Israeli Air Force Attack in Gaza – Grave Suspicion of War Crime

[Englander]

June 22, 2006: Israeli Air Force Attack in Gaza – Grave Suspicion of War Crime

The Israeli Air Force fired missiles again yesterday into a residential neighborhood in the Gaza Strip. The missile fire, which hit a home in Khan Yunis, killed a 35 year old pregnant woman, Fatmeh Ahmad, and her brother Zachariya Ahmad, 48, and injured 11 others, among them 6 children.

Since 20 May 2006, 25 civilians who took no part in the fighting, including 7 children, have been killed by IDF missile fire in the Gaza Strip.

The circumstances of this incident, as well as the circumstances of previous incidents this month, raise the grave suspicion that this was a disproportionate attack. Attacks of this kind are defined as a war crime. B'Tselem wrote the IDF Judge Advocate General demanding that a Military Police Investigation be opened immediately regarding all those responsible for the operation, including the Chief of Staff and the Commander of the Air Force.

The principle of proportionality, a central pillar of international humanitarian law to which Israel is obligated, prohibits conducting an attack, even against a legitimate military target, if it is known that the attack will cause harm to civilians that is excessive compared to the anticipated military advantage. Israel bears the burden of proof that a particular attack was expected to achieve a military advantage significant enough to justify harming civilians. This burden of proof also requires proof that there was no reasonable alternative to the attack. Violation of the principle of proportionality is defined as a war crime, and therefore carries individual criminal liability for those responsible.

The missiles were launched in the heart of a residential neighborhood. Those planning the attack should therefore have expected that innocent civilians would be harmed, particularly given the incidents that have taken place during the past month. All of these facts raise the grave suspicion that yesterday's operation was a disproportionate attack of a nature defined as a war crime.

Link;
B'Tselem

[TomInTib]

1. Israelis - War Criminals - Heaven forbid!

Don't they have some kind of waiver?

Kinda like the one Baby Jesus gave the USA?

[MidwestTransplant]

2. Yeah remember that massacre in Jenin

OH wait there wasn't one.

[TomInTib]

3. Or when the Spiders From Mars

attacked the USS Liberty.

And just try to nominate the OP.

[In Truth We Trust]

4. No shit... whats up with THAT!!!!

[pelsar]

5. ignorence...at its best...

jenin "massacre"...52 palestenains dead, 23 israelis during urban combat.....(israel refrained from using accepted methods used by every other army in the world in such scenarios)

Liberty incident....none of the israeli jets carried the proper weapons to sink a ship.....characteristic of "targets of opportunity" and not preplanned missions.

_____

thats it? thats the best you guys can do?.....come on, israels done far worse than those misnomers.....after more than 58 years of continual warfare several wars, theres got to be better...

[Poll_Blind]

6. The IDF is not like the Army in the US. Because of the compulsory...

...service requirement at least half of Israel has served in the IDF. This means that every single Israeli has someone in their family who has served in the IDF, even if they haven't themselves. More so, because of the extremely diverse political and socio-economic makeup of Israeli immigrants, the IDF is a common cultural denominator. From Border Crossings: American Interactions with Israelis:

  In addition, and perhaps more significantly, the army also reflects and reinforces their Israeli norms. It is as much a part of the socialization process for native-born Israelis as it is for new immigrants and their families. When they leave the army, soldiers often transfer army norms, values, and behavior patterns to civilian life. The annual reserve duty reinforces the impact of the early socialization process.

  Most immigrants who arrived in Israel when they were adolescents report that they became "real Israelis" during/because of their army experience. They left their old ways behind because they wanted to adapt and become accepted by Israelis, or because not abandoning those ways meant that they would never advance. At the very least, keeping the old ways guaranteed a miserable army experience.

  In the army, sabras* and immigrants alike go through a rite of passage into Israeli adulthood.

Because of the extreme cohesiveness of the IDF units there is a real sense of extended family which is not always easily translatable into an American's understanding, especially one who has not served in the military, of how the IDF is viewed in Israel. Because of the Israeli emphasis on self-reliance and risk-taking, the Israeli mind does not easily see or accept these events as indicative of a systemic problem with the IDF but a growing number of isolated incidents, mistakes by individuals. The majority of Israelis certainly deplore these acts but their consciousness is more likely to view them with a more limited scope, one which is less likely to "connect the dots", than a viewer outside Israel would.

PB

* A native-born Israeli

[eyl]

7. From the other side

Given that most Israelis have some level of familiarity with the military, we have an appreciation of the unfortunate fact that miltary operations can go disasterously wrong, especially in the conditions in Gaza, even when everyone is doing there jobs properly.

Just 20 minutes ago, there was a segment on the news which illustrated this. They showed a sequence from the gun camera of an aircraft (presumably a helicopter, or possibly a drone) during a strike at a Qassam launcher. I don't have a link to the video, but there might be one later; I'll post it later if I find it.

The video shows the Qassam in a vacant lot, already set up for firing. On the next street over, a group of kids is playing soccer.

Once the missile is fired at the Qassam, it takes several tens of of seconds for it to hit. If the ball gets kicked into the lot and one of the kids goes to retrieve it....well, you can imagine. On the other hand, if the Qassam is allowed to launch, civilians on the Israeli side might get hurt*.

*Doubtless, someone will bring up that Qassams have killed much less people than Israeli missiles. While true, that fact is starting to engender a believe in divine providence in me; there have been quite a lot of "near misses", including schools hit during the day (in one case I particularly remember, a schoolroom was hit, and was empty only because the kids had been running a bit late**)

**Because of prayers, no less

[Poll_Blind]

8. I find the choice of weapons used by the IDF to be very poor in...

...the majority of situations where there have been civilian casualties.

  Using the case you described: If those attack helicopters had fired their reasonably-accurate machine guns to pepper the area with bullets, it might have served to scare off children playing nearby before launching of the missiles. It's not like a terrorist is going to rush in and grab the shoddy launcher between when the gunfire stops and the missle hits. I'm not saying it would be more acceptable...the IDF claims regularly that they abort missions if there is any hint that civilians will be harmed and, as you described it, this case does not appear that such rigerous concern for safety was adhered to.

  I recognize, by the way, that the case you gave is a rough sketch of what you saw from a news program and my commentary is expected to be received not as a forensic diagnosis of a generalized description but an equally general approach based on the material presented.

  Israel has access to the breadth of the U.S. military arsenal. Their reliance on some weapons or weapons systems over others which would serve as more appropriate tools to achive their ends, without judgement on whether they should or should not even carry out the mission, is a criticism I have had for a long time with the IDF and one which, until addressed, will continue to plage the IDF in the legacy of dead innocents.

PB

[pelsar]

9. machine gun?......Poll_Blind

missiles are far more accurate then machine gun fire from a moving platform.....furthermore its IAF which has developed the system of targeting specific targets given a limited time frame and has upgraded the systems as such. The US doesn't have anything in its arsenal thats more accurate.

As was mentioned, our familiarity with the military, helps us understand the limitations of both equipment and the human element, either a wrong decision based on partial information or simply a series of events that one couldn't have known about, or taken into consideration.

lots of that comes with experience......

[eyl]

18. There are several problems with that

First of all, machine-gun fire tends to be less acurrate than a missile.

Second, bullets which miss tend to go on in a straight line - and are lethal for a considerable distance (I'm not familiar with the Apache's autocannon, but a 5.56mm round - which is far less powerful - is considered to have a lethal range of 2.6 km* in the open. In an urban environment, the range is of course less, but it will still go through buildings - and will go much fartehr than shrapnel.

To prevent that, you need to get close (to increase the angle), bringing us to the third problem. Judging by the news segment*, which states that it takes at least 20 seconds for the missile to hit, and given the for the Hellfire, that means the helicopter is at least 13 km away. The M230 autocannon the Apache carries, OTOH, has a range of 6 km - and if you're going to be firing warning shots, you'd want to be a lot closer. The problem is that you don't want to close the range, for two reason; getting closer means a greater risk to the helicopter, and more importantly, provides the target with warning and time to get away (especially when the target is a vehicle). Remember that the launch teams are also targets, not just the launchers themselves.

The video segment I mentioned in my previous post is link:www.keshet-tv.com/VideoPage.aspx?MediaID=4611&SourceID=23|up] (bear in mind I have no idea how long it will stay up). The kids can be seen when the video player's countdown reach 1:41 or so.

