re: Israel at War Crimes Tribunal to dutymanager Generals in...

re: Israel at War Crimes Tribunal to dutymanager Generals in Egyot and Syria talked about how they had planned the invasion and how it all collapsed when the Israeli caught them out. The undying perception I got was what a rag tag discipline Arabic armies have.
I'm sure that both the arabs and israeli's had battle plans involving attacks on each other, just as the US and Soviet Union did in the cold war. The key question is would the arabs have attacked if Israel did not initiate the six day war? From the information I've read the answer is probably no. You are correct that the Arab armies were a ramshackle bunch. The ease with which they were defeated remains an embarrasment.

Okay some people have asked me for some views on all manner of things in this thread. So what is the definition of a War Crime? Depending on your definition will be the answer.
I don't know the official geneva convention definition, but I would define a war crime as any military action taken by a state with reckless disregard for civilian casualties that results in the deaths of more than 20 people. By this definition the Oklahoma bombing, the WTC bombing and most Palestinian sucide attacks are not war crimes since they are not initiated by states. I'm not saying they are justified, they are criminal acts, not war crimes. Hiroshima & Dresden would be war crimes, as would be Israels ethnic cleansing in '48.


But now contrast this with another analogy. Yesterday in the news, it was reported that some `obess, fat' people were suing fast food chains in the US for selling them fast foods and making them the way they are. Now more than likely, after the lady got a few million for spilling McDonalds coffee on herself whilst it was on her lap and she was driving, that these fatties will also get a big payout.
The McDonalds coffee thing is not as clear cut as you might think http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm
I doubt if the fatties case will get very far.


Okay this one we can live with - some rules make Society function better - like
road rules. Some rules and laws inhibit and impede people and Societies. Law is an evolutionary problem. But the time will come, in my view, that there should be no rules (save those such as road rules that serve the common good)- just personal responsibility. It is not up to me to tell someone they can't have an abortion. They can't committ Euthanasia, they can't eat GM food, they can't this or that (given that protection is still there for children) etc etc. I might vehemently oppose these things, but at the end of the day it is not my place to dictate to anyone else.
I agree 100%. Everyone should have complete freedom so long as it does not infringe on the liberties of others. The laws on drugs are another example of unecessary government infringement of personal liberty.


So what is a war crime. A lot of people die in war. War is a struggle where political solutions have not been found. Who is to condemn the actions of people in a war zone.
History. But this is little consolation to the long dead victims.

So was the Holocaust a war crime. I think it was because people were not in war zones when atrocities on them were being committed. (I still shed a tear when I see what happened with the gas chambers); I dispute the number 6Million however, there were not even that many Jewish people in Europe when the war broke out. The holocaust was a war crime. Hiroshima, Dresden were as well. The massacres of Tasmanian aboriginals, the dutch attrocities in the spice islands, the list goes on. With Hiroshima and Dresden you can argue that a greater good was achieved by reducing the duration of the war causing the total lives lost to be lower that would otherwise be the case.

I find it a bit rich when that Mary left wing Irish UN Human Rights Commissioner goes running around Australia trying to make out there is something wrong with our treatment of illegals, when she would be better served tackling the real problems in the world - abuses in places like Angloia where poor innocent children are stolen from their families and childhood and made to fight as soldiers in a war with no end. That is a war crime.
I agree. This undermines the credibility of the UN Human rights organization.

So is Sharon a war criminal - I don't know. In what context did he do what he is accused of doing. By what was written, if it is true, that he went about in a manner to inflict the greatest civilian casualties and there was no justification for the action from a military viewpoint, then I would imagine he committed war crimes. But these things are NOT balck and white and I would really be careful condemning a soldier in time of war.
In a just world Sharon would be swinging from the rafters for the crimes he has committed. There are many criminals among the Palestinians, but Israels hands are bloody as well.

Some things are clear - some are grey. It does come also to who makes the rules.
Only Israel has the power to make the rules. They must take the initiative to break to the cycle of violence. A full withdrawal to the 67 border. A US guarantee of Israels territorial integrity. Reparations and resettlement of refugees in the West bank and Gaza and the dismantling of the settlements. This is the only way to stop the violence.

