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.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Accidents happen during war.

Again, if it's war, the 'war crimes;' have been stacking up like cord wood. I mean, seriously, men were hanged for WAY less then we've seen Israel do by thier own admission in the last few weeks. Not the stuff they might have done, the stuff they openly admit to would have sent someone to dance the Tyburn Jig.

Is it unreasonable to hold Israel to the same standards we hold other nations to?

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Accidents happen during war.

Again, if it's war, the 'war crimes;' have been stacking up like cord wood. I mean, seriously, men were hanged for WAY less then we've seen Israel do by thier own admission in the last few weeks. Not the stuff they might have done, the stuff they openly admit to would have sent someone to dance the Tyburn Jig.

Is it unreasonable to hold Israel to the same standards we hold other nations to?

No it's not. Nor is it resonable to hold Israel to a higher standard. What is the procedure here from prosecuting Israeli soldiers who are guilty of a war crime? Is the procedure not being followed? Is there any evidence this was intentional - in the article nor video do I see any. Witnesses (who are completely biased against israel and therefore completely unreliable can not be the judge here) say she was targeted. Is there any video? Or any Israeli soldiers who are willing to testify against the shooter? Without that there can be no war crime as Israels statement is completely reasonable granted the situation. Disproportionate? Maybe. Investigations by 3rd parties should be conducted - I am sure Israel will cooperate with them.

 Xenomancers wrote:
I am sure Israel will cooperate with them.

I'm hoping this part was sarcasm since their cooperation with any investigation in the past has been, effectively, a massive middle finger, even when the subject was found to be responsible for war crimes even under Israeli law. Ariel Sharon was found 'personally responsible' for the massacre of civilians during the Israel - Lebanon war, though their argument was effectively the same one that was used against Kurt Meyer (who was sentenced to death but later had his sentence commuted) vis a vis that while he had not ordered it, his lack of action constituted his approval.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:Did you use an online resource?

You may have to pick up a book or use archive.org

Iron_Captain wrote:Guys, please start a new thread about the colonisation atrocities already. This thread was supposed to be about the Israel/Palestine conflict.

Speaking of which:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/05/world/middleeast/israel-gaza-najjar.html

Israel admits they may have shot someone by accident. Because boy, does this look bad.

Accidents happen during war. Sometimes in war you kill your own soldiers too. Plus anyone getting shot in a rowdy protest/riot knew full well they were going into a dangerous situation. ESP in Israel.

THe problem is, its known that any conflict between IDF and Hamas, will be dangerous for anyone involved or close to it.

the two sides are not exactly considered for there ability to bend and back down from a fight..

the lines between Riots, and wars and enemy combatents starts to blur, espechilly when Hamas start to dozens of the dead where Hamas fighters, IDF, everyone knows has no soft western mode, we are used to our weak willed, and so etc leaders and policies. The middle east fights on the old rules of victory or death. there is no middle. You win, or our nation dies.

Hamas never claimed they were Hamas fighters, just members. Hamas is more than just a militant organization. Its a full fledged political party and government with a militant wing in Gaza. Just because they are members doesn't make them combatants.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
I am sure Israel will cooperate with them.

I'm hoping this part was sarcasm since their cooperation with any investigation in the past has been, effectively, a massive middle finger, even when the subject was found to be responsible for war crimes even under Israeli law. Ariel Sharon was found 'personally responsible' for the massacre of civilians during the Israel - Lebanon war, though their argument was effectively the same one that was used against Kurt Meyer (who was sentenced to death but later had his sentence commuted) vis a vis that while he had not ordered it, his lack of action constituted his approval.

I was being sarcastic. International law is a freaking joke. ICC is a joke. UN is pretty much a joke too. You can only hope that people inside of Israel will start to have enough influence fix this from within.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
I am sure Israel will cooperate with them.

I'm hoping this part was sarcasm since their cooperation with any investigation in the past has been, effectively, a massive middle finger, even when the subject was found to be responsible for war crimes even under Israeli law. Ariel Sharon was found 'personally responsible' for the massacre of civilians during the Israel - Lebanon war, though their argument was effectively the same one that was used against Kurt Meyer (who was sentenced to death but later had his sentence commuted) vis a vis that while he had not ordered it, his lack of action constituted his approval.

