Israel, Palestine and Iran

[Thug]

10 minutes ago, ender4 said:

I don't think that maths work but i can't work out why.  1.3 children per couple doesn't give you 40% of the population being children. 

The UK is around 2.0 children and we don't even have 25% of the population as children. 

Because 1.3 children per couple is assuming that everyone who is not a child is a parent.

That is not likely to be the case.

Let me apply the maths to your example.

if 18% of the uk is a ‘child’, the that would leave 82% as an adult.

let’s assume the population of the uk to be 70,000,000

82% = 57,400,000 adults

18% = 12,600,000 children 

change adults to couples: 28,700,000

at your average of 2.0 children thus would suggest that 57,400,000 children.  Which is obviously not 18% of 70,000,000

So that’s why the maths doesn’t work 

Edited November 1, 2023 by Thug

[The Fun Factory]

Sorry, my bad I got it wrong. Unicef state 45% of the population of Gaza are children. 

[bickster]

34 minutes ago, Thug said:

Amnesty international?  Meh. Who listens to these guys? Probably Russian/Iranian funded.

Just look at their previous damning reports about Israel.  Obviously biased.

Nothing to see here, move  along.

Well now you mention it, have a look at the report they did on that other big war that's going on at the minute. They aren't currently infallible either and I say that as someone who has put on gigs and donated the profits to them in the past. They did used to be very trustworthy but now I'm more questioning of their reports too now.

[Thug]

1 minute ago, bickster said:

Well now you mention it, have a look at the report they did on that other big war that's going on at the minute. They aren't currently infallible either and I say that as someone who has put on gigs and donated the profits to them in the past. They did used to be very trustworthy but now I'm more questioning of their reports too now.

Would be an interesting read about the other big war.  Do you mind linking?

[magnkarl]

28 minutes ago, Thug said:

Would be an interesting read about the other big war.  Do you mind linking?

He's talking about how Amnesty skirted around the issues surrounding Russia's war crimes in Ukraine and struggled with the realities of Russia bombing Ukrainian cities to oblivion, parroted Russian propaganda like saying Ukraine had placed troops in civilian areas. In that case, they should probably also consider where Hamas is.

To me, it really doesn't matter if you're Ukrainian or Palestinian, if an occupying force is bombing civilians indiscriminately it's a war crime no matter who donates to Amnesty, or in this case, is/was on the board of Amnesty. One of the organisation's founders left the group because he couldn't stand how it was pandering to Russia.

More on the subject

Quote

A leaked internal review commissioned by Amnesty International is said to have concluded there were significant shortcomings in a controversial report prepared by the rights group that accused Ukraine of illegally endangering citizens by placing armed forces in civilian areas.

The report, issued last August, prompted widespread anger in Ukraine, leading to an apology from Amnesty and a promise of a review by external experts of what went wrong. Among those who condemned the report was Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, who accused Amnesty of “shift[ing] the responsibility from the aggressor to the victim”.

But then again Amnesty clearly struggles with comparing situations, a termobaric mlrs rocket fired into a whole block of civilian buildings in Mariupol was considered a military action by them then due to Ukrainian troops maybe being close to 10 kms from the building.

There are a lot of organisations that are much less politically coloured than Amnesty, and they're reporting widely on Israel's breaches of humanitarian law, but that doesn't neccesarily mean that the use of white phosphorous is one when Israel, the US and NATO also use different variants of said munitions, and Israel and the US have not signed up to the convention banning them. Amnesty needs to get its facts straight before making emotional assumptions and claiming things are breaches of international law when they aren't. They've been absolutely shredded by a panel of experts on humanitarian law for not understanding the actual laws before publishing statements.

Edited November 1, 2023 by magnkarl

[magnkarl]

Meanwhile on Al Jazeera Iran's foreign minister is calling for a blockade of Israel with the Turkish foreign minister present, and regurgitating some pretty horrific things about Jews.

Turkey will likely not be very happy for being used by Iran like this.

[Thug]

8 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

He's talking about how Amnesty skirted around the issues surrounding Russia's war crimes in Ukraine and struggled with the realities of Russia bombing Ukrainian cities to oblivion, parroted Russian propaganda like saying Ukraine had placed troops in civilian areas. In that case, they should probably also consider where Hamas is.

To me, it really doesn't matter if you're Ukrainian or Palestinian, if an occupying force is bombing civilians indiscriminately it's a war crime no matter who donates to Amnesty, or in this case, is/was on the board of Amnesty. 

More on the subject

But then again Amnesty clearly struggles with comparing situations, a termobaric mlrs rocket fired into a whole block of civilian buildings in Mariupol was considered a military action by them then due to Ukraine maybe being close to 10 kms from the building.

Thanks for this (I’m referring to the entire post)

And thanks for the part in bold in particular.  I sometimes feel that this sentiment isn’t present in what I read, and that is what gets my back up to be honest.
 

I’m going to see if I can find the full report to have a good read.

[magnkarl]

10 minutes ago, Thug said:

Thanks for this (I’m referring to the entire post)

And thanks for the part in bold in particular.  I sometimes feel that this sentiment isn’t present in what I read, and that is what gets my back up to be honest.
 

I’m going to see if I can find the full report to have a good read.

It's not a good read. It's a document that blames Ukraine for putting civilians in harms way when it's been proven over and over again that Russia doesn't care about what it bombs. If Ukraine was to try to adhere to the report they'd need to evacuate the whole of Ukraine. Amnesty seems to give Hamas more credit than they did Ukraine, a nation that was attacked and terrorised by the world's second army.

