Hamas leader killed, children killed too

Post #46,505 by marlowe 7/23/02 12:19:17 PM Reply	Hamas leader killed, children killed too [link\|http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2145267.stm\|Very messy] Excerpt: The militant Palestinian group Hamas has confirmed that the leader of its military wing has been killed in an Israeli air strike on a residential building in Gaza City. Sheikh Salah Shahada was among at least 15 people killed, including eight children, in the missile attack. I say: It's an ugly business when thugs hide behind children. Second guessing of the Israeli air force is inevitable, by reasonable people. They'll have to defend their tactics. Could they have handled this better? A commando raid, perhaps? Elsewhere, I see that Bush has condemned the attack. [link\|http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/marlowe/index.html\|http://www.angelfir...e/index.html] Everything's a mystery until you figure out how it works. Free Joel Mowbray! I'm a-gonna put a gun rack on my SUV.
Post #46,508 by boxley 7/23/02 12:28:26 PM Reply	This is to be condemned by all sides But the palestinians have to realize that it is their onerous occupation of israeli which is causing these rash acts. As soon as they withdraw from israel and recognise human rights of Israelis to exist will these attacks cease. Serious error in Judgement in my opinion only. thanx, bill ."Once, in the wilds of Afghanistan, I had to subsist on food and water for several weeks." W.C. Fields
Post #46,701 by Arkadiy 7/24/02 10:16:39 AM Reply	Israel is all in knots over it. NPR, which is way above any suspicion of pro-Israely feelings, reports that political parties "across the spectrum" (I wonder if it include religious right) condemned this horrible blunder. Newspapers are full of questions, investigation started. Have you ever seen similar reaction from Palestinians when Israeli infants are killed? Looks like democracy is attempting to heal itself. Will see how much success it has.
Post #46,546 by Brandioch 7/23/02 4:13:57 PM Reply	Residential building, after midnight. And you say he's hiding behind children?
Post #46,548 by boxley 7/23/02 4:19:30 PM Reply	They should be using the SAS Model that the Brits used in NI snipers in the badlands, that way you setup a couple of days ahead of a likely spot on a rooftop etc then a .50 into the body that will go thru any armoured vest. Gaza presents more of a challenge but an infiltration with a hard extraction team waiting on hand for the sniper and his spotter should work while minimising civilian casualties. thanx, bill ."Once, in the wilds of Afghanistan, I had to subsist on food and water for several weeks." W.C. Fields
Post #46,606 by Ashton 7/23/02 6:45:58 PM Reply	Murican as apple pie IF... one recalls merely the epithets gooks, buck-toothed Japs, slopes, ginks, chinks, etc. ad nauseum. One Murican cannon-fodder GI 'boy' is worth: 50? 100? 1000? of such humanoid non-Murican detritus: in How Many conflicts to date? (could we say.. 100% \ufffd 0.12% ?) Obviously the Israelis have a similar stochastic-weighting to Our Own - justified (as Ours, every time) by "the exigencies of conflict with Someone Against >\| US" someone == anyone What was that one about 'the mote in another's eye / the beam in one's own?' Ashton ain't consistency a gasser !?
Post #46,609 by Brandioch 7/23/02 7:07:12 PM Reply	Yup. I can understand that mentality. OUR's is always worth more than THEIR's. But to go beyond that and claim that someone was hiding behind children when they fired a missle into the apartment building he LIVED in. Lived as in "home" as in "wife and kids" as in "other families living there". Again, when you kill innocents to achieve your goals, you are no different from the "terrorists" you claim to be fighting. Or, rather, suppose I phrase it this way. When was the LAST time we or our allies did NOT launch an attack against a target because children were there? Translation: When was the last time that children were an effective shield?
