"oops"*3700+: are israeli soldiers that inaccurate or is israel guilty of terrorism?

[Aardvark]

"No. Try to understand the difference between 'atrocious acts' and genocide. Even if Israel is cupable for all you charge that does not met the definition of genocide."

 

am i talking to a brick wall? i already addressed this! read above!

 

No you haven't. The accusation of Genocide is a very serious one which you haven't substaniated. You have mentioned Israeli excesses and stated' date=' without any evidence at all, that these excesses are secretly condonned by Israeli authorities as part of a secret plot of genocide.

 

That does not count as addressing the issue. You have not presented any backing for your extreme and very serious charge.

 

 

 

the first article appears to be legitimate. the victim in the second article was british, and was undoubtedly aided in his case by british influence. the third also seems legitimate. so there we have it. two cases in which israeli soldiers have been jailed for hurting innocent palestinians. and these are just "assaults." what about the murders? what about the 29000+ injured? you are hardly proving any case.

 

As i stated, those links were just to get you started.

 

It is a fact that Israeli soldiers operate under the law and are subject to disciplinary action and prosecution if they violate that law. Which does help disprove your contention that the Israeli military is engaging in a secret genocide plot.

 

 

it's hard to believe that the israelis cant be wrong in killing 3700+ and injuring 29000+ when the palestinians are wrong in killing 1000+

 

Measuring right and wrong by bodycount arithmetic makes no sense at all. If the Palestinians were inflicting more causalties would you consider them to be in the wrong, but as long as they are receiving more casualties they are in the right?

 

If the Israelis were engaged in genocide, secret or not, would they be pulling back from Gaza? Would Palestinians in Israel have full citizenship and the vote? Would they have Palestinians be represented in the Israeli Parliament? Would the Palestinian territories be holding an election?

 

Of course not. But that is because Israel is not engaged in any form of genocide.

[padren]

You claim that "members" of the Israeli military believe that mass murder "is the only solution." I've yet to see a shred of evidence that this is the position of any IDF officer or enlisted person, let alone the position of any significant IDF personality. So what is the basis for the claim? I'm not interested in anything else except for this.

 

1) From various documentries and interviews it is clear that many Israelis (not sure the exact percent of course) feel that as long as palastinians are living there, there will not be peace, and Israelis will continue to die. Many palastinians of course would rather fight and die than move.

 

The only thing that stops people from genocidally killing each other is the belief they can co-exist eventually (or more rarely the belief its better to die themselves than kill another).

 

2) The Israeli military is made up of people in the same pool (ie Israelis) as were interviewed and are on record as holding those convictions.

 

Honestly I am not even blaming them for holding this position, I am just pointing out its a position that leads to an escalation of violence and not its resolutoin.

 

I don't believe their actions as a whole are consistent with an attempt to bring about systematic mass murder, nor do I think such plans would be approved. I think proponents of such actions are limited to pushing the boundries only so much within authorized field operations.

But, I do believe the results of many actions are consistent with a general disregard for innocent civilian populations that would never be tolorated if carried out in a major US city.

[padren]

Just to propose a scenario:

 

Radical anti-abortionists want abortion to be declared capital murder, and be applied retroactively to all persons who have gotten abortions - in other words, a stance that is highly rejected by the majority and will never be accepted.

 

Unfortunately, the radical group persists in acts of terrorism, bombing hospitals, the supreme court, other government buildings, and even restaurants and theatres.

 

The group, appears mostly based in Beverly Hills. The military, blockade all entry and exist to the area, effectively crippling the area's ability to be productive, causing large difficulties for everyone in those areas regardless of association.

Various raids are conducted, including air raids with missiles being fired into marketplaces where suspected members are believed to be.

Among rumors that people are often executed in no-knock raids regardless of guilt, many families who have no association with the group gather weapons to defend themselves should they be raided.

 

While just over 1000 people are killed by the acts of terrorism by the group, over 3,700 residents of beverly hills are killed (exact number of group members killed are unknown), and nearly 30,000 injured, while the entire population is heavily decimated by a drastic drop in standard of living and personal freedoms.

 

 

Two questions:

 

1) How would the nation react to its own people being treated in this fashion?

 

2) How would the residents of Beverly Hills who previously had no negative experiences with the US military feel about about them during the conflict?

[patcalhoun]

1) From various documentries and interviews it is clear that many Israelis (not sure the exact percent of course) feel that as long as palastinians are living there, there will not be peace, and Israelis will continue to die. Many palastinians of course would rather fight and die than move.