I was being sarcastic. International law is a freaking joke. ICC is a joke. UN is pretty much a joke too. You can only hope that people inside of Israel will start to have enough influence fix this from within.

Well if they tried to be consistent at the very least.

You don't need an international court to judge your country's own military shooting your subjects. An Israeli judge should be the one stepping in.

jouso wrote:
You don't need an international court to judge your country's own military shooting your subjects. An Israeli judge should be the one stepping in.

Thing is, the palestinians are not Israeli subjects when it comes to being shot by the IDF. They're not even granted the same legal procedures if they're arrested for something. Israelis get to see a civilian court, palestinians are sent to a military court.

Spetulhu wrote:

Thing is, the palestinians are not Israeli subjects when it comes to being shot by the IDF. They're not even granted the same legal procedures if they're arrested for something. Israelis get to see a civilian court, palestinians are sent to a military court.

If they see a court at all. Looking back at the 'burning children alive' thing, remember that when the victim's American relatives turned up to basically ask 'WTF?', the Israeli police response was to torture one of them for several weeks before releasing him.

The state department was so upset as to write an official complaint, and then do absolutely nothing. If they had been Muslim or Arab police, the Marines would have landed the next day.

Well, an interview came out, that I missed in this: An Israeli general gave a radio interview in Israel, discussing how the Israeli snipers covering this had orders to shoot any children at the protests, to be certain that they did not find any weak points in the fence, or damage it.

also, it would distract their parents, which was more effective then just shooting terrorists.

When I saw a new post on this thread I thought it would be about Israel removing Arabic as an official language and granting specific rights to Jewish people (as opposed to the 20% Arabic population).

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/19/one-more-racist-law-reactions-as-israel-axes-arabic-as-official-language

It was known Israeli Arabs were next on the chopping block just not this quick.

jouso wrote:
When I saw a new post on this thread I thought it would be about Israel removing Arabic as an official language and granting specific rights to Jewish people (as opposed to the 20% Arabic population).

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/19/one-more-racist-law-reactions-as-israel-axes-arabic-as-official-language

It was known Israeli Arabs were next on the chopping block just not this quick.

It's not too bad, they stripped out the part where all Arabs lost their citizenship and had their property taken, as well as the rule that Judges could only ever rule in favor of Jews.

And people claim Israeli are not Nazis....

 BaronIveagh wrote:

jouso wrote:
When I saw a new post on this thread I thought it would be about Israel removing Arabic as an official language and granting specific rights to Jewish people (as opposed to the 20% Arabic population).

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/19/one-more-racist-law-reactions-as-israel-axes-arabic-as-official-language

It was known Israeli Arabs were next on the chopping block just not this quick.

It's not too bad, they stripped out the part where all Arabs lost their citizenship and had their property taken, as well as the rule that Judges could only ever rule in favor of Jews.

And people claim Israeli are not Nazis....

Well, Israel did help the White Helmets escape Syria, so that is a positive note at least.
But yeah, Israel's discrimination of its Arab citizens and oppression of the Palestinians is getting worse. And given that it was already quite bad at times, well... Hopefully elections in 2019 will bring more moderates to power in Israel, because Israel seems on course to slowly become an apartheid state as of now.

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Well, an interview came out, that I missed in this: An Israeli general gave a radio interview in Israel, discussing how the Israeli snipers covering this had orders to shoot any children at the protests, to be certain that they did not find any weak points in the fence, or damage it.

also, it would distract their parents, which was more effective then just shooting terrorists.

Do you have a link or the general's name? If true, this is absolutely horrific and needs to be punished.

In other news...

Syria conflict: White Helmets evacuated by Israel

Or as the Russian media would call the, "White Helmet Terrorists".

 Wyrmalla wrote:
In other news...

Syria conflict: White Helmets evacuated by Israel

Or as the Russian media would call the, "White Helmet Terrorists".

