The Mighty, but cowardly IDF is Exposed.

www.guardian.co.uk...

Soldiers are speaking out about the IDF's routine use of old people, women and children as human sheilds during their almost nightly raids on Palestinian homes to arrest suspected criminals. It is of course a war crime for occupational forces to use civilians as human shields and these revelations should be prosecuted as such. It's important to note the use of human sheilds is contrary to Israeli law but apparently a blind eye is turned when it comes to the mifgty IDF. Aside from the human sheild issue the manner in which the IDF conducts their "assults" on the Palestinian homes is barbaric. They, according to this soldier, fire at the house without regard to the women and children inside, fire at times stun grenades and God only knows what other nefarious tactics they use. This is a soldiers testimony. He refused orders to join in these assults on the grounds it was against Israeli law and patently immoral. His commander told his he did not mind breaking the law if it kept his soldiers out of harms way. The mighty IDF indeed!

I trust the Guardian as much as I trust Gary Glitter to look after my children.
The most left wing liberal paper, possibly on earth.

How about commenting on the provocation that Israel receives from their neighbours? Or does that not interest you?

Palestine is not innocent. Infact their people hate you and your liberal views. It is certainly a one way relationship.

1. Guardian is as reliable as my arse when it's addressing Middle Eastern issues.
2. You assume you know perfectly well how raids to arrest wanted criminals are conducted, yet you say "and god knows what else", meaning everything you say is speculation.

Use of human shields is illegal in the IDF. Some cases require the use of a human shield in case of a life risk to a soldier, and I support it in these cases - but it still barely happens. On the other hand, how many times does it happen with Hamas, Hizbollah, or any other Muslim/Arab force/militia? I don't see you say they are cowardly as often as you say that about the IDF. Bias?


Nevertheless, if the IDF is so cowardly you are more than invited to take part in the silly jihad waged on Israel. I mean, how hard would it be to fight off such a cowardly army? You must be a very brave man to say that from your computer hundreds of miles away.

Originally posted by LondonerBLV
I trust the Guardian as much as I trust Gary Glitter to look after my children.
The most left wing liberal paper, possibly on earth.

How about commenting on the provocation that Israel receives from their neighbours? Or does that not interest you?

Palestine is not innocent. Infact their people hate you and your liberal views. It is certainly a one way relationship.

First of all it is not the Guardian on the video but rather a former IDF soldier recalling the cowardly and illegal acts of the IDF. Second, of course all the Palestinians are not innocent but that does not give the IDF the right to commit a war crime or flount Israeli law. Just as all palestinians are not innocent all are not guilty.

some love ignorance

some more than others

israel attacked the us in 1967

uss liberty

look it up

israel is an illegal state occupying stolen land

Originally posted by IsraeliGuy
1. Guardian is as reliable as my arse when it's addressing Middle Eastern issues.
2. You assume you know perfectly well how raids to arrest wanted criminals are conducted, yet you say "and god knows what else", meaning everything you say is speculation.

Use of human shields is illegal in the IDF. Some cases require the use of a human shield in case of a life risk to a soldier, and I support it in these cases - but it still barely happens. On the other hand, how many times does it happen with Hamas, Hizbollah, or any other Muslim/Arab force/militia? I don't see you say they are cowardly as often as you say that about the IDF. Bias?


Nevertheless, if the IDF is so cowardly you are more than invited to take part in the silly jihad waged on Israel. I mean, how hard would it be to fight off such a cowardly army? You must be a very brave man to say that from your computer hundreds of miles away.

No, I did not assume I knew how raids were conducted but the former Idf soldier in the video certainly does. You support the use of human sheilds when there is risk of life to an IDF soldier? A human shield is an innocent person with no relation to the supposed crime. So you support using old people, women and children, as long as it is a palestinian, to protect a mighty IDF soldier? Well, that is a war crime AND contrary to Israeli law. Hamas also has a history of using civilians as human sheilds and is just as illegal. Somehow, the most moral army in the world would be expected to be above the actions of Hamas.

Its been proven in the past that Israeli soldiers were using Palestinian children as human shields. in the past so this does not surprise me any soldier who uses a child as a sheild is a coward

reply to post by LondonerBLV


I like you ad-hominem attacks against liberals and I laugh at your assumption that only liberals support Palestine. Read the article, The Guardian isn't writing this themselves they are simply citing sources who were once closely tied into the ranks of the IDF.


reply to post by IsraeliGuy

B'Tselem's initial investigation indicates that, during an incursion by Israeli forces into Beit Hanun, in the northern Gaza Strip, on 17 July 2006, soldiers seized control of two buildings in the town and used residents as human shield.

After seizing control of the buildings, the soldiers held six residents, two of them minors, on the staircases of the two buildings, at the entrance to rooms in which the soldiers positioned themselves, for some twelve hours. During this time, there were intense exchanges of gunfire between the soldiers and armed Palestinians. The soldiers also demanded that one of the occupants walk in front of them during a search of all the apartments in one of the buildings, after which they released her.

www.btselem.org...
Uncommon? I beg to differ.

