Small town's controversial role in War on Gaza - 26 Mar 09

[logisist]

hey idiots they destroy old bombs and war chemicals in that arsenal they don't make them.

[jsprink30]

actually nanarocxie or w/e the arsenals in white hall..which is about as far away from redfield as it is pine bluff..oh and i live literally right down the street form the arsenal too :))))

[nanarocxie]

fuck this i live in pine bluff and the arsenal isnt really in pine bluff its in redfield

[logisist]

its in White Hall not redfield

[Entaruadunexecutor]

WP is not legal when used in civilian areas, this is a fact and is not arguable. All these people arguing that it is lawful to use WP in civilian areas are deluding themselves or lying through their teeth.

Furthermore, the targeting of civilian infrastructure and UN aid with WP is completely illegal regardless of what weapon was used.

[yofic]

Show me one legal source (not some newspaper article) that prohibits WP in civilian areas.

You're so worried about legality, Entaruadun? What about the legality of showering deadly rockets on Israeli schools and homes? What about the legality of stealing aid from one's own people? The legality of hiding terrorists in one's home? The legality of a combatant hiding among civilians, without a uniform, and launching rockets from schools? Why don't you protest those illegalities?

[bigveasy]

The Geneva Convention, you fucking Moron.

[yofic]

Where in the Geneva Convention? Show me the text.

[bigveasy]

Article 1 of Protocol III of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons defines an incendiary weapon as 'any weapon or munition which is primarily designed to set fire to objects or to cause burn injury to persons through the action of flame, heat, or combination thereof, produced by a chemical reaction of a substance delivered on the target'. The same protocol also prohibits the use of incendiary weapons against civilians (already forbidden by the Geneva Conventions) or in civilian areas.

[yofic]

Bigveasy, I would suggest a more thorough reading, as Protocol III also states:

"(b) Incendiary weapons do NOT include:

(i) Munitions which may have incidental incendiary effects, such as illuminants,

tracers, smoke or signalling systems"

The prohibitions of Protocol III, therefore, do NOT apply to WP (some add, unless it is specifically intended to be used as a toxic weapon).

[bigveasy]

The prohibitions of Protocol III therefore apply FULLY to white phosphorus where it is being used as a weapon designed to burn. To argue to the contrary is stupid to the point where no further reading could be of benefit to me. WP smoke won't do your health any good but there are no recorded fatalities from the inhalation of its fumes. Nobody except you has ever mentioned it as a toxic weapon.

[yofic]

Actually, CWC spokesman Peter Kaiser referred to its toxic properties, but that's irrelevant.

You and I never disagreed that WP is illegal when used as a weapon (-key words here) against civilians. I said: WP is not prohibited. It's regulated. It should not be used as a weapon against civilians. It may be used in civilian areas for other purposes because it isn't an incendiary weapon.

[bigveasy]

The first half of that concurred that WP weapons exist. Your last sentence then contradicts the rest. I repeat, for clarity's sake: "The protocol...prohibits the use of incendiary weapons...in civilian areas".

If your argument is, infact, that it was only ever used to illuminate, I implore you to Google the bracketed [white phosphorus "shake n bake"]. The first result is a BBC page. Read the opening sentence.

For the stupid and lazy, the Pentagon has admitted WP weapons were used in Fallujah

[yofic]

Bigveasy, you're confusing yourself. Allow me to clarify:

We are currently discussing Gaza, not Iraq. I made no comment whatsoever regarding Iraq.

WP is not an "incendiary weapon". Therefore, it cannot be prohibited by provisions that prohibit the use of incendiary weapons. This is basic logic. Therefore, it is permissible to use WP in civilian areas, as in Gaza, so long as it is not used as a weapon (but rather to create smoke screens, etc).

[bigveasy]

I am not confused at all. WP is being used as a weapon in civilian areas. That is illegal. That is all.

[yofic]

Ok, now you're making stuff up.

[bigveasy]

No fiction here. The theatre of war is irrelevant to my argument. Read the ****ing article I asked you to, and take up your call of "bullshit" with the British Broadcasting Corporation.

[yofic]

The article discusses Iraq, not Gaza.

[bigveasy]

Thankyou for reading it. My argument is irrespective of borders.

[yofic]

I'm not sure what your argument is.

[bigveasy]

yofic (2 weeks ago) Show Hide -3

Marked as spam

Reply | Spam

Show me one legal source (not some newspaper article) that prohibits WP in civilian areas.

-----

I read through a few of your other comments then answered that question. Since then it seems like most of your blind flailing has been directed at me. It opens up a great philosophical question whether one is better to let ignorance flourish than try to answer questions.

