a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
Rock throwing can kill. All references I have made to what I believe are against the IDF rules of engagement are other types of incidents.
Tmy
Philosopher
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2002
- Messages
- 6,487
Yeah but by "police" i mean they are a govt security force. Government employees with guns are held to a higher standard than bomb toting terrorists.
I am not talking about anything that went on before the so-called "second Intifada". And that's for a pretty simple reason: I am pretty much limited to what I can link, and most of what went on before the mid nineties is not on-line.
There's a small paragraph in one of the articles I linked that made an impression on me:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0906-02.htm
It seems to me that this indicates that the military practices (and the military culture) inside the IDF may have changed for the worse.
Last edited:
Considering the idiotic hostility that any criticism of Israel creates around these parts, I felt that I had no choice but to swamp the thread with links supporting my points.
Look, we probably both want the same thing: an end to violence. But Israel will certainly never achieve any kind of peace by brutalising and killing an ever increasing number of Palestinians: not only will that create the hatred that feeds the extremists with the cannon fodder they need, but that will also make Israel loose the sympathy of people around the world.
Last edited:
Have I denied that Palestinian terrorists exist in one of my posts? No, I haven't. I'm sure that there are many soldiers in the IDF that behave humanely and follow whatever procedures they're supposed to follow. I am also sure that there are elements in the IDF who don't give a damn, and that the "culture of impunity" mentioned in several of my links has encouraged these elements to target civilians.
I know you believe that the IDF never targets civilians, you already said so countless times. But why should I believe you and not AI, HRW, B'Tselem, the Israeli soldiers quoted by newspapers, observations by journalists, etc.?
Last edited:
webfusion
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2004
- Messages
- 9,795
Not saints
Indeed it doesn't. And as Orwell has so conveniently posted for everyone, there are huge effing problems with the IDF actions, problems that range from using people as human shields (addressed in the Israeli High Court of Justice), to the use of mass detention without trials, to shooting 12-year-olds who are holding toy guns, to overzealous reactions to mobs attacking with stones.
Indeed, there are thousands of Palestinian dead (I abhor the arbitrary use of death-counts in the media using Sept 2000 as a demarcation for 'the intifadeh' because as we Israelis are painfully aware, the Palestinians have suffered casualties going back all the way to the outbreak of street violence in December 1987). Although a characterization has been made of me here by Orwell as saying or believing "a good palestinian is a dead palestinian" --- that is absolutely false. I would prefer that the palestinians cease confronting the armed and lethal IDF directly, cease terrorism in our cities, cease their campaign of incitement and involving children in their jihad, and cease their support of radical islamic fundamentalist movements (such as AlQueda). They have the potential to be good neighbors, they have the potential to emulate our robust democracy and hi-tech industry and attract tourism to their valuable and important land; they have such a positive future ahead of them, if they only adopt a path that that leads them there.
In the discussion at hand, the fact that the IDF does not 'mow down' Palestinians certainly is a Big F'ing Deal. That is exactly the point the Israeli-supporters are making when denying that the IDF targets civilians. The very use of the term 'targets civilians' means that the IDF is out there using their tanks and artillery and air force and other means and methods to kill 'em, to kill as many as possible, to shoot at the crowds and mow them down, to decimate the populations in their cities, to 'ethnically cleanse' the Palestinians in cold blood with malice aforthought, as a matter of IDF policy and government approval.
Targeting civilians does not mean the IDF shooting an (unarmed) man who is participating in potentially-lethal violence and threatening the lives of an IDF patrol, during a riot. Human Rights Watch may think otherwise, Orwell may think otherwise. (I'm not sure, actually, since he is still remaining silent about that incident in Jenin --- he made three posts just now, and not one word in answer to my question about the shooting, and if he believes it is a case of targeted killing.)
Targeting civilians is the what the Islamic terrorists have perfected, to the great chagrin and sorrow of people everywhere.
(see: bombings in Iraq yesterday, in Hillah, where 11 Iraqis were killed and 17 injured Thursday when a car bomb exploded near a crowded soft drink stand, and a second incident near a Baghdad hospital, where innocent kids who were being given sweets by American troops for Thanksgiving lost their lives in a suicide attack).
Israel also faces such terror attacks, routinely, and to equate the IDF as being an organization that 'targets civilians' and by saying 'both sides' are guilty, is disgusting.
Indeed it doesn't. And as Orwell has so conveniently posted for everyone, there are huge effing problems with the IDF actions, problems that range from using people as human shields (addressed in the Israeli High Court of Justice), to the use of mass detention without trials, to shooting 12-year-olds who are holding toy guns, to overzealous reactions to mobs attacking with stones.
