Has Israel breached the conventions on a just war?

This is a vexing question for any part-time political pundit. Where does one start in understanding what is meant by a just war? How does one go about determining which side is behaving in a way that brings blame and calls for the trial of war criminals? The way in which these questions can be answered is to refer to the specific articles of the Geneva Convention that relate to civilian populations. If Israel is guilty of wrong-doing, then how can those who cry out against Israel excuse the way in which the Hezbollah thugs misuse the civilian population in southern Lebanon? Is Hezbollah guilty of using these civilians as human shields? It must be noted that Hezbollah fighters are equally bound by the Geneva conventions when it comes to the conduct of war. There are some articles of the Geneva convention that apply directly to this situation: Protocol 1 and article 28 of the Geneva Convention make it clear "the deliberate intermingling of civilians and combatants, designed to create a situation in which any attack against combatants would necessarily entail an excessive number of casualties is a flagrant breach of the Law of International Armed Conflict," This raises in my mind questions about the way in which the left wing anti-Semite members of the U.N. have flagrantly used the present situation to condemn Israel alone for a situation that has been purposefully been created by the Hezbollah in Lebanon. It could be said that true to form, the Hezbollah have deliberately courted the population of the region by pretending to provide services to them. They have done this in an attempt to gain the total trust of the locals, whilst they intend in reality to use them as human shields. There is no justification for putting total blame on Israel for the deaths of civilians who were sheltering from the war, when in reality the Hezbollah set these people up to become victims in order to force other western countries to withdraw support from Israel. Which side is in breach of the Geneva convention? It is obvious that the Islamic states point the finger at Israel for the deaths of 54 civilians. However, Hezbollah deserve to be condemned for the way in which they have flagrantly defied the Geneva conventions on war, and have deliberately intermingled combatants with civilians, thus setting up and causing the loss of civilian life during an air strike. Koffi Annan has condemned Israel because of the bombing of the U.N. observors' post, pointing out that Israel knew that the post existed. However, what is not widely reported is the fact that Hezbollah had deliberately moved in and around the U.N. compound. Was the attack on the outpost an error? I doubt that it was an error at all. It is possible that Israel had received intelligence that indicated that the Hezbollah were in the environs of the outpost, and the strength of the intelligence would have been sufficient for the action that took place. Once again, I believe that Israel should not be condemned for its actions, unless it can be proved that Hezbollah did not set up the situation so that there would be a loss of life amongst the U.N. observors. In a given war situation there will always be mistakes, and there will always be loss of civilian lives. One example that comes to mind, where there was the freak killing of a female civilian, is that of the battle at Gettysburg. The bullets richoted off a building, and a young woman was killed as she sat in her bedroom. On the other hand, in a war situation, the "enemy" will often use the civilian population to gain the upper hand. How many civilians were used by the Germans as shields or fodder during the second world war? Civilians were killed during the second world war. The bombings of London and Dresden are examples of the way in which civilians end up dead as a result of "enemy" action. On top of that, we have the dropping of the A-bombs on the civililan populations in Nagasaki and Hiroshima. The bomb that was dropped on Nagasaki was dropped in error when killed thousands of innocent Japanese (many of those who were killed died in the Catholic Cathedral at Nagasaki as they were praying for peace). Just as there needs to be a proportionate response to aggravation and provocation, there also needs to be a very close look at the way in which civilian populations are being exploited in an effort to try and prevent Israel from taking strong action against Hezbollah, who have been threatening their very existence. Why should it be considered not appropriate to bomb the positions of those who are firing rockets into Israel? Why should Israel continue to tolerate the hostile actions of Hezbollah and Hamas? Why is it that the civilian population within an Hezbollah stronghold should be considered so sacrosanct that all military action is to be considered as unacceptable, yet Hezbollah is allowed to rain down rockets on Haifa? Perhaps a member of the looney bleeding heart left of politics might like to ponder these questions and come up with some answers that would truly allow for justice to be done in this critical situation.

