Rights group: Most Gazans killed in war were civilians

[ProgressiveMuslim]

By Avi Issacharoff, Haaretz Correspondent, and AP
Tags: palestinians, gaza

The vast majority of the Palestinians killed in Israel's operation in the Gaza Strip last winter were innocent civilians rather than combatants, according to a new report to be published by the B'Tselem organization Wednesday morning. This is the opposite of what the Israel Defense Forces has said.

According to B'Tselem, 1,387 Palestinians were killed during the three weeks of Operation Cast Lead, of whom 773 were noncombatants and only 330 were combatants.

The remaining 248 were Hamas policemen killed when Israel bombed Palestinian police facilities at the start of the operation. The IDF has argued that these policemen, as armed Hamas members, should be considered combatants. However, B'Tselem noted that they took no part in the actual fighting. In 36cases, the organization was unable to determine whether the casualties were combatants or noncombatants.
Advertisement
Of the civilians killed, 320 were minors under the age of 18 and another 109 were women, the organization said.

The IDF, in contrast, claims that 1,166 Palestinians were killed during Cast Lead, of whom 709 were Hamas combatants and 295 were civilians. It said it was unable to determine the status of the remaining 162.

read on...
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1113402.html

[Scurrilous]

1. NGO Reports on Gaza War Belie Israeli Claims

<snip>

"This week, two respected human rights organisations - one Palestinian, one Israeli - each came out with very full reports into the extent of the damage caused by the assault Israel waged against Gaza last winter.

According to the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR), which is based in Gaza, 1,419 Palestinians were killed during the fighting, of whom 252 were combatants and the rest noncombatants, including members of the civilian police. Three hundred and eighteen of those killed were, it said, children.

The Israeli group B'Tselem ("In the Image") tallied 1,387 Gazans killed by the Israelis, including 320 minors. It assessed that 330 of those killed had taken part in the hostilities. B'Tselem also noted that three Israeli civilians and nine soldiers were killed during the fighting.

The Israeli government earlier claimed that 1,166 Palestinians were killed in the fighting, of whom only 89 were minors under the age of 16, while 60 percent were "members of Hamas and other armed groups".

PCHR and B'Tselem published their latest reports in the lead-up to next week's widely awaited presentation to the U.N.'s Human Rights Council of the final report on Gaza war casualties prepared by the investigative commission headed by South African judge Richard Goldstone.

PCHR and B'Tselem based their tallies on painstaking field research. (There are some small discrepancies between them. But most can be explained by differences in the definitions used.)

The Israeli government, by contrast, has not revealed the methodology by which - without having any access at all to surviving family members or local officials on the ground - it felt able to compile its much lower tally.

Meanwhile, in the lead-up to the publication of Goldstone's report, the Israeli government has launched a very tough offensive against all the Israeli and international rights organisations that have been documenting the damage in Gaza.

At the international level, that includes both the Goldstone Commission itself and international citizen groups like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch (HRW)."

more

[stranger81]

12. Interesting that the Israeli cheerleaders around here don't deny the figure anymore

-- that was the original line of defense. Now, they just argue those civilians needed killing.

If there's still a single person here who doesn't understand why Israel is often criticized, they should think long and hard about such statements. Doesn't take a genius.

[Kurska]

31. I'd dispute the figure, but the arguement has gotten tiring.

Must we do the same dance every month with each new report?

[stranger81]

33. No, we don't have to.

You could always choose to join reality with the rest of us, and stop disputing cold, hard facts. Not that I think that will happen, but it's an alternative.

[shira]

34. you need to be able to distinguish fact from fiction before advising others to join reality

Here's one post from a while back showing how PCHR's 'civilians' turned out to be combatants. Knock yourself out:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=275820&mesg_id=276928

you see, civilians like you and me don't usually dress in military fatigues, carry grenade launchers and assault rifles, and get counted as warriors by Hamas.

such people really aren't "civilians".

but maybe the IDF just got "lucky" killing these particular people?