Indeed, there are thousands of Palestinian dead (I abhor the arbitrary use of death-counts in the media using Sept 2000 as a demarcation for 'the intifadeh' because as we Israelis are painfully aware, the Palestinians have suffered casualties going back all the way to the outbreak of street violence in December 1987). Although a characterization has been made of me here by Orwell as saying or believing "a good palestinian is a dead palestinian" --- that is absolutely false. I would prefer that the palestinians cease confronting the armed and lethal IDF directly, cease terrorism in our cities, cease their campaign of incitement and involving children in their jihad, and cease their support of radical islamic fundamentalist movements (such as AlQueda). They have the potential to be good neighbors, they have the potential to emulate our robust democracy and hi-tech industry and attract tourism to their valuable and important land; they have such a positive future ahead of them, if they only adopt a path that that leads them there.
In the discussion at hand, the fact that the IDF does not 'mow down' Palestinians certainly is a Big F'ing Deal. That is exactly the point the Israeli-supporters are making when denying that the IDF targets civilians. The very use of the term 'targets civilians' means that the IDF is out there using their tanks and artillery and air force and other means and methods to kill 'em, to kill as many as possible, to shoot at the crowds and mow them down, to decimate the populations in their cities, to 'ethnically cleanse' the Palestinians in cold blood with malice aforthought, as a matter of IDF policy and government approval.
Targeting civilians does not mean the IDF shooting an (unarmed) man who is participating in potentially-lethal violence and threatening the lives of an IDF patrol, during a riot. Human Rights Watch may think otherwise, Orwell may think otherwise. (I'm not sure, actually, since he is still remaining silent about that incident in Jenin --- he made three posts just now, and not one word in answer to my question about the shooting, and if he believes it is a case of targeted killing.)
Targeting civilians is the what the Islamic terrorists have perfected, to the great chagrin and sorrow of people everywhere.
(see: bombings in Iraq yesterday, in Hillah, where 11 Iraqis were killed and 17 injured Thursday when a car bomb exploded near a crowded soft drink stand, and a second incident near a Baghdad hospital, where innocent kids who were being given sweets by American troops for Thanksgiving lost their lives in a suicide attack).
Israel also faces such terror attacks, routinely, and to equate the IDF as being an organization that 'targets civilians' and by saying 'both sides' are guilty, is disgusting.
Last edited:
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2003
- Messages
- 20,501
Essentially your argument here is this:
Because the IDF is made up of humans, some of those humans will be bad people, you use the words dishonest and brutal.
Because we know some of the IDF are dishonest and brutal, it follows that these dishonest and brutal men in the IDF sometimes commit atrocities.
Because the IDF commits atrocities and the Palestinians commit atrocities, it’s beyond dispute that both sides commit atrocities.
And so you’ve created equivalence between the IDF and Palestinian terrorist organizations without any evidence at all.
You could use the same argument on any organization.
The Mafia is a brutal, violent criminal organization. Sometimes its member commit brutal and violent crimes.
Major League Baseball has thousands of members, all of whom are human. Some of these humans will be brutal, violent and criminal.
Because we know that some Major League Baseball players are brutal, violent and criminal, it follows that sometimes they commit brutal and violent crimes.
Because Major League Baseball players sometimes commit brutal and violent crimes, they are no different from the Mafia.
Absurd? Yeah, but all it takes is one news article about a baseball player getting involved in a drug deal, rape, or drive-by shooting and you have all the evidence you need to “prove” your case.
You can do the same with any organization. Boy Scouts, policemen, paramedics, public school teachers…any group large enough will have some members in it who are criminal and violent, more than enough to “prove” your case.
That’s why these equivalence arguments are fallacious. It doesn’t create an accurate picture to simply say ”atrocities are committed by both sides” and to let it go at that. That’s misleading and dishonest, though being technically true makes for good propaganda.
The truth here is that one of these groups commits atrocities as a matter of policy, and the other group has a policy not to commit atrocities, even if sometimes rogue members do it anyway. That’s the difference, and they are not equivilent.
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2003
- Messages
- 20,501
Therefore you may feel free to accept even the worst smear against the IDF without applying any critical thinking at all.
After all, “might be true” is good enough if you want it bad enough.Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2003
- Messages
- 20,501
When I was a kid, early grade school, some of my friends were a little more violent than normal. We’d have pine cone wars that would invariably escalate into rock wars. We’d pick up pieces of gravel or decorative stone and chuck these rocks at each other as hard we could, and they would hurt. You hoped for the body shot and would be wearing a jacket, and that would offer you pretty good protection, but if you got hit in the legs or, god forbid, the head…yeaouch!
