Jump to content

Talk:List of Israeli civilian casualties in the Second Intifada/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From VfD

    • I think it should be kept with a rephrasing of the title from "massacres" to "murders" or something else. Massacres does imply partiality, which taints the legitimacy of this article and detracts from me, personally, considering the facts unaltered or uninflated. In other words I think rephrasing it less colorfully will lend credence to its content. -Profeign
    • An israeli propaganda. they don't show the reasons or the attacks, neither the israeli crimes done a day or two before the attacks.. + "massacre" is not a objective, and even wrong.. Should be deleted, or done again with changing the name, to "attacks" instead of massacres, and showing reasons and israeli crimes, done a day or 2 before. [Unsigned contribution was by User:81.49.157.203 19:00, 2004 Jan 31. Noted by Jerzy ]
    • Keep - Factual events - large number of people died on those dates and those terrorist groups claimed responsibility. ` Texture 19:53, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete -- Nico 20:18, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
    • I'm the author of the page. I would like to request that the decision on this page will be based on the same criteria used when deciding on List of massacres committed during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war (also listed on VfD). Either "keep both" or "delete both" will be OK with me. -- uriber 21:15, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Well, they are not massacres, but suicide bombers, or attacks or anything else.. a massacre is another definition.. also the 1948 massacers ARE massacres, because done by jewish terrorist organisation (as the UN says) and against civimians. the difference, is by killing 100 civilians, each one alone, killing to kill... Both articles shouls be rewritten, specially List_of_massacres_committed_during_the_Al-Aqsa_Intifada, it is pure proaganda, and not a history subject like List of massacres committed during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war..... And wikipedia is not a place for a cat and mouse play game.. Europeen
    • Delete. - UtherSRG 23:29, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. These are facts. They are massacres: intentional, indiscriminate killing of civilians, even if they "acts of war". I'm wondering who is aginst the list? Israelis would see it as a martyrolog, Hamas would see it as "hall of fame". Both sides should be happy. Mikkalai 03:22, 1 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep of course. Humus sapiens 04:20, 1 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep both; change both page titles to "List of attacks during". Both pages should eventually include attacks from each side against the other, for the given time period; often there is a clear correlation. Individual attacks may be named "<foo> massacre", if that is how they were most commonly known. +sj+ 21:26, 2004 Feb 1 (UTC)
    • Uriber created this to make a point, as indicated above. However the point is invalid for several reasons. One is that this page only lists things done by one side (and you can be sure that trying to add the larger number of Palestinian civilians killed would be fought tooth and nail). On the other had the older page lists actions from both sides using the same criteria. A second reason is that all this stuff is listed already at Terrorism against Israel in 2004 (and similarly 2003, 2002, ...). What is the excuse for listing it twice? These have to be merged into a single article. A third reason is that one should not create articles just to make points. --Zero 11:23, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Unlike the other article, this is not yet history. It is an article in a controversial area, set up with arbitrary criteria to favour one side over the other. Otherwise for balance will we have a list detailing every killing of every Palestinian over the same period? (From the BBC website today "More than 2,600 Palestinians and at least 875 Israelis have died since the outbreak of the Palestinian uprising in September 2000.") Imc 19:49, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • It is a list of indisputable facts....these, along with others, will provide the material from which people will select and deem some subset to be relevant and create a history. The history will contain context. It is indeed early to write that context. Wikipedia should be, at least we should strive to make it, a consistent whole. This list is a subset of Terrorism against Israel with a selection based upon the number of dead. Terrorism against Israel does not include failed attempts or acts that failed to kill Israelis, so that list is also partial, a subset of a fuller list. List of massacres committed during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war to the List of villages destroyed during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war may (have not checked each and every instance) have a similar subset/superset relationship. If so we should decide how to handle such articles and apply that decision to both. So, keep until we have a policy on subset/superset articles. OneVoice 01:31, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • It's obvious the only reason for creating this page was to prove a point (aka trolling). It is also a quite arbitrarily chosen specification for what to be selected on the list. However, it is also quite easy to disprove his point by adding three to four times as many massacres made by the Israeli army. I'd me much happier with the name "list of suicide bombings during the Al-Aqsa Intifada". Keep. BL 02:27, Feb 4, 2004 (UTC)
    • Not a contributer to this page or the discussion so far, I happened to bump into it and wish to give my two cents. I believe this to be factual information provided under well-defined criteria. Since Amnesty International defines the Palestinian suicide attacks as Crimes against Humanity, the definition massacre for the attacks with more than 10 victims is anything but unreasonable. However, I do not agree to Uriber's proposal of conditional removal, all war crimes should be published and be kept unconditionally online. It is regretful that these crimes happen, but since past events (of any war) can not be undone, it is best to give them their due exposure. That is exactly what this and similar pages accomplish. Keep. Gidonb 21:49, 4 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. keep info as is (change title if needed though). JDR
    • The real trouble is, you need a lot of information from both sides to produce a database like this with NPOV. As long as there is at least one person on each side of the lines adding to each of these pages, it should be allowed to stay. The month-by-month lists of attacks since the Intifada began similarly needs balanced contributors; some months only attacks on Israelis are listed, others it is mainly attacks by Israelis. And again, bombings (no matter how detestable) aren't 'massacres'; neither are the modern-day Israeli attacks on stations, moving vehicles, etc. There hasn't been a proper massacre in a while, and thank God for that. +sj+ 10:04, 2004 Feb 5 (UTC)
    • I'm sure this can be kept, but needs a lot of work. There are loads of these articles on the middle east. I think we either delete them all or keep them all. I'm not taking sides. Ideally one day you'd all be able to come together and make a NPOV article - we are a long way from that yetSecretlondon 19:32, Feb 5, 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. This an accurate data that should be recorded. It was claimed here that it doesn't provide the full picture. This article deals with only aspect and therefore limits itself to it. There are plenty of other articles related to the al-Aqsa intifada which can give the full picture. MathKnight 21:26, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. I think that the only problem is that the title is somewhat ambigious; because, arguably, Israeli forces may have committed "massacres" which took place during the period of the Second Intifiada... The page title should be changed to either reflect this fact, or the article should include "massacres" by both sides. To my mind, there's no NPOV question here whatsoever. - Seth Ilys 14:11, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep but change to a title without massacre. Also it would be nice to see the actions of both sides in one article. Rmhermen 14:33, Feb 6, 2004 (UTC)
      • Keep. I just wanted to add that it the definition of 'massacre' that was given as 10 or more & equivalent to the 'List of Massacres Committed During the 1948 Arab-Israeli War' lists one massacre {Jerusalem Post Bombing February 1, 1948 Arab 6+ } at 6+ individuals. Finally, some of the 'massacres' mentioned in the '48 list have no sourcing (such as the Lydda/Lod) yet offer up numbers such as 250! Shouldn't there be some evidence of a massacre and not merely a battle? --Just wondering

This is Neutral

This is perfectly accurate and true. Just because some posters support Palestinian terrorism does not make such crimes excusable.

You're trolling bad, now. The facts are true, but the list is one-sided; and you're clearly biased strongly against Palestine ~ No one can excuse terrorism by Palestine, but why is it then that you ignore the state terrorism perpetrated regularly by the Israeli Defense Forces?

Not sure how that's a threat...

I'm not sure how that's a threat... what would be wrong with going in and adding in monthly incursion casualties to balance it out? I'd also be open to other ideas (such as renaming this to be a list of suicide bombings, and then creating another article on monthly Palestinian casualties (or particularly disturbing Palestinian civilian deaths) and then have the two reference each other) - but are we expected to leave this as a (quite clearly) NPOV article with no balance? Rei

It came across as a threat. "Delete or else". Sorry if I misunderstood your intent. Martin 20:10, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Keep

Apologists for terrorism may want to equate mass murderers with the actions that Israel is forced to commit to protect itself against the same. But there is no justification in equating planned, premeditated homicide with self-protection. This should in no way be combined with the separate issue of the equally tragic deaths of Arab civilians who get caught in the crossfire.

The list is accurate in describing the killing as a "massacre" -- which by definition is:

  • "The act or an instance of killing a large number of humans indiscriminately and cruelly." (American Heritage Dictionary)
  • "The killing of a considerable number of human beings under circumstances of atrocity or cruelty, or contrary to the usages of civilized people" (Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary)

Is anyone disputing that >10 people killed is "a large (or considerable) number of humans?" Or having your body blown up while sitting in a cafe or riding a bus is an "atrocity or cruelty?"

It's weak-kneed ephemisms like "attack" and "sucide bombing" that whitewash the cruel reality and savage butchery of these horrid events.

Unless you can dispute the factual nature of the material, in terms of the count of victims or the terrorist groups responsible, the listing is a valid article and deserves to be kept intact. --LeFlyman 01:56, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Leflyman, that's ridicolous. The facts are indisputable, but that does not mean it is valid, nor that it should not be re-written. It only lists massacres committed by one side, violating the NPOV policy - If you read up on the definition of massacre, or for that matter, of terrorism(regardless that this article is not about terrorism, but on massacres committed during the AA intifada), you will understand that the massacres committed by the IDF during the intifada deserves mentioning here.

No longer on VfD as most votes were to keep. Angela. 10:28, Feb 8, 2004 (UTC)

Will move to "list of suicide bombings in the Al-Aqsa intifada" soon unless someone object. BL 20:58, Feb 9, 2004 (UTC)

  • I object. I'd like this to be a general list of massacres, regardless of the specifics of the kinds of weapons used. -- uriber 17:53, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Context

An israeli propaganda. they don't show the reasons or the attacks, neither the israeli crimes done a day or two before the attacks

If anyone thinks they can do it, why not provide links of some sort between the various acts of violence? That is, if the Israeli army blows up a car or destroys a house or fires a missile, we have two basic choices:

  1. Report it like a "bolt from the blue", bolstering the claim of some advocates that Israelis are waging indiscriminate and unprovoked war on innocent civilians; or,
  2. Report it as a response to previous Arab violence (if so claimed by Israel), thus bolstering the claim of some advocates that Israelis are waging a defensive war against Arab terrorism

Note: I'm not saying these are the only 2 choices, but they're the first that came to mind. I'm open to suggestions about how we can make this a neutral article. --Uncle Ed 21:19, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Theres also NPOV which simply reports how many children or innocent civilians were killed, and whether the intended target themself was actually injured, and whether or not he got a fair trial. -戴&#30505sv 20:42, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  1. How old is a "child"? In discussions of gun control in the US, anyone 25 years or younger killed with a "gun" is "child".
  2. Does it matter if the child was attacking someone, e.g., 15-year-old with a rifle?
  3. How do you define "fair trial"?

I don't think NPOV means neutral in the sense of "value-free" or "unrelated to human motives". Rather, it means that the Wikipedia shouldn't endorse or condemn any particular person, act, or philosophy.

Hm. Maybe I should make a UnificationWiki, touting the absolute values of truth, beauty and goodness. Then I could freely condemn violent terrorism by Arabs its articles, just as much as violent acts of "counter-terrorism" by Israelis. Maybe I could give Sharon and Arafat 30-day suspensions from Palestine for each offense? Ah, the power of dreams! --Uncle Ed 19:57, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Neutrality does not mean equality of proganda

I fail to see what any of the massacre lists add to the debate or to the wealth of information already to be found on wikipedia. The conflict is covered with a reasonably complete historical overview and with minute detail of the Al-Aqsa intifada. The lists should either be made addenda of the latter or dropped as meaningless point scoring.

The suggested compromise of merging both lists ignores wider context and provides no useful information other than that the Israel-Palestine conflict is a waste of life and effort; if only that were the authors' point.

I agree. Our efforts should go towards a balanced overview of the context of this sad conflict, and not degrade into a competition of who can say "massacre" more often. dab 20:29, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

VfD

For a june 2005 discussion about deletion of this article, see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/List of massacres committed during the Al-Aqsa Intifada.

Research

I was doing some research into urban terrorism, and came across this page. I have to say, that this is totally useless to anybody wanting to find any real information about the events described. The name of the list isn't a problem, so much as the way everything on it is described as a massacre. A proper, encyclopedic list of "massacres" during the Intifada would have titles briefly explaining the event, i.e. XXX bus bombing or XXX restaurant shooting, thus enabling a researcher to gain some idea of the actual nature of the attack, rather than the very vague term massacre. The individual links should then have an interesting article about the circumstances and context of each attack. Instead there is the briefest description followed by a list of names, where there is even an article at all. I have no problems with lists of names, but only when they are backed up by a well-written article about the incident. Finally, the following articles deal with similar events, but the writers have managed to retain the descriptive nature of the title and content by using specific types of attack and refraining from the unclear massacre, and should be used as a model for this issue: 7 July 2005 London bombings, 11 March 2004 Madrid train bombings and September 11, 2001 attacks. This is my case for why this could-be-interesting article should be rewritten. --Jackyd101 04:23, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I'll add "Jenin massacre"

Robin Hood 1212 22:18, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Nonsense. Even the UN concluded that there was no massacre there. ←Humus sapiens ну? 22:39, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

It certainly fits the arbitrary definition of massacre given here... More than 10 civilian Palestinians were killed by the IDF. This page must be deleted. These inconsistencies and double standards should not be accepted.--Burgas00 18:19, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I suggest you read and observe WP:POINT. John Nevard (talk) 05:12, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Another word instead of Massacres?

