Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Because it was talked about earlier that the dude got up and kept running, but keep on spinning those "facts" there son
Yes, the guy in blue was hit with a rubber bullet. Then two guys come from the right side of the frame and start helping him, and then the guy in the black shirt is shot.
He doesn't get up and keep running, he falls flat on his face and dies. Keep spinning those 'facts' 'son'.
Here's a third view of the shooting, though, beware this has the usual jihadist recruiting music and a 19 year old kid take a bullet.
According to the Health Ministry, Abdelfattah Abdelnabi was DOA. He had been shot once in the head.
On a positive note, protests have erupted in Tel Aviv, and thus far no one there has been shot.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2018/04/01 23:23:50
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
Assuming that everything is as it appears (which is a leap of faith in and of itself in anything to do with anything involving Israel or Hamas), then yep, that was a manslaughter/murder. Live bullet at someone nowhere near the border fence at the time.The bloke shouldn't have been capped, that was wrong. There should definitely be an investigation launched into which trigger happy moron was trying to earn extra credit.
That being said; he still gets a Darwin award in my book. We can see in the various accumulated videos quite clearly where the Israeli' are considering the 'no-go' line to begin; and all these young blokes are dicking around trying to collect tyres to light up and roll at the fence to do damage. It's why the rubber bullets are flying, the protestors tried it once already and the tyres have fallen over before they got there. So the idiots are trying to collect them to have another go whilst the crowd cheers them on for their manly endeavours. Unfortunately, this one paid the ultimate price for moronically attempting to damage a heavily militarised border crossing.
tl;dr It was manslaughter or murder, the shooter should be located and any access to arms removed (at an absolute minimum), but given the context the victim was clearly an imbecile. Not that anyone should ever get killed for that; but it's a bit like hearing about the death of a bloke who got hit by a car because he had an argument in the middle of a motorway. Lamentable all around.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/04/02 00:45:45
Sure they mean disaster, but lets be honest here no one is lining palestinians in front of trenches shooting them in the necks and dumping their corpses in said trenches in Ukraine, Poland, and the Baltics so lets not be disingenuous here and try to make the two to be the same
No, not in the Ukraine, Poland and the Baltics, but yes, those things actually have gone on. Dawayima springs to mind. To this day, no one knows how many died there.
Ok, so that's 30. Where's the other over 5999970 of your...
BaronIveagh wrote: the IDF has slaughtered over six million Palestinian civvies.
Don't get me wrong, it sounds terrible. Shall we also start going through and listing all the terrible things done by US troops in Germany in WW2? There's a big difference between "bad gak happens in war" and "state sanctioned genocide of millions".
You ain't glossing over gak except the gak where that was, according to your link, a massacre undertaken by Lebanese Christians likely as a retaliation for a massacre of Lebanese Christians by the PLO and Lebanese National Movement which in turn was a retaliation for another massacre that occured during the Lebanese Civil War. The IDF were there and bore some responsibility, but you're definitely glossing over a lot of gak if you're lumping that massacre in with the absurd claim of 6 million civilians killed by the IDF.
The Post said, the UN said... just post your link please because I can't find it and it's a pretty heinous claim to be making.
Proportion of civilian to military deaths among Palestinians: 50% [Israeli government]
This last one is pretty damning...
{sarcasm}Yeah, it's so damning that a group that uses civilians as bullet shields has a high civilian casualty rate compared to an army that is actively trying to protect its people. {/sarcasm}
We're talking about a group that knows it can't win militarily. They're trying to win hearts and minds by doing stupid gak that gets civilians killed and then appeal to an international audience.
Maybe the IDF acted poorly in this circumstance, I really don't know, but forgive me for not automatically believing the IDF are evil folk when it's the goal of their opposition to make them look like evil folk.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2018/04/02 01:54:32
And AJ is a state sponsored mouthpiece, who routinely shows anti-israeli bias (I believe we went over this before with the burning of a Jewish holy site that was not reported on by AJ, but instead played up the response by Israel)
That's nice, but totally irrelevant. They just showed the same murder the British caught from uphill and to the left. The only difference was the British censored the actual killing whereas AJ ran it unedited. So, how does their bias negate that it showed something that actually happened?
130+ out of nearly 100,000? I bet you I can find 130 former Wehrmacht soldiers who thought Hitler wasn't that bad of a guy pretty easy as the numbers between the two groups are comparable.