Israel suspends bombing raids after raid kills 54 "civilans" in Qana

In the early hours of Sunday morning, Israel launched a bombing raid on the village of Qana, an Hezbollah stronghold. One of the buildings targeted (based upon intelligence that the guerillas lived in the block and the rockets were being stored in the building), also housed people who are termed as civilians. When the first bomb hit the building at 1.00 a.m., some people went outside to survey the damage. According to "witnesses", there was another raid, and the building then collapsed.

However, thr Israel Defence Force is puzzled as to why it took 7 hours for reports to surface that the building had collapsed. Did the collapse occur later than the time claimed by the "witnesses"? I wonder if we will ever know the answer to this question. Who do we believe? In the meantime, Reuters has reported that the IDF has announced a suspension of the bombing raids into Southern Lebanon. The death of at least 54 "civilians" is regrettable, and the Israelis are wrong if they are targeting civilians without adequate proof that weapons are being held in the particular village. However, the Israelis do have the video evidence that the Katushya rockets were being fired into Israel from the village of Qana. It would seem that Hezbollah are also wrong because they have been firing rockets into the civilian population in Israel with the express intention of killing civilians. If the world leaders see fit to condemn Israel for these "civilian" deaths, why have they remained silent over the deaths that have occurred in Haifa? Are the civilian deaths in Haifa not worthy of the same world wide condemnation as that of the deaths in Qana? There are other commentators in the blogosphere who are prepared to state that the women and children in the village of Qana cannot be considered as civilians, since they are members of the families of Hezbollah. If they are members of the families of Hezbollah thugs, then they have given tacit approval to the terrorist tactics that are being employed. The children have already lost their innocence, since they are already being trained to be terrorist thugs. The IDF did a propaganda drop urging the villagers who were not involved with Hezbollah to get out of town before the bombing raids began. These people failed to leave the village, and of course they dispute ever receiving such a notice. The point remains open to debate and I guess the best liar will win the score on that round. If Israel is true to her word, and she suspends the bombing raids, then I wonder if Hezbollah will do the same and suspend their rocket attacks on Israel. War is a very serious matter, and it has always been the intention of Iran to destabilise the Middle East by causing a serious situation between Israel and her neighbours. It is Iran and Syria who are supplying the weapons for use by Hezbollah. These two countries should be called to account for their actions in attempting to start a major war.

When thugs take control - the threats from Hezbollah

The Muslim "cleric" leader of Hezbollah has once again made serious threats against Israel. You can read his address here. There is the possibility of new terror for Israel, as the rockets fired on Israel continues. Meanwhile, Israel is being criticized because of the death of people termed to be "civilians" by a left leaning press corps. However, one must question whether of not the people who have died were in fact true civilians. They were in areas that are known to be Hezbollah strongholds. The "civilians" are the wives and children of members of Hezbollah. Can they really be termed civilians? Where radical Islam is concerned, the women support the work of their husbands and the children have been trained to become the future murder-suicide bombers who are sent on missions to murder as many others as possible as they take their own lives. These are children who have been raised up to hate others. Whilst it is wrong to kill civilians during war, we have to question whether or not the members of families living in Hezbollah strongholds are in fact civilians, and if they are not to be classifed in this way, then we have to rethink our own moral relativism on such subjects of war. Hezbollah exists to wage war on others, including other Lebanese and Israel. They have one aim - to force Lebanon to become yet another nation under Sharia Law. There is a lot at stake in this war between Israel and Hezbollah. Israel needs to win the war because she is fighting for her existence. Nasrallah, who is nothing more than a thug, wants to win the war, and he is also waging a propaganda war, for he has much at stake in trying to claim that it is Hezbollah who is winning the military battle.

