm,
Referring the issue to the UN Security Council is what is required by International Law if a country is violated but not under a persistent attack. This is exactly what Lebanon has done, every month, during 20 years of Israeli aggression towards it.
Yes, Hizbollah did not disarm according to a UN Resolution. Naughty Naughty. It is very hard to accept disarming when an aggressive neighbour constantly violates them. This ‘war’ has only strengthened their resolve to stay armed.
Some Lebanese were hoping that the Israeli would have done a better job and wiped out hizbollah altogether.
There are always differing opinions in any country. There are also some Israelis that hoped Hizbollah would have dealt a better blow to the Israeli army aggression. Hizbollah enjoyed the more Lebanese support during the ‘war’ than ever before.
Anti Flag - I could link to the HUNDREDS of news reports of Hezbollah rocket attacks in the year or so leading up to Israels discplining of Lebanon but I can't be fucked so google it.
Because I choose to disagree with your world view you label me ignorant.
I have spent several years in that part of the world. How much time have you spent there? Or are you just another bullshit leftie with a trendy cause?.
To accuse me of knowing little of the history of the area just shows your own ignorance. What happened in Lebanon was nothing compared to what has happened there in the past 3000 years and unfortunatly I fear there is worse to come yet.
If you haven't been on the ground there then you are as karlos puts it -
" your high exposure to poor media / information?"
Take care.
"I could link to the HUNDREDS of news reports of Hezbollah rocket attacks in the year or so leading up to Israels discplining of Lebanon"
This will be regarded as bullshit until you do so.
Shit man, people need to add a name to their post to distinguish themselves from the rest of the anonymous writers.
Anonymous who answered the question i had for Bomber. I agree. Firstly, as a human being, and secondly, as a Muslim, i see the importance of the Palestine-Israeli conflict. I'm involved in various groups who advocate justice for the Palestinians. However, increasingly, i'm seeing Lefites in the West infatuated with this specific conflict and neglecting other important issues and conflicts. Sure, like you argued, it represents the injustices against other people in the region. However, focusing on it alone, ignores the fact that the same thing is going on elsewhere. It's not helping the oppressed in other parts of the region, it merely ignores them i'm afraid. Until we start to highlight the patterns between all these conflicts, it'll continue to be viewed as insulting to prioritise them. Israel isn't the only country the West needs to worry about. These other conflicts also have the West's silent approval- or in the US's case, direct involvement. So the grievance Muslims have don't only stem from the Palestinian situation. It's the West's continous intervention.
Hateseeker, your logic is disturbing. Discplining Hizbullah? Wtf.
Israel has made countless incursions into Lebanese territory, IN ADDITION to its continous occupation of the Sheeba farms. Now tell me, is this a reason for Hizbullah and the Lebanese as a whole to be a tad upset? Especially when there's a UN resolution that requires Israel to completely withdraw? And let's not delve into the violations against the Palestinians.
-Anti-Flag.
...
really very good posts here from nobody/karlos and of course anti-flag.
AF - you make a very valid point re checnya and the focus on the Israel conflict - I don't mean to take anything away from Chechnya and the horror the Russians are inflicting there - and will try and do more on that region in future - the reason I suppose that there is so much focus on Israel and Iraq is because each situation involves America, a 'democracy' that can be 'reasoned' with - the point I always make is this - if we can't make America play to the rules - how can we get much more authoritarian regimes to play by the rules - America leads by its example and if its example is shit, I have a hrad time getting Putin to listen to anything - that bastard gets a 'get out of jail free' card, like all other world dictators do - America has to start playing by the rules, and then we can get these other countries back to the table.
"I could link to the HUNDREDS of news reports of Hezbollah rocket attacks in the year or so leading up to Israels discplining of Lebanon ..."
You will find that almost all of these have been restricted to military targets within occupied Lebanese territory. You will also find thousands of incidents of Israeli provocation to these rocket attacks, in particuary violations of land, air and kidnapping of civilians.
That doesn't mean the rocket attacks are acceptable, but it puts them in perspective.
Heat seeker, we label you ignorant because if you are informed and still speak the way you do, you'd be immoral. We give you the benefit of the doubt.
"I have spent several years in that part of the world. How much time have you spent there?"
I have lived in Saudi Arabia for many ears and travelled around Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. Where have you lived in the ME heat seeker?
Good point regarding the other issues Anti-Flag. Unfortunately, I am unable to spend time researching these and I can only discuss the issues which I know much about.