Because it was talked about earlier that the dude got up and kept running, but keep on spinning those "facts" there son
I'd be impressed if you found 100 living Wehrmacht soldiers at this point.
And congratulations for bringing Hitler into a conversation about Jews.
Good job.
And AJ is a state sponsored mouthpiece, who routinely shows anti-israeli bias (I believe we went over this before with the burning of a Jewish holy site that was not reported on by AJ, but instead played up the response by Israel)
That's nice, but totally irrelevant. They just showed the same murder the British caught from uphill and to the left. The only difference was the British censored the actual killing whereas AJ ran it unedited. So, how does their bias negate that it showed something that actually happened?
130+ out of nearly 100,000? I bet you I can find 130 former Wehrmacht soldiers who thought Hitler wasn't that bad of a guy pretty easy as the numbers between the two groups are comparable.
Because it was talked about earlier that the dude got up and kept running, but keep on spinning those "facts" there son
I'd be impressed if you found 100 living Wehrmacht soldiers at this point.
And congratulations for bringing Hitler into a conversation about Jews.
Good job.
Okay since you couldn't read between the lines I'll spell it out for you. There are roughly 100k survivors of the holocaust and around 250k german ww2 vets. Baron made the sickening comparison by saying the Nakba and the Holocaust were pretty much the same at this point, and I made an egregious comparison to draw to that point
Ketara wrote: Assuming that everything is as it appears (which is a leap of faith in and of itself in anything to do with anything involving Israel or Hamas), then yep, that was a manslaughter/murder. Live bullet at someone nowhere near the border fence at the time.The bloke shouldn't have been capped, that was wrong. There should definitely be an investigation launched into which trigger happy moron was trying to earn extra credit.
That being said; he still gets a Darwin award in my book. We can see in the various accumulated videos quite clearly where the Israeli' are considering the 'no-go' line to begin; and all these young blokes are dicking around trying to collect tyres to light up and roll at the fence to do damage. It's why the rubber bullets are flying, the protestors tried it once already and the tyres have fallen over before they got there. So the idiots are trying to collect them to have another go whilst the crowd cheers them on for their manly endeavours. Unfortunately, this one paid the ultimate price for moronically attempting to damage a heavily militarised border crossing.
tl;dr It was manslaughter or murder, the shooter should be located and any access to arms removed (at an absolute minimum), but given the context the victim was clearly an imbecile. Not that anyone should ever get killed for that; but it's a bit like hearing about the death of a bloke who got hit by a car because he had an argument in the middle of a motorway. Lamentable all around.
There is a big difference though. If you get hit by a car on the motorway, then all the blame is on you, because the motorist that hit you could not have avoided you, being on a motorway and all. In this case, the blame is fully on the Israeli soldier. There was no excuse for shooting here, yet that soldier (or soldiers) took the conscious decision to shoot anyway. It is cold-blooded murder. It sounds like you are trying to blame the victim.
Ketara wrote: Assuming that everything is as it appears (which is a leap of faith in and of itself in anything to do with anything involving Israel or Hamas), then yep, that was a manslaughter/murder. Live bullet at someone nowhere near the border fence at the time.The bloke shouldn't have been capped, that was wrong. There should definitely be an investigation launched into which trigger happy moron was trying to earn extra credit.
That being said; he still gets a Darwin award in my book. We can see in the various accumulated videos quite clearly where the Israeli' are considering the 'no-go' line to begin; and all these young blokes are dicking around trying to collect tyres to light up and roll at the fence to do damage. It's why the rubber bullets are flying, the protestors tried it once already and the tyres have fallen over before they got there. So the idiots are trying to collect them to have another go whilst the crowd cheers them on for their manly endeavours. Unfortunately, this one paid the ultimate price for moronically attempting to damage a heavily militarised border crossing.
tl;dr It was manslaughter or murder, the shooter should be located and any access to arms removed (at an absolute minimum), but given the context the victim was clearly an imbecile. Not that anyone should ever get killed for that; but it's a bit like hearing about the death of a bloke who got hit by a car because he had an argument in the middle of a motorway. Lamentable all around.
There is a big difference though. If you get hit by a car on the motorway, then all the blame is on you, because the motorist that hit you could not have avoided you, being on a motorway and all. In this case, the blame is fully on the Israeli soldier. There was no excuse for shooting here, yet that soldier (or soldiers) took the conscious decision to shoot anyway. It is cold-blooded murder. It sounds like you are trying to blame the victim.