:eyes:

[stranger81]

2. kick

I know this story has been posted here before, but it sinks like a rock every time.

[Vegasaurus]

3. What;s to say?

Killing of children is always a pity, but when terrorists hide among their children, after having provoked a war, some will die. It's unfortunate.

[proteus_lives]

4. Stop making sense.

All they want to hear about is the Israeli boogeyman.

[Violet_Crumble]

5. How is justifying the killing of children 'making sense'?

Very few people in this forum justify or try to excuse the killing of children, whether they be Israeli children or Palestinian. It's sad that you and the poster you responded to are part of the very few who do....

[shira]

6. murdering kids as Hamas does should not be equated to the IDF response to Hamas & their strategy

...to use Gaza as one big human shield.

There is no moral equivalence b/w Hamas rockets and the IDF response to those rockets.

[Violet_Crumble]

7. In this case the IDF, not Hamas, murdered kids...

Rockets are rockets. Dead kids are dead kids. Whoever fires the rocket is responsible for those who are killed by it, and the 'but they made me do it!' excuse is equally weak if used by supporters of Palestinian groups who fire rockets or those who support the IDF firing rockets into Gaza.

[shira]

8. according to that logic, the IDF should never defend Israeli civilians from Hamas rocket....

...attacks if, by firing back against the perpetrators, some children who are used as shields die.

Is that correct?

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a06_1231310126

note in the video above that the terrorist is dressed as a civilian and shooting from a civilian area....so you're saying that if Israel fires back and kills the perpetrator along with other civilians, that is murder which is morally equivalent to the action in the video?

[Vegasaurus]

9. Yes, Shira, that is correct

Israel should open the gates, and feed and clothe the Palestinians, give them electricity and gasoline, provide them with opportunities for business growth and trade, and even teach them about democracy (or so some say, although those same people say Americans and Westerners and israelis shouldn't get involved in Arab ways).

And they should do absolutely nothing when rockets fly across the border.

Israels who have had their homes crushed by rockets, their schools, etc., should do nothing.

That is the answer.

[azurnoir]

10. False hyperbole as usual

Israel is not "giving" as you claim the Palestinians anything that goods are coming from the aid you continually whine about and you know that it has been pointed out to you more than once.
As for Israelis homes how many are currently6 homeless due to Palestinian rockets? Has anyone blocked building materials to rebuild homes lost?

[Kurska]

11. You can't compare equivalence in war.

Both sides are using every weapon available to them, if hamas had the same artillery as Israel they would be using it to.

You can compare cause and effect though, when the rockets aren't flying aid is allowed in.

[azurnoir]

14. Using that logic we should be nuking

Iran and Afghanistan

[Vegasaurus]

15. The US is not fighting a defense war on its own soil

Rather a big difference, wouldn't you say?

[azurnoir]

16. Do you consider Gaza Israeli soil?

and at least by claims made both Iraq and Afghanistan are wars of defense against an attack on American soil, so nope not much difference

[oberliner]

17. What the heck?

You are saying the Iraq war is a war of defense against an attack on American soil?

What are you talking about?

[azurnoir]

19. Perhaps more reading of an actual statement and less

convenient parsing is due here or is that what I said?

[Kurska]

18. No, we aren't nuking Iran or afghanistan because it wouldn't be military or polticaly the right move

It would cause a huge backlash and a possible nuclear war.

However, in Israel's case using anything less then every conventional weapon available to them to shut down a potential threat is just plain stupid. If you want to play nice, meet in a field, walk ten paces and fire. Fine, but when you start launching rockets at civilian centers of a much better armed enemy you open yourself up to a world of pain that is measured in craters.

You respond with exactly as much force as you think you can get away with, militaries operate on no more and no less, to think otherwise is absolutely naive.

[azurnoir]

20. Ah so your saying that using WP in as a "smoke screen: in civilian areas

is ok? or just when they're Arab civilians?

