Israel murder 12 people throwing stones

RichieC · 16-05-2011 04:37PM

Israel should either sort its sh*t out, stop being led blood thirsty zionist yanks or f*ck off to the history books.

Fuhrer · 16-05-2011 04:37PM

Warper wrote: »

Well done Hitler

Any time.

Laika1986 · 16-05-2011 04:48PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

By your logic the germans were right to shoot agaisnt the allied troops who landed in france as from the germans point of view it was german soil and borders.

That's shocking logic, what did you expect them to do?if you read interviews with the german soldiers who were there that day say it was either them or you, what would you do?

Manic Moran · 16-05-2011 05:05PM

Where is the line between things being a soldiers responsibility and it being the responsibility of those who sent him?

One is political, the other is tactical with constraints imposed.

Once the soldier is told 'go stand here, and this is the effect we want from you' (eg 'nobody gets across the border'), then the soldier is going to do whatever he can within the limits of his rules of engagement, the equipment at hand, and the laws of war or of domestic law (as applicable in the situation) in order to attain that end result.

The tasking is a political/command question, beyond the average soldier's pay grade. The RoE are generally politically imposed (and almost always have an 'out' clause saying akin to 'nothing in these RoE will prevent you from using lethal force in the event that you feel your life is threatened'), and is also above the soldier's pay grade. And, of course, the laws of war or domestic law are also beyond a soldier's ability to affect. In deciding what to do, the soldier must presume (and is expected to) that he can take any action he wants as long as they fit within the restrictions and instructions imposed upon him. Remember, a soldier's most basic job description is to do violence on behalf of the State. That's why he's trained with a rifle, not a wiffle bat.

NTM

Predalien · 16-05-2011 05:11PM

Cassidy Obnoxious Tonsillitis wrote: »

According to you what is proportionate force against stone throwers? - throw stones of equal size and weight back?.

God forbid if I was attacked by a stone throwing anybody I don't have it in my arsenal to throw stones back!.. I can fire warning shots, I can fire containing shots but my ultimate deterrent against attack upon my life is the use of lethal force.. I can't reach into my battle vest and take out a magic bullet which won't seriously wound or kill an attacker.

Battles are won by using disproportionate force, be that in weight of numbers or weapons used.. And of course good tactical awareness.

Next.

Problem is Israel tend to go for lethal force first, they have no intention of merely dissipating the threat by less violent means, why not use water cannon, tear gas, rubber bullets, shield themselves sufficiently etc. there is no need to resort to, using your words "ultimate deterrent", in the first instance. Also you commented that you felt "all guns blazing" would have been understandable, care to explain how you justify this?

And I haven't been condescending so I'd appreciate it if you'd refrain from that kind of attitude.

PatsytheNazi · 16-05-2011 05:27PM

The friends of little Israel -

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_-2Al2MGY0GM/TRwu970-qiI/AAAAAAAAAF4/mPrYmDsjSCg/s400/uda-israeli-flag.jpg

Manic Moran · 16-05-2011 05:37PM

Predalien wrote: »

Problem is Israel tend to go for lethal force first, they have no intention of merely dissipating the threat by less violent means, why not use water cannon, tear gas, rubber bullets, shield themselves sufficiently etc. there is no need to resort to, using your words "ultimate deterrent", in the first instance.

It seems that when they have the luxury to be able to do so, they do. Note, for example, the use of rubber bullets and tear gas in Ramallah the same day. It could have been that the numbers ratio of personnel was such that they could afford to try the less lethal approach.

On the other hand, the soldiers on the border are equipped to deal with anything which may happen, up to and including a conventional armed assault by Hezbullah or Hamas. Just because the protestors currently storming the gate aren't armed doesn't mean to say that once the gate is breached that there won't be a Hamas snatch team right behind them, which they need to be equipped to deal with. That means having rifles in their hands, not tear gas launchers.

Remember, non-lethal weapons don't really stop anyone, unless you break some leg bones. They are designed to make life uncomfortable and to encourage people on the receiving end to want to be somewhere else. If someone's determined enough, however, and their desire to do one thing is stronger than their desire to avoid pain or tear gas, then you step up to actual incapacitating.