They did have links to the terrorist groups and extremist organisations that make up the vast majority of the Syrian rebels, so yeah. Those links were necessary to be able to operate in rebel areas (and many White Helmets are in fact members of said rebel groups themselves), but by doing so they did clearly pick a side in the war. They are anything but apolitical, they are a rebel group. And a rebel who does good deeds is still a rebel. And since they are clearly on the losing side, it is good that they are being evacuated. Because with a few exceptions, they are good, heroic people, but I am pretty sure Assad won't see it the same way.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Well, an interview came out, that I missed in this: An Israeli general gave a radio interview in Israel, discussing how the Israeli snipers covering this had orders to shoot any children at the protests, to be certain that they did not find any weak points in the fence, or damage it.

also, it would distract their parents, which was more effective then just shooting terrorists.

Do you have a link or the general's name? If true, this is absolutely horrific and needs to be punished.

This is the most original source I can trace:-

https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/snipers-ordered-shoot-children-israeli-general-confirms

Pretty standard 'evils of Israel' blog (I'm not saying that makes them inaccurate, merely pointing out the political affiliation). I can't speak as to the accuracy of the transcript and the translation only starts part of the way in. The subject of the discussion would appear to have been teenagers being shot near the border; likely because during the recent border troubles several 14 & 15 year olds got capped by snipers. The gist is that ex-Israeli General Fogel states that anyone trying to damage, infiltrate, plant explosives, or otherwise mess with the border wall is liable to be shot and killed, under 18 or not.

There's no comment about it distracting the parents though that I can find in the transcript or any of the other sites carrying the story; that seems to have been added later on. It's also being deleted as a 'fake news' story on Reddit at the moment apparently, though I've no idea why. I saw elsewhere that the Brigadier-General Fogel in question is a relative of those killed in the Fogel Family Massacre seven years ago (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itamar_attack), which was carried out by an 18 & 17 year old. If true that could explain his attitude, but like the Reddit thing and translation, I've no real corroboration. It should also be pointed out that Fogel retired from the IDF over a decade ago (2004); he's not actually a serving officer and has absolutely nothing to do with the border.

Assuming that the transcript is perfect, Fogel said those things, and is indeed related to the family that got butchered by teenage extremists; I can understand why a decade and a half after being put out to pasture he'd be willing to handwave away some teenagers getting shot along the border for playing with the fence. I'm not saying it's justified (I don't think it is), but I can understand his reaction. If one of my cousins had had their baby's head sawed off with a knife by a seventeen year old, I'd doubtless be able to bear the idea of similar teenagers being shot with remarkable equinamity.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

jouso wrote:
When I saw a new post on this thread I thought it would be about Israel removing Arabic as an official language and granting specific rights to Jewish people (as opposed to the 20% Arabic population).

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/19/one-more-racist-law-reactions-as-israel-axes-arabic-as-official-language

It was known Israeli Arabs were next on the chopping block just not this quick.

It's not too bad, they stripped out the part where all Arabs lost their citizenship and had their property taken, as well as the rule that Judges could only ever rule in favor of Jews.

And people claim Israeli are not Nazis....

Methinks you are ignorant of who the Nazis were.

 Frazzled wrote:

 BaronIveagh wrote:

jouso wrote:
When I saw a new post on this thread I thought it would be about Israel removing Arabic as an official language and granting specific rights to Jewish people (as opposed to the 20% Arabic population).

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/19/one-more-racist-law-reactions-as-israel-axes-arabic-as-official-language

It was known Israeli Arabs were next on the chopping block just not this quick.

It's not too bad, they stripped out the part where all Arabs lost their citizenship and had their property taken, as well as the rule that Judges could only ever rule in favor of Jews.

And people claim Israeli are not Nazis....

Methinks you are ignorant of who the Nazis were.

You know the Pro/ Anti- Israel subs banned the use of referencing Israel to Nazism. ...Mostly so people could find other less played out analogies.

Throwing around terms like Nazi, fascist, racist, communist and Marxist instantly discredits the person using them...

 Frazzled wrote:

Methinks you are ignorant of who the Nazis were.

