in 11 days there have been 600 plus casualties. the official number that you hear is 25% at least civilians. i have posted before why i don't think this is accurate but if we go by the number 25% at least 150 have been civilians. this comes out to be roughly .01% of the population (1.5 million). if you take the iraqi population (it was a bit less than 25 million in 03. a bit more than 25 million in 04. war started in march. i'll say 25 million for math sake) and multiply this by .01 you get 2500. do you think in the first 11 days of the war in iraq, 2500 iraqi civilians were killed? if you take the iraqi ministry which said 151,000 deaths caused up till june 06 by violence (the lancet attributed non violence related deaths). divide the deaths for the duration and you get roughly 1400 deaths in 11 days in iraq. mind you these include ALL the suicide bombings and such. so while i completely dispute the notion that israel has even attempted to minimize civilian casualty, the fact is that they haven't minimized civilian casualties by any stretch. if you lived in iraq during 03-06 you had a 50% less chance of being killed by a us missle or a road side terrorist bomb or anything of that sort, than you do right now being in gaza by the idf. abc news
You need to also take into account population density. Gaza is one of the most densely populated placed on earth.
That war was FAR from won. Pick up a damned book sometime and read it. Our soldiers were being forced on death marches, etc etc. The Japanese were not about to surrender, and the decision to send the Enola Gay on its mission was not made lightly.
Bingo bango. Pretty sad that the US is in the thick of it. 60 year conflict? Lets double down and make it an even century.
Yes, name-calling! Aren't you well rehearsed in self-indulging rhetoric. We used state terrorism to end that war with Japan. The Emperor and Royal family of Japan were the ones who declared war on us, not the 140,000 civilians we killed in a matter of seconds. Not to mention it was wholly unnecessary of us to use it. Our naval blockade had already got Japan talking about surrendering as early as August 1945. On top of that, Russia had just declared war on Japan. They were facing a naval blockade, and were about to face a war on 3 different fronts. I guess that makes it a justifiable reason to destroy that many people's lives in a matter of seconds, just to end the war quicker. Add that dropping another bomb 3 days later. It was not needed and was a terrorist move by the United States. So yes, I am the moron for thinking it's no one's god damn right to disregard human life on that scale. If you can rationalize the use of atomic bombs, then I can rationalize with your same logic that legality of the Holocaust.
I agree with this. The first week of the Iraq war was spent driving across open desert. To try and compare the two based on death count is silly. Apples and oranges. A better analog would be the Battle of Fallujah. And even then, the Iraqis were fighting much more honorably than the Hamas human shield tactics and the population density wasn't quite so high.
right. but those are the cards that have been dealt (actually those cards weren't dealt...israel has essentially created the slum of gaza). and while they may be 'attempting' to do a better job...the fact is that the numbers clearly indicate that israel is not doing as good of a job. i care about the facts on the ground. and in choosing to attack gaza, idf has to consider the destruction it will wreak in gaza, not in a relatively less densely populated place. instead of pretending like they're doing a wonderful job protecting civilians, the idf/idf apologists need to admit that in gaza they simply can't protect civilians no matter how hard they try. and at some point the reality is the collateral damage will be too high to continue. and that point will be way sooner than the point where hamas is overthrown/impotent. and at that point we'll return to an unstable cease fire.
The US released a survey of evaluations of Japan's surviving leaders and concluded that an atom bomb-less Japan would have surrendered as early as of November 1, 1945 and no later than December 31, 1945.
a) the numbers i used were from the first 39 months so we aren't talking about the first 11 days in the desert. and even if we were, there was incredible bombing in the first 11 days (remember shock and awe that first night). and the figures included ALL civilian deaths due to ANY violence. so they are grossly exaggerated in terms of deaths occurred due to US bullets and bombs. b) the hamas human shield tactics are disputed. c) see post above. at the end of the day, idf cannot by any honesty claim that they are protecting civilians. they simply cannot. and this responsibility cannot simply be on hamas since there are other non lethal better options out there.
I'm no history expert, but I do believe that there is considerable debate on the military necessity of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. Of course all sides were employing heavy bombings of civilian areas with conventional weapons; so that was happening, regardless. But the US using atomic bombs against an opponent for whom surrender was essentially a forgone conclusion set a very dangerous precedent. From wikipedia, this is what Eisenhower wrote in his memoirs years after the war: "In 1945 Secretary of War Stimson, visiting my headquarters in Germany, informed me that our government was preparing to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. I was one of those who felt that there were a number of cogent reasons to question the wisdom of such an act. During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives."
Sometimes people make claims like this, and the one that walls are an act of war where I just don't know how to respond without being condescending, so I'll just say that I think your zeal does you credit, but your ability to analyze the situation logically leaves something to be desired.
The most interesting statistic to me is that so many Purple Heart medals were produced in anticipation of the Invasion of Japan (500,000) that the US Military hasn't had to produce a Purple Heart since the end of WWII and they still have more of them in stock than they know what to do with.
What constitutes an act of war, in your mind? How would you define it? Let's just all get on the same page.
I care more about clarification than being condescended to. Just direct your condescension towards me. I won't take offense, I promise.
assuming arguendo, my logical coherence is lacking, im still happy to advocate for causes i believe in, instead of being a self-admitted contrarian.
Although the U.S bunker buster missle causes more devestation per sq ft than the man made suicide bomber, the U.S missiles are holier than thou. So if used by 'friends' it is not an act of war. =/ In related news, Venezuela just expelled Israel's ambassador. I think every country in AMERICA should do the same, even the U.S. Even the right wing president in el salvador is thinking of doing the same It does help that President Saca's parents are from Palestine. Ahhh... I forgot that some of you guys don't give a crap what the world thinks.
Oh yes, we should definitely follow suit with Venezuela... they are such a bastion of freedom and love.
I don't know if this has been mentioned earlier, but I'll let you guys know anyways: a UN sponsored SCHOOL in Gaza was attacked today by Israel.. this is the SECOND school that Israel has attacked.. the ensuing death toll of the past 11 days: -640 in total -215 CHILDREN -89 WOMEN yeah, they're defending themselves alright.. those F***ing children and toddlers are terrorists.. a freaking genocide is taking place.. and, wait for it, all of us are paying for it.. 2.4 millions of the tax money WE'RE paying goes to fund this "defending", great success indeed.
Reading is FUNdimental: [rquoter] Two residents of the area who spoke by telephone said they saw a small group of militants firing mortar rounds from a street near the school, where 350 people had gathered to get away from the shelling. They spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal. [/rquoter]
