Israel tried to limit civilian casualties in Gaza: U.S. military chief - Polidicks

[quote]The highest-ranking U.S. military officer said on Thursday that Israel went to "extraordinary lengths" to limit civilian casualties in the recent war in Gaza and that the Pentagon had sent a team to see what lessons could be learned from the operation. Army General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, acknowledged recent reports criticizing civilian deaths during the 50-day Gaza war this year but told an audience in New York he thought the Israel Defense Forces "did what they could" to avoid civilian casualties. I actually do think that Israel went to extraordinary lengths to limit collateral damage and civilian casualties," Dempsey told the group. "In this kind of conflict, where you are held to a standard that your enemy is not held to, you're going to be criticized for civilian casualties," he added. He said the IDF, in addition to dropping warning leaflets, developed a technique called "roof-knocking" to advise residents to leave sites they planned to strike. Dempsey said the Pentagon three months ago sent a "lessons-learned team" of senior officers and non-commissioned officers to work with the IDF to see what could be learned from the Gaza operation, "to include the measures they took to prevent civilian casualties and what they did with tunneling." The general said civilian casualties during the conflict were "tragic, but I think the IDF did what they could" to avoid them. "The IDF is not interested in creating civilian casualties. They're interested in stopping the shooting of rockets and missiles out of the Gaza Strip and into Israel," Dempsey said.[/quote] [URL=http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/06/us-israel-usa-gaza-idUSKBN0IQ2LH20141106?irpc=932]Source[/URL]

Israel bombing the UN several times during this is a clear sign they didn't try at all.

-snip dumb tired and influenced- [highlight](User was banned for this post ("PUI" - Orkel))[/highlight]

tbh people say this and that but if israel really was trying to target and kill civilians indiscrimately the west bank would be a parking lot by tommorow

[QUOTE=Limed00d;46484781]it's the thought that counts!![/QUOTE] Or it's avoiding a good deal of casualties considering we're talking about one of the most densely populated regions in the world. You wouldn't see any other country giving actual fliers out before shelling an area-- there's no easy answer to the situation, and there's a good reason that the highest-ranking U.S. military officer states that they took the least casualty-bringing route in what's essentially a minefield of a situation. (The article is interesting-- do give it a read. Like, past the headline.)

When you say 2,100+ is "extraordinary lengths to limit collateral damage and civilian casualties" all you are doing is reinforcing the fact that the Israelis could commit genocide tomorrow and cleanse Gaza of Palestinians and it would take nukes or a near-unanimous condemnation and renouncement from the President and Congress to stop them. I'm not saying this is Israel's plans, but "extraordinary lengths" with an average daily death toll of 42 just means "if we weren't so careful, you'd need an extra zero or two".

[QUOTE=SexualShark;46484803]tbh people say this and that but if israel really was trying to target and kill civilians indiscrimately the west bank would be a parking lot by tommorow[/QUOTE] If they did that then they wouldn't be able to bullshit the world into thinking this.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;46484825]No-one would do anything about it. The US/EU/Russia/China would obviously say something like "omg that's bad", but no actual actions would be taken.[/QUOTE] if Israel killed 2 million people in a few weeks I think it would be a little different yeah.

[QUOTE=SexualShark;46484803]tbh people say this and that but if israel really was trying to target and kill civilians indiscrimately the west bank would be a parking lot by tommorow[/QUOTE] If they were actually trying they'd have bombed the west bank and Gaza to the point that the whole thing would've been cratered below sea level and submerged under the Mediterranean/Jordan by now. And sadly this is what happens when you use rockets and airstrikes to counter plainclothes militants who attack primarily from civilian areas, those civilians are still there, and the only alternatives are to just sit there and ignore the bombings and the tunnels, or escalate to full scale occupation.

