Human Rights Watch: Israeli soldiers shoot and kill fleeing civilians.

Gaza: Israeli Soldiers Shoot and Kill Fleeing Civilians.

(Gaza) – Israeli forces in the southern Gaza town of Khuza’a fired on and killed civilians in apparent violation of the laws of war in several incidents between July 23 and 25, 2014. Deliberate attacks on civilians who are not participating in the fighting are war crimes.

Israeli forces provided general warnings to Khuza’a residents to leave the area prior to July 21.

While the laws of war encourage “advance, effective warnings” of attacks, the failure of civilians to abide by warnings does not make them lawful targets of attack – for obvious reasons, since many people do not flee because of infirmity, fear, lack of a place to go, or any number of other reasons.

The remaining presence of such civilians despite a warning to flee cannot be ignored when attacks are carried out, as Israeli forces have done previously.

“Warning families to flee fighting doesn’t make them fair targets just because they’re unable to do so, and deliberately attacking them is a war crime,” Whitson said.

Whats there to say. Very very sad if true.

Can only hope that these leaders and their soldiers are held accountable for their actions.

Looking at this panorama of the town in the OP, it's a wonder really that people survived at all but apparently they were given a 7 hour "get out of dodge" window. www.telegraph.co.uk...

a reply to: gladtobehere

Lets just hope that Palestine is able to become a member of the ICC without any issues and.. and just maybe those responsible will see their day in court. A precedent must be set.. and example needs to be made.

a reply to: WhiteAlice

that panorama is crazy... it's almost as if they are trying to clear the land for new construction and possible occupation in the near future.

Forgive my ignorance, but is HRW a credible source? Do they lean to a certain side on this issue?

Ok I'm trying to understand something...

The Hamas invade people living space and shoot rockets at Israel...

Israel gives a warning that they're going to bomb an area...

Hamas leaves, probably telling the family if they attempt to flee, they'll shoot them. Or the people can't leave because they're infirm, or any number of reasons. Still plenty of time for Hamas to get their people out of there, while the innocent civilians are stuck. So as said Hamas leaves.

Israel bombs the area. Houses, schools, whatever, is destroyed, as are any innocents still stuck there for any reason. Chance that any members of Hamas were harmed, practically nil. Chances that Hamas made this attack using anything they probably couldn't leave with in under 7 hours, probably non existent.

So other than destroying schools, homes, and civilian infrastructure, as well as killing civilians who cannot flee. What exactly is this doing to combat Hamas?

I would really like to know, WHAT is this accomplishing?

The only way this works to eliminate Israel's enemies is when all of Gaza and everyone in it is dead.

Is slow systematic slaughter with only one possible end as long as this horrible inverse game of mine sweeper is being played.

a reply to: gladtobehere

While the laws of war encourage “advance, effective warnings” of attacks,

huh? What law of war is that? You ever heard of a town in Germany named Dresden? How about Hiroshima or Nagasaki? Did Japan call Hawaii before it attacked on December 7th, 1941? If the Palestinians would stop Hamas from shooting rockets at Israel they wouldn't get their ass kicked during a limited invasion. They were invaded because they keep attacking Israel. Full stop. Whining that War is a nasty business is a pointless endeavor by those supporting the losing side. That is all it is. Everyone knows War is terrible. Ask the Syrians or now the Kurds. You can't pick a fight with someone then call the guy beating you up a terrible person. Maybe they are, maybe they are not, but you simply look like a idiot. Only a biased person would start pointing at the people responding to an attack as the bad guys.


V


D

a reply to: gladtobehere

From the source...

On the morning of July 23, Israeli forces ordered a group of about 100 Palestinians in Khuza’a to leave a home in which they had gathered to take shelter, family members said. The first member to leave the house, Shahid al-Najjar, had his hands up but an Israeli soldier shot him in the jaw, seriously injuring him.

Israeli soldiers detained the men and boys over age 15 in an area close to the Gaza perimeter fence. Based on statements from witnesses and news reports, some were taken to Israel for questioning. Israeli forces released others that day, in small separate groups. As one group walked unarmed to Khan Younis, Israeli soldiers fired on them, killing one and wounding two others.

Disgusting!!!


But Netayahu said these attacks were "proportionate" & "justified"...

So who knows what's to be believed, it's only The Human Rights Watch...

Sarcasm is a bane, I apologise!!!

War Criminals!!!


Peace glad!!!

a reply to: Variable

So to be clear.. Shooting unarmed civilians is acceptable to you?

Jeez, Israel supporters really wanna see some blood I guess.

a reply to: Variable

Another one making it about Hamas...
On page one as well!!!

Shame on you!!!

The article has nothing to do with Hamas!!!

originally posted by: SUBKONCIOUS
a reply to: WhiteAlice

that panorama is crazy... it's almost as if they are trying to clear the land for new construction and possible occupation in the near future.

Probably are or at least, assuring that the residents who fled have nothing to return to. Can you imagine having 7 hours to pack up your family and life with the threat of death looming? Even if every person got out of there, they lost just about everything but their lives. War is so cruel.

Another article on the destruction via the Wall Street Journal that has a "before and after" graphic of various towns/cities in Gaza.

a reply to: Variable

People like you that claim rights of retribution have all kinds of wacky rules to apply to tell them what retribution is morally correct.

Apparently, you don't understand natural law or you would understand that killing fleeing civilians, including children is wrong under any circumstances. It's known as pride of vengeance. It is a deep character flaw

a reply to: rockintitz

So to be clear.. Shooting unarmed civilians is acceptable to you?