Post #46,663 by Ashton 7/24/02 4:08:08 AM Reply	"collateral damage" - this ugly and premeditated event is different from the snap judgments of a fire fight. I suppose it points out for the nth time the utter hypocrisy of that phrase - whoever employs it to dissemble. Was the target fair game? I'd agree that he was. But at what cost ??? Gawd we Love our euphemisms. I suppose the people in that building.. passed away. Now what would we / anyone have paid in collateral damage to have assassinated Hitler? Stalin? [obviously we didn't offer enough] Answering that might bring some perspective also to: Just how many lives (of various races, nationalities) is a US person worth? a US person in uniform? a US executive? nurse? pregnant woman wanting an abortion? Librul? Conservative (ordinary or the endangered.. 'compassionate' species) ? yada and yada. (Betcha Someone.. has a Boolean formula already worked out) Ashton
Post #46,673 by boxley 7/24/02 6:37:00 AM Reply	Nit "But to go beyond that and claim that someone was hiding behind children when they fired a missle into the apartment building he LIVED in." He LIVED in a different apartment and or house every night staying in heavily populated areas because he knew he was a target. Not excusing the act but lets try to keep honest about it. If he lived in the same place all the time, his morning newspaper would have ignited a long time ago. thanx, bill ."Once, in the wilds of Afghanistan, I had to subsist on food and water for several weeks." W.C. Fields
Post #46,692 by Brandioch 7/24/02 9:42:13 AM Reply	When did that ever stop us or our allies? Really. When have we ever not attacked someone because the civilian casualties would be too high?
Post #46,628 by wharris2 7/23/02 9:53:10 PM Reply	2 reactions (a) The guy deserved it but a pity the innocent(?) children and others were killed, too. (b) Never stand next to a guy throwing shit at an armed opponent. I don't like "innocent" children (who, like all Palestinian children, were likely being indoctrinated into the "kill jews" cult) being killed, but living next or with Sheikh Salah Shahada, what do you expect? Famous last RPG quotes: "I'll just shoot this fireball down the dungeon passageway..."
Post #46,744 by marlowe 7/24/02 2:24:42 PM Reply	Small children are by definition innocent. They are below the age of accountability. They haven't enough self awareness and moral maturity to judge right from wrong as such. They pretty much believe what the grownups tell them. When a child is vicious and exceptionally stupid, I blame those who brought him up. You'd be amazed how often the parents turn out to be just as vicious and stupid. [link\|http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/marlowe/index.html\|http://www.angelfir...e/index.html] Everything's a mystery until you figure out how it works. Free Joel Mowbray! I'm a-gonna put a gun rack on my SUV.
Post #46,748 by orion 7/24/02 2:40:59 PM Reply	Never had any kids, did you? Especially boys, can be rough at times. They will hit you, and climb on you, and pinch you, and bite you, and slap you, and kick you in the groin for no apparent reason. They know what they are doing is wrong, but they do it anyway and smile about it after they do it. After telling them that it is wrong, staring them in the eyes and talking about it, they will turn around and do it again. Maybe not all boys, by my 3 year old sure seems to do this to me a lot. He's smarter than the other kids in his Mini-School, and his teacher says that he scored 100% in all tests for his age. He knows right from wrong, and will tell me when something is wrong. Yet at times, he just attacks me for no reason because he thinks it is funny. I am not sure what to do with him, and I am at my witts end most of the time. Time outs, talking to, spankings, etc do not seem to work. Still I am not teaching him to be this way, unlike other parents which train their three year olds to shoot guns or take a bomb into a crowded group. So where does the innocence end? Does it matter if some 30 year old or 3 year old does a suicide bombing? *I am free now, to choose my own destiny.*
Post #46,778 by wharris2 7/24/02 9:24:31 PM Reply	Re: Never had any kids, did you? So where does the innocence end? Does it matter if some 30 year old or 3 year old does a suicide bombing? I'm not qualified to say (I'm not a father), but I think any kid under the age of six is a monster tolerated for the sake of continuing the human species. The age of accountability may come before that with exceptional children. The age of accountability may come far, far, far after that. But in general 6 years seems to be when a kid starts understanding things (and I think it's no coincidence that 6 seems to be a magical number for 1st grade.)
Post #46,837 by Arkadiy 7/25/02 12:31:03 PM Reply	I am a father of twins, and I have to disagree. My kids (4 at the moment) don't do thigs to hurt me or anger me. They do things because they are curious, mostly. Once I tell them to stop, they do stop (ok, twice or three times I tell them to stop). But then again, I try not to stop them too often. Experience at 4 is more valuable than at 34 (well, 31).
