Indiscriminate slaughter from the air is a barbarism that must be abolished

[subsuelo]

Those killing from the air need have no sight of the carnage they unleash. They are placed at both a geographical and a moral distance, with a licence allowed no soldier on the ground. Whether they are dispatching free-fall bombs or GPS-guided missiles, tank shells or predator drones, Hamas's Qassam rockets or improvised explosive devices, they know they often miss their targets, but they launder any carnage as "collateral damage" and leave politicians to handle the backlash. The soldier shrugs and walks away, with no obligation to humanity beyond the occasional apology and a reference to the other side being just as bad.

If gas, landmines, chemical weapons and cluster munitions are now banned - a ban broadly obeyed by most civilised armies - why not aerial bombardment? Instead, bombing is becoming ever more prevalent. It precedes any operation, as a sort of overture, and eagerly takes part in each tactical twist. Counter-insurgency war, in Iraq and Afghanistan, has seen western armies take heavy casualties. But such is the political aversion to them that Israeli, American and British ground forces operate under strict "force protection" rules to minimise losses.

If Israel fails to win its political objectives in Gaza, it will in part be because of its massively destructive attempt to terrify the Palestinians into surrender from the air. Every errant missile explodes on the television screens of the world.

In the complex politics of war, these weapons are like torture. They numb moral sensibility and do harm beyond all justification of victory. They should be abolished. If we wish to kill other people for whatever reason, we should use only weapons that kill the right ones.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/16/gaza-aerial-bombing-david-miliband">The Guardian - read more

[DogPoundPup]

1. White Phosphorous and Dense Inert Metal Explosives: Is Israel Using Banned and Experimental Munition

Israel is coming under increasing criticism for its possible use of banned and experimental munitions. Human Rights Watch has accused Israel of illegally firing white phosphorous, which causes horrific burns if it comes in contact with the skin, over crowded refugee camps in Gaza. Medics and human rights groups are also reporting that they are seeing injuries distinctive of another controversial weapon, Dense Inert Metal Explosive, known as DIME, that was designed by the US Air Force in 2006. Those struck by the weapon who survive suffer severe mutilations and internal injuries. We go to the Gaza border to speak with Marc Garlasco of Human Rights Watch and to Norway to speak with Dr. Mads Gilbert, who just returned from the Shifa Hospital in Gaza City. He says Gaza is “truly a scene from Dante’s Inferno.” .............

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/1/14/white_phosphorous_and_dense_inert_metal

[Duckhunter935]

3. (DIME) is uniquely suited for Low Collateral Damage.

Dense Inert Metal Explosive (DIME) is uniquely suited for Low Collateral Damage. It produces lower pressure but increased impulse in the near field. Far Field damage is reduced (no frags/ impulse rolloff). The lethal footprint can be tuned to precision footprint.

They should just keep using conventional munitions

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/dime.htm

[DogPoundPup]

4. Yet, it is highly carcinogenic and harmful to the environment. Doctors in Gaza noticed cases

of amputated limbs with evidence of intense heat at the point of amputation but no shrapnel. It shred’s the body in pieces. If the person lives they will develop Cancer and Leukemia.

Your excuses for this are as sickening as the weapon itself.

[Duckhunter935]

5. I see no excuses, I just posted information not opinion

Please do not put words in my mouth.

Both sides need to stop this crazyness. Hamas needs to stop the rockets andd morter and suicide bombers and Israel needs to stop thier attacks and open the borders to allow aid (not weapons)and goods and people out of Gaza

[ProgressiveProfessor]

19. No verified existence of fielded DIME weapons

*NONE*

[DogPoundPup]

9. your 'information' is deceiving info posted over and over when you know

full well or should by now that it isn't low collateral when used in a densely populated area as the evidence has shown.

http://youngfoxredux.blogspot.com/2009/01/take-walk-through-gaza.html

[Duckhunter935]

13. OK nice pictures, how do you know dime was used in any of these?

I just go to a reputable source for info on the type of munitions that you were complaining about and do not know the purpose of them. They have been developed to limit collateral damage. All I said is would you have them use conventional and not even try to limit the casualties. Some of you people post things that you have no idea about and do not even think about the other side of your point of view.

