If an organization is formed to destroy your nation, its leaders proudly proclaim this, and they say they are not afraid of death, and sends bombers to murder your countrymen and women, then what is UNETHICAL about you assassinating the leaders of that organization?

Israel may very well have been unstrategic in its "whacking" of Hamas ldrs because it makes folks madder, but Hamas does openly work for an end to Israel.

Oh you poor things.

My God it must be hard to be humble when you are perfect in every way.

As a matter of fact some of those countries you probably do owe them something.

Cheers,

Trot

This is the thing. Israel denies that Palestine is a nation (until recently, now Israel is willing to admit to the possibility of a Palestinian state), and as such Israel can't be at war. But Israel is adamant to call this a war against a nation that doesn't exist due to Israel's persistence.
I don't view the US policy of assassination with much more approval either.
Though Hamas claims to want the destruction of Israel, its support will radically diminish once a working peace has been established, and I'd reckon the whole organization would become defunct. Sheik Yassin actually did support a peaceful resolution, until Israel killed him. His successor didn't, they "whacked" him too. Right now Hamas only benefits from the unwillingness to find peace, these "whackings" give their recruiting campaigns such a boost that no other event could.
I'm not talking of the ethics behind this policy, I'm talking about the legality of it. But because you pointed it out, how is assassinating a figurehead leader, who is also crippled, after his return from friday prayers with helicopter gunships, killing surrounding civilians also, ethical?

Assassination as self defense will always be at best a gray, non black and white moral act. If you are claiming you will destroy an enemy then how outraged can you be when that enemy launches a first strike on you.

Revolutionaries and social change movements can't bellyache that they are being oppressed or attacked. Duh! That's why there is a need for a revolution. Right?

Yassin and Rantisi's murders were a little less gray ethically than if it were Arafat or Abu Mazzan or the current PM. These "whackings" do incite rage, although there was no shortage of rage a few months ago. My point is that Sharon and more so Likud and those to Sharon's right have decided to beat Hamas and Hezbollah at their own game with own their tactics like bombing soft targets during religious times. It's wrong but Hamas has had a role in bringing things this far, with suicide bombings and a refusal to out-diplomat Arafat and Israel. They have for many years lived by the sword.

Just remember, now it is Hamas who is evil and prevents peace. Before them, it used to be the PLO, which has been bombed to practical obliteration. So, what's next?

You people seem to be forgeting a key fact. As it isn't a declared war, there is no POW status, therefore Palestinians are partisans. So they are viewed as traiters and it is appropreate to kill them out of hand, as you can spys. Much in the same way as the Polish were in the 1944 uprising until the Germans gave them POW status, so you see it is perfectly legal to kill Hamas leaders.

Would you complain about them killing lower status Hamas members? Should they just not react at all an just wait until the Palestinians run out of ammo? Or should they take action to undermine their organisation and reduce it to a fully underground movement.

On another note, what I cant understand is people complaining about kids being shot. I understand (and would agree with) the outrage the first few times they were shot whilst pelting tanks. However they know they can be shot for doing it, so if they are stupied enough to keep on doing it time and time again, then they deserve to be shot, to remove the faulty genes from the gene pool. Fronter law, hard luck if you are to stupied to learn, a curfue is a curfue and it's not like kids havn't tried to bomb tanks. I saw footage of one with his handsd up going past the tank, then when he was behind it he lobbed his grenade.

This thread is alive, it's alive!
Oh sorry...
*whistles*

Anyway, interesting view myopic but I'm not sure how Palestinians can be considered traitors. Very few Palestinians hold Israeli citizenship and could be considered traitors, most Palestinians have either no ID or Israeli issued ID (which is just a piece of paper outside of Israel) so I'm not sure whether there would be any legal justification for calling them traitors.

Israel has now acknowledged the existence (or the need of the) of a Palestinian State, so it would be hard to follow this treason logic in that case. So far Israel has justified it's strikes by saying it's self-defence as they are terrorists. It's questionable legally, but it's a case, not very strong but it's a case.

Ok then dont call them traiters, call them partisans and legally kill them for that reason.

Headless-Pixie - Duhhhhh!!!! Didn't you read my post! You said: "So there killing them without declaration of war? Murder then and to the best of my knowledge murder's illegal." - As it isn't a declared war, there is no POW status, therefore Palestinians are partisans. So it is appropreate to kill them out of hand, as you can spys. Much in the same way as the Polish were killed in the 1944 uprising until the Germans gave them POW status, so you see it is perfectly legal to kill Hamas leaders.

What difference does it make if there partisans? Israel has stole land and Palestinians are just fighting to keep it. Israel have MURDERED Palestinians trying to defend there land without declaration war.

__________________
What's this i hear bed? Word has it you and Pam are sleeping together.

Headless-Pixie - Stop posting, your just making yourself look more stupied, try re-reading my posts again. At leats SporkLord comes out with logical thought, rather than coming out with the same rhetoric.

Again, it's not murder, it's perfectally legal in international law!