Newsgroup: it.cultura.militare
Titolo: The Killing of Civilians in Beit Hanun is a War Crime

The Killing of Civilians in Beit Hanun is a War Crime 
Israeli artillery shells struck a residential neighborhood in Beit Hanun,
Gaza Strip, early Wednesday morning, killing 18 civilians, including 7
minors, and wounding some 40 others. The Israeli military contended that
the artillery fire was aimed at the place from which Qassam rockets were
fired at Ashkelon yesterday, an area about half a kilometer from where the
shells actually landed. The IDF said that human or technical error caused
the shells to strike the houses. The Minister of Defense has ordered an
investigation into the incident. 
Even according to the military, the shelling was not defensive; it was not
aimed at Palestinian fire or Qassam rocket-fire that was in progress. The
artillery was aimed at what the IDF refers to as a "launching space,"
i.e., an area from which the army believes that Qassams had previously
been fired. 
Shells fired from cannons several kilometers away are known and expected
to occasionally miss their target by a few hundred meters. For this
reason, it is especially likely that such weapons will harm civilians when
they are fired towards or near densely-populated residential areas.
Several such cases have occurred over the past year, and it was to be
expected that they could recur. 
Moreover, in April 2006, it was reported that the IDF reduced – from 300
meters to 100 meters – the "safety range" between populated areas in the
Gaza Strip and the areas targeted for artillery fire. Six human rights
organization, B'Tselem among them, warned about the great risk inherent in
the decision, contending it would lead to the injury of innocent
civilians. The organizations petitioned the High Court of Justice to order
the IDF to cancel the decision. The High Court has not yet ruled in the
matter. 
It is still unclear if the deaths this morning resulted from the inherent
inaccuracy of artillery or from technical or human error. However, massive
shelling towards a densely-populated area carries a high risk of civilian
casualties. Therefore, as discussed below, such shelling should be
avoided, unless there is no alternative in defending against attack. 
The principle of discrimination, one of the pillars of international
humanitarian law, requires that all parties to a conflict attack only
legitimate military objects. According to the principle of
proportionality, it is forbidden to launch an attack, even if aimed at a
legitimate military object, if the attack is expected to cause injury to
civilians that would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct
military advantage anticipated. These two principles lead to the
prohibition on using a means of warfare which, under the circumstances, is
likely to cause disproportionate injury to civilians. Launching of such
attacks is deemed a grave breach of international humanitarian law and a
war crime. 
The circumstances involved in the killing of the Palestinians in Beit
Hanun, including the fact that the attack was not a defensive action,
raise a grave concern that the shelling constitutes a war crime. The
Israeli military's contention that they did not mean to harm civilians is
meaningless, and cannot justify an action that amounts to a war crime. An
investigation conducted by military officials subject to the same chain of
command responsible for the action cannot serve as a substitute for a
criminal investigation. B'Tselem today wrote to the Israeli Judge Advocate
General, demanding that he immediately order a Military Police
investigation into the incident, with the objective of prosecuting those
responsible for the killings in Beit Hanun. 
http://www.btselem.org/english/firearms/20061108_War_Crime_in_Beit_Hanun.asp
-- 
[si parla della censura sulla strage israeliana di Beit Hanoun sul blog di
tonibaruch]
[sergio]: da perfetto goebbelsuccio quale sei, meglio non parlarne cosi'
nessuno la ricorderà
[Tonibaruch] :  Vero
questo articolo e` stato inviato via web dal servizio gratuito 
http://www.newsland.it/news
 segnala gli abusi ad 
ab...@newsland.it

 war crime.
Tutto giustissimo, salvo il fatto che come già detto ad nauseam questi sono
i principi dei Protocolli del 1977 (c'è una citazione quasi letterale nel
testo di cui sopra). Che non sono stati firmati da Israele. Che non fanno
neanche parte del diritto internazionale consuetudinario, che sia definito
di guerra o umanitario, per il semplice fatto che non esiste, appunto, una
consuetudine per il loro rispetto, dato che, come appena dimostrato, alcuni
degli stati che non li hanno firmati neppure li rispettano.
Perciò siamo alle solite. Il massimo che si può dire è che la violazione in
un caso del genere probabilmente sarebbe stata accertata, se fosse esistito
il vincolo di tipo pattizio o almeno quello di tipo consuetudinario.
Così non è.


