After weeks of denying that it used white phosphorus in the heavily populated Gaza Strip, Israel finally admitted yesterday that the weapon was deployed in its offensive.

The army’s use of white phosphorus – which makes a distinctive shellburst of dozens of smoke trails – was reported first by The Times on January 5, when it was strenuously denied by the army. Now, in the face of mounting evidence and international outcry, Israel has been forced to backtrack on that initial denial. “Yes, phosphorus was used but not in any illegal manner,” Yigal Palmor, a Foreign Ministry spokesman, told The Times. “Some practices could be illegal but we are going into that. The IDF (Israel Defence Forces) is holding an investigation concerning one specific incident.”

The incident in question is thought to be the firing of phosphorus shells at a UN school in Beit Lahiya in the northern Gaza Strip on January 17. The weapon is legal if used as a smokescreen in battle but it is banned from deployment in civilian areas. Pictures of the attack show Palestinian medics fleeing as blobs of burning phosphorus rain down on the compound.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5575070.ece

There should be some sort of penalty for that

Israel denies using WP illegally on civilians.
This story is (another) misrepresentation.

Hamas fired at least one rocket aimed at civilians
with a WP payload that did not go off.

So says the same government that lied about useing WP in the first place. Oh did I mention it was the same government that banned journalists from the conflict?

"Useing" is Spelled Using!

Spelling police.

I do know how to spell "war crimes"

I could never understood the "unshakable" alliance with Israel, to back them whatever they do. Alliance is fine, but to agree with everything 100% is stupid. Hamas fires rockets, not good and condemnable , but so is massacring them with illegal weapons. But close look at any news, the obvious one sided reporting is so obvious, you gotta be blind not to see it. Especially if you just google around on the web.

I do believe that when you are using white phosphorus as a munitions to kill, are you not using chemical weapons?

Spelled W.A.R. C.R.I.M.E.S.

I bet Bush,Cheney and Rumsfeld can spell it just fine right now.

No you are not using a chemical weapon. You are however in breach of accepted Conventions.

Take note however that many nations U.S. and Israel included did not sign Protocol III.

........

According to the Chemical Weapons Convention Schedule of Chemicals, the chemical P4 is neither a toxic chemical nor a precursor to a toxic chemical. Protocol III of The Convention on Prohibition or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May be Deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects (CCW) prohibits and restricts the use of incendiary weapons in civilian populations. It defines an incendiary weapon as "any weapon or munition which is primarily designed to set fire to objects or to cause burn injury to persons"; this definition excludes "munitions which may have incidental effects, such as illuminants, tracers, smoke or signaling systems." Under that qualification, WP is not necessarily considered an "incendiary weapon" if it incidentally sets buildings on fire. The United States has ratified other protocols and amendments of the CCW, but it has not ratified Protocol III.


http://www.fas.org/programs/ssp/bio/factsheets/whitephosphorusfactsheet.html






Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Incendiary Weapons (Protocol III). Geneva, 10 October 1980.

Article 1
Definitions

For the purpose of this Protocol:
1. "Incendiary weapon" means any weapon or munition which is primarily designed to set fire to objects or to cause burn injury to persons through the action of flame, heat, or combination thereof, produced by a chemical reaction of a substance delivered on the target. (a) Incendiary weapons can take the form of, for example, flame throwers, fougasses, shells, rockets, grenades, mines, bombs and other containers of incendiary substances.
....(b) Incendiary weapons do not include:
........(i) Munitions which may have incidental incendiary effects, such as illuminants, tracers, smoke or signalling systems;
........(ii) Munitions designed to combine penetration, blast or fragmentation effects with an additional incendiary effect, such as armour-piercing projectiles, fragmentation shells, explosive bombs and similar combined-effects munitions in which the incendiary effect is not specifically designed to cause burn injury to persons, but to be used against military objectives, such as armoured vehicles, aircraft and installations or facilities.
2. "Concentration of civilians" means any concentration of civilians, be it permanent or temporary, such as in inhabited parts of cities, or inhabited towns or villages, or as in camps or columns of refugees or evacuees, or groups of nomads.
3. "Military objective" means, so far as objects are concerned, any object which by its nature, location, purpose or use makes an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage.
4. "Civilian objects" are all objects which are not military objectives as defined in paragraph 3.
5. "Feasible precautions" are those precautions which are practicable or practically possible taking into account all circumstances ruling at the time, including humanitarian and military considerations.