Maybe we should call them incidents, they same things it's done to what Israelis do here, they call their massacres incidents. Robin Hood 1212 18:16, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

  • While for a different reason than Robin Hood 1212, I think massacre isn't the right word. Massacre suggests to me very large scale. How about suicide bombings or major/notable terrorist attacks? ehudshapira 04:16, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
massacre is the correct word, and also widely used with many of the incidents here, and therefore it's the word that should be used. It's also the word used for other acts of similar sort in differnet contexts. Amoruso 12:26, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
I would support such a move, to List of major terrorist attacks during the Al-Aqsa Intofada or List of major acts of terrorism during the Al-Aqsa Intofada. --Eliyak T·C 02:39, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Robin Hood, please take a look at Deir Yassin massacre. If you agree to also rename that to "Deir Yassin incident", I agree with calling this article "List of incidents...". --Daniel575 | (talk) 13:09, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I support changing it to terrorist attacks or something of that sort. Massacre makes it sound like a military massacring unarmed people. These events were bombings and terrorist attacks. These were not massacres. Wounded Knee was a massacre, this is different. --יהושועEric 15:36, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Amoruso, the fact that it's used incorrectly in other instances doesn't mean it should be here too. Using strong words in every instance makes them lose their effectiveness when they're really needed. (And BTW, Maxim restaurant suicide bombing wasn't dubbed massacre, for some reason.) I also think it should be renamed to something like 'Suicide Bombings during...' because otherwise people may add what the Palestinian call massacres, and this doesn't appear to be the intention here.

    So what's the consensus? The above is 4:2 for it. Anyone with more editing skills cares to do it? | ehudshapira 23:57, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Add my vote for a change. I don't personally agree with Robin Hood's reasoning, but as I said above, labelling every terrorist incident a massacre is non-descriptive and unencyclopedic. Change the title to bombing where applicable.--Jackyd101 03:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

It's not always bombings, some massacres can be shootings etc. These are massacres because many people were murdered in them. This is the term used in other wikipedia articles for a reason. Obviously wanting to change it is wanting to further put a good light on the terrorist attacks which wikipedia shound't endorse. It's ok to change it to "Large Scale terroirst attacks" per יהושועEric suggestion if one wants to go that way. Amoruso 11:46, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

We should treat everything equal. If massacre is too pov for mass killing comitted by Israel, it also applies here. I think attack or major attack is better. I also will support deletion of this article(if proposed). Peace. --Nielswik(talk) 13:33, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
To Amoruso - I only said bombing where applicable; if something was not a bombing, then use shooting or another word. I have no desire to play down any aspect of terrorism, only to clarify the nature of the events. Elsewhere in Wikipedia the term massacre is usually only used where a historical event has been widely desribed as a massacre such as Katyn massacre or more pertinently Deir Yassin massacre or 1929 Hebron massacre. The evets here, whilst undeniably tragic, have not been popularly coined as "massacres" in the same way and labelling them thusly is unencyclopedic and confusing, however grammatically correct use of the word may be.--Jackyd101 14:34, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
See List of massacres committed during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war for comparison. Many of the events there are factually disputed, but those alleged massacres are on the same order of magnitude as these listed here. -- uriber 20:59, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Deliberate Ommission?

The figures dont seem to add up here. Over 3500 Palestinians were killed by Israeli forces during the Al Aqsa intifada, compared to 1000 Israelis by Palestinian militant groups. Does none of those 3500 deaths qualify as a "massacre"? Or where they all accidents or "incidents"? I think Israeli military action against civilians should be also included in this article lest it seem POV and politically motivated.--Burgas00 20:40, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

It's not just that- I've looked at 5 sources (so far) none of which even mention the word massacre (including the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs)!! Even some of the internal wiki links don't refer to them as such. This "encyclopedic entry" is a joke. I thought I've seen the worst betrayal of the concept of NPOV here in wikipedia- until I stumbled here that is. If this article is ever going to come anywhere near respectable, a fair criteria should be used, listing BOTH side's tragic civilian losses. --khello 19:22, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Maybe a Rfc should be made for this article...--Burgas00 21:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Palestinians don't count, didn't you know. Israeli lives are worth more. (sarcasm) --70.48.243.138 14:26, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

So please provide a list of all the occasions on which Israel attacked Palestinian civilians with the stated goal of trying to kill or maim as many as possible. TewfikTalk 15:02, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.luquay.com/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_Israeli_civilian_casualties_in_the_Second_Intifada/Archive_1&oldid=1079219558"