When Israel made concessions with the Arabs she underestimated the level of contempt in which Israel was held. The Islamofacists do not believe in true negotiation. They have a history of breaking the peace treaties that have been made. In this respect they behave in the same way as Adolf Hitler, for he held those who made appeasing treaties in contempt. The leaders of Hezbollah want a prisoner exchange as part of any peace brokerage. They behaved aggressively by raiding the Israeli outpost, killing several soldiers, and kidnapping two soldiers. Now they have the left wing moonbats crying out and claiming that the rsponse from Israel is out of proportion with the initial action. This response from the moonbat media is wrong. For many years Israel has endured the aggressive actions of Hezbollah, and now they have a right to the peaceful enjoyment of the land that is known as Israel. Concessions were made, yet the Palestinians and their supporters were not satisfied with what they have received, and so they have also provoked the Israelis with the kidnapping of one Israeli soldier. It would be extremely foolish for Israel to bend to the demands of the Hezbollah. It would be totally wrong to accept the prisoner swap as proposed by Hezbollah. A further prisoner exchange will only invite Hezbollah and Hamas to continue with these same tactics. Israel has a right to exist and to defend herself against aggressive neighbours.

Neville Chamberlain redux

It is difficult being a middle of the road commentator, because one ends up being attacked by people on the right as well as those who are on the left. At the present time though, one has to wonder how it is that an editor of the New Statesman has the necessary foresight to warn Britain about her courtship with radical Islam. Martin Bright of the New Statesman has fronted a show on Channel 4 that warns of the inherent dangers of the attitude of the British Foreign office. You can read Martin Bright's comments regarding his surprise that it is the right wing who have come out in support of what he had to state about the behaviour of the British Foreign Office, here. The most important point that is being made is that perhaps we are seeing a return of the head in the sand attitude that was displayed by Neville Chamberlain and his government in the 1930s. During that period, the British government courted the Nazis and Hitler, and there were several Nazi sympathisers within the British government. The treaty made by Neville Chamberlain did not last very long. Hitler attacked Poland and set his sights on Britain. Chamberlain had not been able to see the dangers posed by Nazism and he was willing to sell the British people down the river with his appeasement attitude. The left wing pundits have, as usual, failed to see the dangers of radical Islam. However, Martin Bright, although an editor of the left-wing New Statesmen has managed to look past the idealism of the left wing and has, with clarity, pointed to the errors of Whitehall, as the civil servants continue to flirt with radical Islam without thinking about the long term consequences of their actions. It is Martin Bright who has pointed to the behaviour of Neville Chamberlain's government and the obvious parallels between the rise of Nazism and the rise of radical Islam. I do not see Martin Bright as an Islamophobic. I see his comments as coming from a man who is reasonably clear headed in that he can see beyond the rose coloured attitude of the British left wing as far as the Middle East conflict is concerned. Britain has been torn over participation in the invasion of Iraq. The left wing are torn because they see the situation in terms of the struggle of the oppressed. Personally, I think that the left wing within politics need to rethink their support for radical Islam. They have not understood the dangers posed by the Muslim Brotherhood and brother organizations. One of the biggest mistakes made in the viewpoint of the radical left-wing would have to be their support of the Hamas and Hezbollah in the Middle East. They have failed to grasp that Hezbollah is not an organization that is protecting an oppressed people, and they have failed to grasp that it is Hezbollah who wants to oppress the Lebanese people. This failure is due to the poor grasp of history that comes as a result of the work of historical revisionists. We hear far too often that history is written by the victors, and then the revisionists set to work to produce a history of events that is totally warped. A good example is the way in which the Islamist historians have been busy revising history so that Islam appears to be more ancient than something started in the 7th century A.D. Members of the left-wing have embraced the Islamic lies and refuse to believe that what they believe is based upon a lie. Their own ideology has interfered with their reason when it comes to the issue of the rise of Islam. The Blair government needs to reconsider its position on a number of issues, especially the embracing of radical Islamic organizations. The left wing within Britain need to examine more fully the issues that are facing them and they need to wake up to the threat of radical Islam that is on their doorstep. Appeasement does not work, and the courting of radical groups such as Muslim Brotherhood is not smart politics.