[yofic]

I fail to understand your argument.

Let's review:

Me: Show me one legal source...that prohibits WP in civilian areas

You: Protocol III of the Geneva Convention

Me: Protocol III of the Geneva Convention does not apply to WP since it is not an incendiary weapon. WP is regulated, not prohibited, and may be used in civilian areas for certain purposes.

Now, with which part do you disagree?

[bigveasy]

"Protocol III of the Geneva Convention does not apply to WP since it is not an incendiary weapon."

To disagree requires opinion. Your statement that WP is not a weapon is factually incorrect.

[yofic]

Protocol III:

"(b) Incendiary weapons do NOT include:

(i) Munitions which may have incidental incendiary effects, such as illuminants,

tracers, smoke or signalling systems"

[bigveasy]

Smack my arse and call me Charlie. Stop me where you need to:

WP WEAPONS cant be used in civilian areas.

WP weapons have been used in civilian areas.

it's that simple.

[bigveasy]

INCIDENTAL incendiary effects refer to things like tracer bullets which may set fire to things as an INCIDENTAL effect. WP mortar shells set fire to things as a primary effect. They are incendiary weapons.

You come across as someone intelligent enough to fully understand the syntax.. Are you being selective in your absorption of the facts?

[yofic]

WP can be used in a variety of ways. The manner in which it is used determines its effect. When used to create a smokescreen, WP will cause some damage (as all weapons do), but nowhere near the amount caused when it is used as a weapon. Therefore, WP is not considered an incendiary weapon unless it is specifically used as such.

[bigveasy]

Indeed, WP flares used for the purpose of illumination are not weapons. The words 'munition' and 'weapon' are not freely interchangeable. Having read the article I referred to before, you will appreciate the matter in question does not concern the deployment of WP munitions, but specifically WP weapons.....in civilian areas...

For some time now I've simply been restating fact and rehashing my words in a bid to force your acceptance of the obvious. Unless there's something else, let's call quits

[yofic]

The conversation Entaruadunexecutor & I were having before you broke in was regarding WP generally, not WP weapons.

It may well be that WP weapons are being used in civilian areas in parts of the world; but this is not the conversation we were having. We were discussing whether WP has legal uses in civilian areas. If it did (and it does), that would mean that all these accusations against the IDF are baseless, malicious slander.

You need not respond.

[bigveasy]

Don't be a dick. I answered a question that you asked.

If you only care about war crimes in 1 place - although I can't see why you would - there are videos on this very site of israel using airburst WP rounds. You're blinkering yourself and trying to change your argument ad hoc to keep on the right side of the facts as they become apparent to you.

[yofic]

Nope. I'm pretty sure the question was:

"Show me one legal source ... that prohibits WP in civilian areas." So the question was about prohibitions, not regulations, and WP generally, not WP weapons - words that have colossal legal implications. As for air-bursts - once again, legal if used in certain ways.

Let's do that logic thing again - How does focusing on false accusations against Israel (the purpose of this forum) imply that I don't care about war crimes around the world?

[bigveasy]

I guess people focus on what they want to focus on, and believe what they want to believe.

"You need not respond." - Yofic.

[brumbar162]

Nazi yofic,

You're just another israeli propagandist.

WP is illegal to use against civilians as defined by the UN. Your arguments are nonsense designed to mislead the public.

Fred Abrahams, a senior Human Rights Watch researcher. "It fired white phosphorus repeatedly over densely populated areas, even when its troops weren't in the area and safe smoke shells were available. As a result, civilians needlessly suffered and died."

All israelis are war criminals!

[yofic]

Brumbar:

Read the discussion. No one said it was legal to use WP against civilians. It IS legal to use WP in civilian areas.

Don't bring me pathetic accusations from Human Rights Watch. HRW also called Muhammad al-Dura's "death" a case of indiscriminate and illegal use of force." Accounts of the "death" have since been proven to be a hoax. (Put "al-dura" in youtube's search box, see for yourself) HRW has long lost its credibility.

[brumbar162]

Nazi yofic:

It is not legal to use WP in civilian areas where it will cause unnecessary harm to civilians.

It is very clear there was no threat when the israelis used WP directly against civilians and only against civilians.

It is israel that has long lost it's "credibility" - no one believes israel or its propagandists like you.

Human Rights Watch is an independent organisation. The reason you attack it is because they refuse to follow israeli propaganda.

You're a Nazi joke!

[yofic]

Brumbar,

I understand how tempting it is to make up facts to fit your arguments, but I urge you to stop giving in to that temptation!

