Israeli soldiers convicted for using Palestinian children to check booby-traps

SugarHigh

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-11462635

An Israeli military court has convicted two Israeli soldiers for using a Palestinian child as a human shield during an offensive in Gaza in 2009.
The soldiers were found guilty of reckless endangerment and conduct unbecoming for forcing the nine-year-old boy to check suspected booby-traps.
It is reportedly the first such conviction in Israel - where the use of civilians as human shields is banned.
The sentencing will be decided at a later date, the court said.
No protection On Sunday, the southern command military court found the two Israeli soldiers guilty of "exceeding their authority to the point of endangering life" and conduct unbecoming in the incident in Gaza City's suburb of Tel al-Hawa on 15 January 2009.


A summary of the verdict said that - when rounding up residents of Tel al-Hawa - the soldiers came across bags in a home and ordered the Palestinian boy to search for suspected booby-traps.
"The boy, who feared for his fate and was under the stress of the situation, wet his pants," the three-judge panel wrote in the summary of the verdict.
"The court has noted that, unlike the soldiers, the child was, naturally, bereft of any form of protection."
However, the court acknowledged that at the time the soldiers - whose names have not been released - had been under "difficult and dangerous conditions".
The bags that the boy - identified only as Majd R - had checked did not have any hidden explosives and the child was later returned to his family unharmed.
Israel launched its Gaza offensive in December 2008, saying it was aimed at halting Palestinian rocket attacks from the territory controlled by militant Hamas movement.
Some 1,400 Palestinians and 13 Israelis were killed during the 22-day fighting.
Last year's report by UN investigator Richard Goldstone accused both Israel and Hamas of war crimes during the fighting.

It really shows how dehumanized Palestinians are to some Israelis

Celly Smunt

damn juice.

strobe

Not surprised in the slightest. Which is pretty sickening in itself.

IBTSA (In before the scumbag apologists)

citizen_p

from ops source
It is reportedly the first such conviction in Israel - where the use of civilians as human shields is banned.

theres always one egit that does somthing so wrong and new, that a ban has to be put in place against it.

"why are ya doing that"
"well, theres no law against it"

Chaotic_Forces

So what? It's a damn war. People do messed up things. It's not as if it's a peaceful place. Psychopaths can do more stuff during a war than if we were all sitting around being happy and loving.

SV

That's twisted...

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

So what? It's a damn war. People do messed up things. It's not as if it's a peaceful place. Psychopaths can do more stuff during a war than if we were all sitting around being happy and loving.

Yes it's a war, there should still be no 'So what?' attitude about it, It's a horribly sick thing to do/happen. Nothing excuses it.

Chaotic_Forces

SV wrote: »

That's twisted...



Yes it's a war, there should still be no 'So what?' attitude about it, It's a horribly sick thing to do/happen. Nothing excuses it.

Why shouldn't there be? It's not as if I'm saying "oh well lads, go and do it again". It's just not shocking to me, war generally turns normal people a bit loopy and brings out the psycho in people. Couple that with hate of a certain people and you've got horrible things happening.

I'm not saying it was fine to do just that it's not shocking and I don't think people should find it shocking.

Ronin247

How could they be so inhuman.....Its not like the poor Palestinians have ever used children as human shields or to carry weapons is it???

There are no recorded incidents of Isreali suicide bombers in the Palestinian markets or the high street.

Oh the poor downtrodden Palestinians.

Augmerson

In before the friends of Israel arrive.

round tower huntsman

what about the holacaust? eh!

Augmerson

Augmerson wrote: »

In before the friends of Israel arrive.

Obviously not...but you were close..

jugger0

Well its a war, its not nice.

Celly Smunt

round tower huntsman wrote: »

what about the holacaust? eh!

never happened,ill now run off to the CT forum

karma_

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

Why shouldn't there be? It's not as if I'm saying "oh well lads, go and do it again". It's just not shocking to me, war generally turns normal people a bit loopy and brings out the psycho in people. Couple that with hate of a certain people and you've got horrible things happening.

I'm not saying it was fine to do just that it's not shocking and I don't think people should find it shocking.

That attitude says more about you than anything else.

Chaotic_Forces

karma_ wrote: »

That attitude says more about you than anything else.

What's that supposed to mean?

ScissorPaperRock

Ronin247 wrote: »

How could they be so inhuman.....Its not like the poor Palestinians have ever used children as human shields or to carry weapons is it???

