• Israeli Troops Invade Qalandiya Refugee Camp and Kill Two civilians
    215 replies, posted
[QUOTE=jaykray;31678253]What if they didn't go in and someone in the houses was planning a terrorist attack?[/QUOTE] Is this sarcastic, or what? [editline]11th August 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=yawmwen;31678276]YES! it was reckless and endangered both the palestinians and the soldiers that were sent in.[/QUOTE] Alright, I agree.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;31678308]the military shouldnt be involved in that shit. thats a job for law enforcement agencies trained to properly investigate and do legal humane searches.[/QUOTE] Do they even have a policeforce?
[QUOTE=kimr120;31678442]Do they even have a policeforce?[/QUOTE] Yes
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Police[/url] [quote]The Israel Police (Hebrew: משטרת ישראל‎, Mishteret Yisrael; Arabic: شرطة إسرائيل‎) is the civilian police force of Israel. As with most other police forces in the world, its duties include crime fighting, traffic control, maintaining public safety, and [b]counter-terrorism.[/b][/quote]
[QUOTE=yawmwen;31677769]i blame the uk police officers for injuring those poor poor protesters the last couple of days [editline]11th August 2011[/editline] not if your defending yourself. if they are attacking you they arent refugees, they are combatants[/QUOTE] So if a group of individuals have rocks, it's perfectly acceptable to gun them down? [editline]11th August 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=yawmwen;31677803]or in the chest or sternum. or in certain parts of the back. or in the groin.[/QUOTE] I got hit in the fucking head with a cinder block chunk before, at the age of [B]EIGHT[/B]. I'm still alive. I'm pretty sure armoured grown soldiers can take a few rocks without having the need to kill people
[QUOTE=amute;31678808]So if a group of individuals have rocks, it's perfectly acceptable to gun them down?[/quote] if you are a soldier and they are trying to kill you they are enemy combatants. [quote]I got hit in the fucking head with a cinder block chunk before, at the age of [B]EIGHT[/B]. I'm still alive. I'm pretty sure armoured grown soldiers can take a few rocks without having the need to kill people[/QUOTE] ok they should just take it. they should be letting these palestinians hit them with rocks.
Nice, you're advocating gunning down civilians. What about the police officers in London, they have fire, debris and rocks being thrown at them, why not just gun them down? They aren't exactly TRAPPED in the area, now are they? they can, y'know, retreat? It's easy. All you do is move the opposite direction you go to in order to murder civilians.
[QUOTE=amute;31678963]Nice, you're advocating gunning down civilians. What about the police officers in London, they have fire, debris and rocks being thrown at them, why not just gun them down? [/quote] Police aren't the same as soldiers. Soldiers aren't obliged to look after those who are threatening them. In the same sense that police are, anyway. Plus the officers in London are trained in the use of, and have access to, riot gear. [quote] They aren't exactly TRAPPED in the area, now are they? they can, y'know, retreat? It's easy. All you do is move the opposite direction you go to in order to murder civilians.[/QUOTE] Completely ignorant as to how a military works. You cant just retreat without orders to. That's desertion. Edit: Please reread the thread, we pretty much covered all this.
[QUOTE=Timebomb575;31679066]Police aren't the same as soldiers. Soldiers aren't obliged to look after those who are threatening them. In the same sense that police are, anyway.[/quote] Why are they sending soldiers to do this job then? If they have no self restraint and will murder anyone who even raises a finger, why have them do these assignments? [quote]Completely ignorant as to how a military works. You cant just retreat without orders to. That's desertion.[/QUOTE] Hmm, move to cover or kill innocents. what a difficult choice. If this is how the military operates, then that's fucking stupid. [editline]11th August 2011[/editline] I find it hard to swallow that there are people who actually defend this. You guys must love what's going on in Syria.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;31678877]if you are a soldier and they are trying to kill you they are enemy combatants. ok they should just take it. they should be letting these palestinians hit them with rocks.[/QUOTE] well what do they expect? Israeli Troops have killed a lot more than two civilians in the past. They're not exactly going to greet them with open arms.