But in my view it comes back to personal responsibility. In discussion with a Japanese Officer from WW2. 40 years after the war he said he was sorry for what he had done. He had committed acts of murder on commands from his superiors. He said he had to obey those orders. But 40 years on he recognised that he should have said no - no matter what the consequences. We are all personally responsible for our actions and as we draw closer to meeting our maker, our conscience tells us that we also live in a moral world order, beyind this physical plain. And all karma will be set right, and we will pay for our deeds ultimately.
Interesting you should say that. There is a movement in Israel called Ometz Le'sarev, Courage to Refuse. Th is was written by an elite Israeli paratrooper, Guy Grossman:

I was the 11th Israeli reserve officer to join Ometz Le'sarev (Courage to Refuse) and sign the declaration that ''We shall not continue to fight beyond the 1967 borders in order to dominate, expel, starve and humiliate an entire people.'' At the same time, we declare our loyalty to the state and people of Israel and our willingness to ``continue serving in the Israel Defense Forces in any mission that serves Israel's defense.''

This decision required difficult confrontations with family and friends and a willingness to pay a high personal price. Some military comrades severed all ties with me, and 35 municipalities have decided not to employ refusers. As I write, 36 fellow refusers are serving sentences in military prison. Last week the Israeli attorney general raised the stakes by proposing the much more serious charge of treason.

Renowned Israeli author Amos Oz wrote in the April 7 Observer, ''Two wars are being fought in this region. One is a just war, and the other is both unjust and futile.'' I am willing to fight the just war for the survival of Israel.

HATRED IN KIDS' EYES

I refuse, however, to fight for the continued occupation of Palestinian land. This war is unjust. It saps my country's sanity and morality and corrupts its soul. There is not and can never be a benign occupation. For 11 years my friends and I risked our lives and sanity to perpetuate this unbearable reality -- the daily humiliations at checkpoints, the arbitrary closures and destruction of homes. I saw the kids grow up with hatred in their eyes -- eyes that I was ashamed to meet.

This war is also futile. During my service in the occupied territories, I realized that I was issuing commands with little bearing on the security of my country. Quite the opposite. As a patriot, it is my duty to speak the truth and tell my people that this continued war of folly is undermining my country's long-term security. It erodes our legitimacy and the world's support.

This ''war for the settlements'' does not deter the despicable scourge of Palestinian terror that strikes us almost daily in our buses, hotels and restaurants. Indeed, we have relentlessly stirred a cauldron of uncompromising hatred, which is gradually turning potential neighbors and partners into relentless foes. This futile war is unwinnable -- eventually we will withdraw, and the Palestinians will have their state.

A JUST WAR?

Confusing these two wars, the just and the unjust, exacts a terrible price. We fight in Jenin and Ramallah, but our politicians insist that that we are fighting the just war for our homes. Our leaders tell us that we will forever have to live by the sword and that where force has failed, more force will succeed.

But it is clear that all our tanks and fighter aircraft cannot impose a military solution. Confusing these two wars endangers Israel's long-term security, which rests on two pillars: the legitimacy of our country and our military effectiveness.

In fighting the unjust war, a war designed to delay the inevitable and defend the indefensible, we are eroding these fundamental pillars of security. We strengthen our enemies, lose international support and, worst of all, weaken our own morale. Tanks and aircraft are only as strong as each individual soldier's belief in the justice and morality of the mission.

As a patriot, it is my obligation to expose the confusion and say No to the unjust war. I refuse to serve in the occupied territories. It is not only my democratic right to refuse; it is my duty.

Ending the occupation and establishing secure, internationally recognized borders may not stop every terrorist attack, but it will start the process of cooling the cauldron. It may not stop every military threat, but we will confront any threat with courage, conviction and strong international support. This is the just war that I stand ready to fight.

WE LOVE ISRAEL

Our voice is growing louder every day. In January, 54 reservists signed the initial officers' letter, and today we number 417. We bring the message to our fellow citizens and American supporters that one can love Israel and yet criticize its misguided policies. We have seen the injustice and futility of the occupation with our own eyes and refuse to participate any longer.

We are articulating a different vision of Israel that draws from a proud Jewish and Zionist heritage. Refusal is not just saying No; it is a patriotic way of saying Yes to a secure, just and prosperous state of Israel.