Israel didn't use WP against civilians, and if you claim it did, you'd better have proof to back that up. Even HRW, whose biases are obvious to anyone with half a brain, admitted Israel was using WP for its illuminating and smoke-creating effects.

How does HRW's status as an independent organization prove its honesty & impartiality? What about al-dura?

[Xavierandre]

who gives a fuck about historical facts...

is white phosphorus legal to use in war? NO

WHO SUPPLIED IT? THE US!

gaza is one of the poorest places in the world bullied by two powerful countries

[yofic]

xavierandre:

For your own sake, I suggest you research facts before embarrassing yourself in public. It is perfectly legal to use WP in war.

And FYI, Gaza impoverished itself many times over. The clearest example of this was in 2005 when Palestinians destroyed greenhouses and other structures that Israel had left behind specifically to help the Gaza economy grow.

[Xavierandre]

wait... so the way WP was used in Gaza was not in violation of the geneva convention?

how bout the fucken embargo they got on gaza and dont give me that "preventing" strategy bullshit... the demolishing of Palestinian homes to build houses for Israeli citizen IS MAKING THINGS WORSE... U SHOULD BE EMBARRASSED IN DEFENDING THE STATE THAT WILL GO DOWN IN HISTORY AS ONE OF THE MOST DESPICABLE REGIMES IN HISTORY

[yofic]

I can't tell you that one way or the other, I don't have enough evidence. You see, in contrast to some people, I try not to come to conclusions without knowing the facts. But, based on the IDF's past record, it's far more likely than not that WP was used legally and in a way that would result in minimal civilian casualties.

The embargo was the direct result of terrorism carried out by Gaza's elected government. Would you advocate for the US to provide supplies to people who elected al-Qaeda?

[Xavierandre]

u mean the same government (US) that had already supplied millions of dollars to the Taliban during the cold war? JAJAJAJA the hypocrisy in ur words is unbelievable

[yofic]

Fool! I'm not talking about random governments the US supports because it is in US interests; that is a separate discussion. My question was: would you advocate for the US to provide supplies to a people who elected al-Qaeda although it murdered US civilians and stated its goal to destroy America?

[waterroadtree324]

who the hell said anything about al qaeda? so random... idiot.

[yofic]

Ah, watterroadtree, good to hear from you again! Word to the wise, though - don't butt into conversations you can't follow.

[yofic]

As for demolishing Palestinian homes to build houses for Israelis - C'mon! you could come up with arguments that make more sense. Show me one Palestinian house that was replaced by an Israeli one.

[Xavierandre]

????!!!!!! is absurd for you to deny this... there is PLENTY of evidence of this... including the invasion stated by the US of Israel inside Palestinian territory.

[yofic]

What? We weren't talking about territory. We were talking about houses. You said Israel demolishes Palestinian homes to build houses for Israeli citizens. My question: What Palestinian house was replaced with an Israeli one? If there's proof, I'm open to hearing it, but tell me what it is, not that it exists.

And what invasion are you talking about?

[brumbar162]

Nazi yofic: you're full of it!

ALL OF ISRAEL IS BUILT ON PAL HOMES!

israel even now still confiscates Pals homes & land INSIDE israel. Pals are barred from 93% of israeli land. jews only even purchased 6% of Pal land-the rest was taken.

israel ethnically cleansed 777,000 Pals & Gaza, East Jerusalem & West bank are CONCENTRATION CAMPS.

israeli laws against Pals ARE worst than the Nuremberg Race laws!

Pals have no army, no defence-israelis are COWARDS!

You are a murderer & thief!

[waterroadtree324]

bumbar- i love you. yofic- youre an idiot. =)

[yofic]

Israel, "one of the most despicable regimes in history"? Really? Not maybe, Nazi Germany, which gruesomely and methodically murdered millions? Not maybe, Communist Russia, which brainwashed kids into turning parents in to the KGB? Not the Taliban, which cuts off thieves' hands, stones women accused of adultery, and throws acid on girls going to school? Not Hamas, which murders "informers" and people who listen to music, and trains toddlers in the art of war? None of those? Israel, really?

[Xavierandre]

not as bad as them but considering the expediences they went thru it makes it even worse theyre actin like the same nazis that committed the holocaust

[yofic]

Really, Xavierandre, that comeback was laughable. Firstly, you obviously need a refresher course on the Nazi era. Nazis starved people until they were sacks of bones. Nazis tore babies apart limb from limb. Nazis experimented on living, conscious children. Nazis tied women's legs together as they were giving birth. Do not EVER compare Israel with Nazis.

Second, it is ludicrous for you to say that because Jews were victims in the past they've lost their right to self-defense.

