[QUOTE=TH89;28595275]-Israel bias. If you want to see what an anti-Israel bias looks like watch, the arab media.[/QUOTE]
Al Jazzera is a part of the 'Arab media'.
[QUOTE=TH89;28595375]A reputable source publishes facts and reasoned coverage that gives people an accurate understanding of what it is they're covering. There shouldn't BE any "sides" if you're getting your news from good sources, is my point.[/QUOTE]
and I agree with you. Although once you find a good source looking at the "bad sources" can be interesting for different reasons.
[QUOTE=Starpluck;28595385]Al Jazzera is a part of the 'Arab media'.[/QUOTE]
And Al Jazzera is biased against Israel; no, Al Jazzera is not God's gift to media outlets. That's obvious from any trip to their web-page. While this isn't good, it doesn't make them a "bad" or untrustworthy source. For example, my national broadsheet "The Australian" has a conservative bias, which is obvious from the opinion articles it publishes. That doesn't make it unreliable - I'd trust it any day.
[QUOTE=Sporkfire;28594898]How should you know whether it was carried out by an minority? I find it amusing that the self-proclaimed "world's most moral army" had to even address this issue, and yet it stills occurs today apparently. What Hamas does is a bit incomparable, they're a guerilla group fighting agains all odds. They don't exactly have a code of conduct, yet the IDF still acts comparably similiar to them.
Hamas uses human shields because they often have no other means of repelling attacks, the IDF uses human shields, not because they have to, but because they're assholes. At least Hamas uses its own people.[/QUOTE]
The report says that human rights groups report that use of human shields by IDF has sharply dropped after 2005; unless it went from 90% to 60% or something, which I highly doubt.
Hang on - what does size of military force have to do with ANYTHING? Just because Hamas is a small guerilla group doesn't remotely justify the use of human shields. How does not having "a code of conduct" make anything right - if anything, it makes them more appalling! Does that mean Hamas can do whatever they want?
And how does desperation justify that sort of immorality? If I'm in a hostage situation, can I use a baby as a hostage and human shield because I have no other choice, what with police surrounding me? If you shell a stronger force than you, you can't simply resort to using human shields as a legitimate tactic. Alternatively, if we want to use your argument, the IDF can use human shields to combat the effective nature of guerilla fighting against their organised force, thus saving the lives of their troops!
Don't be dumb - you can't justify the deliberate, wide-spread and repeated use of human shields.
[QUOTE=Dr_Funk;28596400]And Al Jazzera is biased against Israel; no, Al Jazzera is not God's gift to media outlets. That's obvious from any trip to their web-page. While this isn't good, it doesn't make them a "bad" or untrustworthy source. For example, my national broadsheet "The Australian" has a conservative bias, which is obvious from the opinion articles it publishes. That doesn't make it unreliable - I'd trust it any day.
The report says that human rights groups report that use of human shields by IDF has sharply dropped after 2005; unless it went from 90% to 60% or something, which I highly doubt.
Hang on - what does size of military force have to do with ANYTHING? Just because Hamas is a small guerilla group doesn't remotely justify the use of human shields. How does not having "a code of conduct" make anything right - if anything, it makes them more appalling! Does that mean Hamas can do whatever they want?
And how does desperation justify that sort of immorality? If I'm in a hostage situation, can I use a baby as a hostage and human shield because I have no other choice, what with police surrounding me? If you shell a stronger force than you, you can't simply resort to using human shields as a legitimate tactic. Alternatively, if we want to use your argument, the IDF can use human shields to combat the effective nature of guerilla fighting against their organised force, thus saving the lives of their troops!
Don't be dumb - you can't justify the deliberate, wide-spread and repeated use of human shields.[/QUOTE]
I'm not trying to put Hamas in positive light, I'm reinforcing the fact that the IDF even with a strict code of conduct acts similarly to a terrorist group. Hamas using human shields is wrong, but they do have far more justification in doing it than the IDF does, for the reasons I have previous mentioned in my last post.
Why do you even act surprised that Hamas doesn't have a code of conduct? It's a fucking guerilla group, it should be embarrassing that the IDF which touts itself as the world's most moral army, is even using the same tactics they are.
Bravo, the world's most moral army had a sharp drop in the use of human shields after a court had to address the issue, too bad they're still doing it. But I suppose if a guerilla group is doing it, it's okay for the IDF to do as well? :downs:
[QUOTE=Sporkfire;28600820]I'm not trying to put Hamas in positive light, I'm reinforcing the fact that the IDF even with a strict code of conduct acts similarly to a terrorist group. Hamas using human shields is wrong, but they do have far more justification in doing it than the IDF does, for the reasons I have previous mentioned in my last post.
Why do you even act surprised that Hamas doesn't have a code of conduct? It's a fucking guerilla group, it should be embarrassing that the IDF which touts itself as the world's most moral army, is even using the same tactics they are.
Bravo, the world's most moral army had a sharp drop in the use of human shields after a court had to address the issue, too bad they're still doing it. But I suppose if a guerilla group is doing it, it's okay for the IDF to do as well? :downs:[/QUOTE]
You've just made the same points again. No one should use human shields, it can't be justified on either side, saying that Hamas has far more justification is kind of sick.
[QUOTE=jaykray;28601789]You've just made the same points again. No one should use human shields, it can't be justified on either side, saying that Hamas has far more justification is kind of sick.[/QUOTE]
The thing is the IDF is a first world army, Hamas is a guerrilla group. Don't you find it more concerning that the IDF is even using human shields in the first place? I got myself into this whole fiasco because someone previously denied the IDF used them in the first place.
[QUOTE=Sporkfire;28602018]The thing is the IDF is a first world army, Hamas is a guerrilla group. Don't you find it more concerning that the IDF is even using human shields in the first place? I got myself into this whole fiasco because someone previously denied the IDF used them in the first place.[/QUOTE]
Using human shields is a part of the Hamas agenda.
However, the IDF does not have a rule of conduct that says "use a human shield when being threatened by an enemy soldier." In fact, the sharp drop in the usage of human shields among soldiers means the IDF is actually acting to prevent the phenomenon among soldiers.
The written rule makes all of the difference.
Almost all of the countries in the world have rules banning the act of murder. Now lets assume theres a country out there that legalizes it. Both have some percentage of murder in them.
According to your logic, the country which legalized murder has the moral ground because they don't give a shit about it in the first place, while countries who ban murder don't because they still have murder.
This is just fucked up.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.