Iran warns the west: ignore us at your peril

The perpetrators of the current Middle East conflict have issued a warning to the rest of the world: "Ignore us at your own risk". The Iranians are miffed because they have been excluded from the peace talks in Rome. Yet, take another look at the attempted deal that the U.K. and the USA are attempting to broker in Rome. They are proposing that Israel must give up land that it took in 1982 from Lebanon. Who are these people kidding with such a proposal? The issue must remain with focus upon the illegal activity of the Hezbollah in Lebanon. This group is made up of suicidal maniacs who either come from Syria and Iran or they were trained by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. The Hezbollah have always had one stated aim - the wiping of Israel off the face of the map. This is also the stated aim of the present Iranian leadership. The Hezbollah began this current crisis when they kidnapped the Israeli soldiers, after they had gone across the border illegally and killed several other Israeli soldiers. They did not expect the level of retaliation and they are trying to step up the propaganda with their dire warnings against the west. The moonbats in the press corps and the liberal moonbats who follow blindly anything they are told by revisionists, continue to do the will of "allah", who is not God, but a figment of Islamic imagination. The Iranian leadership wants world domination, and they are prepared to use whatever means are available to achieve that end. They have been attempting a divide and conquer action. The liberals all around the world, like the lost sheep of Satan have been all too willing to accept whatever the Iranian leadership says without even blinking. If the Rome conference is doomed to fail, then it will not be due to the lack of the presence of either Syria or Iran, but it will be due to the dubuious terms of a brokered peace deal that aims to force Israel to relinquish territory that she requires to keep her people secure. Koffi Annan, the present president of the United Nations is an extremely weak link as far as bringing about a brokered peace plan is concerned. He has been guilty of taking sides with Hezbollah. He speaks like an ignorant man who is very much involved in the widespread Islamic terrorism that we are witnessing in so many parts of the world. His weakness is cause for alarm because no western nation is safe so long as he remains leader of the United Nations.

Why I believe that Israel has the right to exist

I am a Judeo-Christian, that is I am a Roman Catholic and the roots of my religion stretch back to Judaism in the period in which Jesus Christ who is God the Son, roamed the earth. I believe that the land of Canaan was taken away from the original inhabitants and it was given to the Jews, who remain God's Chosen People. Over the centuries, the Chosen People have been scattered amongst the Nations because of their wickedness as they have turned away from God. However, many ordinary people in Judea followed Jesus and they converted to the Way, which in turn is known as Christianity. We are forever linked to that earlier form of Judaism, but we are not obliged to follow the stifling precepts of Judaism. Instead we are asked to follow the Law that is inscribed upon our hearts. The Pharisees and Sadducees who rejected Jesus, and plotted to kill Him caused Judea to be punished when the Romans invaded Jerusalem and demolished the Temple of Solomon once and for all. It will never be rebuilt because the animal sacrifices are no longer required. Jesus came to be the Perfect Sacrifice, and He is the Lamb of God. The Sacrifice on the Cross was once and for all. Over the centuries the Jews have been punished over and over again because of their crimes and the hardness of heart. However, this is not true of those Jews who have always been pure of heart and who have faithfully done the Will of God, according to what they believe. Jerusalem belongs to the Jews and the Christians alike. It does not belong to the Muslims. The Temple Mount is of no significance to the religion of Islam, despite Muslim claims to the contrary. Mohammed was not a prophet of God, for he was an agent of the enemy of God. The same is true for those Shi'ite Muslims who are intent upon the destruction of modern Israel. Prior to the outbreak of the present hostilities, the leader of Hezbollah made certain threats against the civilians of Lebanon, and against the government of Lebanon. He had stated that all of the Lebanese who were not a part of Hezbollah were tourists, and that Hezbollah were the rightful owners of Lebanon. At the same time, it was reported that the leaders of Iran and Syria met with other Middle Eastern nations and that this meeting was in reality a war cabinet meeting. They had declared what they term a Holy War against all who are not Shi'ite Muslims. However, there is nothing Holy about this war at all. It is an UNHOLY war and the perpetrators are members of Hezbollah. It is of grave concern that the Lebanese government has proved to be useless with regard to the menace of Hezbollah. Ever since I can remember, the Palestinian and Lebanese terrorists have been making war on Israel. There is nothing new with regard to the hostilities for they are in fact very ancient. Hezbollah is a terrorist organization and as such the Lebanaese government should have the guts to declare the members outlaws. However, the Lebanese government lacks the guts to make such a move because they have members who are aligned with Hezbollah. How else could a member of the Lebanese government know that the soldiers that were kidnapped are safe. Why is it that there has been no effort by the Lebanese government to secure the release of these soldiers? I believe that the Lebanese government should be held responsible for the lack of action. The state of Israel has the right to exist. I admire all that the people of Israel have achieved in such a short time after their return to the land of Israel. They returned to a barren land and through their hard work and ingenuity they were able to create an oasis and return the land to some of its former glory. The Palestinians have always refused to settle in the land that was given to them, and instead of providing for themselves through industrious work, they remained jealous of the Israelis, and desired to take over what had been created. Their very jealousy has led to the hostility that continues in the Middle East. The acions of Hezbollah and Hamas have destabilized the region. Saudi Arabia continues to call for a ceasefire - I agree that there should be a ceasefire, but not until there has been a deathly blow dealt against Hezbollah and they are no longer a threat to Israeli citizens, or to visitors to Israel. There will not be peace so long as Iran and Syria continue their efforts to keep Hezbollah and Hamas armed.