NTM

The Israeli · 16-05-2011 05:40PM

Predalien -

I'm pretty sure that the messures that you have mentioned had been taken except water cannons.
El Jazira -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5oIkDzrwZLM
Look at the intensity of the stonning by the "peaceful" and "unarmed" demonstratores..

You can see that tearing gaz had a low effect. Rubber bullets are commonly used in IDF.
There were no water cannos because Israel doesn't have too much of them and I think that they were concentrated were they are most effective - in the cities. Don't forget that this Nakba day was occuring all around the country at once.
Israel tried to save lifes, and not many people died. It's a fact. Israel claims that 4 died by its fire.

Israel isn't happy with the result of 4 died. IDF claims that with better preparations they maybe could have been avoided, But given the situation that day, IDF was very restrainted and caused to a minimum mount of casualties.

galwayrush · 16-05-2011 06:00PM

Just saw this, not read any details, but going by the thread title, kinda stupid to throw stones at people with guns.

FlutterinBantam · 16-05-2011 06:17PM

RichieC wrote: »

Israel should either sort its sh*t out, stop being led blood thirsty zionist yanks or f*ck off to the history books.

:rolleyes:

Another constructive post from a poster who has no fcuking idea of the complexities of the area.

Left wing propaganda and little or no understanding of the issues involved.

just chump out an anti-establishment post and let it float.

Doesn't fool people around here pilgrim.

arybvtcw0eolkf · 16-05-2011 06:29PM

Predalien wrote: »

Problem is Israel tend to go for lethal force first, they have no intention of merely dissipating the threat by less violent means, why not use water cannon, tear gas, rubber bullets, shield themselves sufficiently etc. there is no need to resort to, using your words "ultimate deterrent", in the first instance. Also you commented that you felt "all guns blazing" would have been understandable, care to explain how you justify this?

And I haven't been condescending so I'd appreciate it if you'd refrain from that kind of attitude.

Sorry you feel I've been condescending to you.

All I've tried to do is explain the situation that a soldier might find himself in.

You should also appreciate I'm limited in exactly how much detail I can go into, so I cut out a lot of the operational fluff.

With that said I'll back out of this with you, I don't mean you any disrespect but I've broken your queries down to very simplistic terms. I thought you'd understand that.

If your really interested in straight, honest answers your more than welcome to PM me.

See ya.

FlutterinBantam · 16-05-2011 06:47PM

Cassidy Obnoxious Tonsillitis wrote: »

Sorry you feel I've been condescending to you.

All I've tried to do is explain the situation that a soldier might find himself in.

You should also appreciate I'm limited in exactly how much detail I can go into, so I cut out a lot of the operational fluff.

With that said I'll back out of this with you, I don't mean you any disrespect but I've broken your queries down to very simplistic terms. I thought you'd understand that.

If your really interested in straight, honest answers your more than welcome to PM me.

See ya.

Forgive me for butting in to a post Mak, but you have what I would assume most others who post here have not, experience in the confrontation area.

Now a soldier, as you rightly said ,must do as ordered, and I have to laugh when the usuals come in with the definitive response, none of them having been ever confronted by an angry mob with harm on their minds,and serious harm at that.

Great men and women for parsing and analysing confrontational situations from thousands of miles away.

Your posts are the fairest and most relevant I have read pertaining to this area, and I don't mean to be condescending.

It's fine to be commenting from 3000 miles away, I prefer to hear it from someone with no agenda other than give the real story from those on the front lines.

I have no time for bleeding heats or armchair generals.

Thanks for your objectivity in this situation.

Wolfe Tone · 16-05-2011 06:50PM

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Forgive me for butting in to a post Mak, but you have what I would assume most others who post here have not, experience in the confrontation area.

Now a soldier, as you rightly said ,must do as ordered, and I have to laugh when the usuals come in with the definitive response, none of them having been ever confronted by an angry mob with harm on their minds,and serious harm at that.

Great men and women for parsing and analysing confrontational situations from thousands of miles away.

Your posts are the fairest and most relevant I have read pertaining to this area, and I don't mean to be condescending.

It's fine to be commenting from 3000 miles away, I prefer to hear it from someone with no agenda other than give the real story from those on the front lines.

I have no time for bleeding heats or armchair generals.