Post #46,834 by marlowe 7/25/02 12:24:30 PM Reply	Better nip that in the bud. Just talking won't do it. First get their respect, then you can program them as you see fit. (Whether the programming will hold into adulthood is another question. Free will starts seriously to kick in around puberty.) And you don't get a kid's respect by just talking. They need reinforcement, both positive and negative. If you don't mold his behavior, someone else will. At that age, right and wrong are less than abstractions. They're just a catechism. Words. Sounds made with the mouth. Rote questions, rote answers. Comprehension is another thing entirely. [link\|http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/marlowe/index.html\|http://www.angelfir...e/index.html] Everything's a mystery until you figure out how it works. Free Joel Mowbray! I'm a-gonna put a gun rack on my SUV.
Post #46,838 by orion 7/25/02 12:31:23 PM Reply	How do I get his respect? He doesn't seem to respect anybody or anything. *I am free now, to choose my own destiny.*
Post #46,841 by Andrew Grygus 7/25/02 12:46:33 PM 7/25/02 12:58:33 PM Reply	(scratch) Ooops - didn't read that sequence carefully enough. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx] Edited by Andrew Grygus July 25, 2002, 12:58:33 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #46,843 by Arkadiy 7/25/02 12:53:35 PM 7/25/02 12:56:43 PM Reply	Re: How do I get his respect? Just the way you get an adult's respect: by being honest, by keeping your word, by respecting the child. Any method you use has to be used with respect for the child. Never attempt to change his behavior for your convinience alone. That said, my method (I started to apply it when they were old enough to walk) of coping with lack of obedience is to slowly count to 3, repeating the request after every count. 1, 2, 2 and 1/2, 3. If the word "three" is said, it does not matter whether the child does as he is told: a punishment follows no matter what. Of course, the compliance is still requered after punshement. It used to be spanking, now it's mostly sending them (twins) up to their room, or not taking the guilty party somewhere and so on. Things go to "three" no more that once a month nowadays. There was one moment when one of the kids (he was 3 then) obviously tried to break the system. I think it was drawing on the walls that brought the challenge. After being told not to do it many times (more than 3 :) ), He was given a final notice: once again, and some pain will happen. So he scrawled something once again, and got spanked. I asked him if he understood. "No" was the answer. I administered a more severe dose, and asked again. "No" again. After the third attempt, he broke into tears. We hugged 50 seconds later, and the question was settled. (I wish I could say that they never drew on walls again... But next time around, punishment was accepted as justified, w/o defiance. And it only happens couple times a year, not every other day, And I don't have to spank them any more.) Now, that may seem cold and cruel. I do not see it that way from the inside. I hope dearly that the kids don't see it so. Time will tell. But for now, there seems to be some rather pleasant balance reached in the family. Overall, just use your head. I don't remember who said it: "A commander can only get pissed in front of his troop for show". You can only get mad at a kid for show. If you are mad for real, run away as fast as you can. You'll regret whatever you've done in anger. Come back when you're calmer. Praise is unlimited, unless it's incincere. Anger must be incincere at all times. Edited by Arkadiy July 25, 2002, 12:56:43 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #46,907 by Ashton 7/25/02 8:10:33 PM Reply	Wise words. Especially re the essential! insincerity of 'anger' before a child. I think that's the clearest I've ever heard this put. (And indeed - adults may need those famous time outs even more than the kiddies) Kudos, Ashton
Post #46,923 by Silverlock 7/25/02 9:42:13 PM Reply	Simplicity works well Lay down the rules. Then you have to follow them. You can't expect a child to follow rules if you don't. If you say "don't do this or you will be punished" and then don't deliver punishment when they do, expect constant trouble. "...the problem with the French is that they don\ufffdt have a word for entrepreneur." George W. Bush
Post #46,787 by Andrew Grygus 7/24/02 10:27:55 PM Reply	Bull I've never had kids, but I have a very good memory going all the way back to year one, and I remember exactly what kind of lying, manipulative, destructive, mean, self centered son-of-bitch I was, in detail. And I was a very good boy, comparitively. I understand girls are differently viscious, but really not much better. Maybe that's why I've never had kids. Most adults seem to have drunk the water of forgetfulness somewhere between 18 and 22, and can't remember childhood. I guess this is natures way of assuring a next generation. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #46,844 by Arkadiy 7/25/02 1:00:22 PM Reply	Bull indeed. I remember my childhood well starting from around 4. I was self-centered, may be, but none of the other stuff. And, until I went to school at 7, I don't remember seeing a lot of other kids of the sort you describe. Later, in school, herd mentality sets in, and little mosters are abundant. But not in the early years.