But at what point does lack of common sense become indefensible? They knew the IDF had orders to shoot if needed at least a day head of time and they know Israel is pretty serious when it comes to the border of Gaza
And AJ is a state sponsored mouthpiece, who routinely shows anti-israeli bias (I believe we went over this before with the burning of a Jewish holy site that was not reported on by AJ, but instead played up the response by Israel)
That's nice, but totally irrelevant. They just showed the same murder the British caught from uphill and to the left. The only difference was the British censored the actual killing whereas AJ ran it unedited. So, how does their bias negate that it showed something that actually happened?
130+ out of nearly 100,000? I bet you I can find 130 former Wehrmacht soldiers who thought Hitler wasn't that bad of a guy pretty easy as the numbers between the two groups are comparable.
Because it was talked about earlier that the dude got up and kept running, but keep on spinning those "facts" there son
And congratulations for bringing Hitler into a conversation about Jews.
Good job.
Okay since you couldn't read between the lines I'll spell it out for you. There are roughly 100k survivors of the holocaust and around 250k german ww2 vets. Baron made the sickening comparison by saying the Nakba and the Holocaust were pretty much the same at this point, and I made an egregious comparison to draw to that point
Amazing. It's like you're telling me things I already know because you said them in the post I quoted.
Do share your further pearls of wisdom with me.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/04/02 02:23:04
Ketara wrote: Assuming that everything is as it appears (which is a leap of faith in and of itself in anything to do with anything involving Israel or Hamas), then yep, that was a manslaughter/murder. Live bullet at someone nowhere near the border fence at the time.The bloke shouldn't have been capped, that was wrong. There should definitely be an investigation launched into which trigger happy moron was trying to earn extra credit.
That being said; he still gets a Darwin award in my book. We can see in the various accumulated videos quite clearly where the Israeli' are considering the 'no-go' line to begin; and all these young blokes are dicking around trying to collect tyres to light up and roll at the fence to do damage. It's why the rubber bullets are flying, the protestors tried it once already and the tyres have fallen over before they got there. So the idiots are trying to collect them to have another go whilst the crowd cheers them on for their manly endeavours. Unfortunately, this one paid the ultimate price for moronically attempting to damage a heavily militarised border crossing.
tl;dr It was manslaughter or murder, the shooter should be located and any access to arms removed (at an absolute minimum), but given the context the victim was clearly an imbecile. Not that anyone should ever get killed for that; but it's a bit like hearing about the death of a bloke who got hit by a car because he had an argument in the middle of a motorway. Lamentable all around.
There is a big difference though. If you get hit by a car on the motorway, then all the blame is on you, because the motorist that hit you could not have avoided you, being on a motorway and all. In this case, the blame is fully on the Israeli soldier. There was no excuse for shooting here, yet that soldier (or soldiers) took the conscious decision to shoot anyway. It is cold-blooded murder. It sounds like you are trying to blame the victim.
But at what point does lack of common sense become indefensible? They knew the IDF had orders to shoot if needed at least a day head of time and they know Israel is pretty serious when it comes to the border of Gaza
At the point where the lack of common sense is such that the killer can no longer be assigned blame. As in the analogy, someone standing on a motorway and getting hit by a car is indefensible. Standing on motorways is very likely to get you hit by a car, and there is not much a motorist can do to avoid hitting you. But here, walking near that border or picking up a tire should never be a reason to get shot. The blame is fully on the killer. Yes, the guy who got shot could have and likely did know that what he did might get him shot. But trying to blame him is like trying to blame a rape victim for being dressed inappropriately. Yes, she may have been dressed inappropriately, but that is no excuse to rape someone. Same as someone picking up a tire to roll at a border fence is no excuse to shoot at him.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Ketara wrote: Assuming that everything is as it appears (which is a leap of faith in and of itself in anything to do with anything involving Israel or Hamas), then yep, that was a manslaughter/murder. Live bullet at someone nowhere near the border fence at the time.The bloke shouldn't have been capped, that was wrong. There should definitely be an investigation launched into which trigger happy moron was trying to earn extra credit.
