Why arabs have so many civilian casualites

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Was Hezbollah's capture of Israeli soldiers lawful?

The targeting and capture of enemy soldiers is allowed under international humanitarian law. However, captured combatants must in all circumstances be treated humanely.

Hezbollah leader Hassan Nassrallah has stated that the captured soldiers will be used to negotiate the release of Palestinian, Lebanese and other Arab prisoners from Israel. The use of captives who are no longer involved in the conflict for this purpose constitutes hostage-taking. Hostage-taking as part of an armed conflict is strictly forbidden under international law, by both Common Article 3 and customary international law, and is a war crime.

The point of posting the Q&A was not for the purposes of selective quotation. But seeing as you have:

As for electrical facilities supplying the civilian population, they almost never are legitimate military targets. On the one hand, they might be considered dual-use targets, given that both civilians and armies use electricity. On the other hand, the harm to civilians is often enormous, affecting refrigeration, sanitation, hospitals and other necessities of modern life; in urban society, electricity is arguably “indispensable to the survival of the civilian population,” meaning that it can be attacked only in extremely narrow circumstances. Meanwhile, the military effect of targeting electrical facilities serving the civilian population often can be achieved in more focused ways, such as by attacking military facilities themselves or the portion of an electrical grid directly serving a military facility. Although final judgment must await a more detailed on-the-ground investigation, Israel faces a very high burden to justify these attacks.

Edited July 30, 2006 by erekose

[dalegg 143]

Has there ever been a war where both sides obey the international rules of war?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Has there ever been a war where both sides obey the international rules of war?

Probably not, but then again some degree of morality and common sense has to be applied to these situations.

[mawilson 2,133]

The point of posting the Q&A was not for the purposes of selective quotation.

Hezbollah's capture of the Israeli soldiers is what started the war. Hostage-taking is

terrorism, pure and simple. Some people here justified it as a legitimate form of

"resistance" - it's not. Israel had no presence in Lebanon since 2000, military or

otherwise - there was nothing to "resist".

We can argue all day long about the legitimacy of Israel's response, but Hezbollah

are the ones who got Lebanon into this mess.

[Identity 0]

The point of posting the Q&A was not for the purposes of selective quotation.

Hezbollah's capture of the Israeli soldiers is what started the war. Hostage-taking is

terrorism, pure and simple.

Maignorant, by your reckoning of time, the Universe was created 7 days ago.

[mawilson 2,133]

Maignorant, by your reckoning of time, the Universe was created 7 days ago.

Please explain.

[Identity 0]

Maignorant, by your reckoning of time, the Universe was created 7 days ago.

Please explain.

Paradigm shift REQUIRED. If you held a Systems view of what happened, then you'd ask, "Why did Hezbollah do what they did?" ie what started Hezbollah?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The point of posting the Q&A was not for the purposes of selective quotation.

Hezbollah's capture of the Israeli soldiers is what started the war. Hostage-taking is

terrorism, pure and simple. Some people here justified it as a legitimate form of

"resistance" - it's not. Israel had no presence in Lebanon since 2000, military or

otherwise - there was nothing to "resist".

We can argue all day long about the legitimacy of Israel's response, but Hezbollah

are the ones who got Lebanon into this mess.

The "mess" is bigger and goes further back than the current incident.

[dalegg 143]

Has there ever been a war where both sides obey the international rules of war?

Probably not, but then again some degree of morality and common sense has to be applied to these situations.

Man, that sounded VERY British right there!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Has there ever been a war where both sides obey the international rules of war?

Probably not, but then again some degree of morality and common sense has to be applied to these situations.

Man, that sounded VERY British right there!

[Risto 0]

The point of posting the Q&A was not for the purposes of selective quotation.

Hezbollah's capture of the Israeli soldiers is what started the war. Hostage-taking is

terrorism, pure and simple. Some people here justified it as a legitimate form of

"resistance" - it's not. Israel had no presence in Lebanon since 2000, military or

otherwise - there was nothing to "resist".

We can argue all day long about the legitimacy of Israel's response, but Hezbollah

are the ones who got Lebanon into this mess.

The "mess" is bigger and goes further back than the current incident.

sure is bigger, ordered by Iran without consideration what's gona happen to Lebanon

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The point of posting the Q&A was not for the purposes of selective quotation.

Hezbollah's capture of the Israeli soldiers is what started the war. Hostage-taking is

terrorism, pure and simple. Some people here justified it as a legitimate form of

"resistance" - it's not. Israel had no presence in Lebanon since 2000, military or

otherwise - there was nothing to "resist".

We can argue all day long about the legitimacy of Israel's response, but Hezbollah

are the ones who got Lebanon into this mess.

The "mess" is bigger and goes further back than the current incident.

sure is bigger, ordered by Iran without consideration what's gona happen to Lebanon

Agreed. That said, much as I sympathise with Israel's current situation, their response to what was clearly intended as a diversion to make them begin shelling Lebanon is extremely disturbing. IMO they've ridden into a trap as arrogantly as Custer rode to the Little Bighorn.