[QUOTE=amute;31679160]Why are they sending soldiers to do this job then? If they have no self restraint and will murder anyone who even raises a finger, why have them do these assignments? [/quote] You do realize that the soldiers were most likely ordered or authorized to open fire by a superior? In a situation like that, the decision on wether to open fire or not is not made by your rank and file grunt. You are completely misunderstanding how militarys work. This is a failure on a political and command level, not the tactical level. Dont blame the soldier for being given shit orders. [quote] Hmm, move to cover or kill innocents. what a difficult choice. [/quote] Taking cover and retreating are very different things. Ill bet they would have taken cover or at least taken measures to prevent themselve from being hit with rocks if they could have. Why wouldnt they? Getting hit with rocks kinda sucks, after all. [quote] If this is how the military operates, then that's fucking stupid. [/QUOTE] A well trained army does what its told, when its told to, how its told to do it. Thats how good militarys have operated pretty much forever.
[QUOTE=The Pretender;31672490]The youths attacked the Israeli soldiers. The ones that died were 22 and 23, adults.[/QUOTE] With stones. OH MY GOD. STONES ARE BEING THROWN AT HEAVILY ARMOURED SOLDIERS WITH ASSAULT RIFLES! RETALIATE WITH AUTOMATIC WEAPONS FIRE! Seriously, their ages dont mean shit. It's still a death that will be mourned.
[QUOTE=Hick2;31675444]Only with proper justification of course, terrorism and such.[/QUOTE] "Terrorism" doesn't have a meaning anymore. It's just a horseshit word they use to scare people into letting them do what they want.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;31673841]they dont get a fucking choice on the matter. whoever is in charge of the operation gets to choose equipment if that soldier didnt have rubber bullets its not his fucking fault[/QUOTE] Wow, no. Military personnel does not exclusively refer to the men sent into battle. I was referring to the entirety of the people responsible for sending out this mission. They looked at their available supplies and said, "Wow, we're sending troops to do jobs that aren't really theirs into a hostile territory where violent protest is likely. Let's give them no alternative than to use deadly force, and punish them if they refuse." I take offense to the lack of humanity in Israel's government.
How dare you criticize Israel? You gigantic nazi anti-semite bigot! Don't you know everything Israel does is proper and justified and it's all done to protect the world against the evil terrorists?
[QUOTE=The Epidemic;31679986]How dare you criticize Israel? You gigantic nazi anti-semite bigot! Don't you know everything Israel does is proper and justified and it's all done to protect the world against the evil terrorists?[/QUOTE] Tell me who here has said that.
[QUOTE=Timebomb575;31679066]Police aren't the same as soldiers. Soldiers aren't obliged to look after those who are threatening them. In the same sense that police are, anyway. Plus the officers in London are trained in the use of, and have access to, riot gear. Completely ignorant as to how a military works. You cant just retreat without orders to. That's desertion. Edit: Please reread the thread, we pretty much covered all this.[/QUOTE] fine next time we are in a war the military should use non lethal force, fire warning shots first, and go out of their way NOT to kill anyone when confronting an enemy force
[QUOTE=Timebomb575;31679440]You do realize that the soldiers were most likely ordered or authorized to open fire by a superior? In a situation like that, the decision on wether to open fire or not is not made by your rank and file grunt. You are completely misunderstanding how militarys work. This is a failure on a political and command level, not the tactical level. Dont blame the soldier for being given shit orders.[/quote] I blame the soldier for following it. There is no fucking question, boyo, they did it, they're at fault. [quote]Taking cover and retreating are very different things. Ill bet they would have taken cover or at least taken measures to prevent themselve from being hit with rocks if they could have. Why wouldnt they? Getting hit with rocks kinda sucks, after all.[/quote] Rocks aren't accurate things. You can dodge them, you can get behind a god damn pillar, wall, vehicle anything to protect yourself. [quote]A well trained army does what its told, when its told to, how its told to do it. Thats how good militarys have operated pretty much forever.[/QUOTE] I don't give a fuck how well trained it is, if they kill innocents, there is something wrong. You may be okay with murdering innocent people, but i'm not.
