Ward Churchill: American Civilians' political support for America's unjust foreign policy perogatives justified their being targeted by terrorists.The reasoning in which of the following statements most closely parallels the reasoning in the stimulus?A) AI: In the case of the attack on Qana the Israeli authorities have claimed that Hizbullah used civilians as “human shields” -- a tactic clearly prohibited under international humanitarian law. However, Israel has provided no evidence to support that allegation. Moreover, any such violation of international humanitarian law by Hizbullah would not have absolved Israel from its legal obligations to protect civilians by strictly observing the principle of proportionality. For its part, Hizbullah’s firing of rockets against Israeli cities and towns violates the prohibition of direct attacks against the civilian population.B) HRW: Human Rights Watch has documented the Israeli military’s persistent use of indiscriminate force, which has killed hundreds of Lebanese civilians...But war crimes by one side in a conflict never justify war crimes by another. Hezbollah must stop using the excuse of Israeli misconduct to justify its own.C) Alan Dershowitz: We need a new vocabulary to reflect the realities of modern warfare. A new phrase should be introduced into the reporting and analysis of current events in the Middle East: "the continuum of civilianality." Though cumbersome, this concept aptly captures the reality and nuance of warfare today and provides a more fair way to describe those who are killed, wounded and punished.... The Israeli army has given well-publicized notice to civilians to leave those areas of southern Lebanon that have been turned into war zones. Those who voluntarily remain behind have become complicit.
Quote from: chris43 on August 10, 2006, 11:28:29 AMWard Churchill: American Civilians' political support for America's unjust foreign policy perogatives justified their being targeted by terrorists.The reasoning in which of the following statements most closely parallels the reasoning in the stimulus?A) AI: In the case of the attack on Qana the Israeli authorities have claimed that Hizbullah used civilians as “human shields” -- a tactic clearly prohibited under international humanitarian law. However, Israel has provided no evidence to support that allegation. Moreover, any such violation of international humanitarian law by Hizbullah would not have absolved Israel from its legal obligations to protect civilians by strictly observing the principle of proportionality. For its part, Hizbullah’s firing of rockets against Israeli cities and towns violates the prohibition of direct attacks against the civilian population.B) HRW: Human Rights Watch has documented the Israeli military’s persistent use of indiscriminate force, which has killed hundreds of Lebanese civilians...But war crimes by one side in a conflict never justify war crimes by another. Hezbollah must stop using the excuse of Israeli misconduct to justify its own.C) Alan Dershowitz: We need a new vocabulary to reflect the realities of modern warfare. A new phrase should be introduced into the reporting and analysis of current events in the Middle East: "the continuum of civilianality." Though cumbersome, this concept aptly captures the reality and nuance of warfare today and provides a more fair way to describe those who are killed, wounded and punished.... The Israeli army has given well-publicized notice to civilians to leave those areas of southern Lebanon that have been turned into war zones. Those who voluntarily remain behind have become complicit. It is undisputed that Hezbollah fired rockets from Qana. Israel just returned fire. BTW, I dont think that Hezbollah should be allowed to fire from civilian areas with impunity merely because there is a loophole for them in international law. Sorry, international law is not binding on anyone, especially when it inherently favors one side over another side in a war.
there is no evidence that there were any hezbollah targets in the four story building that was destroyed by israel, resulting in the deaths of about fifty people. there may have been hezbollah forces operating in the village, but that doesn't matter for the same reason that it didn't matter that whether or not there were vc forces in my lai.
also, the fact that civilians die does not necessarily mean that disproportionate force was used. what constitutes disproportionate force is failing to take reasonable steps to protect civilians and distinguish them from combatants. the steps israel has taken to protect civilians has generally been limited to declaring entire areas free-fire zone, advising innnocent civilians to leave, and then reasoning that those who are still around after a certain period of time are, ipso facto, combatants. this is both immoral and illegal.
Hezbollah was firing rockets from Qana. No one disputes this.The loophole is that if one hezbollah soldier fires a rocket from a civilian area, Israel cannot attack that area without killing civilians and thus allegedly using "disproportionate force." In that case, there is no way for Israel to comply with international law and return fire for the protection of its citizens. Frankly, I would not expect Israel or any other country to refrain from attacking because Hezbollah found a loophole in international law.
Discussion
Resources