There are no recorded incidents of Isreali suicide bombers in the Palestinian markets or the high street.

Oh the poor downtrodden Palestinians.

It was a 9 year old f****** kid.

It's wrong under any circumstances. He's a helpless victim regardless of who did what before.

KevinVonSpiel

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

What's that supposed to mean?

It means that you are a bad person &, therefore, karma, henceforth, will not look favorably upon you...

SugarHigh

Augmerson wrote: »

In before the friends of Israel arrive.

To be fair there really shouldn't be any need to defend Israel on this because it's not like it's an official policy to use kids as shields. The people who did this were convicted by an Israeli court so it's clear most Israeli's do not find this exceptable.

If someone in the Irish Defense Forces was to go mad and start killing kids should the whole of Ireland have to defend it self?

I'm not an Israeli supporter by the way it's just that in this specific case I don't see how it's the state of Israel that's at fault because of the actions by 2 rogue soldiers.

Jim

It is reportedly the first such conviction in Israel - where the use of civilians as human shields is banned.

They need to make a point of it. lolololololol

Wolfe Tone

I am not even surprised. Scum.

strobe

strobe wrote: »

IBTSA (In before the scumbag apologists)

Ronin247 wrote: »

How could they be so inhuman.....Its not like the poor Palestinians have ever used children as human shields or to carry weapons is it???

There are no recorded incidents of Isreali suicide bombers in the Palestinian markets or the high street.

Oh the poor downtrodden Palestinians.

Blamo! Who had 17 minutes in the pool?

Doc

strobe wrote: »

Blamo! Who had 17 minutes in the pool?

I know its crazy to think that some people are justifying it when the Israelis themselves are not!

speedboatchase

What's with all the anti-Israel articles in AH, I thought this place was meant to be fun? In other news, Palestinians families frequently strap explosives to their teenage sons or daughters with the pure intent of blowing up innocent civilians. But I digress...

arybvtcw0eolkf

speedboatchase wrote: »

What's with all the anti-Israel articles in AH, I thought this place was meant to be fun? In other news, Palestinians families frequently strap explosives to their teenage sons or daughters with the pure intent of blowing up innocent civilians. But I digress...

Well regardless, two supposedly professional soldiers sent a nine year old to check for booby traps, that should be illegal in any man's army.

In this case the IDF deemed it illegal and convicted the soldiers.

In Israel a conviction leading to imprisonment or discharge from the military can have life long consequences, ie unlikely to find employment, college places and exclusion from other state services - and good enough for the idiots.

Zebra3

Ronin247 wrote: »

There are no recorded incidents of Isreali suicide bombers in the Palestinian markets or the high street.

That's cos the Israelis drop their huge bombs from high up in the sky from expensive planes paid for by the American taxpayer.

Einhard

SugarHigh wrote: »

I'm not an Israeli supporter by the way it's just that in this specific case I don't see how it's the state of Israel that's at fault because of the actions by 2 rogue soldiers.

Oh but you are. You have a relatively nuanced view of the incident at hand, and don't use it to reflexively slam Israel, so therefore you're a "friend of Israel" and an inhman scumbag. That's how it works here you see.

Dyr

SugarHigh wrote: »

To be fair there really shouldn't be any need to defend Israel on this because it's not like it's an official policy to use kids as shields. The people who did this were convicted by an Israeli court so it's clear most Israeli's do not find this exceptable.

I'm think it was the IDF's policy a few years back to use human shields, the israeli courts stopped them.

Einhard

strobe wrote: »

Not surprised in the slightest. Which is pretty sickening in itself.

IBTSA (In before the scumbag apologists)

SV wrote: »

That's twisted...

You're correct in that such behaviour is to be condemned, but what exactly is not surprising? That the two were convicted in an Israeli court? That such behaviour is explicitly banned in Israeli law? I'm not sure how this story can be used to have a go at the state of Israel, as opposed to the two miscreants involved.

Yes it's a war, there should still be no 'So what?' attitude about it, It's a horribly sick thing to do/happen. Nothing excuses it.

The problem is that a lot of people here exploit such events to have a go at Israel, irregardless of whether it's warranted. Thus we have a story about how an Israeli court investigated and convicted two soldiers, and yet somehow it turns into active condemnation of Israel.

Augmerson wrote: »

In before the friends of Israel arrive.