That being said; he still gets a Darwin award in my book. We can see in the various accumulated videos quite clearly where the Israeli' are considering the 'no-go' line to begin; and all these young blokes are dicking around trying to collect tyres to light up and roll at the fence to do damage. It's why the rubber bullets are flying, the protestors tried it once already and the tyres have fallen over before they got there. So the idiots are trying to collect them to have another go whilst the crowd cheers them on for their manly endeavours. Unfortunately, this one paid the ultimate price for moronically attempting to damage a heavily militarised border crossing.
tl;dr It was manslaughter or murder, the shooter should be located and any access to arms removed (at an absolute minimum), but given the context the victim was clearly an imbecile. Not that anyone should ever get killed for that; but it's a bit like hearing about the death of a bloke who got hit by a car because he had an argument in the middle of a motorway. Lamentable all around.
There is a big difference though. If you get hit by a car on the motorway, then all the blame is on you, because the motorist that hit you could not have avoided you, being on a motorway and all. In this case, the blame is fully on the Israeli soldier. There was no excuse for shooting here, yet that soldier (or soldiers) took the conscious decision to shoot anyway. It is cold-blooded murder. It sounds like you are trying to blame the victim.
But at what point does lack of common sense become indefensible? They knew the IDF had orders to shoot if needed at least a day head of time and they know Israel is pretty serious when it comes to the border of Gaza
At the point where the lack of common sense is such that the killer can no longer be assigned blame. As in the analogy, someone standing on a motorway and getting hit by a car is indefensible. Standing on motorways is very likely to get you hit by a car, and there is not much a motorist can do to avoid hitting you. But here, walking near that border or picking up a tire should never be a reason to get shot. The blame is fully on the killer. Yes, the guy who got shot could have and likely did know that what he did might get him shot. But trying to blame him is like trying to blame a rape victim for being dressed inappropriately. Yes, she may have been dressed inappropriately, but that is no excuse to rape someone. Same as someone picking up a tire to roll at a border fence is no excuse to shoot at him.
Oh come on, this is now crossing the line. A rape victim "Dressing inappropriately" is doing nothing wrong what so ever. Are you seriously suggesting that wearing a suggestive outfit is in the same league of attacking a foritifed millitary border, during a riot, manned by armed soldiers, whom have been known to use lethal force in the past, in a crowd containing terrorists, while gunfire is being exchanged?
If you're saying there's even the slightest bit of equivilency between the two, that's seriously gosh darn offensive.
Ketara wrote: Assuming that everything is as it appears (which is a leap of faith in and of itself in anything to do with anything involving Israel or Hamas), then yep, that was a manslaughter/murder. Live bullet at someone nowhere near the border fence at the time.The bloke shouldn't have been capped, that was wrong. There should definitely be an investigation launched into which trigger happy moron was trying to earn extra credit.
That being said; he still gets a Darwin award in my book. We can see in the various accumulated videos quite clearly where the Israeli' are considering the 'no-go' line to begin; and all these young blokes are dicking around trying to collect tyres to light up and roll at the fence to do damage. It's why the rubber bullets are flying, the protestors tried it once already and the tyres have fallen over before they got there. So the idiots are trying to collect them to have another go whilst the crowd cheers them on for their manly endeavours. Unfortunately, this one paid the ultimate price for moronically attempting to damage a heavily militarised border crossing.
tl;dr It was manslaughter or murder, the shooter should be located and any access to arms removed (at an absolute minimum), but given the context the victim was clearly an imbecile. Not that anyone should ever get killed for that; but it's a bit like hearing about the death of a bloke who got hit by a car because he had an argument in the middle of a motorway. Lamentable all around.
There is a big difference though. If you get hit by a car on the motorway, then all the blame is on you, because the motorist that hit you could not have avoided you, being on a motorway and all. In this case, the blame is fully on the Israeli soldier. There was no excuse for shooting here, yet that soldier (or soldiers) took the conscious decision to shoot anyway. It is cold-blooded murder. It sounds like you are trying to blame the victim.
But at what point does lack of common sense become indefensible? They knew the IDF had orders to shoot if needed at least a day head of time and they know Israel is pretty serious when it comes to the border of Gaza
At the point where the lack of common sense is such that the killer can no longer be assigned blame. As in the analogy, someone standing on a motorway and getting hit by a car is indefensible. Standing on motorways is very likely to get you hit by a car, and there is not much a motorist can do to avoid hitting you. But here, walking near that border or picking up a tire should never be a reason to get shot. The blame is fully on the killer. Yes, the guy who got shot could have and likely did know that what he did might get him shot. But trying to blame him is like trying to blame a rape victim for being dressed inappropriately. Yes, she may have been dressed inappropriately, but that is no excuse to rape someone. Same as someone picking up a tire to roll at a border fence is no excuse to shoot at him.