Thanks for your objectivity in this situation.

lol, bit rich coming from yourself

squod · 16-05-2011 06:55PM

http://www.expatica.com/de/news/german-news/prosecution-appeals-demjanjuk-court-verdict_149249.html

German prosecutors said Monday they were appealing a court decision condemning former Nazi camp guard John Demjanjuk to five years imprisonment for assisting in the killing of almost 30,000 Jews.

Some people may think they are just following orders which they have to obey. The law will tell you that's not correct sometimes and using ''orders'' as a defence is akin to hiding behind an apron in my opinion.

This conflict will someday be settled. Some time in the future you will see soldiers (and Palestinian fighters) facing legal proceedings because of their actions. Something to bear in mind before we go blaming ''orders'' on peoples actions.

RichieC · 16-05-2011 06:57PM

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Another constructive post from a poster who has no fcuking idea of the complexities of the area.

Left wing propaganda and little or no understanding of the issues involved.

just chump out an anti-establishment post and let it float.

Doesn't fool people around here pilgrim.

hehe.. left wing propaganda... :rolleyes: just chump out a pro establishment post and let it float, sure it makes you appear more grown up.

There are Jews in Israel who agree with me re American Zionist interference and plenty of them. There are even those living in the occupied territory's who agree. They live there not because they are zionists, but because they were offered cheap housing and benefits hard to turn down by the isreali government.

As for the complexity of the situation on the ground, or "facts on the ground" as you could say. I'm well aware of them.

I'm as entitled to a flippant remark as the next man.

FlutterinBantam · 16-05-2011 06:58PM

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

lol, bit rich coming from yourself

Less of the personals chum ok.

Nodin · 16-05-2011 06:58PM

The Israeli wrote: »

.. I do agree that Israel will have to give lands back someday, when Hamas won't be in power or at least accept the Israeli right to exist, ...........

Hamas are the only representatives of the Palestinians?...

Well they didn't do it before Hamas existed, didn't do it before Hamas was elected, didn't do it in the West Bank where its not Hamas in power and Fatah cooperated with Israel against Hamas for the last 4-5 years.....And why should they? Theres no consequences for their actions. Casualties are minimal, disruption likewise - its a winning strategy.

Flutterinbantam wrote:

.
............. and little or no understanding of the issues involved..

What are the issues involved, might I ask?

FlutterinBantam · 16-05-2011 07:08PM

Nodin wrote: »

H

What are the issues involved, might I ask?

How would I know buddy, I wasn't there .

Can you guys not understand that there is a difference between making comments from a 3000 mile distance to being actually in the firing line?

I'm pretty sure Dickie wasn't there either so as I posted earlier I look on Makkikomi's input as the most trustworthy and agenda free in that respect.

If you were there and were under attack I would take your view into consideration, but flogging an agenda from 3000 miles away and expecting to be listened to.

Sorry buddy........;)

Manic Moran · 16-05-2011 07:10PM

Some people may think they are just following orders which they have to obey. The law will tell you that's not correct sometimes and using ''orders'' as a defence is akin to hiding behind an apron in my opinion.

I would be very curious to read the actual opinions/evidence presented in that case. It usually has to be pretty egregious in order to counter the 'acting pursuant to orders' defence, as immediate obedience to orders is a cornerstone of military discipline.

I find it very hard to believe that the guy was convicted of just being a guard at the camp. I have a strong feeling that he had conducted himself in a manner which was a little more 'enthusiastic' than simply doing his unavoidable duties.

NTM

Wolfe Tone · 16-05-2011 07:11PM

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

How would I know buddy, I wasn't there .

Can you guys not understand that there is a difference between making comments from a 3000 mile distance to being actually in the firing line?

I'm pretty sure Dickie wasn't there either so as I posted earlier I look on Makkikomi's input as the most trustworthy and agenda free in that respect.

If you were there and were under attack I would take your view into consideration, but flogging an agenda from 3000 miles away and expecting to be listened to.

Sorry buddy........;)

If some Palestinian came on and said something which was not pro establishment and did not fit in with your world view would you be so quick to pat them on the back and agree?

Nodin · 16-05-2011 07:16PM

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

How would I know buddy, I wasn't there .

....I was speaking of the general situation. The one thats being going on a few years.