Friends of nuance, and opponents of knee jerk reaction more like. You lover of suicide bombers you.*

*See how easy to give idiotic labels to people who hold a different opinion to you?

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

I am not even surprised. Scum.

Yes, the soldiers involved were scum. Happily, the Israeli court recognised this, and convicted them So, we can all agree that this story reflects well on Israel.

Doc wrote: »

I know its crazy to think that some people are justifying it when the Israelis themselves are not!

Exactly. Israel themselves are not justifying it. Yet, to judge from the reaction of some here, you'd swear that the soldiers were not only cleared of all charges, but hoisted onto the shoulders of the judges, and cheered through the town, before receiving medals of honour for serices to the state. Rather than, ummmm, convicting them for crimes. Which now, it seems, is a bad thing if done Israel has done it/

KyussBishop

Responses to a couple of repetative arguments: (I realize some people have said these things, without arguing against discussion; it doesn't apply to them)

1: "So what? I'm not surprised/well it's a war/this isn't exactly news/etc.":
Just because bad events happen very often between Israel/Palestine, and people are not often surprised by much anymore, doesn't mean events aren't newsworthy or aren't worth posting about.

The opposite actually, because the more routine these kind of events are, the more they turn into bare 'statistics', the less empathy people are going to have towards people in these conflicts and the less people will care; this stuff needs to be talked about more, and often, not just in spite of people not being surprised/caring, but because of that.

Really good article the other day from Ben Goldacre, which touches on a semi-related topic, which is interesting in the context of this:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/oct/02/ben-goldacre-bad-science-crime-punishment-empathy


2: "Well it's not like the Palestinians haven't done the same":
If true, this doesn't make it any less newsworthy, and (to take it to a length which hasn't been said) if such an argument is applied to imply hypocrisy, for not mentioning that Palestinians may do the same thing, then that is a false argument because:
- Nobody has made the claim saying Palestinians don't do the same, and there is nothing said to imply people hold them to a different standard
- Even if it were hypocrisy, that would not invalidate an argument, or make this less newsworthy; it stands by itself
- Israeli crimes are more frequent, on a larger scale (thus far more disproportionate), and show a far greater level of inhumane treatment than Palestinian actions, Israel are also the oppressors in this conflict; thus Israel will (rightly) get far more negative attention

3: "If you don't immediately condemn Israel, anti-Israeli's label you an apologist/scumbag"
Lazy straw man argument, which in itself ironically/hypocritically labels all anti-Israeli (for lack of a better term) posters, as irrational and dishonest, and is a very thinly veiled way of trying to discredit their arguments through attacking credibility.

4: "This was the action of individuals, the individuals were convicted, Israel should not be critcised, it is exploitative to do so, stick to the topic at hand etc."
While it is good the Israeli courts are prosecuting the individuals in this case, Israel is open to a huge amount of criticism on a very wide range of things involving the conflict with Palestine; using this discussion to criticise/condemn Israel, the IDF etc. on their actions is perfectly within the subject of this topic.
To label criticism of Israel from these topics as exploitative, is to slur the posters criticizing Israel, and try to lazily dismiss their arguments without acknowledging/engaging them.

SugarHigh wrote: »

To be fair there really shouldn't be any need to defend Israel on this because it's not like it's an official policy to use kids as shields. The people who did this were convicted by an Israeli court so it's clear most Israeli's do not find this exceptable.

If someone in the Irish Defense Forces was to go mad and start killing kids should the whole of Ireland have to defend it self?

I'm not an Israeli supporter by the way it's just that in this specific case I don't see how it's the state of Israel that's at fault because of the actions by 2 rogue soldiers.

Well, the added issue with this, that also makes it more newsworthy, is that it also reflects the views/attitudes of many Israeli/IDF soldiers towards Palestinians; that their view towards Palestinians views them on such a sub-human level, that some of them are willing to use Palestinian children as human shields.

This kind of semi-indoctrinated disregard/dehumanization of Palestinians is extremely common among the IDF (not saying it encompasses most of the IDF or anything, not at all, just that it's common), and this story is important in showing that, and how far it can go.

Gummy Panda

Someone pm this story to that girl from cork who was parroting IDF propaganda a few months ago.

Einhard

Gummy Panda wrote: »

Someone pm this story to that girl from cork who was parroting IDF propaganda a few months ago.