[QUOTE=ilikecorn;46484843]There have been several conflicts across the globe that the UN has done fuck all to prevent, and has done fuck all to resolve. The UN wouldn't do a damn thing about the palestinians disappearing. Know who would? Iran. Lebanon. Syria.[/QUOTE] You realize the death toll of killing 2 million people in a few weeks would be ten times higher than the death toll of the current Syrian civil war and 1/3rd the size of the holocaust? I'm pretty baffled that this hypothetical is being questioned

Bombing UN ran hospitals and shelters = careful. Guess that means 9/11 was also a careful operation to limit civilian casualties. I mean guys, think about it, [I]only[/I] around three thousand people died. If they were [I]trying[/I] to indiscriminately kill civilians, they would have killed a lot more. :downs:

[QUOTE=SexualShark;46484803]tbh people say this and that but if israel really was trying to target and kill civilians indiscrimately the west bank would be a parking lot by tommorow[/QUOTE] But people aren't claiming that Israel was trying to target civilians. They're claiming that they were criminally negligent.

[QUOTE=CommunistCookie;46484975]But people aren't claiming that Israel was trying to target civilians. They're claiming that they were criminally negligent.[/QUOTE]if the highest-ranking military officer in the US actually praises them for how little damage they've caused, that's gotta mean something. You don't go to war with the most densely populated region in the world without a few unintended casualties. Especially while fighting uniformless militants with a strong tendency to use guerrilla warfare and civilian hostages. What else could Israel really do? The whole warnings thing is something that most countries would never bother doing.

[QUOTE=draugur;46484909]Bombing UN ran hospitals and shelters = careful. Guess that means 9/11 was also a careful operation to limit civilian casualties. I mean guys, think about it, [I]only[/I] around three thousand people died. If they were [I]trying[/I] to indiscriminately kill civilians, they would have killed a lot more. :downs:[/QUOTE] the gulf war killed about 5000 civilians over 7 months, parts of which occurred over sparsely populated areas. the recent war in gaza lasted just under 2 months and occurred in one of the most densely-populated regions in the world. that's also an unfair comparison. 19 hijackers to 3,000 civilians is much different from 176,500 soldiers to 2100 civilians.

[QUOTE=joes33431;46485359]the gulf war killed about 5000 civilians over 7 months, parts of which occurred over sparsely populated areas. the recent war in gaza lasted just under 2 months and occurred in one of the most densely-populated regions in the world. that's also an unfair comparison. 19 hijackers to 3,000 civilians is much different from 176,500 soldiers to 2100 civilians.[/QUOTE] They could have a million soldiers for all it matters. Intentionally shelling designated UN hospitals and shelters, which they were informed of on many occasions, is the exact opposite of carefully avoiding civilian casualties.

[QUOTE=draugur;46485461]They could have a million soldiers for all it matters. Intentionally shelling designated UN hospitals and shelters, which they were informed of on many occasions, is the exact opposite of carefully avoiding civilian casualties.[/QUOTE] then they should be condemned for that matter specifically, not the sheer number of casualties. [QUOTE=ilikecorn;46484867]Yes i'm very well aware of this. I'm saying Israel makes for good business, and no one is going to fuck with their business partners. Obviously countries with little at stake in israel would respond (like Iran), but countries with a lot to lose are obviously going to block everything you can throw at them (like the US) via political or military or economic means. No country, and I mean NO country intervenes for ANY reason other than to put themselves on a better footing. There is no such thing as a "humanitarian" intervention, no country just sends a humanitarian expedition just to stop suffering, they're going to get something out of it, and Israel has more to offer than anything the Palestinians have to offer.[/QUOTE] our relationship with israel is primarily for political and cultural reasons. we like having a reliable ally in the middle east, we have one of the largest diaspora of jews on the planet, and much of our christian population feels a connection with israel for obvious religious reasons. but when that ally starts committing genocide, it becomes less advantageous on the international playing field to support them. so we stop supporting them. meanwhile, israel needs our support, because we're basically the only seat on the UN security council to back them up with our veto power, and we give them lots of military aid. when we stop supporting them, they're effectively isolated in an international community that is increasingly willing to take international action against their illegal activities (namely, illegal settlement in the west bank)