...and now you're comparing a soldier defending a border to a rapist and an idiot attacking said border to a woman dressing inappropriately, because that's a much more apt analogy
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/04/02 02:32:30
Ketara wrote: Assuming that everything is as it appears (which is a leap of faith in and of itself in anything to do with anything involving Israel or Hamas), then yep, that was a manslaughter/murder. Live bullet at someone nowhere near the border fence at the time.The bloke shouldn't have been capped, that was wrong. There should definitely be an investigation launched into which trigger happy moron was trying to earn extra credit.
That being said; he still gets a Darwin award in my book. We can see in the various accumulated videos quite clearly where the Israeli' are considering the 'no-go' line to begin; and all these young blokes are dicking around trying to collect tyres to light up and roll at the fence to do damage. It's why the rubber bullets are flying, the protestors tried it once already and the tyres have fallen over before they got there. So the idiots are trying to collect them to have another go whilst the crowd cheers them on for their manly endeavours. Unfortunately, this one paid the ultimate price for moronically attempting to damage a heavily militarised border crossing.
tl;dr It was manslaughter or murder, the shooter should be located and any access to arms removed (at an absolute minimum), but given the context the victim was clearly an imbecile. Not that anyone should ever get killed for that; but it's a bit like hearing about the death of a bloke who got hit by a car because he had an argument in the middle of a motorway. Lamentable all around.
There is a big difference though. If you get hit by a car on the motorway, then all the blame is on you, because the motorist that hit you could not have avoided you, being on a motorway and all. In this case, the blame is fully on the Israeli soldier. There was no excuse for shooting here, yet that soldier (or soldiers) took the conscious decision to shoot anyway. It is cold-blooded murder. It sounds like you are trying to blame the victim.
But at what point does lack of common sense become indefensible? They knew the IDF had orders to shoot if needed at least a day head of time and they know Israel is pretty serious when it comes to the border of Gaza
At the point where the lack of common sense is such that the killer can no longer be assigned blame. As in the analogy, someone standing on a motorway and getting hit by a car is indefensible. Standing on motorways is very likely to get you hit by a car, and there is not much a motorist can do to avoid hitting you. But here, walking near that border or picking up a tire should never be a reason to get shot. The blame is fully on the killer. Yes, the guy who got shot could have and likely did know that what he did might get him shot. But trying to blame him is like trying to blame a rape victim for being dressed inappropriately. Yes, she may have been dressed inappropriately, but that is no excuse to rape someone. Same as someone picking up a tire to roll at a border fence is no excuse to shoot at him.
Oh come on, this is now crossing the line. A rape victim "Dressing inappropriately" is doing nothing wrong what so ever. Are you seriously suggesting that wearing a suggestive outfit is in the same league of attacking a foritifed millitary border, during a riot, manned by armed soldiers, whom have been known to use lethal force in the past, in a crowd containing terrorists, while gunfire is being exchanged?
If you're saying there's even the slightest bit of equivilency between the two, that's seriously gosh darn offensive.
Picking up a tire is an attack now? Come on, you are beyond ridiculous right now.
Ketara wrote: Assuming that everything is as it appears (which is a leap of faith in and of itself in anything to do with anything involving Israel or Hamas), then yep, that was a manslaughter/murder. Live bullet at someone nowhere near the border fence at the time.The bloke shouldn't have been capped, that was wrong. There should definitely be an investigation launched into which trigger happy moron was trying to earn extra credit.
That being said; he still gets a Darwin award in my book. We can see in the various accumulated videos quite clearly where the Israeli' are considering the 'no-go' line to begin; and all these young blokes are dicking around trying to collect tyres to light up and roll at the fence to do damage. It's why the rubber bullets are flying, the protestors tried it once already and the tyres have fallen over before they got there. So the idiots are trying to collect them to have another go whilst the crowd cheers them on for their manly endeavours. Unfortunately, this one paid the ultimate price for moronically attempting to damage a heavily militarised border crossing.
tl;dr It was manslaughter or murder, the shooter should be located and any access to arms removed (at an absolute minimum), but given the context the victim was clearly an imbecile. Not that anyone should ever get killed for that; but it's a bit like hearing about the death of a bloke who got hit by a car because he had an argument in the middle of a motorway. Lamentable all around.