No, but you are assuming its all true as specified by some crazy human rights loon who says in war your supposed to tell people your attacking and let them flee. The whole article is just full of bias not to mention the fact that the person spouting your quotes is obviously not well versed in war.

Civilians die in war. War is terrible. It's nasty ugly brutal business and should not be entered into lightly.


V

a reply to: InverseLookingGlass

Apparently, you don't understand natural law or you would understand that killing fleeing civilians, including children is wrong under any circumstances. It's known as pride of vengeance. It is a deep character flaw

You are simply believing the article in total as it is related by an obviously biased and crazy person. This human rights watch person is a wingnut. Look at what she spouts on about how wars should be run. It's pure kooky fantasy.

There are two sides to everything, calling troops war criminals because people die in war MAY be true, but it could equally be NOT true. Israeli troops are no different than any other, some may be jumpy and kill people. It's terrible, its war. There are always sad stories. Whining about war crimes from your arm chair in Boise, using a obvious wing nut as the basis for your proclamation just all seems a little on the "Burn the witches!" side of human mentality.


V

a reply to: Variable


WIKI article

A first lieutenant in the U.S. Army named Clint Lorance was found guilty of two counts of second-degree murder in July 2013 for ordering soldiers in his unit in Afghanistan to open fire on three men on a motorcycle who were approaching his patrol. These actions were deemed to violate the Rules of Engagement. His sentence includes 20 years in prison, forfeiture of all pay and dismissal from the U.S. Army.[5]

Seven UK Royal Marines were arrested on suspicion of murder for their actions in slaying a badly-wounded Taliban enemy in October 2012.[6] In November 2013 one soldier, known as 'Marine A', was convicted, while two others were acquitted.[7] Marine A was heard to utter after he performed the act: 'Obviously this doesn't go anywhere, fellas. I just broke the Geneva Convention.'[7]

Those are 2 recent enough examples how civilized nations have rules they follow. There have been more than many
blind eyes to crimes by military but the laws still exist. Israel's problem is that the world is watching so blind eyes won't help. There biggest problem (or weapon depending if you are Israel or not) is that they do not written rules of engagement nor have they adopted rules written by the International Institute of Humanitarian Law like many other countries do. Israel KNOWS that there is consequence to war and genocide as they were given carte blanche from the international community to hunt down and assassinate any remaining ex-members of the Nazis. Great Hollywood film by the way. I totally hated the French when it was through. Or not.

Since Israel has agreed to no such laws nor have they declared the nuclear weapons we all know they have, they can pretty much do what ever they want. So you are correct - from Israel's stand point - they would see any objection to killing innocent people including children as crazy. They clearly CAN do it as we are all witnessing.

a reply to: MALBOSIA

Sigh...

So you are correct - from Israel's stand point - they would see any objection to killing innocent people including children as crazy.

I didn't say that, you are agreeing with me on something i didn't say. A poor trick...

To buttress your argument you point out troops arrested by their own Army and brought to a court of law are somehow comparable to what the article states. But in this case, we are trying them in the court of public opinion. No trial, just hearsay. It's all very biased. Again, has the feeling of mobs with pitchforks.

Look, if Israel wanted to commit genocide they could, they don't. If they wanted to wipe the Palestinians off the face of the earth they could. If they are as bad as you say, then why are they not? Who would invade them as retribution? We can go down blind alleys of argument all you want. I am simply saying this article is a biased hack piece. That lady talking about laws of war require you to advise of attacks is dumb. There is no "rule of war" that requires you to advise you are going to attack a specific point. It's crazy to say that.


V

originally posted by: Variable
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Sigh...

So you are correct - from Israel's stand point - they would see any objection to killing innocent people including children as crazy.

I didn't say that, you are agreeing with me on something i didn't say. A poor trick...

To buttress your argument you point out troops arrested by their own Army and brought to a court of law are somehow comparable to what the article states. But in this case, we are trying them in the court of public opinion. No trial, just hearsay. It's all very biased. Again, has the feeling of mobs with pitchforks.

If Israel HAD rules and held their own accountable, there would be no need for public opinion. Sadly, that is why we have the rules; for public opinion.

Look, if Israel wanted to commit genocide they could, they don't. If they wanted to wipe the Palestinians off the face of the earth they could. If they are as bad as you say, then why are they not? Who would invade them as retribution? We can go down blind alleys of argument all you want. I am simply saying this article is a biased hack piece. That lady talking about laws of war require you to advise of attacks is dumb. There is no "rule of war" that requires you to advise you are going to attack a specific point. It's crazy to say that.

Israel wants legitimacy from the global community. If this was the 16th century; yeah, they could just wipe out the remaining Palestinians and then wave their nukes (16th century version) at their neighbors. That would be it. This is the 21st century though and legitimacy requires a little more tact. Yes, Israel was successful in their "war by deception" till this point, but it is a different world now than the one Israel started this campaign in. The world can think for themselves and write all over the internet about it. The government has a twitter account FFS. Israel HAD network television support but nobody really listens to that any more.
their attempt at deception over the internet is lame to say the least.

The world is watching and will continue to watch until the point comes when the whole world will call for the absolute destruction of this new Nazi regime.
In the end it will all be their fault for not trying for peace.
Soon.

originally posted by: WhiteAlice
Looking at this panorama of the town in the OP, it's a wonder really that people survived at all but apparently they were given a 7 hour "get out of dodge" window. www.telegraph.co.uk...

One or two city blocks at the most...You call that a town??? You can clearly see the town unscathed outside of this little tiny area...Propaganda...