Firing Qassam rockets at a civilian population is a war crime
From June 2004 to the end of March 2006, thirteen civilians, five of them
minors, were killed by Qassam rockets that Palestinians fired into Israel
and at Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip. Eight of the victims were
Israeli, four were Palestinian, and one a Chinese national. The rocket
attacks also caused substantial property damage.
The Palestinian organizations responsible for the rocket-fire state openly
that one of their aims is to kill Israeli civilians. Deliberate attacks on
civilians are both immoral and illegal. The willful killing of civilians is
classified as a grave breach in the Fourth Geneva Convention and as a war
crime that is unjustifiable under any circumstances. Furthermore, Qassam
rockets are themselves illegal, even when aimed at military objects, because
the rockets are so imprecise, and thus endanger civilians situated in the
area in which the rockets are fired or where they land. Therefore, the
persons involved in firing the rockets violate the requirements of
distinction and proportionality, which are fundamental principles of
international humanitarian law.
To aggravate matters, many of the rockets are fired from, or near, areas in
which civilians live. International humanitarian law prohibits attacks from
inside or near the homes of civilians, and from using civilians as human
shields. IHL's objective is to reduce to a minimum injury to civilians
during an anticipated military response by the other side. The Palestinian
organizations that carry out the attacks against Israel from within or near
a populated area breach this rule; in doing so, the organizations show their
indifference to the loss of Israeli and Palestinian lives.
The Palestinian Authority has the duty to prevent attacks against Israeli
civilians. In failing to take action to cease the rocket fire from being
launched near civilian homes, the PA also breaches its duty to protect its
own civilians who are not taking part in the hostilities.
The firing of Qassam rockets is illegal, and Israel has the right, and even
the obligation, to protect its citizens from the attacks. However, in doing
so, it must comply with international humanitarian law. The army is not
permitted to consider the entire general area from which the rockets were
fired as one target-area. The laws of war require the sides to direct their
attacks only against specific military objects, to take cautionary measures
to prevent injury to civilians, and to refrain from acts that are likely to
cause incidental loss of civilian lives, when the loss is excessive in
relation to the military advantage anticipated.
The Palestinian Authority must do everything it can to cease the Qassam
rocket fire, and the Palestinian organizations must cease attacks aimed at
civilians.
www.btselem.org/English/Israeli_Civilians/20060417_Qassam_missiles.asp
Naturalmente i principi del diritto internazionale qui citati sono perlopiù
riferibili ai Protocolli del 1977, di cui Israele non è firmatario. Tuttavia
è interessante notare che la fonte ha ragione per quanto riguarda il
riferimento alla Convenzione di Ginevra IV del 1949. Che ormai viene
considerata facente parte del diritto consuetudinario, indipendentemente dal
fatto che chi spara deliberatamente i razzi contro obiettivi civili ne sia
firmatario o meno.
Ne consegue che l'attacco di Beit Hanoun sarebbe stato una violazione del
diritto internazionale se Israele avesse firmato i Protocolli del 1977,
mentre gli attacchi con i razzi Qassam contro obiettivi civili sono in ogni
caso una violazione del diritto internazionale.


Mi dispiace di non essere riuscito a spiegare la differenza tra le due cose
in modo tale che tu la possa comprendere. Ho cercato di pensare ad un altro
modo, ma purtroppo non riesco a semplificare ulteriormente la questione.

Michele Armellini ha scritto:

Per andare incontro alle sue limitate facoltà mentali dovresti usare una
pittura rupestre per farti capire. <g>
-- 
Tobe Bofh

 ha scritto nel messaggio
news:4565612a$0$7628$4faf...@reader1.news.tin.it...

Non devi angosciarti per questo
la vita continua
Grazie

 ha scritto nel messaggio
news:ek3o4u$ep7$2...@nnrp.ngi.it...

..e due braccia uscirono dalla bocca della giara...il destro piegato a
 90 gradi e colla mano sinistra sul gomito...
--
Honni soit qui mal y pense
Pomero