Three Palestinians killed in Israeli strike

[Resistance]

Al-Jazeera

An Israeli aircraft hit a car in Gaza, killing three people and wounding at least 15 others, medical workers said.

Security sources said the helicopter, backed by an F-16, fired three missiles at the car.

The attack took place at about 19:45 (17:45 GMT) in the Saftawi neighbourhood. It completley destroyed the car killing Amin al-Dahduh, a member of the Islamic Jihad movement.
Al-Dahduh was travelling with his brother, Ayman, who was not said to belong to the Palestinian group.

The third victim, whose identity was not immediately clear, was a bystander, security sources said.

Of the 15 wounded, one was a child, who is said to be in serious condition.

[Resistance]

1. BBC Story

"Militant killed" in Gaza strike

Saturday's attack happened at about 1945 (1745 GMT), in a densely populated residential area.

Television pictures showed a car that had been completely destroyed.

Three children, including a girl in critical condition, were among the wounded, said doctors at Gaza's Shifa Hospital.

Palestinian security officials were seen struggling to keep order around the scene of the incident as crowds of people converged, calling for revenge.

[packerssuck]

3. I'm getting tired of this endless cycle of violence.

It's a shame that Bush has decided to let these two parties fight it out. What happened to the great peace plan submitted by that bastion of democracy, Saudi Arabia?

[Resistance]

4. There was a semi-decent plan recently

submitted by moderates - remember the Geneva Accords?

Sharon rejected it in favor of continuing to rob, steal, and murder.

Also, the Palestinian side routinely calls for international intervention, (y'know like what is called for in other war-torn areas in the world?) but this is always rejected by the war-profiteers as well.

[JohnLocke]

2. I'm sorry the bystander was killed.

But if Amin al-Dahduh hadn't chosen to be a terrorist leader, this never would have happened.

[Resistance]

5. yeah right

:crazy:

[JohnLocke]

6. What part of my statement do you object to?

[Resistance]

7. for misdirecting responsibility

from the killers (brave Israeli pilots pressing buttons inside their "Apache" WMDs) to the victims.

[JohnLocke]

8. I laid the responsibility properly.

The responsibility for the deaths of some bystanders belongs to Islamic Jihad and the terrorist leader targeted in particular. The death and injury of children and bystanders is horrible, and I believe that the Israeli government should use every precaution to minimize damage to peoople and infastructure not connected to crimal activity. But sometimes it is not possible to do so.

[tinnypriv]

9. Question

Assuming the Palestinians had the capability, would you support them using a missile to liquidate Ariel Sharon (and a bystander or two) in an attack on his car in Kaplan street?

[Resistance]

27. good question n/t

[Forkboy]

28. One which you wont see an answer to

it's only ok for one side to act in this way.

[Resistance]

10. oh ok, thanks.

So, the next time a suicide bomber blows away innocent people in Israel, I'll look for a similar essay from you on how the responsibility belongs to Israeli leaders who continue a land-theft and oppressive policy against Palestinians.

[packerssuck]

11. Is land theft the new Palestinian whine and battlecry?

Palestinians are always the poor helpless victims even though they get hundreds of millions of dollars in foreign aid each year which they use for leaders' homes and military weapons so they can target busses and schools. Poor Palestinians.

[Resistance]

12. yeah I hear you

stealing someone's land, then murdering anyone who opposes is nothing to "whine" and cry about. These people should stop complaining and just be thankful for .... er... to be alive!!

:party:

[Forkboy]

13. Be glad!

:hi:

[Herschel]

14. Well said

A killer was eliminated. However, we acknowledge the collateral damage.

[_Jumper_]

30. What "military" weapons does the PA buy?

F-16's?

[JohnLocke]

15. Your post seems to defy logic.

I see a difference between a) targeting a terrorist leader and inadvertently wounding some bystanders and killing one; and b) deliberately targeting non-combatant civilians.

[Orangeone]

17. right

So if a driver speeds through a crowded schoolyard and kills a bunch of kids, it's okay because it was an accident?

[JohnLocke]

19. Well, that was random.

If if was done with reckless disregard for life, of course not.

[Resistance]

20. but IDF reckless disregard for human life

is always rewarded

[DuctapeFatwa]

24. Are you saying sharon is responsible for deaths caused by suicide bombers?

I don't agree. I think every individual is responsible for his or her own actions.