I think both sides are wrong as I have said many times before!!!!!!!

ISRAEL needs to stop

HAMAS needs to stop

[Duckhunter935]

14. and how is it deceiving, your pictures can be seen as deceiving

Can you prove DIME was used in any of those or are you just speculating without proof?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

28. Your lack of knowledge of the effects of air lauched ordnance is breathtaking

*IF* DIME weapons existed, they would cause *lower* collateral damage than standard ordnance. Of course no one has said they have fielded them yet, so its just theoretical

[ProgressiveProfessor]

18. No evidence for DIME

[EFerrari]

21. A group of Italian docs are looking into it. They can't verify

while their access is blocked. The salient text is mid p. 2 of this Christian Science Monitor article. Every time I try to post it, I get a page load error.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0114/p07s01-wome.html?page=2

[ProgressiveProfessor]

33. I've read the article previously

Several other pubs are saying about the same thing, but the seminal source is Mads Gilbert who is a controversial at this point.

What supports DIME is that there is a new wound pattern that has not been seen before. However, without scene context, that claim is little more than conjecture. As I see it today, Occam's razor says its most likely not DIME.

[EFerrari]

47. What is the story on Gilbert? Someone elsed mentioned that

but maybe it was too late at night but all I could find were articles at right wing sites like LGF and FR and I won't go there.

As I understand it, the Italian group is looking at photographs. But, it's not the same as being on scene.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

49. One of the recent videos he made looked faked to some medical types

not just the political sites. It was taken off YouTube and elsewhere. There is some comment at sites other the LGF, though that looks to be the only place the video is still up. Part of it involved CPR being done to a dying(?) child as I recall. Gilbert clearly has a political agenda, but the video had lots of people jumping on him, not just political opponents. Whether the video if fake or real, the is a significant smear on his name at this point and he is no longer being taken seriously or appearing on the M$M.

If DIME is really out there (which I doubt), there will be other ways to document it, not just Gilbert.

[EFerrari]

50. I can't discount what he's saying based on a video at LGF.

There has been an effort to smear him. I was just wondering if any of it was true. As far as having a political agenda, most of the people who have worked in Gaza seem to be furious. He's certainly not the only one.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

51. Whether he faked something or not, he is now discounted and has lost his standing with the MSM

Just being pragmatic, with out agreeing with it or not. If the claims he made were true, it will come out.

[EFerrari]

52. Yep. It will come out in the wash.

[Behind the Aegis]

23. They don't need evidence.

[subsuelo]

2. Not only is it barbaric

It's also cowardly. Just saying. Riding around in a jet fighter pushing buttons that fire missiles on crowded population centers -- how much more pathetic and cowardly can you get? The scum of humanity that do this would probably turn and run if a kitten purred at them the wrong way

[hack89]

6. Are suicide bombers at the other end of your moral spectrum?

they get nice and close.

[razors edge]

11. That would depend,

are we talking blowing up innocent civilians or military targets?

One thing you have to give them, they have more invested in their tactic than the fighter pilots over secure airspace.

[Duckhunter935]

15. How many military targets have they gone after? % of total?

[razors edge]

16. About equal to what the fighter pilots have

I'd say. But the pilots are doing 250 sorties a day, when was the last day 250 suicide bombers hit?

When was the last time one hit for that matter?

[hack89]

26. There is a reason no suicide bombers have hit in a while

perhaps Israel understands how to secure their borders after all.

[razors edge]

36. That would be giving Israel much undeserved credit.

There is one other possibility...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/apr/09/israel

Hamas in call to end suicide bombings

Hamas is to abandon its use of suicide bombers, who have killed almost 300 Israelis, in any future confrontations with Israel, its activists have told The Observer.

The Islamic group, which leads the Palestinian Authority, says, however, that it may resort to other forms of violence if there is no progress towards Palestinian statehood.

Yihiyeh Musa, a Hamas member of the Palestinian Legislative Council, said Hamas had moved into a 'new era' which did not require suicide attacks.