I’ve seen videos of Palestinian kids throwing rocks. They were not chucking gravel like we used to. They were throwing rocks ranging in size from fist sized to soft-ball sized, and it wasn’t just one at a time, but 30 or 40 would come crashing down on their target all at once. They were deadly.
Shoot someone throwing rocks? The soldiers in the video I saw didn’t. They just took cover in their vehicle and drove away.
But having seen it it’s easy to imagine a situation where retreat isn’t an option. What do you do? You defend yourself.
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2003
- Messages
- 20,501
I would have to call myself a partisan hack in order for it to be "self-avowed." Since I don't label myself that way, the correct term would be "so called."
Because you know that I can't tolerate subtle remarks. It must be obvious to you that Orwell doesn't have a case,not because IDF is the perfect army ( armies are by definition unliberal and undemocratic) but because nobody will be able to prove that a country built on western principles allow its officilias to give orders to target civilians deliberately even if this country is in War and its own civilians are being targetted by terrorists.
Also, you do know that IDF has nothing in common with the American or British troops and maybe the Australian ones. IDF soldiers are people like you and me. Your sons would be serving in IDF if you lived in Israel and they would be serving in real war conditions.
So, IDF is about common Israelis, people like me and I don't tolerate unfair and unsupported snide remarks for the people of Israel who try to make a life in a very hostile environment. I don't tolerate unfair remarks for people that they were never given a chance to figure out what sort of country they wish because they try to protect their lives.I don't tolerate descrimination for a country that unlike its dreadful conditions goes really well and will go better.Above all, I refuse to demonstrate my solidarity towards the fair palestinian cause by eating my flesh,there are other ways, less dramatic and more efficient.
Like every nation, Israel is far from perfect but I don't understand why people,especially the atheists of this forum judge Israelis by applying moral standards and expect Israelis to live in the islamic terror and be the examples of democratic westeners in the same time.
All the above are familiar to you from our previous conversations, public and private and yet you, like some other people here ( Capel Dodger,Cleon etc ) refuse to judge Israel by applying the same standards you use to judge your countries. People like Orwell don't influence anybody so I am not interested in pushing him by putting him in my signature and ridicule him in the way only I know. People around the world are influenced by people like you or Capel Dodger that why it's you that I am pushing.
That's why you made it to my signature.
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
Good grief, now I'm being subtle again. Honestly, you have no idea what you are talking about when you try mind reading about what is the real meaning of what I am saying, behind the subtlety. I tried really hard to say just what I thought, as plainly and simply as I could, without any other meaning to be attributed to what I did say.
I was not arguing for Orwell or against him, but simply trying put the 'sceptical' case. What is the evidence?
That is, are there copies of orders that say the IDF must target civilians and kill them? I don't believe anyone has ever offered any evidence that there are.
Why then do we get examples such as the 12 year old girl riddled with the bullets of a full magazine of an automatic weapon? If there are no orders, then the individual must have acted outside orders, and the rules of engagement. Yet when they do, it seems that they are let off, even when these rules must have been broken.
Are you claiming that Israel is being treated unfairly when this is pointed out?
Who started this thread? It wasn't me, nor anyone else who thinks the Palestinians have the rough end of the pineapple. It was someone who is pro-Israeli.
I was not arguing for Orwell or against him, but simply trying put the 'sceptical' case. What is the evidence?
That is, are there copies of orders that say the IDF must target civilians and kill them? I don't believe anyone has ever offered any evidence that there are.
Why then do we get examples such as the 12 year old girl riddled with the bullets of a full magazine of an automatic weapon? If there are no orders, then the individual must have acted outside orders, and the rules of engagement. Yet when they do, it seems that they are let off, even when these rules must have been broken.
Are you claiming that Israel is being treated unfairly when this is pointed out?
Who started this thread? It wasn't me, nor anyone else who thinks the Palestinians have the rough end of the pineapple. It was someone who is pro-Israeli.
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
When I am being subtle, and not saying clearly and openly what I really think, what is it that I am really thinking?
zenith-nadir
Illuminator
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2004
- Messages
- 4,482
A large terrorist bomb factory was found concealed in a house in Jenin.
So the IDF had to go get the head of Islamic Jihad in Jenin at their own peril. They risked their lives to stop the leader of the group who is responsible for sending a suicide bomber into an open air market full of Israeli civilians. And guess what, concealed in a noncombatant house was a bomb factory producing more bombs specifically built to kill Israelis.
Did the Palestinian Authority know Iyad Hussein Abu Al-Roub was there, you bet your boots they know who the leader of Islamic Jihad is in Jenin. Did they take any action against the the leader of Islamic Jihad in Jenin who sent a suicide bomber into an open air market full of Israeli civilians? Nope.