I don't know if there are weapons which will be less risky to use. While I'm not an expert (anyone with better knowledge is invited to step in) it seems to me that the Hellfire's shaped-charge warhead shouldn't cause much collateral damage (it focuses the power of the warhead to a small area, to increase penetration) - so I suspect the problem is shrapnel from the explosion of the vehicle.

There are some ideas I've seen which could reduce the damage (e.g. an AP warhead with a reduced charge). However, I don't know whether those are viable.

As for the IDF claims that missions are aborted when civilians are at risk, that's not completely accurate (or at least not how I've heard it). They say they try to avoid firing when there is a high likelihood of civilian casualties, but not at any hint of the possibility. Otherwise, they could not take any action at all - any action in Gaza carries the risk of civilian casualties.



*Though it's effective range, which is determined by the limitations of targeting ability, is far less then that.

[barb162]

31. I find the choice of Pal suicide bombers and qassams very poor

You know, no warnings to totally innocent people, killing kids, killing anyone around, no accuracy, etc. At least Israel goes after MILITARY TARGETS. Now if the cowards shooting off those qassams would stop using the civilians as human shields, these accidents wouldn't be happening.

[Violet_Crumble]

36. Since when have innocent civilians been MILITARY TARGETS??

In one recent case, Israel fired a missile after an initial one had hit a car and when a crowd of bystanders had gathered, killing a doctor, amongst other civilians. Can you explain how they were MILITARY TARGETS or human shields?

As for trying to justify these missile attacks that kill so many Palestinian civilians as mere accidents, when the same thing is done again and again it stops being an accident. The aim of Israeli missiles is a hell of a lot more accurate than Qassams, btw...

[DELUSIONAL]

10. Israel got away with murdering US sailors -- on USS Liberty

nothing happened then. This new evidence of war crimes (murdering of innocent civilians) will be ignored.

Murdering innocent civilians is just another crime that will be dismissed and excused by their supporters using words like "self defense".

This fighting will go on and on -- and the Palestinians are just "numbers" -- so who cares anyway? Jesus doesn't love the Palestinians -- he only loves . . . . . . (fill in the blanks).

There are wise Israelis who support Peace -- but apparently not enough in positions of power to make a difference. The elected leaders have discovered that whipping up fear among the voters gives them power.

Peace = weakness

seems to be the message that the bush crime family pushes -- I wonder if they learned this from the successful elected leaders of Israel? Or is this how malignity evil leaders have always operated -- whip up the fear among the people to ensure everlasting power??

[Scorpio2000]

11. In the Middle East, Weakness = War

"Israel got away with murdering US sailors -- on USS Liberty"

Israel apologized and paid reparations. What was a US spy ship doing in a hot war zone? Why didn't they advise the Israelis of their presence? YEs, the ship was flying the US flag, but false flags is the oldest of naval tactics.

It's always a bit funny when "progressives" defend the NSA.

[Englander]

14. So, it was justified?

Isn't a bit of a no-no, any attempts to justify the murder of US servicemen, accidental or not?
The argument you're using would indicate you think the attack was justified, is that correct?
btw, what do you think about the actual subject of this thread, I see that the main subject has
been completely ignored.

____________

'DEAD IN THE WATER
Saturday 21 August 2004 7pm-8.10pm; rpt 1.50am-3am


During the Six-Day War, Israel attacked and nearly sank the USS Liberty belonging to its closest ally, the USA. Thirty-four American servicemen were killed in the two-hour assault by Israeli warplanes and torpedo boats. Israel claimed that the whole affair had been a tragic accident based on mistaken identification of the ship. The American government accepted the explanation.

For more than 30 years many people have disbelieved the official explanation but have been unable to rebut it convincingly. Now, Dead in the Water uses startling new evidence to reveal the truth behind the seemingly inexplicable attack. The film combines dramatic reconstruction of the events, with new access to former officers in the US and Israeli armed forces and intelligence services who have decided to give their own version of events.

Interviews include President Lyndon Johnson's Secretary of Defence Robert McNamara, former head of the Israeli navy Admiral Shlomo Errell and members of the USS Liberty crew.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/features/dead_in_the_water.shtml

[DELUSIONAL]

15. Thanks for this additional information -- there is a PATTERN

of behavior of the Israelis -- and it is best to look at their history of behavior.

