Civilian casualties?

Question

If Hezbollah is hiding behind the civilian population, placing missles in civilian houses and radars on roofs, how should Israeli forces respond? Should they do nothing while Hezbollah fires rockets at Israeli cities?

Answer 1

Israel does everything reasonable to minimize civilian casualties.

Hezbollah and Hamas do everything they can to maximize civilian casualties on both sides.

If Arab families don't like their houses being destroyed they should think twice about storing missiles for Hamas or Hezbollah in them.

Answer 2

Should Israel do nothing? No. But should they deliberately target civilian installations of no miltiary value? Not in a million years. The Law of Armed Conflict strictly forbids that. Now, I don't know if Isreal is a signatory of the Geneva Convention, but the GC states that civilians are off-limits. Using them as shields for a military target will land whoever gave the order to do so at The Hague. However, the indiscriminate striking of civilians is also a war crime.

However, you have to note that Hezbollah is not a military force that follows the LOAC, and as such fall under the category of Unlawful Combattants. As such, they are not covered under the stipulations of the GC towards teh treatment of prisonners of war. So if they are captured, they are to be tried as terrorists according to Lebanese or Israeli law, depending on how the fighting ends.

And as for the civilians not leaving, where would they go? The roads are bombed out, the airports are shut down, and I'd wager that the railways aren't in much better shape. At this point, they are safer in their own homes. I have friends who have served in Bosnia, and while there were Serbs civilians in their area of operations, those Serbs did nothing to them, or to help the Serb military/paramilitary units. They just wanted this whole mess to end. The same applies to the great majority of Lebannon's population.

Answer 3

This has always been the dilemna an invading army faces when the opponent resorts to guerilla tactics. Examine Iraq, Vietnam, and to a lesser degree even our own Revolutionary War.

From a tactician's point of view, I would think the options for victory would involved either striking fear in the civilian population that aiding and abetting the opponent will be severely punished (questionable if that would have any positive effect), ignoring the shield and firing away (counting civilian losses as unfortunate but necessary), or mitigating the targets to only clearly military "safe" targets devoid of civilians.

I think it is civil (humane?) for the IFD to drop the leaflets and announce its intentions the way that it has, and in the final analysis that may be the only reasonable response.

Certainly, they cannot simply sit and do nothing in the face of Hezbollah aggression.

Answer 4

sure there has been a conflict without civilian casualties. Americas chilly conflict with Russia. All that occurred became physiological injury and financial injury. no one had to die. whilst 2 u . s . a .'s could have at the same time certain destruction. they might by no capacity initiate killing one yet another. So no longer purely have been there no civilian casualties there have been very few if any protection stress casualties the two. whether it became a real conflict.

Answer 5

Civilian is a shaky word here; what would you say if some really bad dudes knocked on your door and asked to put rockets on your roof? The houses wouldn't be getting bombed if the "civilians" would stand up to the thugs.

Israel has done their due diligence; drop the leaflets, wait 24 hrs, and turn the sand into a sheet of glass for as far as you can see.

Like we say in Chicago "they're all guilty of something".

Answer 6

Lebanon should find the Hezbollah scoundrels, round them up, and hand them over to Israel for great justice. If Lebanon isn't doing this, then they're tacitly endorsing the actions of the Hezbollah. Israel should continue an aerial bombardment of Lebanon until Lebanon makes some effort to help oust the Hezbollah.

Answer 7

Why would a civilian stay in a place that they know is going to be assaulted unless they are helping?
The Israeli forces are doing exactly what they should be doing, protecting their people.
It is Gods job to forgive, It is the Israelis job to arrange the meeting.
The Israelis are the only country in the world that are fighting terrorism the way it should be fought. With overwhelming force.
They have been dealing with these murders for decades. Think maybe that's why they are doing what they are doing?

Answer 8

Israel will only take so much of that before they level the whole place. So the civilians need to leave or they are helping Hezbollah and are enemys of Israel.

And no I don't want that, but I am just stating what I think will happen.

Answer 9

The act of placing military assets is a location removes any and all protections that the location would otherwise be entitled to.

And under international law the deaths of any civilians that result are the fault of those who placed those military assets there.

Just as it is the responsibility of the defender to evacuate civilians from places where a battle is likely to be fought.

Answer 10

It is war-time for them, their primary goal is to remove these missles, protecting civilians takes a backseat to eliminating the people, who, in turn, would cause a larger civilian casualty count if left alone. I know that may anger anti-war people, it's too bad, fact of life, deal with and get over it, ok?