There is a big difference though. If you get hit by a car on the motorway, then all the blame is on you, because the motorist that hit you could not have avoided you, being on a motorway and all. In this case, the blame is fully on the Israeli soldier. There was no excuse for shooting here, yet that soldier (or soldiers) took the conscious decision to shoot anyway. It is cold-blooded murder. It sounds like you are trying to blame the victim.
But at what point does lack of common sense become indefensible? They knew the IDF had orders to shoot if needed at least a day head of time and they know Israel is pretty serious when it comes to the border of Gaza
At the point where the lack of common sense is such that the killer can no longer be assigned blame. As in the analogy, someone standing on a motorway and getting hit by a car is indefensible. Standing on motorways is very likely to get you hit by a car, and there is not much a motorist can do to avoid hitting you. But here, walking near that border or picking up a tire should never be a reason to get shot. The blame is fully on the killer. Yes, the guy who got shot could have and likely did know that what he did might get him shot. But trying to blame him is like trying to blame a rape victim for being dressed inappropriately. Yes, she may have been dressed inappropriately, but that is no excuse to rape someone. Same as someone picking up a tire to roll at a border fence is no excuse to shoot at him.
...and now you're comparing a soldier defending a border to a rapist and an idiot attacking said border to a woman dressing inappropriately, because that's a much more apt analogy
No. The comparison is not between the rapist and the soldier, but the situation they are in and in how they respond to it. Both the woman and the tire guy do something they know might potentially put them at risk. But in both cases, what they are doing is something that absolutely should not be something risky. When the woman gets raped, or the tire guy shot, what they were doing is absolutely not a valid excuse for the perpetrator. The behaviour of the victims was not inherently risky, it is only risky because the perpetrator consciously decided to make it risky.
Also, you'd have to be crazy to call that an attack.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/04/02 02:49:55
Iron_Captain wrote: The behaviour of the victims was not inherently risky, it is only risky because the perpetrator consciously decided to make it risky.
Yeah no, being in a crowd of 17k doing stupid things like flinging stones and rolling burning tyres toward a border fence and it's armed soldiers is an inherently risky thing to do.
Iron_Captain wrote: The behaviour of the victims was not inherently risky, it is only risky because the perpetrator consciously decided to make it risky.
Yeah no, being in a crowd of 17k doing stupid things like flinging stones and rolling burning tyres toward a border fence and it's armed soldiers is an inherently risky thing to do.
No. Not in any place except Israel. It is completely non-threatening and therefore is no excuse to use potentially lethal force. I am shocked I need to explain this to you.
When someone picks up a tire to roll at you, shooting him is NOT the appropriate response. Rolling a tire at a fence is not something that should get you shot, ever.
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
This just in. Rolling flaming tires, throwing rocks, and generally assaulting an international border isn’t “threatening”!
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Israel gives up land. Agrees that Jerusalem has a joint authority.
.
Palestine denounces Hamas, recognises right of Israel to exist and improves its treatment of women and minorities.
Everything else can be worked out round the negotiation table.
This "simple solution" for 60 years can not be solved.
Mordant 92nd 'Acid Dogs'
The Lost and Damned
Inquisition
Ketara wrote: Assuming that everything is as it appears (which is a leap of faith in and of itself in anything to do with anything involving Israel or Hamas), then yep, that was a manslaughter/murder. Live bullet at someone nowhere near the border fence at the time.The bloke shouldn't have been capped, that was wrong. There should definitely be an investigation launched into which trigger happy moron was trying to earn extra credit.
That being said; he still gets a Darwin award in my book. We can see in the various accumulated videos quite clearly where the Israeli' are considering the 'no-go' line to begin; and all these young blokes are dicking around trying to collect tyres to light up and roll at the fence to do damage. It's why the rubber bullets are flying, the protestors tried it once already and the tyres have fallen over before they got there. So the idiots are trying to collect them to have another go whilst the crowd cheers them on for their manly endeavours. Unfortunately, this one paid the ultimate price for moronically attempting to damage a heavily militarised border crossing.
tl;dr It was manslaughter or murder, the shooter should be located and any access to arms removed (at an absolute minimum), but given the context the victim was clearly an imbecile. Not that anyone should ever get killed for that; but it's a bit like hearing about the death of a bloke who got hit by a car because he had an argument in the middle of a motorway. Lamentable all around.