[QUOTE=amute;31680267] I don't give a fuck how well trained it is, if they kill innocents, there is something wrong. You may be okay with murdering innocent people, but i'm not.[/QUOTE] they werent innocent, they were enemy combatants as far as the military is concerned. they are no more innocent than an irregular army.
Again, you are advocating lethal force for civil disobedience and minor attacks. [editline]11th August 2011[/editline] Say it was a 10 year old throwing them, they have done so before, would lethal force be justified?
Oh hey look, I think I remember this from the native Americans.
[QUOTE=amute;31680338]Again, you are advocating lethal force for civil disobedience and minor attacks.[/quote] no im saying the soldiers had no other choice. the military shouldnt have been used here for just this reason. police have to use restraint, soldiers dont have to near to that extent you are putting words in my mouth and using emotional strawmen against me.
[QUOTE=amute;31680267]I don't give a fuck how well trained it is, if they kill innocents, there is something wrong. You may be okay with murdering innocent people, but i'm not.[/QUOTE] Do you know the old Lawful-Chaotic scale? It pretty much comes down to Lawful being deontological and judging something purely by it's actions whereas a Chaotic person is more consequentialist and judges something by what it achieves. The two sides of do the ends justify the means. A lot of stuff in this topic comes down to that argument.
damn there are a lot of people seeing everything black and white in this thread. and also ignorant fools.
What these Israeli soldiers did was horrible, but don't compare it to what the Nazis did to the Jews. It's fucking dumb.
[QUOTE=amute;31680267]I blame the soldier for following it. There is no fucking question, boyo, they did it, they're at fault. [/quote] Lol. Its funny because you A: think soldiers are going to disobey orders and face being court martialed and B: think that they would disobey orders to open fire on people who are attacking them [quote] Rocks aren't accurate things. You can dodge them, you can get behind a god damn pillar, wall, vehicle anything to protect yourself. [/quote] Why do you figure they didn't do that? Why would they NOT take cover? There has to be a reason since 5 people somehow got injured. [quote] I don't give a fuck how well trained it is, if they kill innocents, there is something wrong. You may be okay with murdering innocent people, but i'm not.[/QUOTE] Im not OK with that either. But Im also not OK with you pinning the blame on the soldiers and not the politicians or the commanders. Soldiers are expected to follow orders, even if they are shitty or morally wrong. That's why soldiers don't get tried for things their commander orders them to do (even if they went through with it), the commander gets a war crimes trial.
At least someone knows who to judge.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;31670736]Israel isn't doing genocide though.[/QUOTE] oh i beg to differ
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;31674178]Like if they're throwing rocks about this size: [img]http://img.inkfrog.com/pix/thevideodrome/iraq_youth_throwing_rock_50.jpg[/img] I'd be worried about injury and probably get out the area, but "shoot the people" isn't an option I'd go with. It was a careless decision, and it costed lives that didn't need to be taken. [editline]11th August 2011[/editline] What, no.[/QUOTE] Just shoot the leg or arm with a lower caliber weapon, not the fucking chest.
[QUOTE=amute;31680338]Again, you are advocating lethal force for civil disobedience and minor attacks. [editline]11th August 2011[/editline] Say it was a 10 year old throwing them, they have done so before, would lethal force be justified?[/QUOTE] at what point does civil disobedience go to attempted lethal assault? is it the use of non-guns? in that case, if a soldier rounds the corner and someone jumps out and starts smashing a brick into a face, is this not the sort of enemy soldiers are trained to neutralise with guns? is is the range? in that case, at how many metres distance does civil disobedience go to a military assault by an ununiformed enemy with a non-ballistic weapon? thus, any arguments that because the enemy was throwing rocks automatically and unconditionally rules out a lethal response, in the manner of a trained army by a trained army, is stupid. its really fantastic that you survived getting hit with a cinderblock, but that really doesn't mean anything. a us congresswoman survived getting shot in the head, does that mean the soldiers should not use a lethal response when met with gunfire?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.