Amnesty doesn't have a shred of credibility when talking about war crimes anymore. They bought a review by several experts on how it could publish such panderous BS, and then they watered the final product down so that it doesn't actually criticize Amnesty for much.

Unreleased Report Finds Faults in Amnesty International’s Criticism of Ukraine 

Quote

 Amnesty International’s board has sat for months on a report critical of the group after it accused Ukrainian forces of illegally endangering civilians while fighting Russia, according to documents and a person familiar with the matter.

The 18-page report, a copy of which was obtained by The New York Times, underscores the complexity of applying international law to aspects of the conflict in Ukraine — and the continuing sensitivity of a matter that prompted a fierce and swift backlash to the human rights group.

Anyways, back to Palestine, Israel and Iran.

Edited November 1, 2023 by magnkarl

[Keyblade]

2 hours ago, ender4 said:

That's a lot of kids!  Is that even possible to achieve?  Each adult couple are having like 8 kids each?  Is that just bad maths by me?

 

My humble guess is the prevalence of people meeting untimely deaths over there.

[Rustibrooks]

They hit the refugee camp again today according to Al Jazeera

 

 

 

 

[Chindie]

Just now, Rustibrooks said:

They hit the refugee camp again today according to Al Jazeera

 

 

 

 

But was it a refugee camp?

How many children are actually dead? Really? Really? Have you counted them?

Was it justified? I mean, it was, they probably killed a bad guy. Totally justifiable. Not a war crime, no.

Etc etc.

[sne]

38 minutes ago, Chindie said:

But was it a refugee camp?

How many children are actually dead? Really? Really? Have you counted them?

Was it justified? I mean, it was, they probably killed a bad guy. Totally justifiable. Not a war crime, no.

Etc etc.

And what about the zoning permit. Was it actually zoned as a refugee camp on the building permit?

[Chindie]

1 hour ago, sne said:

And what about the zoning permit. Was it actually zoned as a refugee camp on the building permit?

Now now lets not pretend that would make any difference.

[magnkarl]

Both Israel and Hamas are wading deeply in breaches of the Geneva Convention here:

Quote

No prisoner of war may at any time be sent to, or detained in areas where he may be exposed to the fire of the combat zone, nor may his presence be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations.

Article 28 of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides: “The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations.”

Under no circumstances shall medical units be used in an attempt to shield military objectives from attack. Whenever possible, the Parties to the conflict shall ensure that medical units are so sited that attacks against military objectives do not imperil their safety.

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, favour 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

Parties to the conflict are prohibited from placing or keeping members of the civilian population subject to their authority in or near military objectives, with the idea of inducing the enemy to refrain from attacking those objectives.

Humanitarian law defines attacks as acts of violence against an adversary, whether carried out in offense or in defense, and in whatever territory conducted (API Art. 49.1).

The basic rule governing attacks is that the parties to a conflict must at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants, and between civilian objects and military objectives. The parties to the conflict may direct their operations only against military objectives. Consequently, indiscriminate attacks are prohibited (API Art. 48 and Rules 7, 11–13 of the ICRC customary IHL study).

Humanitarian law establishes that military commanders are under the obligation to take precautionary measures when preparing and carrying out attacks, so as to limit their possible detrimental effects and to ensure that they are not indiscriminate, and that the incidental harm on civilians is proportionate to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated (API Art. 57, 58 and Rules 14–24 of the ICRC customary IHL study).

 

[VILLAMARV]

Wasn't the argument for Guantanamo and other torture's legitimisation that 'terrorists' weren't covered by the geneva convention?

[magnkarl]

3 hours ago, VILLAMARV said:

Wasn't the argument for Guantanamo and other torture's legitimisation that 'terrorists' weren't covered by the geneva convention?

Even if so, civilians are falling victims both to Hamas’ use of them as a shield for their military objects and Israel’s aim at targeting Hamas objectives. Both parties fail badly at following the Geneva Convention.

[Jareth]

Have Israel defined what victory looks like? 

[OutByEaster?]

32 minutes ago, Jareth said:

Have Israel defined what victory looks like? 

Only as a concept paper.

It's looking increasingly like that for Israel, the best way to not have to worry about rockets coming from Gaza when this is finished is to not have a Gaza when this is finished. I think that's the objective - no more Gaza.

 

[VILLAMARV]

8 hours ago, magnkarl said:

Even if so, civilians are falling victims both to Hamas’ use of them as a shield for their military objects and Israel’s aim at targeting Hamas objectives. Both parties fail badly at following the Geneva Convention.

Oh, I agree, It wasn't a question with a sarcy tone behind it. Just a call out to the hive mind.

I suppose the point would be in whether our allies are really that worried about that thing we ourselves have undermined for +20 years. And coming on the back of I wouldn't worry about the UN anymore type posts - and at a time in our society where the label "irregular migrant" seems to trump any human rights for refugees and so on perhaps we shouldn't be surprised at countries openly flouting International Law anymore. Fool me once and all that.

[magnkarl]

It properly grinds my gears when people from Lebanon and Egypt complain about Palestine when their own bloody governments treat Palestinians like disposable pieces in their own geo-political games, and have kept Gaza under military occupation and blockade themselves (Egypt) for pretty much as long as Gaza was a thing.

Where's the criticism of the same occupying apartheid mentality when it comes to Arab neighbours of Palestine? No one dares mention why these same states want to keep Palestinians where they are, because it would mean that a lot of angry second or third generation Egyptians and Lebanese would need to actually consider the extremely difficult situation this is, and that their own states contribute to the issue.

Jews across the world are being targeted for what Israel is doing, yet these same people can't fathom what their own countries are doing to increase the issue.

Edited November 2, 2023 by magnkarl