Article 2
Protection of civilians and civilian objects

1. It is prohibited in all circumstances to make the civilian population as such, individual civilians or civilian objects the object of attack by incendiary weapons.
2. It is prohibited in all circumstances to make any military objective located within a concentration of civilians the object of attack by air-delivered incendiary weapons.
3. It is further prohibited to make any military objective located within a concentration of civilians the object of attack by means of incendiary weapons other than air-delivered incendiary weapons, except when such military objective is clearly separated from the concentration of civilians and all feasible precautions are taken with a view to limiting the incendiary effects to the military objective and to avoiding, and in any event to minimizing, incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians and damage to civilian objects.
4. It is prohibited to make forests or other kinds of plant cover the object of attack by incendiary weapons except when such natural elements are used to cover, conceal or camouflage combatants or other military objectives, or are themselves military objectives.


http://www.ccwtreaty.com/KeyDocs/protocol3.html

Of course Israel did not use incendiary weapons targeting civilians. But Hamas did.

Israel did not fire indiscriminately at civilians but the Palestinians did.

Israel did not use civilians as human shields and operate out of civilian and humanitarian installations but Hamas did.

Israel did not cache weapons in residences but Hamas did.

Israel did not violate humanitarian cease fires with rocket fire...but Hamas did.

Gee.

Israel has admitted to using incendiary munitions aimed at civilian concentrations.



They fired said munitions into areas with high concentrations of civilians.



Israel only showed a lack of concern over hitting civilians in the areas. Hence a UN school, UN aid center getting hit.



So Israel leveled neighborhoods even with civilians there.



Israel only prevented humanitarian aid from reaching those injured and spoiled food etc going in carried by UN.

I've not seen anywhere that Israel has admitted to using incendiary munitions aimed at civilian concentrations.
They have used WP for smoke and illumination but not as a weapon aimed at civilians. Give a credible reference I don't believe it.

Israel fired into areas with high concentrations of civilians only because they were being fired upon from those positions by Hamas. All precautions were taken to avoid civilian casualties whereas Hamas purposefully used civilians as shields. Israel did not aim to attack civilians but did have to Israeli civilians and themselves. The fault lies entirely with Hamas.

When Hamas fired from in and around UN installations the UN installation were regrettably also hit. The UN should have protested loudly that their installations were being used for cover by Hamas.

Israel warned civilians to leave areas which were being used by Hamas for armaments and cover for attacks before eliminating the weapons caches and firing in areas where there were civilians.

Israel was the side who unilaterally paused fighting to allow for aid to flow to the innocent Gazans during the conflict. Hamas is the party who used the cease fire times to launch rockets. Simple as that.

read it again slowly...from the Associate Press


The International Red Cross said Tuesday that Israel has fired white phosphorus shells in its offensive in the Gaza Strip, but has no evidence to suggest it is being used improperly or illegally.

The comments came after a human rights organization accused the Jewish state of using the incendiary agent, which ignites when it strikes targets and can cause serious injuries. (AP)

"The potential for harm to civilians is magnified by Gaza's high population density, among the highest in the world."



Area:
total: 360 sq km
land: 360 sq km
water: 0 sq km
Area - comparative:
slightly more than twice the size of Washington, DC


http://geography.about.com/library/cia/blcgaza.htm



In 2007 approximately 1.4 million Palestinians live in the Gaza Strip, of whom almost 1.0 million are UN-registered refugees.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip#Demographics



Hmmm. That works out to about 3888 people per sq. Km. I'd say that's densely populated. Definitely a concentration of civilians in any military planning for use of incendiaries or secondary incendiaries.

Airbursts around civilian concentrations!!!!!

3888 per sq. km is not very dense as far as population centers go...actually...for example...

City Population/km2
Cairo 35,420
Dhaka 30,403
Mumbai 29,042
Seoul 17,008
New York 10,439
Moscow 9,644
São Paulo 7,247
London 4,697
Los Angeles 2,980

Of course it really has nothing to do with
population density. Hamas was firing rocket
from urban areas. Israel had to go into urban
areas and fight Hamas to make them stop. If
Hamas had stopped at any time, all casualties
would have also stopped.

Hamas showed total contempt for human life
both Israelis and Gazans.