[3dbeing]

Just one more example of how Americans only care about doing the right thing when their money is disappearing, otherwise, they really don't care about anyone....

[Entaruadunexecutor]

The Palestinians lived under Ottoman jurisdiction. However, the Ottomans did not force the Palestinians to leave their homes like the Israels do or force them to live under a brutal military occupation. Furthermore, the Palestinians governed themselves in those days. Unlike the current Apartheid treatment.

And White Phosphorus is illegal when used in civilian areas. WP burns to the bone, and is virtually impossible for Gazan doctors to treat. Sometimes the wounds reignite many days later.

[yofic]

entaruadunexecutor:

It is NOT illegal to use WP in civilian areas; it's legality depends on the purpose for which it was used. It may not be used as a weapon against civilians, but it may be used to create smokescreens, etc.

[FlatulenceFox]

Is White Phosphorous an illegal weapon, like mustard gas or Sarin gas? Because if it is not then this story makes about as much sense as going to the town where they manufacture guns and asking the citizens there about how the guns are being used half way across the world. Obviously, these people have absolutely zero control over how Israel chooses to use the gas. And as the mayor about it was even more useless - although he did give a great answer I think.

[qualityrkc]

I agree not the peoples fault who make and sell the weapons but man oh man do I hate our relationship with Israel. These people both Israeli and Palestinians are childish scumbags and we should stay out of it. Israel is worse tho.

[funkyboodah]

this is stupid, if someone gets stabbed to death, do you sue the knife company?

[wabdinur]

Good point.

[tastybitepizza]

yes, that would be stupid. but the white phosphorous being manufactured here does not serve a secondary purpose off the battle field.

[tootshoe]

White ph is a joke, is nothing more than tear gas, I'd use it on Palestinains too if I saw those bastrads firing rockets at my country and holding signs saying "God Bless Hitler"

[rafyselles]

the point is not about where is made ,Is about it is ilegal the use of it at war ,is like weapon of mass destruction ,(nuclear bombs)no body else cant have them but we do.However israel actions is still unhuman.

[oceanbound222]

Izraelis = Hebrew speaking Nazis !!!!

[bigveasy]

take you anti-semitic filth somewhere else. the adults are talking now.

[DocumentaryDude]

Israel is 90% European.....they have killed and exterminated for the last 500 years, the Palestinians need to revolt or just wilt and be wiped out

[FlatulenceFox]

Although you are correct about Israelis being of mostly European descent, the rest of post is a bit of stretch. The current state of Israel has been around since 61 years and not 500 years. Your margin of error is pretty horrendous. In reality the Palestinians have lived under the domination of other Muslims (the Ottoman Turks) over most of the last 500 years than the any other power. The oppression by the Israelis is relatively new. Read some history.

[davidinfo13]

great reporting...but you can't really blame the people there in arkansas

[jackwwarwick]

Ignorance is a valid excuse, to continue after knowing the truth they are just as guilty. ...as am I and you.

[RapahelakaMac]

Do you hear the mayor buy into the old idea that the "conflict" or Israel ethnic cleansing has been going on for "ages" and "can't be solved"!1

[godshiva]

While I certainly don't agree with the use of white phosphorous - I think the mayor has a point. You don't not make a munition because it might be used improperly. If you stop making it, then they will find someone else to. Focus on politcal change and resolving conflict, not on the factory.

[artsci10]

Human Rights Watch says WP was used illegally as a weapons against personnel. The Red Crescent / Red Cross says WP was only used for illumination (ie, legally). This news report gives the impression that a warcrime was certainly committed, when the truth is still unclear.

[danmanjones]

They used it during the day time and had smoke shells if they wanted it for a smokescreen.

That argument is weak.

[mth71]

gaza, lol.

[RouletteRog]

I wouldn't blame the town of Pine Bluff for the sins of the Israeli government any more than I'd blame Detroit for someone in LA getting run over by a drunk guy in a Ford Mustang.

[JawSeven]

exactly...

[JJJadm]

his laughling,stupid brainless guy

[uru86]

The people in Pine Bluff are not to blame for the use of white phosphorous in Gaza, they are doing their job no matter how unethical it may be. The real people who should be held accountable are those in the corporate HQ who profit from the manufacture and sale of the weapon, and Israel who uses it in such a indiscriminate way. Although, I certainly think it is important to expose to the population of Pine Bluff and the US in general what their "aid" goes to.

[chalkies]

I like what they did here. It shows how human the manufacturers can be without necessarily condoning their practices.

This type of reporting adds depth to what's usually prescribed .

[Kamal767]

Good stuff.