Post #46,847 by Andrew Grygus 7/25/02 1:34:22 PM Reply	Nostalgia . . It's fun bringing up some of those old memories. One of my favorites (age unknown, but at least a year before kindergarten) when I ran away from home (no particular reason, just for the adventure of it). I remember deliberately sliding down the ice of a frozen brook to make sure I left no tracks in the snow that could be followed. Someone found me wating patiently at a bus stop on a local highway, captured me, and took me home. Damn buses - always late! [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #46,852 by Arkadiy 7/25/02 2:04:01 PM Reply	Yep I once ran away from nursery school (I thihk I was 5). With a buddy, no less. A girl dared us to do it :) Did not have any better things to do than going home. My mom turned it into an object lesson of why lying is worse than actually misbehaving. Backside hurts more.
Post #46,674 by dmarker2 7/24/02 6:37:53 AM 7/24/02 6:41:33 AM Reply	Re: Children Killed ? This may well be true, events as they unfold may clarify the accuracy of the claim. For my part, as abhorent as night attacks on civillian areas are, they are no more and no less abhorent than human bombs blasting unsuspecting bypassers to heaven. The Palestinans are unfortunately notorious for greatly exaggerating their claims of suffering whilst greatly diminishing their own acts of terror and barbarism against both adults and children. When did HAMAS begin training their walking bombs or gunmen to avoid Israeli children & babies. I am so cynical that I am expecting that their claims may prove 3/8ths true as in ... 3 children did die - and that would be terrible, but the other 5 of the claimed child deaths may turn out to be adults not that that makes the deed any more palitable, just greatly diminishes the propaganda claims these people tend to make. If they can sing from the rooftops that the Israelis killed many Palestinian children (even if not quite true) they will do it. They only need other Arabs to believe them - doesn't matter as much what we think. I have listened to the Palestian spokesman ranting almost incoherently at times, about the evil & barbarous acts of the Israelis, and when asked by the interviewer about the Palestinian bombers, brush that aside as if it is irrelevant. Either way it is the Israelis that are really responsible. It seems as if these people cannot connect the effects of their own deeds to the responses of the Israeli authorities. One thread of converstaion the Palestinian spokesman blathered on with was how HAMAS had agreed to talk to about peace but that this horrible deed destroyed that goodwill and Israel was entirely to blame - seems to me he is asking me to turn my brain off if he expects me to believe HAMAS has any ounce of goodwill toward Israelis or understands what it takes to move toward a lasting peace in the area. THAMAS may excel at attempts at 'putting out fires with gasoline'. Almost every time any peace was approached in the past bewteen PA and Israelis, HAMAS sent in another human bomb to torpedo the event. Cheers Doug Marker Edited by dmarker2 July 24, 2002, 06:41:33 AM EDT Expand All History
Post #46,695 by Brandioch 7/24/02 9:53:02 AM Reply	But that's the problem. For my part, as abhorent as night attacks on civillian areas are, they are no more and no less abhorent than human bombs blasting unsuspecting bypassers to heaven. What differentiates us from the terrorists then?