'The suicide bombings happened in an exceptional period and they have now stopped,' he said. 'They came to an end as a change of belief.'

As Hamas toned down its rhetoric, Israel increased pressure on the Palestinians, particularly in Gaza. Two militants were killed in an airstrike near Gaza City yesterday and five men and a five-year-old boy were killed on Friday night.


Edit: BTW, why don't you answer the Fockin question, when was the last time 250 suicide bombers struck Israel in a single day?

[The Magistrate]

37. The Problem With That, Sir

Is that by the time this statement came, the success rate in such attacks had trickled off to a very small percentage. Of the last four such attacks, in 2005, two were at border check-points, and the Israelis had thwarted at least two dozen attacks through various security measures, leaving a success rate of no more than one in seven attempts. Obviously, when something no longer works, a clever man will try and make some propaganda capital out of halting an endeavor, but there is no need to take him seriously....

[razors edge]

43. Indeed,

Israel did improve it's intervention, but that is not the only reason the tactic has completely disappeared. I believe in giving credit where credit is due.

Here in Toledo we had a Saturday Night Special hand gun ban, while it was never stated as the reason for such, it had the effect of removing protection options from the poor and underprivileged who live in our inner city. Many, including those who supported the ban, saw it as a way of keeping guns out of the hands of African Americans.

If an occupied people are left with no option but to retaliate with unguided missiles, that is a product of the conditions of their occupation. It may be counterproductive to do so, but that is for the occupied people to decide.

On edit: Do you think that after this latest attempt by Israel to bomb Hamas into submission fails, the Israelis will abandon a demonstrably failed tactic, as did Hamas with the suicide bombings?

[The Magistrate]

44. Actually, Sir

The rockets are much superior to sending people out to immolate themselves among crowds of non-combatants as a tool for the purpose of the militants. It is the rockets' very material ineffectiveness that makes them so. The provocation of firing them over time is sufficient to guarantee that eventually a democratic government will take military measures to seek to end their firing, but their employment does not leave any great piles of corpses littered about in public places to stir the blood of spectators, and for the state assailed to point to as irrefutable proof of the character and intent of its enemy.

In examining matters of this sort, Sir, it is well to leave aside the idea anyone is acting from anything but ruthless calculation of their own advancement at the other's expense....

"Revolution is not a tea party."

[razors edge]

45. Indeed.

But that still leaves one with the inescapable choice of which side we support, and as Rush (the band, not the pill boy) so prophetically put it, "If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice."

You will find me on the side of the oppressed, if that situation reverses itself, so will I.

[The Magistrate]

46. The Formula Is Not So Neat As That, Sir

Poor choices have bad outcomes, and supporting a continuing course of poor choices does not help those who make them.

[razors edge]

48. Exactly.

And one need look no further than the detrimental effects our nation now suffers to see that we have chosen the wrong course on this issue, and many others as well.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

31. Suicide bombers almost always hit civilians

Occasionally a checkpoint but even most of those seemed to be because they were about to be discoverd

[LeftishBrit]

24. Not cowardly exactly, as fighter pilots can and do often get killed in wars

They're hardly in a place of safety.

However, it is true that people are more likely to perpetrate evil acts if they are far away from their victims. The notorious Milgram 'obedience' experiments showed this clearly.

I would hope that aerial bombardment will be outlawed. It's hardly a new technique, or restricted to the Middle East (been around as long as aeroplanes have, and was a strong feature of WW2 - the London Blitz; our own bombing of Dresden). But it is nasty.

[razors edge]

53. But they are not engageing as fighter pilots.

A fighter pilot engages the enemy in the air, such as in a dog fight.

There is most likely not a single pilot on active duty for Israel who has actually went head to head with another aircraft intent and capable of shooting him, or anyone else for that matter, out of the sky.

They may be trained as fighter pilots, but they are in fact performing the duties of bomber pilots, which they are also trained for.

There are no SAMs in GAZA, no Stinger missiles, no surface to air capabilities to speak of whatsoever.

That makes them bomber pilots with total air superiority.

Fish in a barrel.

