Gabrielle Giffords, Tom Hurndall and Palestinian Children; Shot in the Head

Originally posted by Eliad


It's a question of range and threat level, isn't it? Why would a sniper make a shot to the apricot at ranges over 100m? Especially when you consider that most Palestinian combatants are armed with assault rifles and there's no real need in going for the apricot?



And again, I doubt any of these were shot by snipers, but I can't really know for sure.. I'll see if I can find information on where snipers are generally posted and what role do they play, as these "Israeli sniper" blood libels are getting crazier and crazier.

Children are not combatants.
Ma dai! ""Israeli sniper" blood libels" - oh so you're now claiming victim status for murderers? Horrific..
I can see why you don't want to believe that Israeli snipers kill children, but it's true, they do.
I see Tom Hurndall in the thread title. While you're doing your research, start with these...
Wikipedia article on Tom Hurndall
Note that when he was shot, Tom was trying to rescue children..
Guardian obituary
Finally just for you an American site
Because I am assuming that an American site you will believe!
Vicky

reply to post by Ilovecatbinlady


WOE WOE what are you talking about?
I Gave a valid reason why sniper's SOMETIMES choose the head shot.
I was NOT speaking about the atrocities mentioned in this post! if you look
back at what I posted I am agreeing with a poster that this is NOT what has
happened in this case.it's a sick ridicules idea.
you/we have our wires crossed here my friend. please re-assess your claims
about what I think in this thread.

reply to post by Vicky32

Children are not combatants.

Something obviously went wrong for children to have been hurt, as they're obviously no threat to anyone, either that or they really have been targeted, and as I said, in some of these cases they probably have.

Ma dai! ""Israeli sniper" blood libels" - oh so you're now claiming victim status for murderers? Horrific..

Victim? If you'd rather believe cruel nonsense like Israeli snipers blowing off children's heads for effect, than actually examining the truth then go for it, I guess, never meant to say *the snipers* are anyone's victims, only that the assertion that they kill so many people "for fun" is absurd. Why are you always on the lookout for "the victim" angle?

I can see why you don't want to believe that Israeli snipers kill children, but it's true, they do.

I've known some sniper, some of them are scarred for life, yes, but non of them is the "children killing" type...
How do you know it's true? The article says nothing about a sniper, is the only explanation for people getting shot a sniper rifle? You know guns have ranges of up to 250m, and a sharpshooter has an effective range of about 400m (maybe a bit less on both for actual effective fire, but still)...

I see Tom Hurndall in the thread title. While you're doing your research, start with these...

Could he not have been shot due to an error or a bad call?

reply to post by Vicky32


(Sorry for double posting, I had to go to work, so I left the links for later)
You suggested research, right? Here's some research-

Hayb [the sniper] was convicted of manslaughter and obstruction of justice by an Israeli military court in April 2005 and sentenced to eight years in prison.

Idier Wahid Taysir Hayb (or al-Heib) is an Israeli Arab sergeant in the Israel Defense Forces who shot International Solidarity Movement civilian activist Tom Hurndall while on duty in Gaza on April 11, 2003

So yeah, in Tom Hurndall's case (sadly) he *was* shot down by an Israeli sniper. That sniper was then tried and convicted of manslaughter and sent to prison. Isn't that a good thing?

between September 29 2000 and December 18 2003 some 377 Israeli civilians and 80 security forces members were killed in Israel. Some 196 Israeli civilians and 180 IDF members were killed in the occupied territories. In that period, 2,289 Palestinians were killed in the occupied territories

So 833 Israelis dead, and 2,289 Palestinians (Civilians and combatants). Now a good pro Palestinian would note that there's 3 times the amount of Palestinians dead, and a good pro Israeli would note that the Palestinians don't wear uniforms and fight amongst civilians.

I just see 3000 people who died for a stupid conflict.

Who's the true humanitarian then? Does the fact that Palestinian deaths are 3 times that of Israelis diminish from the fact that 833 Israelis died? Does the fact that Hamas fights amongst civilians and might be the cause of civilian deaths due to proximity diminish any from the fact that 2,289 Palestinians died?

Do you see what I mean by both sides being in the wrong, and both sides having good reasons to fight?