Israel is using white phosphorous on areas populated by
civilians in its assault on Gaza. This is a direct violation
of the 1980 Geneva Treaty which forbids the use of such weapons
on civilian populations. Exploded at low altitude over population
areas, white phosphorous rains down on the population, and
when it comes into contact with the skin, it continues burning
until it reaches bone.
But that's not the only illegal weapon being used by Israel:
An interview with a Norwegian doctor Mads Gilbert appears
to reveal that Israel is using a new close-range explosive
shell that causes severe injuries and battlefield amputations
on the civilians being stuck by these weapons. Children are
having their legs cut off, many are having their abdomens
sliced open by the new weapon, and others are simply being
killed outright, according to Dr. Gilbert.
Dr. Gilbert describes the Israeli operations as "an
all-out war against the civilian Palestinian population in
Gaza."
Both the United States and Israel routinely use illegal weapons
against civilian populations in the Middle East, including
firing depleted uranium shells into city structures (roads,
buildings, bridges, etc.), thereby contaminating the region
with latent radiation for the next few thousand years.
Is the use of such weapons justified against civilian populations,
given the previous rocket attacks on Israel?
Is the Israeli war a justified attack on "terrorists,"
or just another form of genocide?
Voice your opinions in the comment section below. We moderate
all comments, and we delete any comments that get too outlandish
with personal attacks or profanity, but if you have thoughtful
comments (even impassioned ones), we will approve them. For
this topic, try to stay focused on the health and humanitarian
aspects of this debate, as this article is reporting a doctor's
view of the events taking place in Gaza right now.
If you want my take on all this, I'm against all violence
to settle disputes, but then again, what can you do if your
neighbors keep sending rockets over the fence? But even if
a nation decides to strike back, isn't the manner in which
they conduct such acts of vengeance strongly indicative of
their true intentions? Does Israel really have to kill so
many civilians in the process of so-called self defense? Post
your own comments below…