Pope renews Mideast cease-fire call

Pope Benedict addressed a crowd of about 3000 near his Alpine retreat, as he renewed calls for an immediate ceasefire between Hezbollah and Israel, and for negotiations to begin. The Pope called on the crowd to pray for peace in the Middle East. Significantly, Pope Benedict did not condemn the actions of Israel, but he did confirm the sovreignty of Lebanon, as well as the right of Israel to exist, and of the right of the Palestinians to have their own country. This is significant because Israel has for years lived in the shadow of the threats of terror from Hezbollah and from Hamas. Israel has the right to live in peace. The people in the region of Galilee (Haifa is in Galilee) have the right to live in peace and not in fear of acts of terror and of being bombed out of existence. The Pope has called on all parties to abandon the path of armed conflict, and pursue a path of peaceful settlement. We do need to turn to prayer and ask for God's help in bringing about a lasting peace in this region. However, how can there be peace when the leadership in both Iran and Syria (Aramia) continue their hate speeches against Israel and her every right to exist and for her citizens to live in peace. We need to pray in earnest to God for the sake of those who are truly innocent and who do not desire this conflict.

Bolton defends Israel's actions in Lebanon - Jul 23, 2006

The US ambassador to the United Nations has defended the actions of Israel against Hezbollah. In a strong statement to the United Nations, Mr. Bolton has responded to the growing criticism that the actions of Israel are disproportionate with regards to the actions taken by both the Hezbollah and Hamas. He has reminded Israel's critics that the Hezbollah did not have the right to kidnap the Israeli soldiers. He also reminded the critics that the Hezbollah have been bombing Israel, especially the city of Haifa. The critics of Israel seem to think that Israel should allow her enemies to plunder and bomb her cities, and otherwise terrorize her citizens at will, and that she has no right to retaliate and attempt to secure Israel so that the Israeli citizens can live in peace. Mr. Bolton stated the following:

"What Hezbollah has done is kidnap Israeli soldiers and rain rockets and mortar shells on innocent Israeli civilians. What Israel has done in response is act in self-defense. And I don't quite know what the argument about proportionate force means here. Is Israel entitled only to kidnap two Hezbollah operatives and fire a couple of rockets aimlessly into Lebanon?

"The situation is that Israel has lived under the terrorist threat of Hezbollah for years, and these most recent attacks have given it the legitimate right, the same right America would have if we were attacked, to deal with the problem. And that's what they're doing."

The fighting began July 12, when Hezbollah fighters killed three Israeli soldiers and abducted two others in northern Israel. (Full story)