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. But I guess their Hamas handlers and rabble-rousers got what they wanted: "Martyrs" for the propaganda wing.
Don't expect any action by the IDF, either. If anything, the personnel that opened fire will probably get bonus shekels and a promotion for bagging another "filthy Palestinian goy".
I'm not saying its morally equivalent to the motorway example. That would not be true. I was talking about the level of reaction on my part there ('lamentable'). It's one of those things where you kind of shrug your shoulders for the most part, because whilst it's not as one sided as the motorway example, it's also nowhere near as one sided as the rape example. The victim was a victim. But he was also an idiot who very deliberately and knowingly put himself in a situation which involved heavy military fire of various types. He shouldn't have died for that, but if you're going to do the moral equivalent of breaking into an American police station at night on a dare? There is always a risk some moron of a cop is going to shoot first and ask questions later. The victim knew what they were doing, and as the poster above so eloquently put it, 'play stupid games, win stupid prizes'.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/04/02 12:36:40
Some comments from the opposing viewpoint. The IDF have apparently claimed the footage of the guy getting shot running with the tyre has been selectively edited to make them look worse, though as far as I'm aware they haven't elaborated on how. They also they have identified 10 of the folk killed as being militants from various known terrorist groups (I think Hamas said 5 of them were). Someone also released what looks like a drone image of one of the folks killed laying near the border fence with a weapon (as in, some sort of AK variant rather than just a sling).
Personally I don't like to jump to conclusions for or against either side, but I feel Hamas tries to play the propaganda card a lot so I tend to take anything anti-IDF with a grain of salt unless I can find solid information on it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/04/02 12:51:38
You'll probably find that like most of these things, it's half guys with AK's, a handful of guys engaged in provocative and moronic behaviour (like the above), and one or two genuine mistaken collateral innocents. That's the usual casualty list.
This "simple solution" for 60 years can not be solved.
The Palestinians (and surrounding nations) aren't going to accept anything other than a total dissolution of Israel. Israel isn't going to accept that, and that's why nothing has been solved in 60 years. This isn't a fight about land per se, but about ideology, and that's why the only resolution will be done through force. Israel is winning because it has powerful international backing (Europe and USA), while nobody actually likes the Palestinians, they are just a cat's paw in the fight against an Israeli state.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: Some comments from the opposing viewpoint. The IDF have apparently claimed the footage of the guy getting shot running with the tyre has been selectively edited to make them look worse, though as far as I'm aware they haven't elaborated on how. They also they have identified 10 of the folk killed as being militants from various known terrorist groups (I think Hamas said 5 of them were). Someone also released what looks like a drone image of one of the folks killed laying near the border fence with a weapon (as in, some sort of AK variant rather than just a sling).
Personally I don't like to jump to conclusions for or against either side, but I feel Hamas tries to play the propaganda card a lot so I tend to take anything anti-IDF with a grain of salt unless I can find solid information on it.
The IDF isn't any less keen on propaganda, and they are a lot better at it than the amateurs of Hamas. You should take everything about the IDF, Palestine, Hamas etc. with not just a grain, but a boatload of salt. I just recently read a book by a journalist who worked in the area for years, and he described how it is impossible to find out the truth about anything what happens there, because everyone is constantly distorting everything to fit their own purposes.
Grey Templar wrote: This just in. Rolling flaming tires, throwing rocks, and generally assaulting an international border isn’t “threatening”!
Nope. There is nothing threatening about a rolling tire, flaming or not. It will fall over after just a few meters, and even if doesn't it will just bump softly into its target and fall over. It is pretty hard, if not impossible to any damage to a structure with a tire. Therefore, tires are not threatening. Throwing rocks is another matter, but that is not what the people in the video were doing. And even throwing rocks should not be answered with bullets. That is disproportionate.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/04/02 15:16:51
Is there conclusive evidence that the kid in the black shirt was hit with a live round? Not knowing what rifle was used it's impossible to know what caliber the bullet would have been but even if it was just the Tavor that would mean a 55 grain bullet passed through his skull around 3200fps. There's no sign of the blood and damage that would cause in the video. It looks like the kid may have taken a rubber bullet to the back of the skull/neck which could have caused a lethal wound.
