Hmmm - I thought there was a thing against using munitions like that on soldiers. I don't remember the details, but you are allowed to use anti-personnel, but not HE or armor-piercing and the like. Those have to be targeted at equipment, vehicles, or the like.

Now, the same person that said that also said that belt buckles are equipment, so take it for what it's worth...

Odd, from what I've read, the Hague Convention requires all signatories to use only bullets that do not expand, fragment, or flatten in the body, which pretty much means FMJ only (even plain lead shot flattens an unacceptable amount). The Geneva Convention of 1978 extended many of the provisions of the previous conventions to non-signatories in general, and Vietcong terrorists in particular, so anyone that was interested in currying favor with the UN would be using FMJs even against Haji and his bloodthirsty buddies.

Thankfully, Israel never signed the 1978 Convention, and while the US's own Jimmy the Dhimmi did sign it, Congress never ratified it, so the two of us can still use hollowpoints all we want.

I'm guessing, therefore, that this probably was Hamas vs. Fatah, presented on Israeli TV, probably using ammo purchased through the UN.

Dunno if I was clear, I was talking about the video of the group getting taken out by a missile of sorts. Personally, FMJ seems like a good idea to me. For the most part, wounding a soldier with FMJ, even a torso hit, doesn't necessarily kill them. It does, however, wound them which means they and probably one to two of their buddies are now out of the fight (as the buddies should be dragging them back to the corpsmen).

AFAIK, dropping bombs on bad guys is sorta what it's all about.

Depends on the situation, I guess. You can bomb certain things and not others. Except that we napalmed things and all. I really do need to look into what the deal is, just so I know.

"Personally, FMJ seems like a good idea to me."

It actually is, for the reasons you mentioned... when fighting soldiers on a battlefield who obey the Geneva Convention.

When fighting guerillas in general, and terrorists in particular, not so much. When the enemy's goal is propaganda victories instead of military ones, using ammunition that tends to overpenetrate and damage houses or kill civilians plays right into their hands. Further, ammo that doesn't stop the enemy cold gives them an opportunity to take out nearby civilians, and civilian deaths are always blamed on the stronger side in asymmetric warfare. "If you're so powerful, why can't you keep the terrorists from killing us?" is the question guerillas love to make people ask.