Quote:
Originally Posted by zeliner
So you're saying that Zionists don't demolish Palestinian homes and erect their own Zionist homes instead, as part of a new Zionist settlement.
Right?
So you're stating then, that Zionist Jews don't forcibly displace Palestinians...Right?
You're further stating that if Palestinians have been displaced, then they're absolutely NOT forbidden to enter or approach Zionist settlements without special permission...Right?
Apparently, many Israeli Jews also have a problem with Ethiopian Jews, due to their ethnicity. Their ethnocentrism also extends beyond those of lslamic Arab descent...Is that true?
|
In 1948 many Palestinian Arabs abandoned their homes due to the Arab countries saying that they will crush Israel and they shouldn't be in the fighting zones. When Israel managed to survive, these people were left stateless as they were considered enemies of the State of Israel and couldn't return to their homes and their fellow Arab countries did not give them citizenship and a new life instead.
Nowadays the homes of Palestinian terrorists are destroyed by the IDF but they are not used for Israeli Jews instead.Destroying a terrorist's home might not be the right approach but these areas have been under military law due to an ongoing state of war.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuling
Size plays no role, the international laws on that are the same for everyone.
Also, if it is a strategic place (which makes no sense as modern weapons don't care about such topography, it only comes in handy when throwing stones  ), why steal Syria's oil there? |
Israel captured the Golan Heights in 1967 in a defensive war and again kept the Golan Heights after the surprise of Syria (together with Egypt) in the 1973 war. A cease fire line has been in effect since that period approx. and the Syrian Government has never come forward to discuss a peaceful existence with Israel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeliner
Zionists wouldn't be able to tolerate anything suggestive of yielding any land and would also continue attempts to either expand its borders or fortify them in order to remain separate.
|
Israel has given back land more than once. It returned the Sinai to Egypt after the 1956 campaign and then returned the Sinai again to Egypt when Egypt signed a peace treaty with in 1979.
Also Israel withdrew its troops and people completely from Gaza during under the former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GotHereQuickAsICould
Why is the U.S. a tool of Israel?
We pay an enormous price for fighting their battles.
What do we gain by this?
|
American soldiers have not died in the defense of Israel. Only the IDF fights Israel battles!
Quote:
Originally Posted by mollygee
Celebrating, while unarmed protestors being killed, right next to them, over the "wall." This has to be one of the worst atrocities and complete lack of humanity, I have seen in my lifetime. Cocky, leaders are getting away with murder and they are whooping it up and partying at the same time, people are suffering and dying.
|
Armed Hamas terrorists were using unarmed protesters to shield them while trying to breach the Israeli border.
Here is something I was given permission to share:
For the next time someone tells you that the response was " disproportionate:
" Shared from Erika Bond H/T Jeremy Kareken
This was written by Noru Tsalic, who has given me permission-- and you also-- to share. Please share, because I think this is important:
Here’s my tuppence. This is not advocacy, but an attempt to inform, based on my personal experience as an IDF soldier during the time of the Intifada.
1. Armed soldiers vs unarmed protesters
Most people tend to view such confrontations as uneven and unfair. What chance do unarmed people (or even people armed with sticks and stones) against fire arms? More than once in my military service, I have faced a mob advancing towards my position. With sticks and stones, yes, but also axes, metal bars, steel chains… Have you ever faced a mob baying for your blood? Have you smelled real hatred? I am hardly shy, but I can assure you it is a frightening experience. If the mob closes down on you, the numeric advantage (we were typically 3-8 soldiers facing hundreds) is what counts, not the weaponry.
I was standing guard once at the government offices in Shkhem/Nablus. From beyond the tall fence, a bottle of acid was thrown in my direction. It shattered about a yard from my feet. I saw the acid eating into the tarmac, hissing and fuming. I was unscathed, but later I found little holes in the fabric of my khaki trousers, where tiny droplets of acid must have sprayed them.
A different morning found me together with a comrade on the flat roof of a house in Nablus, tasked with making sure that the main road through the city remained open (i.e., wasn’t obstructed with barricades, burning tyres, rubbish bins, etc. There was a small construction on the roof, perhaps a room to dry laundry. I was leaning with my back against one of its walls, when something smashed into that wall inches to the right of my face. I heard a shout of triumph – the youngster (maybe 15-16 years old) was already looking for another stone to place in his catapult. Have you ever seen these catapults? They are a meter long or more. They are spun faster and faster before the stone is thrown with huge velocity. The wall behind me bore testimony: a big chunk of plaster was missing, as well as a bit of the cinderblock underneath it. I asked and got permission to shoot rubber bullets, but they made very little impression: they are very inaccurate except at short distance – but they are also dangerous at short distance and so we were not allowed to use them. My comrade and I spent the rest of the shift ducking the stones (there were 5 kids in the end), while also trying to keep an eye on the road.