We are asked to always remember the holocaust so that it will never be repeated . . . BUT the murder of innocents is very old -- in fact the god of the Jews ordered holocaust -- slaughter of a people as told in the Old Testament. That story of slaughter always bothered me -- what sort of a god would order the slaughter of a whole group of people? The other stories about how the males were murdered and the women kept as breeders also bothered me -- what sort of a god would order "his" people to do that??

Dominate human cultures aren't very kind to the weaker cultures -- we now have a written history plus the work of anthropologists and archaeologists give us a very unpleasant view of the pre-history of the human race.

Somehow the good evolves with the evil -- and some claim that in the end the good prevails.

If we look at the Israeli -- Palestinian conflict as one of many historical conflicts -- stand back and see how we are being engaged on an cultural emotional level -- we can see that if we take sides we give both sides more power.

[Scorpio2000]

19. Are you justifiying vilification?

"Isn't a bit of a no-no, any attempts to justify the murder of US servicemen, accidental or not?
The argument you're using would indicate you think the attack was justified, is that correct?"

No, it's not justification and your assumption is incorrect. It's merely acknowleging that it happened. Israel apologized and paid reparations.

The US slaughtered some Canadian Servicemen in Afghanistan. Why? Because accidents happen during war.
During the first Gulf War, the majority of US casualties were caused by friendly fire. It's not a matter of justification. 250 US Marines murdered in Beirut. Was it justified? Did anyone apologize, pay reparations? Or, did someone gleefully claim responsibility, hand out candy and dance in the streets?

What remains to strike me as funny is when "progressives" defend the NSA. Vilificaton of Israel trumps all!

[Englander]

20. So, that's a yes?

Since you've pretty much ignored the points I made, whilst continuing to attempt to justify
the murder of US servicemen, with an abuse of logic, & the introduction of a few red herrings.
The argument you're offering is an attempt to justify this attack, by saying 'stuff happens'.

Again, what do you think about the main subject of this thread, & the B'Tselem report? I see that,
again, you've completely ignored the OP.

[Scorpio2000]

21. No...it's a "no"

It's always a shame when innocent people are killed. Reality however is that this is what happens during war. And a war it is.
The alternative of course is peace. Nobody shooting and nobody getting killed.

Bringing up a 40 year old incident, because the big bad Israelis were involved is the red herring.

Pretending that "stuff" doesn't happen in a hot war zone is putting your head in the sand.

[Englander]

23. No, that's a yes.

Again, the argument offered is 'stuff happens', a justification of the attack of the US ship.
The argument being presented is a justification of the attack, it's changed slightly, but it's
still an attempt to justify this attack, you haven't addressed the question of guilt, you're
still attempting to justify the attack on the USS Liberty.

Still no mention of the actual OP, again, I see the B'Tselem has, again, been completely ignored.

[Scorpio2000]

24. Red Herring in Whine sauce

Oh, please.

Things get attacked during wars. Sometimes the wrong targets are attacked.

During the Six Day War, Israel was advised by the US that there were no US ships in the area. The US didn't want to engage the Soviet fleet.

What you are suggesting is that the Israelis targeted the Liberty BECAUSE it was a US ship.

[pelsar]

26. let me help....

he suggesting that the israelis are "different"....we're special in our evil ways...

[Englander]

27. Is that post meant for me?

Since it's a non-sequitur, & not based on anything I've posted, I'm wondering why it was posted
to myself?

Again, zero mention of the OP, & the B'Tselem report, is there some reason why that's being
repeatedly ignored?

[pelsar]

28. no....as far as i recall I'm on "ignore"

so keep on ignoring me......the actual post was simply a direct response to a previous post

[pelsar]

25. justification in a war zone

did the israelis have the "right to shoot on liberty?..did they have the right to shoot up their own unit in rafah a few days earlier?...was the IAF justified in strafing a IDF columne in Lebanon in 82?...or the americans attacking the canadians in afganistan?

questions like that come out of someone who has little knowledge of how humans operate during wars.......or something else when it involves israelis...

[eyl]

29. If it was accidental, then the question of justification

is: were the Israelis justified in attacking what they thought the Liberty was? You can only say the poster is justifying the deaths of US servicemen if he assumes, as you do, that the attack was done knowing the ship was American.