[Gimel]

16. Ha'aretz report

Two Islamic Jihad militants were killed, including the head of the organization's military wing in Gaza, Mahmoud Ouda, in an Israeli helicopter strike on a car in the Jabalya refugee camp in the Gaza Strip on Saturday evening.

According to Palestinian sources, two additional Palestinians were killed in the strike, but their identities are unclear. According to one report, one of those killed is a six-year-old boy.

Ouda was responsible for a number of terror attacks, including the infiltration of the Gaza Strip settlement of Netzarim, in which three soldiers were killed. He also dispatched a suicide bomber who blew himself up near IDF troops adjacent to Kfar Darom in Gaza on Friday.

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/399204.html

Did I hear you say give terrorism and chance?

[tinnypriv]

18. Attacks on occupation soldiers is not terrorism

And Ha'aretz's idiotic use of the term just debases real terrorism, namely that directed against civilians.

[Gimel]

21. Yeah, you are so right

Arez crossing is only for the Palestinians. No Israeli soldiers should patrol their land. /sarcasm

The terrorists were intent on entering Israel to commit terrorist acts. That makes them terrorists. They belong to a terrorist organization. Again that labels them as terrorists.

[tinnypriv]

22. I was referring specifically to the infiltration of Netzarim

Which I remember, since I posted about it the exact moment it happened.

That was not a terrorist attack. In fact, it was an extremely brave resistance operation.

If Ouda also dispatched bombers against civilians crossing Eretz, or dispatched bombers into Israel, he's a terrorist commander (and guilty of terrorism) in addition to being a resistance commander.

The two are not mutually exclusive, and I see no evidence presented that he did any of the former, while he seems to have done the latter.

[tinnypriv]

23. Note

I say this despite seeing pictures of the grieving families of the dead IDF soldiers (two young girls and a 20-something guy).

I also say this despite reading the quite descriptive articles in the Israeli press about how IDF friends had to clear away the personal belongings of their slain comrades.

To repeat: attacking Occupation soldiers is not terrorism.

[Gimel]

25. Ouda was responsible for a number of terror attacks,

So you think that the Netzarim attack is all that is referred to?

While the Al Jazeera report calls the attack "Sharon's crimes" and only incidentally admits that two of the men were member's of Islamic Jihad, does not mention terrorists at all.

From the Washington Post:

An Israeli army spokesman said the target of the strike was a vehicle carrying senior members of Islamic Jihad who, he said, were responsible for planning several deadly attacks against Israeli civilian and army targets.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A15390-2004Feb28.html

Ha'aretz:
The IDF Spokesman issued a brief statement confirming that the "IAF attacked a car in which senior Islamic Jihad operatives, who were responsible for a number of murderous attacks, were traveling."
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/399204.html


The attack you are singling out at Netzarim was carried out be this terroist group. The soldiers were asleep in their bunks. I say it was terrorism.

From Webster's 7th New Collegiate dictionary:

Terrorism: the systematic use of terror as a means of coercion.

As the Palestinians do not have a state, and no recognized military, terrorism is their method of coercion.

[Violet_Crumble]

26. Attacking Israeli troops is NOT an act of terrorism...

That the Palestinians don't have a state doesn't have anything to do with it. I say attacking occupying troops is legitimate resistance, and to label it as an act of terrorism using of all things a dictionary definition is ridiculous and goes a long way towards explaining why the term 'terrorism' is losing all it's meaning. That dictionary definition of terrorism that you gave can be applied to the actions of the IDF in the Occupied Territories, btw, as any political violence can be defined as terrorism. My opinion is and always has been that the Palestinians most certainly do have a right to resist the occupation using legitimate means, which to me means taking all steps to protect civilians and only attacking military targets. Of course there's some people who would love to label any resistance, no matter what it is, as terrorism, and who would love nothing better than for the Palestinians to sit back passively and endure whatever Israel dishes out to them....

I'm just a tad cynical about how the State Dept chooses to define terms, but even their definition (which I think mostly everyone would place more credence on than an entry in some dictionary) points out that it's violence against non-combatants:

US Code, Sec. 2656f(d)


"the term ''terrorism'' means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents"

Violet...

[tinnypriv]

29. Try reading

The post above yours.

If he attacked civilians, he's a terrorist. If he only attacked military targets, he's not.