[bemildred]

7. Bombing, any kind of bombing, is indiscriminate.

The bigger the bomb, the more indiscriminate it is.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

29. Far from true

This is not carpet bombing or shelling. The weapons are clearly aimed. Most of the time the rationale for the target is clear. Some places that that is questionable. Some fraction of the damage would have been done in error due to misses, bad targeting data, weapon system failures, etc..

[bemildred]

34. Bah!

The whole point of a bomb is that it blows up and makes a big mess, that you don't have to aim that close, you get a lot of damage with one shot. If you want precision, you use bullets.

It certainly true that back in the old days carpet bombing was the only way to be sure you hit something, and it's a good thing on the whole that bombs can be well-aimed now, but the big mess at the end is still the attraction of the whole project, not "precision".

[ProgressiveProfessor]

38. Humbug

The point of a bomb is to destroy its target. For that precision is required or you use larger quantities or more powerful bombs. There is quite a bit of science and analysis behind that (its called weaponeering). The goal is not the big mess, its the destruction of the target for the desired amount of time with associated risk and collateral damage

For example. I want to turn off the electrical power to an area. I could:
- Destroy the dam that generates the power (and get all the down stream damage)
- Destroy the turbines at the dam (custom made, years to replace)
- Destroy the switching station where the power from the dam is routed through (6 months to replace)
- Take out the transmission lines (2 weeks to repair)
- Determine the effect I need
- Determine likely and worst case collateral damage
- Evaluate the defenses in the area and what risk they pose to the strikers
.
.
.


The average pilot gets his weapons closer to target more often and more reliably than most infantrymen do.

[bemildred]

39. Now we are arguing about nomenclature.

Context matters. Bombs are not a discriminating way to kill people, especially when they are used in urban areas. They might be in the context of destroying a dam, but even there placed explosives are better. You could make an argument that bombs are discriminating if nothing less would do the job, and the job is a discriminating job, so to speak, but dropping bombs on people is not discriminating, it just kills big indiscriminate batches of them.

[The Magistrate]

40. Indeed, Sir: The Size Of The Hole Left Does Matter

And it is fairly hard to find space big enough for them that does not also contain someone besides the precise target in the circumstances of Gaza at present.

[bemildred]

41. And you don't pound nails with a sledgehammer, if you care much about the finish. nt

[The Magistrate]

42. Sledge-Hammers Are Fun, Though, Sir

Do not get me started on my old favorite among all implements humankind has ever invented....

[scarletwoman]

8. That's what outrages me the most -- the act of dropping bombs on people who have no defense against

them.

The Palestinians have no air force, no "missile defense system", no early warning system.

It is TOTALLY barbaric! Just as what the U.S. did in Iraq was totally barbaric.

sw

[ProgressiveProfessor]

20. There has been past evidence of manpads

[hack89]

27. Then perhaps they shouldn't have started a war

they couldn't win?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

30. You labor under the misunderstaning that war is fair

The London Blitz, the invasion of the Lowlands. The bombing in Germany, the bombing of Japan (conventional and nuclear).

[Rage for Order]

10. Indiscriminate?

:rofl:

[ima_sinnic]

22. wow, now that is really a sick sense of humor

sheesh. disgusting.

[Rage for Order]

35. I'm laughing at the notion that Israel's bombing has been "indiscriminate"

If Israel was bombing Gaza indiscriminately the entire place would be a parking lot by now

[mmonk]

12. Sorry but modern warfare is precisely about mass casualties

on civilian populations by air or missle. Scorched earth. Think Sherman on steroids.

[Sanctified]

17. The worst War Crimes in History have always taken place with Soldiers on the Ground. n/t

[LeftishBrit]

25. Always? I don't doubt that most have...

especially as most wars in history have been fought in this way.

But what about the atom bomb for example?

[Sanctified]

32. Well the Atomic Bomb was never officially called a War Crime.

Just like the Fire Bombings of Dresden and Tokyo were never called War Crimes, guess it's one of the perks of winning a war.

But even as bad as the Atomic Bombs were it is estimated that more civilians were killed during the Rape of Nanking than died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.