I have never been attacked with fire bombs, but soldiers from other units were – some were left with no faces, or with faces you would not wish to see.
2. “Shooting into the crowdâ€
When I hear people accusing IDF soldiers of “shooting into the crowdâ€, I don’t know whether to laugh or to cry. Before crossing into “the territoriesâ€, we always spent a day or two training in the use of non-lethal means (tear gas, rubber bullets) and rehearsing the “rules of engagementâ€. These were also drummed into us as part of the briefing that preceded every mission or guarding shift. That’s why I still remember them. Basically, as an IDF soldier involved in a non-combat mission, you are only allowed to open fire if you or another person is in clear and immediate danger – which was always interpreted as: if you are being shot at, or about to be shot at. And what if someone runs towards you with an axe? Then there is a sequence of actions you must do – as long as the danger is not “clear and immediateâ€: shout ‘Stop!’ (‘Wakef’ in Arabic); then ‘Stop, or I’ll shoot’; then shoot in the air; then shoot, aiming at the legs; finally, shoot aiming at the upper body. You have to stop the sequence at any point, if the attacker stops in his tracks, at which point you are supposed to order him to throw down the axe and capture him. The above may seem impractical and as soldiers we would always question it; but these were always the orders.
3. So why the fatalities?
Here’s why people were killed yesterday (and recently) at the border with Gaza. There is more than one reason, let’s analyse them one by one:
a) Breaching the border
The pattern of “protests†has often been the following: a “vanguard†of 3-20 men attempting to approach the border fence, either stealthily or running to it, often using smoke to cover their approach; and 2-300 yards behind them, a group of thousands of people waiting. The vanguard’s mission is to create a breach in the border fence, that would allow the “rear-guard†to penetrate Israel. If the latter is allowed to happen, a real bloodbath will ensue, because faced with thousands of attackers, the IDF soldiers would then be in clear and immediate danger, forced to – this time in reality – shoot into the crowd. This would result not in dozens of fatalities, but in hundreds. The army therefore has issued orders to shoot members of the “vanguard†when it becomes clear that otherwise they would breech the fence. This is happening at various locations along the 51 km border. Palestinian “vanguards†have tried to breech the fence using axes, knives and wire cutters, but often also explosive and incendiary devices that are hurled at the fence.
But why are they shot dead? Why are they not just incapacitated? The answer is – they are, whenever possible. All those who have actually shot a rifle will know that it is not so easy to hit a target in the leg or arm – particularly when smoke is used for cover and when people crouch or bend to minimise exposure. Also, contrary to popular belief, a rifle bullet in the leg often does not incapacitate a determined and excited man (at least not immediately).
There is also a suspicion (true or not) according to which one or more suicide bombers may be used to create the breach in the fence.
b) Armed individuals and other “permitted targetsâ€
Despite what was reported in the media, some of the “protesters†(a minority) are bringing firearms to the “partyâ€. They may be members of Hamas, of Islamic Jihad or of one of the smaller “factionsâ€. Anyone bearing arms and approaching the fence is considered a combatant. Snipers will shoot him at the smallest suspicion that he intends to use the weapon.
There is another category of “permitted targetsâ€: people who are identified as “ticking bombsâ€. These are terrorists who are known to be in the process of organising attacks against Israel (such attempts are rarely publicised, but are being organised all the time – see for instance
https://www.independent.co.uk/…/pa...-gaza-strip…. These terrorists are sometimes identified (using cameras and face-recognition software) among the “protestersâ€, in which case a decision may be made to take them out.
c) “Collateral damageâ€
I hate the term, though it is used – among others – by NATO. IDF has deployed snipers along the border, in an attempt to improve accuracy and avoid hitting innocents. But this is not so simple. One of the things people who never served in the army don’t realise is the tremendous velocity of bullets. A bullet shot from an M4 carbine, for instance, will travel some 3 km/2 miles. It will still kill at a range of 2 km. It will sometimes go through the target’s body and continue to “flyâ€. Which means that if one misses the target (or even when the target is hit), the bullet can still kill people that are hundreds of metres behind the target. The risk of that happening is greatly increased when there are crowds of protesters in the immediate vicinity of the fence.
So why doesn’t Israel develop lower velocity weapons, that would prevent such problems? If such weapons were possible, they would have been invented years ago – if nothing else, in order to equip police squads. But, as anyone who understands ballistics will confirm, a lower velocity translates also in a lower accuracy, because the slower the bullet, the higher its propensity to deviate from the straight line. It’s a sort of catch-22.
d) Indiscipline
Acts of indiscipline (including illegal use of arms) can occur in IDF, just as they do in other armies. However, they are extremely unlikely to occur under the current circumstances, because high quality troops have been deployed and lots of commanders are present.
That’s it, that’s all I wanted to say; I leave it to others to make judgements.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