Methinks you're ignorant of how they got to where they went. The Jewish State Law, in it's original form, bore a horrifying resemblance to Germany's Nuremberg Laws of 1935. As originally pitched, any Arab or Christian living in Israel would have lost not only all rights to things like voting and property, but also lost the right to a fair trial, and the right to legal redress of wrongs. What got passed is morally and ethically questionable as hell, but they did give up on the idea of stripping all non-jews of any and all rights.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Throwing around terms like Nazi, fascist, racist, communist and Marxist instantly discredits the person using them...

I might point out that would mean that any and all history texts would be self discrediting.

And, bluntly, it was frankly the best comparison, aside from maybe apartheid.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

Methinks you are ignorant of who the Nazis were.

Methinks you're ignorant of how they got to where they went. The Jewish State Law, in it's original form, bore a horrifying resemblance to Germany's Nuremberg Laws of 1935. As originally pitched, any Arab living in Israel would have lost not only all rights to things like voting and property, but also lost the right to a fair trial, and the right to legal redress of wrongs. What got passed is morally and ethically questionable as hell, but they did give up on the idea of stripping all non-jews of any and all rights.

Over Netanyahu's objections, I might add.

 Laughing Man wrote:

Over Netanyahu's objections, I might add.

I think the part that he really wanted was the bit where Jewishness was more important than Democracy or or other laws. Or that a jew could never lose in an Israeli court, unless it was against another Jew. That was really lovely.


He was really trying to hustle things along to the 'Death Camps are Legal!' stage.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Throwing around terms like Nazi, fascist, racist, communist and Marxist instantly discredits the person using them...

But the worst still remains..."cat lover." Oh the humanity!

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Throwing around terms like Nazi, fascist, racist, communist and Marxist instantly discredits the person using them...

You can call me a communist if you want. I don't mind.
Sometimes using those terms is justified, because there are actual Nazis, fascists, racists, communists and Marxists out there. Although I agree with you that in 90% of cases when these terms are used they are not used to refer to actual communists, fascists etc. And that is bad.

I support Israel.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Throwing around terms like Nazi, fascist, racist, communist and Marxist instantly discredits the person using them...

You can call me a communist if you want. I don't mind.
Sometimes using those terms is justified, because there are actual Nazis, fascists, racists, communists and Marxists out there. Although I agree with you that in 90% of cases when these terms are used they are not used to refer to actual communists, fascists etc. And that is bad.

On Dakka Dakka I'd say thats more like 99%.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

On Dakka Dakka I'd say thats more like 99%.

In this case, i see nothing wrong with calling people who propose laws stripping anyone not of their ethnic or religious group of any and all rights (including fair trials, ownership of property, etc) 'Nazis'. Even if they are not, technically, members of the National Socialist party.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Khornate25 wrote:
I support Israel.

With that avatar, I can believe it.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

On Dakka Dakka I'd say thats more like 99%.

In this case, i see nothing wrong with calling people who propose laws stripping anyone not of their ethnic or religious group of any and all rights (including fair trials, ownership of property, etc) 'Nazis'. Even if they are not, technically, members of the National Socialist party.

That'd make them fascists, not Nazis. A Nazi is a specific kind of fascist that thinks that social Darwinism is awesome, is obsessed with racial purity and their own superiority, likes to day-dream about purging "unclean" races and worships their leader as a living god (aka the Imperium of Man). Not to mention that Nazis are virulently antisemitic (something which the Israeli government is hardly guilty of). Common fascists merely are autocratic ultra-nationalists, often but not necessarily with xenophobic tendencies. I don't think the current Israeli government, despite a lot of nationalism and some nasty xenophobic tendencies, has gone far enough yet to be deserving of either title. They are still a democracy, and Israeli Arabs and Christians still have access to virtually the same rights that Israeli Jews have access to.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
They are still a democracy, and Israeli Arabs and Christians still have access to virtually the same rights that Israeli Jews have access to.

'Still' though barely. We both know Netanyahu will never stop trying to get those taken away and has the political capital to eventually get them passed.