Let's continue.
So in order to capture, not target and kill Iyad Hussein Abu Al-Roub, the IDF met stiff resistance where one Palestinian was killed and twelve were wounded.
Where is the Palestinian Authority? Why do they refuse to separate the Palestinian combatants from the Palestinian noncombatants? Why do they allow bomb factories to be hidden in civilian homes? Why do they refuse to arrest known leaders of known terror groups who are known to have sent bombers into Israel to kill Israeli civilians? Remember Islamic Jihad is fighting to destroy Israel not for the Performance-Based Roadmap to a Permanent Two-State Solution to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.
Now imagine if you are Israeli and this has been going on day after day, month after month, year after year, decade after decade....because it has.
Since Israelis are only human and have emotions don't you think some humans in the IDF would resent Palestinians after doing this task day after day, month after month, year after year, decade after decade? But if the IDF simply "targets civilians" why did they just not go wild in Jenin? Why did they wait in a 16-hour-siege while under fire from other Palestinians to arrest Iyad Hussein Abu Al-Roub? I'll tell you why, because there is no policy in the IDF to target civilians.
Those soldiers in the IDF had to risk their own lives to go stop a known leader of a terror group who sent bombers into Israel because the Palestinian Authority refuses to do it. THey risked their own lives to save other lives. And in doing so they were A) shot at, which resulted in the death of one Palestinian and the wounding of 12 others and B) they discovered more terror bombs in a bomb factory concealed in a civilian home.
I do not think anyone at JREF could do that kind of job day in and day out without feeling some sort of emotion. This has been going on for decades and sometimes individuals in the IDF crack and do weird things under this pressure - Hell, even other 'disciplined' military forces do weird things in war, see: Abu Ghraib prison.
I don't judge you by what you are thinking, I am judging you by what you post here.
We have a discussion. Orwell, in a childish fashion made one of his usual,unfounded silly claims. Orwell. A poster who refused to take my challenge a couple of weeks ago when I asked him to mention the most crucial matter for the Palestinians right now. Were you surprized? I wasn't because typing " crucial matter+palestinians" in the google search box won't give you much...
So Mycroft starts this thread, I don't agree with that because he gave too much credit to Orwell who is proverbially unable to debate on the matter and on the top of that now he feels victimized by the "jewish crowd".
Orwell is wrong unique but he will never listen to me because he doesn't consider my point of view unbiased.He can listen to you though. What do you do? You find the whole thing amusing and instead of explaining to him why he has to rephrase his claim--to say the least-- you fuel his idiocy by posting pseudo-neutral comments of " skeptical nature".
This is the subtle behavior that gets on my nerves, aup.
The other thing that gets on my nerves is that there is absolutely out of question for you to demonstrate some level headed approach to the whole matter.
As long as it's Israel bashing it's amusing. It's not for me.
The magnitude of the prejudice and ignorance of the Israel bashers is demonstrated by the fact that nobody discussed the verdict of the Israeli Supreme Court according to which the use of civilians as human shields is banned, a case that was brought to court by Israeli human rights activists.Note that the verdict came as a follow up to an injunction previously issued (a couple of years earlier), in the peak of Intifanda II where human bombs were exploding every other day!!
I am sorry to ruin your illusions.
Off to lunch, REALLY pissed off.
I am sorry to ruin your illusions.
Off to lunch, REALLY pissed off.
Last edited:
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
I thought I was just pointing out that blaming "The IDF" was not supportable. That if he has evidence of action by IDF members that is wrong, it is only evidence of that.
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
I had no idea I found this 'amusing'. Could you point out any evidence that I do?
What exactly are you saying, Mycroft? That we must not criticise the behaviour of IDF soldiers out of fear of "creating equivalencies between the IDF and Palestinian terrorist organizations"? That's horse manure and you know it. I'm sure that there are IDF soldiers who behave correctly, but as you pointed out, there are IDF soldiers who don't. More seriously, it seems that the IDF soldiers who don't behave correctly aren't being punished, and that IDF practices have changed in a way that allows bad behaviour towards Palestinian civilians to go on with impunity.
Frankly, I don't give a damn about these "equivalencies". If the IDF are the good guys, then they should behave like the good guys. Good guys don't drop one-tonne bombs on residential neighbourhoods in order to kill one man.
My claims were that the IDF has targeted civilians (in the strictest sense of the word targeted). I know some people wanted me to be implying more, probably in the hopes of building a straw man... And concerning this claim (that the IDF was targeting, or if you prefer, attacking civilians) I gave you many links that I believe to are credible enough to support it.
Last edited: