Does the IDF target civilians?

Mycroft said:
Not at all. I'm just looking for the part where it says the IDF targets civilians.

Can you point it out?
Click to expand...

Sure, its right there inbettween the lines.

Its almost like saying that in say.... the 60's Blacks were not discriminated in our courts because the Constitution says you couldnt do so. Of course there was plenty of discrimination, even if it wasnt the law.
 
Tmy said:
Sure, its right there inbettween the lines.

Its almost like saying that in say.... the 60's Blacks were not discriminated in our courts because the Constitution says you couldnt do so. Of course there was plenty of discrimination, even if it wasnt the law.
Click to expand...

In the 60's there were plenty of examples of discrimination against blacks. Separate schools, for one.

Sorry Tmy, I'm more skeptical than that. If you want to claim the IDF, or anyone else, has a policy of targeting civilians, I want to see evidence. All these human rights organizations stop short of saying that for a reason, and the reason is there is no evidence.

Is there evidence to support excessive force? Sure, but "excessive" is subjective.

Is there evidence that individual soldiers may have acted way out of line? Sure, but that doesn't translate to a policy shared by the entire organization.

Is there evidence the IDF may have been reckless at times? Sure, but that's still not the same as targeting civilians.

If you're skeptical, you will look at the evidence and make the distinctions. If you just want to believe your predetermined opinions, then you won't.
 
Mycroft said:
In the 60's there were plenty of examples of discrimination against blacks. Separate schools, for one.

Sorry Tmy, I'm more skeptical than that. If you want to claim the IDF, or anyone else, has a policy of targeting civilians, I want to see evidence. All these human rights organizations stop short of saying that for a reason, and the reason is there is no evidence.

Is there evidence to support excessive force? Sure, but "excessive" is subjective.

Is there evidence that individual soldiers may have acted way out of line? Sure, but that doesn't translate to a policy shared by the entire organization.

Is there evidence the IDF may have been reckless at times? Sure, but that's still not the same as targeting civilians.

If you're skeptical, you will look at the evidence and make the distinctions. If you just want to believe your predetermined opinions, then you won't.
Click to expand...

By ignoring the problem you essientially condone it. Many companies have lost sexual harrasment suits, but NONE of them ever had written polices condoing the behavior.
 
The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories, B’Tselem, in a report dated March 14, 2002, titled “Shooting at Ambulances & IDF Impediments to medical treatment,” said:

Over the past two weeks (28 February - 13 March), the intentional attacks on medical teams and the prevention of medical teams from treating the sick and wounded have been almost unprecedented. IDF soldiers have fired at ambulances, killing five Palestinian medical personnel who were on duty, wounded several members of ambulance medical teams, and damaging the ambulances. In addition, the IDF prevented medical treatment to the sick and wounded, even leaving people to bleed to death. Hospitals have been unable to function because of the damage to the electricity, water, and telephone infrastructure, and the blocking of access to some of them. As a result, the hospitals are unable to receive the wounded and sick, or obtain food and medicine… These violations are an integral part of Israeli policy and are accompanied by other grave practices. The matters described in this report are another indication of the IDF's total loss of restraint.
Click to expand...
Souce: http://www.btselem.org/Download/Ambulances_Eng.doc Ooops, link seems to not be working...
 
Last edited:
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2001/07/06/isrlpa81.htm

The clashes between Israelis and Palestinians since October 2000 have been marked by systematic violations of international human rights and humanitarian law. Civilians have been the main victims of the violence, and an immediate priority must be to bring such violations to an end. At least 470 Palestinians have been killed, most of them unlawfully by Israeli security forces when their lives and the lives of others were not in danger. More than 120 Israelis have been killed, most of them civilians deliberately targeted by armed groups and individuals. The death toll includes more than 130 children.
Click to expand...
 
If I could interrupt the mutual posturing here, I think it's quite simple.

Orwell, the IDF doesn't deliberately target civilians.

Mycroft, the IDF has shown a willingness to incur civilian casualties in pursuit of a non-civilian target.

Personally, I think the IDF shows decent restraint. If they were really in the business of actually targeting civilians, how many Palestinians would there be today? Still, the fact is that civilains die from IDF bullets - and that's a PR issue more than a tactical one. You can use that to prop up whatever spin you feel like applying, pro-IDF, pro-Hamas, whatever.
 
Orwell said:
:rolleyes:You know Mycroft, this is the kind of attitude that qualifies you as a partisan hack...
Click to expand...

If demanding proof of your claims before I change my mind makes me a "partisan hack", then I'm guilty and always will be. I freely admit I will not change my mind merely because you express a bad opinion of me for not doing so, but will instead demand sufficient evidence.

Skepticism is about proof. We do not "read between the lines" as Tmy would have us do, nor do we take assertion after assertion that because civilians become casualties, that they are targeted.
 
