Hi Hawkmoon; Re: "There is no way that the driver of that carbomb could have known soldiers were on the bus... Thus, it was NOT a legitimate target."
Oh, give me a break. Jesus weeps! Is there no depth in logic you'll plumb in order to find a way of saving the virgin purity of the Israelis? You're almost as bad as Nadine.
(1) He could look in the windows for uniforms, guns, or those funny hats that soldiers wear.
(2) He could have been informed by someone else with a car phone.
(3) He could have watched them get on the bus.
(4) He might have been aware of some repeated behavior, such as the changing of the guard or something else that would allow him to conclude that there would likely to be soldiers on the bus.
(5) Given the repeated deaths of Israeli soldiers aboard bombed buses, it could be that most buses carry soldiers, particularly when the buses are going back and forth to places where large numbers of soldiers are stationed in the occupied territories:
As Palestinians arrest suspected terrorists, few trust their fate to No. 18 bus
Jerrold Kessel, CNN, March 10, 1996
"I have no passengers except for soldiers and journalists," he sighed as he rolled by one of two sites where suicide bombers killed 44 at exactly the same time and day on two previous Sundays, Feb. 25 and March 3. Most people were taking taxis or had found some other means of transportation.
cnn.com
It's not like this is the first civilian bus bombing that was killed Israeli soldiers:
CNN, June 5, 2002
An explosives-laden car pulled alongside a bus and blew up Wednesday morning in Northern Israel, killing at least 17 passengers -- including 13 Israeli soldiers -- according to Israeli police and emergency medical personnel.
cnn.com
CNN, February 26, 1996
In Ashkelon, the attack was carried out by a man dressed in an Israeli army uniform who had just mingled with nearby soldiers, a local Israel television station reported. That explosion occurred near a bus stop and a soldier hitchhiking post.
cnn.com
CNN, March 3, 1996
An explosion ripped apart a commuter bus on one of Jerusalem's busiest streets early Sunday, killing at least 19 people in a grim replay of last week's deadly suicide bus bombing along the same route and at the same time.
...
Two Israeli soldiers and at least six Romanian contract workers also were among those killed.
...
cnn.com
Belgrade claims another bus hit by NATO bombs
...
If true, it would be the second bus mistakenly struck by NATO bombs in three days. NATO admitted that a bomb struck a bus crossing a bridge north of Pristina on Saturday. Serb media said 39 people died in that attack.
...
cnn.com
February 14, 2001: A bus driven by a Palestinian terrorist plowed into a group of soldiers and civilians at a bus stop near Holon, Israel, south of Tel Aviv. Eight people were killed and 25 were injured.
...
July 16, 2001: Two Israeli soldiers were killed and 11 people -- several of them civilians -- were wounded by a suicide bomber at a bus stop in Binyamina, halfway between Haifa and Netanya. Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the attack.
...
March 20, 2002: Seven people -- including four soldiers -- were killed and about 30 were wounded in a suicide bombing aboard a bus near Afula. Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the attack.
...
cnn.com
The above were found by looking briefly at the first 40 hits on a search of CNN.COM. In addition, I've seen cases where Israeli soldiers were buried as a result of a terrorist operation, but where the bomb was not listed as killing any soldiers in the Western news media. My guess is that the soldiers were out of uniform, but that doesn't make them not subject to military attack.
By the way, the Geneva Convention is quite clear on classifying civilians who take up weapons as "belligerents":
The population of a territory which has not been occupied who, on the enemy's approach, spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading troops without having time to organize themselves in accordance with Article 1, shall be regarded a belligerent, if they respect the laws and customs of war.
fletcher.tufts.edu
The Geneva Convention is quite clear in its comment that it is legal to blow up buses with both soldiers and civilians in it (which would be a form of human shielding):
Art. 28. The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations.
fletcher.tufts.edu
Here's the complete Geneva Convention (and other things), go and find the part that says that you can't use suicide bombers against buses, I'm all ears:
Rules of Warfare; Arms Control
fletcher.tufts.edu
Re: "Now had it been civilians being carried as passengers in a military vehicle, along with armed soldiers, THAT would be a military target."
It would be rather convenient if soldiers could be moved around in public transportation and that would make them "home free", but I don't think it works that way. Every US army that has ever existed would at least consider taking a shot at a bus with soldiers in it. This is a simple fact of war.
Hawkmoon, think about it. If there were buses filled completely with soldiers, and the suicide bombers could blow them up, they'd be doing it. Instead, I'd bet that military buses are either nonexistent, or are so heavily guarded so that no other vehicle can get near them. We could argue forever over the details of the morality, but the undeniable fact is that either one of us wouldn't even hesitate before blowing up a bus that carried enemy soldiers, with ammunition, armed and on their way to the front. Give me a break. I know I'm way more than bloodthirsty enough to take the shot, and I doubt that you're any kinder and gentler.
The basic fact of human nature is that if you are immune to symmetric attack, you will instead receive asymmetric attack.
Re: "So since US Air Marshals are supposedly on every overseas and domestic flight coming into NYC and DC (and probably a few other locals), does that mean they are military targets?? Not hardly."
Under the rules of the Geneva Convention, you might be able to make a case for allowing attacks against flights carrying Air Marshals. But the case with the buses is not that similar. The Air Marshals are essentially policemen, and I think that police are protected under the Geneva Convention (maybe I'm wrong here). And the buses aren't just carrying a single soldier, these buses have lots of them.
It's a fact (under the Geneva Convention) that when you arm civilians you make them legitimate targets (the Geneva Convention doesn't give a hot damn why you armed them). Using the atrocities of the other side as reasons to arm your own citizens is fine, but then that eliminates attacks on your citizens as being atrocities. You can't have it both ways, they are either "innocent civilians", or they are gun toting legitimate targets. If they are "innocent civilians" they can't be provided with weapons so as to defend themselves and others. These rules are quite explicit.
So if you arm your citizens, you can't go squealing about how the other side is violating the Geneva Convention by targeting your civilians. You can, on the other hand, squeal about how they other side has forced you to arm your civilians.
-- Carl |