 

Although you're still not offering up the evidence, I won't dispute this point. Why? It's entirely irrelevant to the claim that the position of some members of the IDF is that mass murder is the only solution to Palestinian terrorism.

 

The only thing that stops people from genocidally killing each other is the belief they can co-exist eventually (or more rarely the belief its better to die themselves than kill another).

 

This is a completely unevidence sociological claim, but also entirely irrelevant to the question of how members of the IDF perceive endgame.

 

2) The Israeli military is made up of people in the same pool (ie Israelis) as were interviewed and are on record as holding those convictions.

 

This is relevant, and it would help me better appreciate your point if you actually presented some supporting evidence to the purported fact.

 

Honestly I am not even blaming them for holding this position...

 

But you are attributing to them a position that as far as I can see has no basis in fact.

 

But, I do believe the results of many actions are consistent with a general disregard for innocent civilian populations that would never be tolorated if carried out in a major US city.

 

Is there a violent insurrection in American cities that we haven't heard of? And considering that Iraqi civilian casualties (30,000 killed and 45,000 wounded) far outstrip Palestinian casualties (where we don't have a consensus breakdown between militant and civilian casualties readily available), exactly why is the American public so tolerant of what you would also describe as "general disregard for innocent civilian populations." Perhaps even this accusation of indiscriminate violence against civilians has no foundation in fact.

 

I have no interest in your two questions or the line of discussion they aim to open. Just this claim about what members of the IDF believe and evidence supporting it.

[Aardvark]

1) From various documentries and interviews it is clear that many Israelis (not sure the exact percent of course) feel that as long as palastinians are living there' date=' there will not be peace, and Israelis will continue to die. Many palastinians of course would rather fight and die than move.

 

The only thing that stops people from genocidally killing each other is the belief they can co-exist eventually (or more rarely the belief its better to die themselves than kill another). [/quote']

 

Your reasoning is flawed. To move from the belief that Palestinians will never peacefully live side by side with Israel to a belief that therefore the only solution is genocide is wrong. Israelis who declare that Israelis and Palestinians can not live together in peace have not advocated genocide. They have advocated separation. Hence the withdrawal from Gaza and the building of a large wall to split Israel from the Palestinian administated West Bank.

 

The idea that 'the only thing' preventing people from commiting genocide is belief in eventual co-existence is wrong.

 

 

2) The Israeli military is made up of people in the same pool (ie Israelis) as were interviewed and are on record as holding those convictions.

 

Actually a large proportion of Israelis do believe in co-existence with Palestinians and that peace between Israel and Palestinians is possible. Even those who don't are not advocating genocide. And i'm not just basing my opinions on watching some documentaries, but from actually talking to Israelis, including some who have serviced in intelligence and in the Paratroops as well as 'ordinary' civilians. I've never heard a comment that could be even remotely interpreted as advocating genocide.

 

Honestly I am not even blaming them for holding this position, I am just pointing out its a position that leads to an escalation of violence and not its resolutoin.

 

You're not blaming them for holding a position that they don't actually hold.

 

I don't believe their actions as a whole are consistent with an attempt to bring about systematic mass murder, nor do I think such plans would be approved. I think proponents of such actions are limited to pushing the boundries only so much within authorized field operations.

 

Do you have any actual evidence for that statement?

 

But, I do believe the results of many actions are consistent with a general disregard for innocent civilian populations that would never be tolorated if carried out in a major US city.

 

Again, do you have any evidence that there is 'a general disregard for innocent civilian populations'? In what way are Israeli tactics in the West Bank different from US tactics in Afghanistan and Iraq? When US forces rocket bomb a wedding party are they guilty of genocide? That idea seems ridiculous, but by your logic it is the answer.

[Lance]

^sayo makes a good point. which reminds me. i had an english teacher misinterpret a very ambiguous paper i wrote. she said it was on masturbation. i said it wasn't. she still tried to fail me. i pointed out the fact that she couldn't fail me for content, especially if i, the creator of said document, denied any references to masturbation. she backed down.

 

You're telling me that you accidentally wrote a paper about masturbation in high school? Right...

[padren]

Although you're still not offering up the evidence' date=' I won't dispute this point. Why? It's entirely irrelevant to the claim that the position of some members of the IDF is that mass murder is the only solution to Palestinian terrorism.

[/quote']

 

I am describing how I came to the conclusion, feel free to call it flawed if you want, I already stated clearly I wasn't refering to acts of genocide or mass murder, but that there are people very likely (I would say undoubtly) hold that view, so if you want "proof" of what people are thinking in their minds you may as well seek a magic eight ball.