[Englander]

34. Again, is that post meant for me?

Since it isn't based on anything I've posted, & is making inaccurate claims about my opinions. I mean
really, what's the point of just projecting any opinions, & getting it wrong? Why are you asking me
about someone else's attempt to justify the attack on the USS Liberty? Why not ask them directly?

[eyl]

35. No

I'm pointing out that contrary to what you wrote, stating the attack was accidental is not trying to justify it.

[Jim Sagle]

30. They only do it on spesssssshhhhhul occasions.

[Tom Joad]

12. I appreciate the work of B'Tselem. eom

[Englander]

13. From ReliefWeb;

Killing of civilians almost certain consequence of Israel's policy - 22 June 2006

IDF Killed 23 Civilians in Gaza in the Past Month "By Mistake"

In the last four weeks, according to B'Tselem's statistics, Israel 's security forces in the Occupied Territories killed 23 Palestinian bystanders, who the military indicated they did not intend to kill. Among them were 7 children. All were killed by helicopter missile fire, excluding one killed by artillery fire.

In this same period, no Israelis were killed by Palestinians.

The killing of innocent civilians with missiles fired during the day in the heart of crowded neighborhoods, as occurred in most of the cases cited, is not an "unfortunate mistake" but a near certain result. Whoever authorized the firing of missiles knew inescapably, or should have known, that this would be the expected result. International humanitarian law prohibits conducting an attack, even against a legitimate military target, if it is known that the attack will cause harm to civilians that is excessive compared to the anticipated military advantage. Violation of this prohibition is defined as a war crime, and therefore carries individual criminal liability for those responsible.

B'Tselem wrote to the IDF Judge Advocate General demanding that a Military Police Investigation be opened immediately regarding all those responsible, including the Chief of Staff and the Commander of the Air Force, for the killing of 23 civilians.

The statistics relate to the period of 20/05/2006 – 21/06/2006, and do not include the members of the Ghaliah family, in regard to whom B'Tselem cannot currently confirm with certainty who is responsible for their deaths.

http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/RWB.NSF/db900SID/EKOI-6R237R?OpenDocument

[Scurrilous]

16. Refuseniks call on soldiers to refuse striking Gaza

Courage To Refuse conscientious objectors movement renews activity in wake of numerous killings of innocent Palestinians by IDF in recent weeks. 'We call on soldiers to refuse to bombard Gaza and carry out what are clearly illegal orders,' group says in statement

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3266470,00.html

<snip>

"The Courage to Refuse organization, which advocates soldiers' refusal to serve in the occupied territories, renewed its activity on Thursday in wake of the series of failed targeted killings carried out by the IDF in Gaza that resulted in the deaths of 31 innocent Palestinians, including 11 children.

In a statement published by the movement, its members call on soldiers to refuse taking part in strikes against Gaza.

"We, officers and combatants in the Israeli Defense Force, who have served for many years in different fronts and who lost friends in the war to defend the homeland… call on IDF soldiers and reservists, pilots, naval officers and gunners, to refuse firing at Gaza," the statement said.

"IDF attacks have already claimed the lives of dozens of innocent people, and obtained nothing but an increase in Qassam attacks and a rise in the hate against Israel. Bombarding the world's most populated area constitutes a war crime which goes against the IDF's spirit and undermines the country's security," it read.

"We call on IDF soldiers to refuse to break the moral backbone of the State of Israel," the statement concluded."

[eyl]

17. Idiots

what, they prefer the IDF reoccupy Gaza? (in their Hebrew statment, they objected to the "fighting from afar" in all its forms, not just bombardments).

[pelsar]

22. where do they live?

any of them in sederot? or the surrounding kibbutizm?....perhaps they prefer "commando style raids"....and the accompanying armor back up if they go "wrong"?

or do they and others prefer that israel do nothing and let the missle launchers take better aim, adjust and increase they success rate, so they can kill and terrorize better..i know many here prefer that.....(its easier if you dont have to worry about some missle zeroing in on you while you set up your own missles...)

[barb162]

33. I bet none of them live in the places you mention

[barb162]

32. There's an easier, super-simple way ; STOP THE QASSAMS!

Then voila, the IDF will stop hitting back.

[Violet_Crumble]

37. Barb, Israel has been attacking Palestinian territory long before that...

..so that 'argument' is a decidedly weak one. Qassams were first used back in 2001. Israel had been firing missiles in Gaza and the West Bank long before that...