[Kurska]

21. You're not getting me, there is no such thing as "Okay" or "not okay" in warfare.

There is "If I use this weapon will it help or hurt me", help or hurt includes the political consequences, the international consequences and the escalation that might result from using that weapon.

Israel probably won't use WP in civilian areas , because on a international scale they really hurt their just war case by using it or even giving off impression they might be. WP just isn't effective enough a weapon to continue using it given the terrible reception it's use gets on a international scale.

Do you really think so many nations banned land mines because the military suddenly decided that they just felt terrible using them? Oh course not, international and domestic pressure built up to the point where using land mines hurt the public relations of the military and the political cost of continuing their use outweighed their military benefit.

However for nations like the USA, China and Russia decided that the military effectiveness of landmines outweigh the political and international criticism of landsmines and thus they still have them around just in case they need them.

Total war is amoral, however acting amoral is not a good strategy for winning the war.

I'm not saying this is right, I'm just saying this is how modern militaries think.

[azurnoir]

22. Please Israel has already used WP in civilian areas

both in Lebanon and in Gaza during OCL in Gaza the claim was that it was merely a "smokescreen" not a weapon

[Kurska]

23. did... did you read what I wrote? n/t

[azurnoir]

24. you wrote

Israel probably won't use WP in civilian areas , because on a international scale they really hurt their just war case by using it or even giving off impression they might be.

did you mean probably won't again?

[Kurska]

25. again*, yes. Didn't the ministry of defense confirm as much?

You're sort of ignoring the point of the post though.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5575070.ece

[azurnoir]

26. Thanks for clarifying n/t

[Kurska]

27. You're a real prince, I hope you know that buddy.

I'll be sure to avoid any attempt to communicate with you in the future.

[azurnoir]

29. OK I was being sincere your comment was confusing n/t

[Kurska]

30. You could atleast a attempt a reply to my broader point, I mean. n/t

[azurnoir]

32. Because I am still not quite sure what your broader point is

except that war is a dirty business, there seem to be several as to the political consequences of using certain weapons I do not think that any of the countries mentioned including Israel really care about that as to Israel's use of WP in Lebanon and OCL there are people on this board who still deny this is true even though the Israeli government has admitted to its use.

[Kurska]

35. "except that war is a dirty business"

There you go, also that any military is going to use any weapon no matter how terrible until pressure forces them to stop.

[Violet_Crumble]

28. No, it's not. Shira was asking me, not you...

I find it revolting when creatures such as you who justify and condone the killing of innocent Palestinians take it upon themselves to try to answer on my behalf. If yr going to insist on answering a question that Shira asked me specifically, at least answer with something I'd say, not something that comes across like it's written by something with an IQ slightly less than that of a garden slug....

My answer to Shira is no of course not, and I've never said anything to indicate I believe anything like that.

[LeftishBrit]

13. This is horrible

I opposed OCL from the beginning.

As regards self-defense arguments: I am sure that Israelis could save an awful lot of Israeli lives (a lot more than are lost to rockets) by making a law that anyone caught driving recklessly will automatically get ten years in prison. (Road accidents have killed more Israelis than all their wars combined.) They would not do this, as I am sure that they would regard it, doubtless rightly, as too much of a threat to civil liberties. This shows that they will not do *anything* in self-defense; and I think that OCL was even less justified - and will not even serve self-defense in the long run, as it increases the popularity of Hamas among Palestinians.

None of this is a defense of Hamas, a disgusting crap government, who are very fond of attacking and killing Israeli civilians, and even fonder of killing other Palestinians. They need to be thrown out; but only their own people can do this effectively.

I would say 'a plague on both their houses' except that this is exactly what is already happening. Rather I would say that both sides need to stop this dysfunctional cycle of retribution, and start the civilized divorce which is the best that can be hoped for in that dysfunctional relationship. As I've said before, I wish that someone would bang the heads of the leaders of both sides together, except that they'd need gloves to protect themselves from splinters from banging those wooden heads.