Bomber, may be. But you're forgeting one thing: America never can be and never was a bastion of democracy. It can never have the moral highground that many believe it once had. Their forefathers were colonising racist murderers. It was established on bloodshed and the state terrrosim it has committed IS committing since its existence in other parts of the world cannot be forgotten. Same goes for other countries. France, Britian, Germany and so on. They have violated the very essence of the democratic values they apparently uphold and international law past and present. America is merely the most brazen out of the lot. These countries are leading the campaign to introduce 'liberal values' to other parts of the world. Fuck that. The Muslim world is well aware of this. So the Western-driven campaign to promote democracy should be put in this context. Also, it is reinforced further by the fact that many of these authoritarian regimes are being supported by the West, mainly the U.S, France and Britian. I'm sure you don't need to be told this but governments are amoral agents. They don't care about the ideals you want to uphold. But they'll certainly manipulate them to achieve their own agenda. So i can't buy into this "let's be good role models for everyone else".
Bomber, another thing that disturbs me about lefties and your reference to America's role in Israel and Iraq demonstrates this perfectly- you fail to also mention America's role in Afghansitan. Time, and time again, as John Pilger recently pointed out- Afghansitan is being presented as the "justified war" or "right war". While Iraq is the war that should not have happened. How can anyone possibly distinguish it from the Iraq war? NZ and other countries who think they're in Afghanistan are nothign but tools of empire. They're being used as a facade of legitimacy, just like the 'coalition of the willing' in Iraq. Of course reaping in the economic benefits in both. Both countries were invaded by a superpower under the mendacious justification of a 'war on terror'. Like Iraq, 'democracy' is too being brought to the people by bloodshed. A pro-US government has been installed. With the same crooks they were meant to be getting rid of. Thousands have died in both countries because of the same crooks that America supported in the first place decided to play up. Both are the casualties of Empire.
Karlos, that's fair enough. But i expect more from Bomber who i'm sure has a broad knowledge of most of these conflicts and issues. He is in a better position to articulate the suffering of oppressed people more so than the rest of us.
-Anti-Flag.
Ooops, typing too fast. Missed a bit..."NZ and other countries who think they're in Afghanistan for the right reasons and doing good...."
-Anit-Flag.
Karlos, Hizballah's attacks have largely been confined to the Shebaa Farms area which technically (or according to the UN) is occupied Syrian territory. The blue line was used for the purpose of confirming Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon. Although this line was never meant to demarcate a permanent border, Israel could credibly claim that it was not occupying Lebanese territory. I believe that now, after the 6th war, this is no longer true.
"I would add though that Hizbollah has hinted at disarming several times. They have stated they are willing to discuss disarming only when the last parcel of Lebanese land is free of Israeli occupation (Shebaa Farms) and when Lebanon has an army capable of defending the country. There is some degree of rhetoric in this. Hizbollah should integrate into the Lebanese army to increase its strength."
This may well represent part of a viable context for Hizballah's disarmament, but you might as well be talking about another world. It is difficult to see how the Shebaa Farms dispute could be resolved without tying it to the Golan Heights, and it certainly could not be resolved without talking to Syria. (at the last point of deprture - the 2000 Israeli/Syrian talks - Syria refused to negotiate an 'agreed upon' border of the Golan Heights, saying that they understood perfectly well where the borders lay, and Israel, of course, refused to contemplate giving back the Golan in full. I think it's safe to say that the situation has deteriorated somewhat since then.)
More generally the Lebanese state (ie not just the Lebanese army) would have to inject itself into south Lebanon. Lebanon's Shia have suffered disproportionately from resource distribution based on sect, and dubious accounting of the numerical strength of each sect (purportedly based on lebanon's last ever census conducted in 1932). In the interim, inequalities became much more pronounced due to a high Shi'i birth-rate, under-representation in government, and the fact that many of those representatives were feudal elites insulated from general Shi'i poverty. This gave Hizballah the institutional space to entrench itself as an advocate for the disenfranchised Shi'i population. As you can imagine, this is a situation that is not easily reversed, particularly after civil war and numerous Israeli attacks during which the government did not protect the Shia. Added to this is the fact that fairer representation for Lebanon's Shia (whether through gaining a greater share of resources through the existing confessional system, or through revolutionary change of the system itself) is going to come at the expense of Lebanon's other sects. As unlikely as either of these scenarios are the issue of competing sources of authority in the domestic context is central to the problem of bring Hizballah under the control of the government. Absent that, Hizballah decides when Hizballah disarms.
Post a Comment
<< Home