 

I made a point of describing what I see in the situation. I can tell you when I think someone in a congressional hearing is lying, I can even point out if he's shifty or not, and while my opinion is not validated by the observations, it is not invalidated by the lack of having a polygraph or documentation of inconsistency in the statements.

 

This is a completely unevidence sociological claim' date=' but also entirely irrelevant to the question of how members of the IDF perceive endgame.

[/quote']

If I said 1+1=2 would you ask me to prove it? Would you care to point out how you can co-exist with people you believe will try to kill your children?

 

Do you not think the conditions that lead to the mindset we are discussing are relevant?

This is relevant' date=' and it would help me better appreciate your point if you actually presented some supporting evidence to the purported fact.

[/quote']

 

If there was clear evidence of what various groups and peoples were thinking within this conflict, don't you think it would be over a long time ago?

 

What are you contesting, that the military does not share the same general range of views as the civilian population, or that none of the civilains feel that forcing the palastinians to relocate or die resisting, if it can save Israeli lives?

 

But you are attributing to them a position that as far as I can see has no basis in fact.

 

I was pointing out it is not an unreasonable position.

 

Is there a violent insurrection in American cities that we haven't heard of? And considering that Iraqi civilian casualties (30' date='000 killed and 45,000 wounded) far outstrip Palestinian casualties (where we don't have a consensus breakdown between militant and civilian casualties readily available), exactly why is the American public so tolerant of what you would also describe as "general disregard for innocent civilian populations." Perhaps even this accusation of indiscriminate violence against civilians has no foundation in fact.

[/quote']

We are tolerant due to our very limited exposure and limited empathy for the victims, and a general belief that what we are doing is for the greater good.

 

Its not a very relevant comparison btw, Israelis and American civilians are in entirely different situations with regards to the respective conflicts.

 

I have no interest in your two questions or the line of discussion they aim to open. Just this claim about what members of the IDF believe and evidence supporting it.

 

Then I suppose we don't have much to discuss.

I respect your opinion even though I disagree with it.

[ecoli]

@ padren... The main flaw I'm finding with your argument, is that you seem to think that all ISraeli's have the same attitude towards Palestinians. The idea that all there should be a Palestinian genocide is actually shared by a small segment of the population. And just because military service is mandatory for all Israeli citizens doesn't mean that they like what they do, or that there ideas are a full cross-section of the population.

[patcalhoun]

I am describing how I came to the conclusion, feel free to call it flawed if you want...

 

All right, so we're left with this impression you've formed based on a couple of documentaries and faith in some thrust of human depravity due to despair.

 

I already stated clearly I wasn't refering to acts of genocide or mass murder

 

Nobody said you did, and why you keep protesting this point is beyond me.

 

I made a point of describing what I see in the situation.

 

Which you did, and subsequently revealed it has no basis in fact. That was the point I sought to get across.

 

I can tell you when I think someone in a congressional hearing is lying, I can even point out if he's shifty or not, and while my opinion is not validated by the observations, it is not invalidated by the lack of having a polygraph or documentation of inconsistency in the statements.

 

I don't care what standard your opinion is validated against unless we're talking about the factual record. And in this case, your opinion--which ascribes a heinous point of view to obstensibly civilized men and women--is wholly without merit.

 

If I said 1+1=2 would you ask me to prove it?

 

If you said 1+1=3, I might.

 

Would you care to point out how you can co-exist with people you believe will try to kill your children?

 

By building high, secure fences, which is precisely what the Israelis are doing.

 

Do you not think the conditions that lead to the mindset we are discussing are relevant?

 

I've seen nothing that substantiates this "absence of peaceful coexistence breeds widespread genocidal sentiment" theory of yours, period. So of course I don't think its relevant.

 

If there was clear evidence of what various groups and peoples were thinking within this conflict, don't you think it would be over a long time ago?

 

I think there is clear evidence of what various groups and peoples are thinking in this conflict. Just no evidence for the views you've ascribed to members of the IDF.

 

What are you contesting, that the military does not share the same general range of views as the civilian population...

 

I'm contesting your depiction of the general range of views in the population, period, let alone your equally unsubstantiated claim that the Israeli military is a representative cross section of its society.

 

I was pointing out it is not an unreasonable position.

 

No, it is definitely reasonable in the sense it follows from the unestablished propositions you put forward. In the end, though, it is an unevidenced mess.