Prestor Jon wrote: Is there conclusive evidence that the kid in the black shirt was hit with a live round? Not knowing what rifle was used it's impossible to know what caliber the bullet would have been but even if it was just the Tavor that would mean a 55 grain bullet passed through his skull around 3200fps. There's no sign of the blood and damage that would cause in the video. It looks like the kid may have taken a rubber bullet to the back of the skull/neck which could have caused a lethal wound.
Are people really getting down to this? 18 people died. One of them a farmer working his own field by a tank shell. No Palestinian got closer than 100 meters to the fence, and soldiers were shooting from the buffer zone. No riot control bullet is going to one-shot anyone at that distance.
Add this headline from the day before the protests:
Prestor Jon wrote: Is there conclusive evidence that the kid in the black shirt was hit with a live round? Not knowing what rifle was used it's impossible to know what caliber the bullet would have been but even if it was just the Tavor that would mean a 55 grain bullet passed through his skull around 3200fps. There's no sign of the blood and damage that would cause in the video. It looks like the kid may have taken a rubber bullet to the back of the skull/neck which could have caused a lethal wound.
Are people really getting down to this? 18 people died. One of them a farmer working his own field by a tank shell. No Palestinian got closer than 100 meters to the fence, and soldiers were shooting from the buffer zone. No riot control bullet is going to one-shot anyone at that distance.
Add this headline from the day before the protests:
Iron_Captain wrote: And even throwing rocks should not be answered with bullets. That is disproportionate.
Not when those rocks are the size of a fist, being thrown with a sling.
As an archaeology student you should honestly know this captain
Yeah, rocks can kill. But they are not very effective. Unless they are sharpened flint and attached to a long pole. The spear was the big killer of the past. Now if someone charges at you with a spear, then you have my blessing to shoot him.
Also, if he is throwing rocks using a sling, that changes things. Slings are not effective weapons unless you use special ammunition for it. If you just shoot a fist-sized rock it is highly unlikely to actually hit anything because rocks are about as aerodynamic as well... rocks. But if you use the right ammunition, a sling is a highly lethal weapon. Tiny rounded pebbles will do in a pinch but historically most sling bullets were made specially for that purpose. (We find them by the bucketload near Roman fortifications and battle sites, and experimental archaeology experiments clearly show they were extremely nasty and lethal. The Romans did all kinds of cool stuff with sling bullets btw, some have been found with snarky remarks inscribed on them and others had holes for making scary sound effects as they fly through the air).
However, even if you just throw a random rock you find on the ground it can in rare cases actually hit the target and be lethal. So, I would not blame a soldier for shooting someone who is flinging rocks at him with a sling. A sling is a lethal weapon. But I did not see any would-be Davids in that video, did you? These guys were just running around with a tire. There is nothing harmful in that. They had no slings, they were not throwing rocks. There was no need to fire at them.
Iron_Captain wrote: And even throwing rocks should not be answered with bullets. That is disproportionate.
Not when those rocks are the size of a fist, being thrown with a sling.
As an archaeology student you should honestly know this captain
Yeah, rocks can kill. But they are not very effective. Unless they are sharpened flint and attached to a long pole. The spear was the big killer of the past. Now if someone charges at you with a spear, then you have my blessing to shoot him.
Also, if he is throwing rocks using a sling, that changes things. Slings are not effective weapons unless you use special ammunition for it. If you just shoot a fist-sized rock it is highly unlikely to actually hit anything because rocks are about as aerodynamic as well... rocks. But if you use the right ammunition, a sling is a highly lethal weapon. Tiny rounded pebbles will do in a pinch but historically most sling bullets were made specially for that purpose. (We find them by the bucketload near Roman fortifications and battle sites, and experimental archaeology experiments clearly show they were extremely nasty and lethal. The Romans did all kinds of cool stuff with sling bullets btw, some have been found with snarky remarks inscribed on them and others had holes for making scary sound effects as they fly through the air).
However, even if you just throw a random rock you find on the ground it can in rare cases actually hit the target and be lethal. So, I would not blame a soldier for shooting someone who is flinging rocks at him with a sling. A sling is a lethal weapon. But I did not see any would-be Davids in that video, did you? These guys were just running around with a tire. There is nothing harmful in that. They had no slings, they were not throwing rocks. There was no need to fire at them.
You are correct on the sling ammunition point, but a large percentage of the rock throwers in the infatadas and riots of past have been using slings or some similar instrument.
Mordant 92nd 'Acid Dogs'
The Lost and Damned
Inquisition