However I note that you not having been at any number of situations or knowing all those involved has not at any time stopped you making claims about them.

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

I'm pretty sure Dickie wasn't there either so as I posted earlier I look on Makkikomi's input as the most trustworthy and agenda free in that respect..

.."agenda free"? What "agenda" are you referring to?

I don't need an apology from you unless I request one, by the way. I'm not your buddy or any other diminutive either.

FlutterinBantam · 16-05-2011 07:23PM

Nodin wrote: »

...

.."agenda free"? What "agenda" are you referring to?

.

Anti Israeli, anti US ,Anti establishment.

Don't ask me to spell it out man.

Nodin · 16-05-2011 07:29PM

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Anti Israeli, anti US ,Anti establishment.

Don't ask me to spell it out man.

Unless you spell things out to some extent, nobody will have any idea what you're on about.

I was unaware that criticism of any state was nessecarily a bad thing. Nor was I aware that peoples criticism of the actions of some states means they need to be classified as having an "agenda". Given the level of internal criticism in the US, it would seem the majority of its own citizens have a large "agenda" of one type or another.

FlutterinBantam · 16-05-2011 07:33PM

Nodin wrote: »

Unless you spell things out to some extent, nobody will have any idea what you're on about.

I was unaware that criticism of any state was nessecarily a bad thing. Nor was I aware that peoples criticism of the actions of some states means they need to be classified as having an "agenda". Given the level of internal criticism in the US, it would seem the majority of its own citizens have a large "agenda" of one type or another.

Get me a magnifying glass for the head of the pin pal.:D

Anyone with a modicum of cop on who read the poster in questions posts would immediately understand what I am on about.

Now stop wasting my time ,like a good man.

Wolfe Tone · 16-05-2011 07:34PM

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Get me a magnifying glass for the head of the pin pal.:D

Anyone with a modicum of cop on who read the poster in questions posts would immediately understand what I am on about.

Now stop wasting my time ,like a good man.

So whats your agenda then?

karma_ · 16-05-2011 07:36PM

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Get me a magnifying glass for the head of the pin pal.:D

Not the only thing you'd need a magnifying glass for I'd say.

Freddie59 · 16-05-2011 07:41PM

brimal wrote: »

I was all over Israel (for more than the 2 days you seem to have misread) and saw first hand the terrible oppressive acts they commit. In the West Bank I saw the huge walls built by Israel to prevent

Suicide bombings and to protect their people.

brimal wrote: »

the checkpoint after checkpoint that Israelis subject people (especially Arabs) to, etc.

In order to secure their people.

Freddie59 · 16-05-2011 07:42PM

conscious wrote: »

****ing zionists

****ing (Hamas) terrorists.

Nodin · 16-05-2011 07:44PM

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Get me a magnifying glass for the head of the pin pal.:D

Anyone with a modicum of cop on who read the poster in questions posts would immediately understand what I am on about.

Now stop wasting my time ,like a good man.

Ahh yes, I forgot - you don't like explaining things. Which, considering you criticise people for "little or no understanding of the issues involved" is a bit hypocritical, don't you think? Funny, ironic and worthy of mockery yes, but definitely hypocritical.

There are any number of legitamate, logical reasons to criticise the state of Israel, and unless you can pinpoint somebody using some wayward criteria to do so, it really would improve the quality of the thread if you dropped your ill defined accusations of "agenda" and kept them to yourself.

As for wasting your time - what were you going to be doing with it?

A thread on your bowel movements?

Going into a thread and accussing everyone who holds position 'x' of being a "waster" and "unemployed"? Waiting a few posts in the same thread again before making an aside to some poster on the same side of the fence about how 'these people' have no clue etc? Surely somebody could write you a bot to do that kind of thing. I'd wager few would know or care for the difference.

Freddie59 · 16-05-2011 07:44PM

Dudess wrote: »

Dude, get a dictionary. Interesting too how you get so "upset" about muslims in one context, but don't give a **** about them in another.

Ah Dudess. On another crusade I see.:D And oh - just to clarify: upset about the mistreatment and subjugation of Muslim women, something which, ahem, others:rolleyes: seem to conveniently ignore.

Israel murder 12 people throwing stones

Comments