Some cases require the use of a human shield in case of a life risk to a soldier, and I support it in these cases

So you are stating essentially that it is ok "to use civillians who are unarmed and are non-combatants in order to preserve the life of a soldier/combatant engaged in combat in order to either a) preserve the life of the soldier by using a civillian as a shield to absord any attack or b) deter any attack by displaying the civillian and placing him in immediate danger. While I believe that what you believe is not only moronic but it is inhumane who am I to decide right? I'm only a civillian. However international humanitarian law states that this is illegal.

International humanitarian law forbids using civilians as human shields by placing them next to soldiers or next to military facilities, with the intention of gaining immunity from attack, or by forcing the civilians to carry out dangerous military assignments.

www.btselem.org...

What use is the fact that on paper these cases of human shields and other henious acts the IDF is engaged in is illegal. It dosen't make a difference when this has been instituionalized into the culture of the IDF as is has with many other military orginizations. As the article displays it isn't just low ranking individuals that initiate these acts, but it is infact high ranking officials that promote, initiate and "look away" as these acts happen.

On the other hand, how many times does it happen with Hamas, Hizbollah, or any other Muslim/Arab force/militia? I don't see you say they are cowardly as often as you say that about the IDF. Bias?

During the 2008/09 intifada the IDF failed to present sufficient evidence that Hamas was infact using human shields and hiding in the basements of civillian hospitals/schools and apartment blocks. They showed exactly nadda, zip, zilch, no evidence.

I'm not denying the fact that they have done so in the past (as I have documented evidence including pictures that Hamas has used Palestinian children as human shields)- I'm just pointing to information pro-Zionists tend to ignore.

What difference does it make if Hamas and Hezbollah use human shields anyway.
a) Two rights don't make a wrong
b) If Israel is morally superior why do they stoop to the same level?

It is as simple as that.

Originally posted by IsraeliGuy
1. Guardian is as reliable as my arse when it's addressing Middle Eastern issues.
2. You assume you know perfectly well how raids to arrest wanted criminals are conducted, yet you say "and god knows what else", meaning everything you say is speculation.

Use of human shields is illegal in the IDF. Some cases require the use of a human shield in case of a life risk to a soldier, and I support it in these cases - but it still barely happens. On the other hand, how many times does it happen with Hamas, Hizbollah, or any other Muslim/Arab force/militia? I don't see you say they are cowardly as often as you say that about the IDF. Bias?


Nevertheless, if the IDF is so cowardly you are more than invited to take part in the silly jihad waged on Israel. I mean, how hard would it be to fight off such a cowardly army? You must be a very brave man to say that from your computer hundreds of miles away.

Hear, hear.

Originally posted by gem_man
www.guardian.co.uk...

Soldiers are speaking out about the IDF's routine use of old people, women and children as human sheilds during their almost nightly raids on Palestinian homes to arrest suspected criminals. It is of course a war crime for occupational forces to use civilians as human shields and these revelations should be prosecuted as such. It's important to note the use of human sheilds is contrary to Israeli law but apparently a blind eye is turned when it comes to the mifgty IDF. Aside from the human sheild issue the manner in which the IDF conducts their "assults" on the Palestinian homes is barbaric. They, according to this soldier, fire at the house without regard to the women and children inside, fire at times stun grenades and God only knows what other nefarious tactics they use. This is a soldiers testimony. He refused orders to join in these assults on the grounds it was against Israeli law and patently immoral. His commander told his he did not mind breaking the law if it kept his soldiers out of harms way. The mighty IDF indeed!

It's not a war crime Israel hasn't had the balls to declare war.

reply to post by buster2010

It's not a war crime Israel hasn't had the balls to declare war.

Very true statement...
It also makes the blockade illegal and Israel thinks it allows them to follow NO laws...

ok,for the apologist in this thread,who have jumped on the guardian,lets remove the guardian,and let this solider explain.

there is no defending these tactics.
sending in palestinian women & children to check for booby traps.

the commanders knows they are breaking the law,and encouraging the soldiers to break the law.

He gradually came to understand, he says, that the Israeli army's intention was "to enforce tyranny on people who you know are regular civilians" and to "make it clear who's in control here".

why should israel be above the law.

Patrols at Night and House Incursions


israel treats palestinian people like animals.

Originally posted by LondonerBLV
I trust the Guardian as much as I trust Gary Glitter to look after my children.
The most left wing liberal paper, possibly on earth.

However it is the most reliable! (Too bad that it says things you don't like! )

Do you actually know any Palestinians or know anything about what they have to put up with?
Vicky

reply to post by gem_man


This was outlawed about 6 years ago, wasn't it?

Is it still relevant? That's like talking about the cowardly Fatah and their suicide bombings as though it was still happening and no progress has been made since.