And while we're at it, let's send a link to every member of the Irish Armed Forces of that sailor convicted during the summer of providing drug lords with the co-ordinates of naval patrol vessels. I mean, if the two Israeli soldiers are representative of the institution they served, then surely all Irish soldiers are in league with drug dealers? By your logic...

Einhard

KyussBishop wrote: »

3: "If you don't immediately condemn Israel, anti-Israeli's label you an apologist/scumbag"
Lazy straw man argument, which in itself ironically/hypocritically labels all anti-Israeli (for lack of a better term) posters, as irrational and dishonest, and is a very thinly veiled way of trying to discredit their arguments through attacking credibility.

4: "This was the action of individuals, the individuals were convicted, Israel should not be critcised, it is exploitative to do so, stick to the topic at hand etc."

To label criticism of Israel from these topics as exploitative, is to slur the posters criticizing Israel, and try to lazily dismiss their arguments without acknowledging/engaging them.

Eh yeah, ok. Except for the fact that nobody in this thread has so far labelled anyone "pro-Palestinian" or "terrorist supporters", whereas one of the first posts in response was the snide "In before the friends of Israel arrive". It seems it's ok for one side to dismiss all contrary opinion in such a manner though. How convenient for you that they also happen to share your POV on the issue...

dlofnep

Nothing new here. Israeli soldiers have a habit of using Palestinians as human shields.

When the Israeli Supreme court banned the use of Palestinians as human shields back in 2005, the IDF went apeshít about it and appealed to have it reversed. Since the ban, there have been countless accounts of Palestinians being used as human shields. It's quite clearly that Israeli actions towards their soldiers is not enough, because they continue to do it.

The IDF are slime.

KyussBishop

Einhard wrote: »

Eh yeah, ok. Except for the fact that nobody in this thread has so far labelled anyone "pro-Palestinian" or "terrorist supporters", whereas one of the first posts in response was the snide "In before the friends of Israel arrive". It seems it's ok for one side to dismiss all contrary opinion in such a manner though. how convenient for you that they always happen to share your POV on the issue...

You don't have to label anyone pro-Palestinian, or 'terrorist supporters', you were implicitly labeling people critcizing Israel.

You argument mentioning the poster who said "In before the friends of Israel arrive" is similar the second thing in my last post:

KyussBishop wrote: »

2: "Well it's not like the Palestinians haven't done the same":
If true, this doesn't make it any less newsworthy, and (to take it to a length which hasn't been said) if such an argument is applied to imply hypocrisy, for not mentioning that Palestinians may do the same thing, then that is a false argument because:
- Nobody has made the claim saying Palestinians don't do the same, and there is nothing said to imply people hold them to a different standard
- Even if it were hypocrisy, that would not invalidate an argument, or make this less newsworthy; it stands by itself
- Israeli crimes are more frequent, on a larger scale (thus far more disproportionate), and show a far greater level of inhumane treatment than Palestinian actions, Israel are also the oppressors in this conflict; thus Israel will (rightly) get far more negative attention

Lets adjust that a bit:
- I didn't make the claim that anti-Israeli posters don't do the same, there's nothing to imply I hold them to a different standard
- Even if, by not mentioning the post you quoted, I was being hypocritical (which I wasn't), that wouldn't invalidate my argument; it stands by itself
- Pro-Israeli posters use false arguments and dishonest tactics in their posts on a far larger scale, and show a far greater inhumane attitude towards people (Palestinian civilians) than anti-Israeli posters (who almost never show similar disregard for Israeli's, minus the inevitable tiny handful of idiots); thus pro-Israel posters will (rightly) get far more negative attention, due to the content of their posts


NOTE: I don't like using the anti-Israel/pro-Israel labels, but it's the simplest way to state what I'm saying.

Einhard

KyussBishop wrote: »

You don't have to label anyone pro-Palestinian, or 'terrorist supporters', you were implicitly labeling people critcizing Israel.

I did no such thing. At all. Have you read this thread?

KyussBishop

You did, implicitly:

Einhard wrote: »

SugarHigh wrote:

I'm not an Israeli supporter by the way it's just that in this specific case I don't see how it's the state of Israel that's at fault because of the actions by 2 rogue soldiers.

Oh but you are. You have a relatively nuanced view of the incident at hand, and don't use it to reflexively slam Israel, so therefore you're a "friend of Israel" and an inhman scumbag. That's how it works here you see.

My (indirect) reply, which you quoted in your reply to me:

KyussBishop wrote: »

3: "If you don't immediately condemn Israel, anti-Israeli's label you an apologist/scumbag"
Lazy straw man argument, which in itself ironically/hypocritically labels all anti-Israeli (for lack of a better term) posters, as irrational and dishonest, and is a very thinly veiled way of trying to discredit their arguments through attacking credibility.

Gummy Panda

Einhard wrote: »

And while we're at it, let's send a link to every member of the Irish Armed Forces of that sailor convicted during the summer of providing drug lords with the co-ordinates of naval patrol vessels. I mean, if the two Israeli soldiers are representative of the institution they served, then surely all Irish soldiers are in league with drug dealers? By your logic...

Yeah because this is an isolated incident :rolleyes:

Einhard

Gummy Panda wrote: »

Yeah because this is an isolated incident :rolleyes:

So Israel is damned when it does, and damned when it doesn't. The OP links to a story about soldiers being investigated and convicted by Israeli institutions, and yet somehow it's a cause to condemn the state of Israel? I really don't get it. I mean, there are plently of reasons to be critical of Israel and her policies, but this jumping on every single situation and story to do so is somewhat tedious.

BlaasForRafa

KyussBishop wrote: »

- Pro-Israeli posters use false arguments and dishonest tactics in their posts on a far larger scale, and show a far greater inhumane attitude towards people (Palestinian civilians) than anti-Israeli posters (who almost never show similar disregard for Israeli's, minus the inevitable tiny handful of idiots); thus pro-Israel posters will (rightly) get far more negative attention, due to the content of their posts

Complete and absolute bull.

Anti-Israel supporters are forever attacking the poster not the post and attempt to invalidate posters opinions by using phrases like "apologist" and the like. Anti-Israel supporters frequently use hyperbole in their posts and strawman arguments to attack Israel. There are important things to be talked about regarding the middle east but the vitriol from the anti-Israeli side makes rational discussion all but impossible sometimes.

Your own post is hypocritical by trying to portray pro-Israel supporters as monolithic and inhumane and attacking their character whereas anti-Israel supporters are apparently pure of heart and even handed.

wes

Well, its a good start. Now they just have to prosecute all the other instances of the same happening.....

dlofnep

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Anti-Israel supporters are ...

Well, there's an oxymoron if I ever saw one.

jackiebaron

Chaotic_Forces wrote: »

So what? It's a damn war. People do messed up things. It's not as if it's a peaceful place. Psychopaths can do more stuff during a war than if we were all sitting around being happy and loving.

A war you say? If there is indeed a war going on then shouldn't the boody RULES OF WARFARE apply? Or are these just to give you peace of mind but they are in fact to be ignored? And before you start screeching and squawking about how Hamas fires rockets into civilian areas and the whole "sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander" cliche I would remind you that "I was only following orders" or "well the other side does scummy stuff too, y'know!" explanations are no excuse for war crimes.

speedboatchase

What an annoying and stupid thread this is. I'm glad people feel the need to create a new anti-Israel thread to validate their own views every day but this particular story actually shows IDF in a fairly productive, positive light. Good work guys!

wes

speedboatchase wrote: »

What an annoying and stupid thread this is. I'm glad people feel the need to create a new anti-Israel thread to validate their own views every day but this particular story actually shows IDF in a fairly productive, positive light. Good work guys!

And yet you keep posting in these threads.........

jackiebaron

No matter how many times that the IDF are exposed for their barbarism and cruelty, people simply shrug it off as an isolated incident...the antics of a couple of bad apples. Well I'm pretty sick of seeing these systemic "isolated incidents" day in day out. The IDF commit war crime on a daily basis and then scream "anti-semitism" or "terrorist sympathiser" if they are criticised. The IDF routinely abuse Palestinians. Pregnant women and pensioners are left to die at checkpoints when they are trying to get to hospital. Don't know if anyone remembers that charming footage of a bunch of Israeli soldiers holding down a Palestinian and breaking his arms with rocks. The problem acting with the utmost cruelty towards kids:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=aeb_1218586727

They are sick. Plain and simple.

KyussBishop

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Complete and absolute bull.

Anti-Israel supporters are forever attacking the poster not the post and attempt to invalidate posters opinions by using phrases like "apologist" and the like. Anti-Israel supporters frequently use hyperbole in their posts and strawman arguments to attack Israel. There are important things to be talked about regarding the middle east but the vitriol from the anti-Israeli side makes rational discussion all but impossible sometimes.

Your own post is hypocritical by trying to portray pro-Israel supporters as monolithic and inhumane and attacking their character whereas anti-Israel supporters are apparently pure of heart and even handed.

I rarely see a thread on this topic, where the arguments defending Israel's actions are not very well deconstructed by people condemning their actions.
Criticizing the posters for what they are defending, is not out of bounds, and is not wrong (it is necessary even, as some peoples viewpoints on these issues are quite disgusting, and that deserves to be pointed out/criticized); to use that in itself as your argument is wrong though.

From some (not all, as you could misread my previous post as saying) of the actual posters defending Israel, you will come across a range of arguments/tactics designed at obfuscation, deflecting arguments back at people ("they do it too", "why don't you mention their actions too?" etc.), straw men, painting it all as a "necessary evil" etc., diminishing condemnation, other arguments like "we're not in a position to judge", "we don't know the facts on the ground" etc. even though available data gives plenty of justification for judgment, and craploads more.

The list of purely dishonest arguments used is quite large, and they are usually arguments which the posters must consciously know are dishonest, and it makes me (and really should make others) think about what it is exactly that these people are defending: usually, the murder and oppression of an entire population, and in some threads, the deaths of specific individuals.

If some of these posters must be entirely conscious of the dishonest arguments they are making, and defend that kind of stuff, what does that say about them as people, and what are their motives for that? (if their arguments require being knowingly false, that implies they know what they are defending is wrong)
I know it's possible (paradoxically) for even the nicest people, who if you knew them in person you know would never harm anyone, can hold totally repugnant views like what has been expressed in past topics on this discussion; I still personally find it quite sickening though, and think there should be much greater personal criticism of those people.

Another thing to add: How many anti-Israel posters have defended any actions which would lead to the death of Israelis or others? If there are some, there are only a tiny proportion, whereas defense of actions which lead to death (or diminishing of criticism of such actions) are routine for posters defending Israel.

By reading my posts, it could be read that I'm attributing this to >all< posters defending Israel (or other arguments to all those criticizing); I'm not, what I'm pointing out is that it's a simple observation that posts defending Israel, and a greater portion of the posters defending them (not all of them), express views which are more ugly and reprehensible than posters criticizing/condemning Israel.


Related to the topic, here's a great article about the UN report on the flotilla deaths, by Glenn Greenwald:
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/10/01/flotilla/index.html (U.N. Report finds Israel "summarily executed" U.S. citizen on flotilla)

dvpower

SugarHigh wrote: »

To be fair there really shouldn't be any need to defend Israel on this because it's not like it's an official policy to use kids as shields. The people who did this were convicted by an Israeli court so it's clear most Israeli's do not find this exceptable.

If someone in the Irish Defense Forces was to go mad and start killing kids should the whole of Ireland have to defend it self?

I'm not an Israeli supporter by the way it's just that in this specific case I don't see how it's the state of Israel that's at fault because of the actions by 2 rogue soldiers.

If it was an isolated incident, I'd agree, but it isn't.
http://www.btselem.org/English/Human_Shields/Index.asp

It is illegal of course, but seemingly condoned by some commanders on the ground.

Nodin

Mousey- wrote: »

from ops source
It is reportedly the first such conviction in Israel - where the use of civilians as human shields is banned.

theres always one egit that does somthing so wrong and new, that a ban has to be put in place against it.

"why are ya doing that"
"well, theres no law against it"

Actually it was banned because it was SOP for the IDF for 30 years.
http://www.btselem.org/English/Human_Shields/Index.asp

philologos

Hang on. Israel convicts people of injustice? - Fair play on the court for ruling this way. I hope Israel continues to take such action in the case of wholly unjust behaviour in the IDF. As I see it this is a positive rather than a negative reflection on Israel.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Nodin wrote: »

Actually it was banned because it was SOP for the IDF for 30 years.
http://www.btselem.org/English/Human_Shields/Index.asp

It would be SOP in many armies if they thought they'd get away it with.

Wolfe Tone

Richard Chubby Kangaroo wrote: »

It would be SOP in many armies if they thought they'd get away it with.

So the soldiers in "many armies" are scum then?