Mycroft said:
If demanding proof of your claims before I change my mind makes me a "partisan hack", then I'm guilty and always will be. I freely admit I will not change my mind merely because you express a bad opinion of me for not doing so, but will instead demand sufficient evidence.

Skepticism is about proof. We do not "read between the lines" as Tmy would have us do, nor do we take assertion after assertion that because civilians become casualties, that they are targeted.
Click to expand...

That's horse manure in this case and you know it. I gave you proof, but since you're a partisan hack, it isn't enough. But I know how it is with you, it's never enough...

Jocko: the IDF targets civilians, sometimes deliberately so. Read the damn links.
 
Let's look at the IDF today, in what can only be called a 'shooting war' in the North -- here we have an unprovoked, cross-border assault, typical of the type that Syria routinely engaged in prior to the outbreak of the Six Day War in 1967.
Now, let's look at the facts:
Is the IDF targeting civilians in retaliation for it's own defensive forces being blasted and the innocent civilians in quiet rural communities coming under violent attack? It would be a simple matter for Israel to target anything that moves on the other side, completely blanketing entire villages with a hail of fire as retaliation. It would be a proper and understandable reaction by any nation on Earth. It is exactly what most people would predict an Army might do under the circumstances.

  • Monday's attacks were the heaviest Hezbollah has carried out since the IDF withdrew from south Lebanon five years ago. The militant group fired a heavy barrage of rockets and missiles at IDF positions along the border area, prompting Israeli retaliation with warplanes and artillery. Eleven Israelis - seven soldiers and four civilians - were wounded in the clashes.

IDF warplanes and artillery. Sounds terrible.... Hmmmmmmmm, there must be a few hundred Lebanese civilians dead, targeted by the IDF.
Can anyone point to any Lebanese civilians dead?

http://yalibnan.com/site/archives/2005/06/hizbollah_strik.php

Oh, sorry, that was an article reporting the same type of thing back in June.
"No reports of Lebanese casualties" is how it's phrased in that news piece.

How about a current body count as a result of the "IDF targeting civilians" in this recent flare-up? Certainly, those Human Rights groups can point to a few innocent Arab civilians caught in the crossfire? No? How strange... it doesn't seem possible that the IDF can send sorties of jets to bomb targets and fire out barrages of artillery shells at targets, and yet, no civilians are targeted.
Makes no sense, if the IDF is in the business of targeting civilians.


Meanwhile, turnspeak continues unabated:
Hezbollah blamed Israel yesterday for the escalation.
 
When Hezzbola targets a military post or boarder crossing are they not terrorists?? Since they aint targeting civillians?
 
webfusion said:
Huh? Could you rephrase that, TMY, so it makes sense?
Click to expand...


Well the definition of terrorists is that they attack civillians. So if their target is a military post, is that action NOT terrorism?
 
Huh? Could you say what you mean, TMY, in more precise terms so we know what you're indicating?
 
I would like to know what proof would be needed in order to show that IDF targets civillians.

Do ya'll not agree with the notion that an organization can created an atmosphere that condones somthing. They condone the action by deciding not to do anything to correct the action.
 
webfusion said:
Huh? Could you say what you mean, TMY, in more precise terms so we know what you're indicating?
Click to expand...

I thought the last one was clear. Its just everyone seems to be so tied to the literal definitions of "targets". If you hang with literal defininations then terrorist are only terrorists when only targeting civilians.
 
From News Reports yesterday: "The Hezbollah shelling continued throughout the afternoon, as a large number of Katyusha rockets and mortar shells fell in Kiryat Shmona, Metulla and other northern Israel communities."

Are you trying to say that this attack on Israeli towns was not terrorism? Just curious, TMY, where you are coming from on this.

The IDF does not target civilians. No orders are given to do so, no strategy exists to do so, no political doctrine exists that they do so, no soldiers have come forward to say they have been asked to do so. As a military organization involved in an active combat role, with live fire directed against its members RIGHT NOW even as we are sitting here typing these words, I see nothing anywhere to indicate that the IDF perpetrates harming civilians as a goal or objective.
 
Well, here we go again... This thread was about the IDF. And now the thread is becoming about Hezbollah. Whenever the subject of Israeli abuses comes up, one of the Israel apologists inevitably lures the thread away from Israeli abuses and starts talking about something or other that the enemies of Israel did, luring people away from the initial subject... (sigh)
 
Orwell said:
the IDF targets civilians, sometimes deliberately so. Read the damn links.
Click to expand...
Now I see your confusion. You are claiming unintentional targeting of civilians, that's a non-sequitor isn't it? Unless, of course, you're re-defining what "target" means to suit your agenda. Much like the Kansas school board re-defining science to include the supernatural.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom