Hamas fired 30 rockets into Israel today - Apparently Israel's bombing the wrong areas

[bigtree]

There's been the explanation from Israeli officials that their bombing raids where civilians have been killed were efforts to weaken Hamas' ability to launch rockets. That doesn't seem to be panning out.

One obvious and apparent effect of these tragic bombings is the increase in animosity from Arabs toward Israel and their aims and an increased likelihood of some sort of retaliation. Also there will likely not be the political distancing of Palestinians from Hamas and the directing of residents toward supporting moderate politicians like Abbas which was undoubtedly one part of the strategy behind the Gaza air strikes.

Militarily and politically, the Israeli offensive is already mired in an escalating failure in their inability to realize their most basic objectives; isolation of Hamas and a cessation of missile and other attacks.

It's becoming less and less possible for Israel to argue that these strikes where hundreds of innocent civilians have been killed are a necessary or productive use of force, especially since these attacks where civilians are known to be present are illegal under international law without any 'imminent' danger to Israel . . .


Protocol 1

Additional to the Geneva Conventions, 1977

PART IV: CIVILIAN POPULATION
Section 1: General Protection Against Effects of Hostilities

Chapter I: Basic Rule and Field of Application

Article 48: Basic Rule

1. In order to ensure respect for and protection of the civilian population and civilian objects, the Parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives and accordingly shall direct their operations only against military objectives.

Article 51: Protection of the Civilian Population

1. The civilian population and individual civilians shall enjoy general protection against dangers arising from military operations. To give effect to this protection, the following rules, which are additional to other applicable rules of international law, shall be observed in all circumstances.

Article 52: General Protection of Civilian Objects

1. Civilian objects shall not be the object of attack or of reprisals. Civilian objects are all objects which are not military objectives as defined in paragraph 2.


Article 54: Protection of Objects Indispensable to the Survival of the Civilian Population

2. It is prohibited to attack, destroy, remove or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, such as foodstuffs, agricultural areas for the production of foodstuffs, crops, livestock, drinking water installations and supplies and irrigation works, for the specific purpose of denying them for their sustenance value to the civilian population or to the adverse Party, whatever the motive, whether in order to starve out civilians, to cause them to move away, or for any other motive.


Chapter IV: Precautionary Measures
Article 57: Precautions in Attack

1. In the conduct of military operations, constant care shall be taken to spare the civilian population, civilians and civilian objects.

2. With respect to attacks, the following precautions shall be taken:

1. those who plan or decide upon an attack shall:

1. do everything feasible to verify that the objectives to be attacked are neither civilians nor civilian objects and are not subject to special protection but are military objectives within the meaning of paragraph 2 of Article 52 and that it is not prohibited by the provisions of this Protocol to attack them;

2. take all feasible precautions in the choice of means and methods of attack with a view to avoiding, and in any event to minimizing, incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians and damage to civilian objects;

3. refrain from deciding to launch any attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated;

2. an attack shall be canceled or suspended if it becomes apparent that the objective is not a military one or is subject to special protection or that the attack may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated;

3. effective advance warning shall be given of attacks which may affect the civilian population, unless circumstances do not pemmit.

3. When a choice is possible between several military objectives for obtaining a similar military advantage, the objective to be selected shall be that the attack on which may be expected to cause the least danger to civilian lives and to civilian objects.

4. In the conduct of military operations at sea or in the air, each Party to the conflict shall, in conformity with its rights and duties under the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, take all reasonable precautions to avoid losses of civilian lives and damage to civilian objects

5. No provision of this article may be construed as authorizing any attacks against the civilian population, civilians or civilian objects.


full list of provisions: http://deoxy.org/wc/wc-proto.htm

[TechBear_Seattle]

1. Israel's targeting is spot on

If they shut down the missile sites, they would have to stop bombing schools, markets and mosques.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

5. You can launch the rockets in a 10 by 10 square

The real issue is if its presurveyed. Since Hamas can not used standard artilery tactics, they go to "known sites" and set up with a compass and an protractor of some sort. That gets them headed towards the Israeli villages. If they have to go to different sites, it means the chances of hitting something is less.

[GoesTo11]

18. You are the astute one!

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

2. You mean those Katyusha rocket factories really were schools?

Yeah, right.

:eyes:

[ProgressiveProfessor]

3. Katyusha/Grads are not made in Gaza. Qassams are

[eridani]

26. Homemade tin cans. Children's weapons n/t

[bigtree]

6. you must be referring to the home of Hamas military wing commander

. . . whose home was said to have been used as a 'factory' and was targeted.

I think Israel just wanted to kill him at his home like they did another Hamas leader Saturday.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

4. OK Israel, Palestine put away your rockets!

or else there will be time out.

[Junkdrawer]

7. Kinda like BushCo not targeting bin Laden....you don't destroy your pretext...

Bad for business...

[Poll_Blind]

9. +1 So simply, elegantly and poignantly true.

PB

[Junkdrawer]

10. The history of this is worse than most imagine:

Here's a book written by journalist historian Robert Dreyfuss

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51oTNEc88pL._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_AA240_SH20_OU01_.jpg

http://www.amazon.com/Devils-Game-Unleash-Fundamentalist-American/dp/0805081372/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1231176679&sr=8-1

[tnlefty]

12. Thanks for the book rec.

Looks like one that I need to pick up.

[Junkdrawer]

14. He spoke to DemocracyNow after the 2006 Hamas elections:

I post a thread that was moved to the I/P dungeon within minutes:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x236880

[klook]

25. Good stuff. Thanks for the link.

It's hard to find the story behind the story sometimes. This looks like an excellent source.

I look forward to reading more from Robert Dreyfuss. This reminds me to also check out Robert Fisk's perspective on the http://www.independent.co.uk/ site.

Thanks.

[underpants]

8. Why then just bomb more!

:sarcasm:

[bigtree]

11. that's the likely course

No chance they'll admit any failure; not even admit a mistake in judgment, without pressing their offensive even further.

We need an IMMEDIATE cease-fire.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

13. Perception counts in politics. And, this "incursion" is all about politics.

Labor/Kadima are up in the polls. Which is exactly what the intent of the massacre was/is.

[bigtree]

15. I saw the Israeli leadership pay a political price in their country after the Lebanon offensive

I think there is some risk that this could backfire politically, especially if the military gets bogged down or starts to suffer a large amount of casualties among their citizen soldiers or if the attacks from Hamas just continue unabated.

In the short term though, there's the political gain (and likely motive) you describe.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

16. A short term benefit indeed.

By any rational measure this, like Lebanon, will prove a disaster for Israel.

They are attempting a tried and true method of failure in M.E. What few allies they may have had around the world are being forced to turn against them by the collective punishment inflicted on the Palestinians.

They fail to realize that in the new world of the internet and instant communication of reports, photos, and video, that denying reporters into the war zone no longer ensures that the slaughter they are inflicting is being hidden.

They are doing a great job of making themselves the equivalent of South Africa (which they supported at the time) before the end of Apartheid (which they are emulating).

[TahitiNut]

17. Everyone knows a mosque isn't a good military target - until it's full of people at afternoon prayer

:puke:

[EFerrari]

19. If Israel controls the land, air and water around Gaza, in what sense

is the occupation over? Is it even legal to bomb the population you are occupying?

This morning on Amy's show, a woman from The Israel Project in DC kept defending this atrocity by saying the residents of southern Israel had had enough. As if this violence won't make their lives more dangerous, not less. She sounded insane to me.

[TahitiNut]

21. It seems that over 500 dead Gaza Palestinians isn't enough. (The "score" is 500-to-5.)

The blood-lust is despicable.

[Zywiec]

20. Your Article 51 listing in the OP is incomplete

What about this section:

7. The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favor or impede military operations. The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations.

Just sayin'

[TahitiNut]

22. In the most densely-populated region on earth, just where AREN'T there civilians?

Isn't it "convenient" that only some of those with foreign passports were allowed to leave? It's clearly a "target-rich" environment. When the IAF waits for afternoon prayers to bomb a mosque, just HOW is that a reasonable act???
:puke:

[EFerrari]

23. Israel isn't targeting civilians, Hamas is using human shields!

:puke:

[bigtree]

24. the last provision should cover that, if you intend to render all the rest moot

. . . because of that violation.

That fact does NOT remove Israel from responsibility if they know civilians are in the areas they're bombing, UNLESS there is some imminent possibility of attack from there. I don't know how they can argue they're in that kind of danger with all of their new sophisticated early warning systems.

[ellisonz]

27. They have massive backstock...

..and these rockets are highly mobile.