Post #46,706 by screamer 7/24/02 11:07:39 AM Reply	One major difference The Israeli's hit their target and took him out. The others were "collateral damage". The target was a combatant. When Hamas sends their fodder out to blow themselves up, the children frequently ARE the targets... That's the major distinction... This same distinction is something that you seem to blur with our actions in Afghanistan as well. By definition, you can't have "collateral damage" if your target is noncombatants (see the World Trade Center)... You can in Afghanistan when bombs miss their targets (their targets being combatants). Just a few thoughts, Screamer As soon as you're born they make you feel small By giving you no time instead of it all Till the pain is so big you feel nothing at all J. Lennon - Working Class Hero
Post #46,707 by mhuber 7/24/02 11:13:43 AM Reply	The target matters When a suicide bomber blows up a pizza place, the capacity of Israel to kill is not reduced. In this attack, there is at least the hope that the Hamas capacity to organize attacks is reduced. Yes, it was ugly. But if it takes Hamas an extra week to organize the next round of suicide bombings, lives have been saved, without valuing lives on one side over those on another. There is the question of retaliation, but that only matters if Hamas isn't already killing as fast as they can. I'm sure there will be "dead is dead" in the reply, but there is a moral difference between attacking an enemy's military assets - including command and control - and attacking a population for raw body count and pain. For Israel to win, the Palestineans have to stop killing people. For Hamas to win, all the Jews have to be gone. The two positions are not moraly equivalent. This is a war, and one side has the option to end it at any time. ---- United we stand Divided we dominate the planet without really trying
Post #46,717 by Brandioch 7/24/02 12:04:00 PM Reply	That's how it always is. This is a war, and one side has the option to end it at any time. That is how it is in every war. When one side surrenders, the war is over. When a suicide bomber blows up a pizza place, the capacity of Israel to kill is not reduced. That's not entirely accurate. The Israeli's capacity to kill is just as reduced after a suicide attack as the Palestinian's capacity to kill is reduced after that attack. In this attack, there is at least the hope that the Hamas capacity to organize attacks is reduced. Let's not deal with hope. But if it takes Hamas an extra week to organize the next round of suicide bombings, lives have been saved, without valuing lives on one side over those on another. Not saved. Their deaths have been delayed. Don't forget, because the Israeli's show not restraint in killing children, this will convert more people to suicide bombing. I'm sure there will be "dead is dead" in the reply, but there is a moral difference between attacking an enemy's military assets - including command and control - and attacking a population for raw body count and pain. That is true. But that is not the case here. A sniper killing him would be morally superiour to suicide bombers. Again, being the "good" guys means that you can't take the same actions as the "bad" guys. For Israel to win, the Palestineans have to stop killing people. For Hamas to win, all the Jews have to be gone. The two positions are not moraly equivalent. I didn't say they were. It's the actions taken that are the problem. You can have a morally superiour position, yet perform immoral actions to achieve that goal. The end does not justify the means.
Post #46,724 by rsf 7/24/02 12:32:37 PM Reply	Q for you Do you feel that are no situations where we (the US, the good guys, etc.) should not kill non-combatants? Ray
Post #46,747 by Brandioch 7/24/02 2:36:54 PM Reply	No. Do you feel that are no situations where we (the US, the good guys, etc.) should not kill non-combatants? No, I don't. Let me remove some of the negatives. "Do you feel that there are situations where we (the US, the good guys, etc.) should kill non-combatants?" Yes, I do. And I've already been over that. In WW2, we had to bomb factories that were in towns and cities and our weapons were not accurate enough to specifically destroy said factories (not to mention some of them were working day and night) and we inflicted civilian casualties. And, as I've already stated, I do not view anti-terrorist operations as military operations. Taking out a factory in a city is a strategic military operation. Firing a missle at an apartment building to kill one criminal is not. An example would be if the NYPD decided to bomb a restaraunt because a known mob boss was eating there.