There's no assault here, they don't pump the house up full of stun grenades and shoot it up in full auto like in some kind of gangster movie..

These are 18 to 21 year old kids, they don't want to be in this, they don't care about politics, they'd rather be with their friends in Tel Aviv, partying, and not out in the cold, away from home, in harm's way.

Can you blame them for not rushing in like crazy suicide bombers, itching to die for their country?

Has any Palestinian died during one of these procedures?

With respect,
Eliad.

reply to post by Vicky32


Do you?

Do you know any Palestinians who live here? In Israel or Palestine?

I'm not talking about Palestinian descendants, or people who left at the age of 5 or anyone that "has relatives" here, I'm talking about people who actually live here.

With respect,
Eliad.

Originally posted by Eliad
reply to post by Vicky32

 

Do you?

Do you know any Palestinians who live here? In Israel or Palestine?

I'm not talking about Palestinian descendants, or people who left at the age of 5 or anyone that "has relatives" here, I'm talking about people who actually live here.

With respect,
Eliad.

Yes, I knew the leader of the Palestinian group in Auckland New Zealand - David Wakim. (he was a friend of my late brother. He left not when he was 5 but when he was an adult.) He had a heart attack whilst on hoiday in Africa, in about 2008.
I am in contact with Palestinians who still live there.
Vicky

Originally posted by Eliad
reply to post by gem_man

 

This was outlawed about 6 years ago, wasn't it?

Is it still relevant? That's like talking about the cowardly Fatah and their suicide bombings as though it was still happening and no progress has been made since.

There's no assault here, they don't pump the house up full of stun grenades and shoot it up in full auto like in some kind of gangster movie..

These are 18 to 21 year old kids, they don't want to be in this, they don't care about politics, they'd rather be with their friends in Tel Aviv, partying, and not out in the cold, away from home, in harm's way.

Can you blame them for not rushing in like crazy suicide bombers, itching to die for their country?

Has any Palestinian died during one of these procedures?

With respect,
Eliad.

Your argument sounds rational. The fact that these kids are admiting to doing this and are ashamed of it proves they don't want to. However, using civillians for military operations is classified illegal under international law. Does the fact that these soldiers don't want to die, justify endagering Palestinian civillians? No.

Why is it important that we point this out? Criticism is important. It improves people as individual therefor improving institutions. If the IDF realises there is a serious problem within their ranks and that the international community is critisizing them for it then they may initiate reforms and try to curb the human rights abuses.

Is it still relevant? That's like talking about the cowardly Fatah and their suicide bombings as though it was still happening and no progress has been made since.

Was Fatah critisized for their cowardly suicide bombings? Yes and look at the progress they have made to achieving a just peace. They saw what is would take to recieve international and Israeli recognition. If we turn a blind eye to what the IDF is doing then they will never change. Imagine the IDF is a company that needs PR reform. A company may do some things that won't hurt their bottom line, somthing symbolic such as donating to charity, giving away free goods, trying to reduce pollution and help the enviroment. These come at a cost to the company but these costs are small compared to the PR benefit. If the IDF did some symbolic things such as not forcing Palestinian civillians to undertake military operations and not combing through a village they know is not a thread then this will be a huge benefit to IDF public relations and those Palestinian will also be happy they aren't woken up 1 in the morning. The first steps to peace can often be superficial.

reply to post by Vicky32


In contact means being in actual contact, speaking on a daily/weekly basis, getting info on what goes on, or does in contact mean they're in your Facebook list?

No disrespect intended, especially not to the late David Wakim, who I'm sure was a person who acted for what he believed was right, and that means something, but unless he's lived in Palestine in the last five years, how is he any different than anyone posting on this forum?

*I* have Palestinian friends, *I* have Arab friends, *real* friends. We may not agree on everything, we may avoid certain topics, but we're friends.

Does that make my opinion any different than yours, or anyone else's?

Just wondering...

With respect,
Eliad.

reply to post by SpeachM1litant

Does the fact that these soldiers don't want to die, justify endagering Palestinian civillians? No.

Nah, it definitely does not, but "the cowardly IDF"? That's hardly fair.

If the IDF realises there is a serious problem within their ranks and that the international community is critisizing them for it then they may initiate reforms and try to curb the human rights abuses.

And it does, as I said, this was outlawed in 2005. It was an Israeli initiative, and the Israeli supreme high court that outlawed this procedure, it didn't just happen..

Was Fatah critisized for their cowardly suicide bombings? Yes

Point was that these are incidents from over 6 years ago, are they really still relevant?

The comparison was that it would be like opening a new thread on the cowardice of Fatah due to the suicide bombings of 2002...

Just not relevant, it isn't what Fatah is today, and it isn't what the IDF is today.

Eliad.

sorry... i dont trust Guardian ,,,,,The most left wing liberal paper, possibly on earth.