Post #46,754 by rsf 7/24/02 3:40:17 PM Reply	Analogy doesn't hold An example would be if the NYPD decided to bomb a restaraunt because a known mob boss was eating there. Is this mob boss trying to drive the Jews out of by NY by force? Is this mob boss organizing suicide bombers to carry out attacks in major NY institutions? And an increasing number of those bombers are teenagers and may be younger? (If the Pals view their children as expendable combatants, why should we shed a tear? Besides, how many potential suicide bomber lives will be spared by cutting the heads off of Hamas, Islamic Jhihad, etc. before they can organize the next wave of bombings?) Is this restaurant in a borough where the population supports the mob and just about every male over 12 in the area has a Kalashnikov and wouldn't hesitate to fire it on a cop (echos of Black Hawk Down here!). If these conditions were true, do you think we would be treating this as a simple police operation? Kind of hard to recite the Miranda Rights while RPG's are exploding around you. Ray
Post #46,760 by Brandioch 7/24/02 4:53:12 PM Reply	It does hold. Is this mob boss trying to drive the Jews out of by NY by force? He's driving out other criminal organizations. Is this mob boss organizing suicide bombers to carry out attacks in major NY institutions? He's ordering the deaths of others. And an increasing number of those bombers are teenagers and may be younger? Why does the age matter? (If the Pals view their children as expendable combatants, why should we shed a tear? Besides, how many potential suicide bomber lives will be spared by cutting the heads off of Hamas, Islamic Jhihad, etc. before they can organize the next wave of bombings?) Okay, every Palestinian in Gaza has the exact same views as every other Palestinian in Gaza. Right? Wrong. What ONE organization views children as has ZERO relevence to how OTHER people view children and EVEN LESS RELEVENCE to how WE should treat children. Is this restaurant in a borough where the population supports the mob and just about every male over 12 in the area has a Kalashnikov and wouldn't hesitate to fire it on a cop (echos of Black Hawk Down here!). Are you saying that in such a circumstance you would agree with the missle strike? There are neighborhoods in the US where gang activity is similar to what you describe. Yet we don't do military strikes against their leaders. If these conditions were true, do you think we would be treating this as a simple police operation? Kind of hard to recite the Miranda Rights while RPG's are exploding around you. Nice visual. But wouldn't the RPG's also kill the leader who was being detained? The analogy is correct. A person who is a leader of a criminal organization that orders the deaths of innocents is in a public building. The age of the people doing the killing does not matter. Whether they are suicides or not does not matter. What his goals are do not matter. Whether he has lots of friendlies around him does not matter. Do we launch an attack that we KNOW will kill innocents in the surrounding area just so we can kill him? The end does not justify the means.
Post #46,779 by wharris2 7/24/02 9:30:56 PM Reply	Problem. Not saved. Their deaths have been delayed. Don't forget, because the Israeli's show not restraint in killing children, this will convert more people to suicide bombing. Maybe, maybe not. The favorite Sesame-street like show on Palestinian television shows Palestinians glad to blow up Jews. I don't think a single incident will change years or decades of indoctrination, just provide more fodder for people elsewhere lending or supporting Palestinians vs. Israel.
Post #46,781 by ChrisR 7/24/02 9:44:45 PM Reply	Time for the ICC to step in? I suspect that this will probably be the first case brought before the new International Criminal Court. Be a great showcase to see how the ICC can (or can't) be used as a political instrument. One other thought occurs to me. The U.S. did something similar when it tried to take out Qaddafi years ago - bombing his home, knowing that others would also be in and around the house - missing Qaddafi but killing several of his family members.
Post #46,783 by wharris2 7/24/02 9:57:47 PM Reply	Results Qaddafi (your spelling, mileage may very, translated spellings can get strange) was very quiet after that. We showed we were willing to use force and kill whoever we had to kill to get Q. We failed in our attempt, but the message was clear: "Mess with us, and you are messing with people crazier than you." Famous last RPG quotes: "I'll just shoot this fireball down the dungeon passageway..."
Post #46,826 by dmarker2 7/25/02 11:24:28 AM Reply	Re: Kaddafi (Qadaffi, etc:) The deceased were his 'adopted' children - what I call Arab propaganda - some poor kids died but the propaganda claimed they were his kids - facts conflicted so they became his 'adopted' children. Arabs seem to so often spoil good facts with fiction & that results in their facts getting lost. Message to Kaddafi was to stop supplying terrorists with arms & funds & it also included the IRA who he was aiding at that time. Cheers Doug
Post #46,817 by boxley 7/25/02 10:33:08 AM Reply	How can the ICC put sharon in the doc without putting arafat next to him? Both gave orders to others to attack. Both are documented. Would be a tad onesided I would think. thanx, bill ."Once, in the wilds of Afghanistan, I had to subsist on food and water for several weeks." W.C. Fields

Welcome to IWETHEY!