|
Israelis kill man in wheelchair (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| nic01445 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Palestinian
That man died because he lived under occupation. |
No, the man died because he got a bullet in the head. "IF he lived without occupation then MAYBE he would have died" is just too vague to be taken seriously. |
|
|
| caddyshack |
| quote: | Originally posted by Palestinian
Whether they killed him on purpose or by accident is not the point. |
says you :rolleyes:
i wasn't there but there is no evidence this poor, helpless man was targeted. on the other hand, Palestinian terrorists target families eating together at a pizzeria, or sneak in to someones house and shoot a 3 year old in her bed (i still have the article with a picture of her horrified mother). these people make sick, and i think they deserve to have more coming to them then they are actually getting |
|
|
| nic01445 |
| quote: | Originally posted by caddyshack
says you :rolleyes:
i wasn't there but there is no evidence this poor, helpless man was targeted. on the other hand, Palestinian terrorists target families eating together at a pizzeria, or sneak in to someones house and shoot a 3 year old in her bed (i still have the article with a picture of her horrified mother). these people make sick, and i think they deserve to have more coming to them then they are actually getting |
While I agree that it is ed up for Palestinian militants (and the IDF) to target civilians, the IDF needs to distinguish between civilian and military personel, primarily because it is part of the Israeli government (while Palestinian cells are not part of a government at all).
You can't really expect a group of insurgents to quit killing civilians because some bureaucrat says so, but you damn well better be sure that government officials and military personel should follow those orders when they are given from their own higher-ups.
The death of civilians never justifies the death of more civilians. |
|
|
| Palestinian |
The bullet in his head by Israeli soldiers wouldn't have happened if it weren't for occupation. There is nothing vague about it.
Whether soldiers target civilians or not is not the point. Stop making it the point. We cannot always prove whether a killing by an Israeli soldier was intentional or accidental, although when Amnesty International and B'tselem say it's intentional, I tend to believe it, but that's not the point.
First of all, why is it that just because it's a military, it automatically becomes a moral institution, just because they have orders. All militaries have orders, do we automatically asume that makes them moral? Why is the Israeli military exempt from being condemned for its actions? After all, it is a military of occupation and that CAN'T be denied.
Palestinians are fighting occupation, and they will murder civilians. This is normal. It's human nature. Without a military, they will target whatever they can to inflict pain upon the occupying enemy, even if that means killing civilians. People born in refugee camps don't really care to distinguish between civilian and soldier when they're fighting for survival, and even if they do, you make it sound like it's easy targetting soldiers, but we all know what happened in Rafah after soldiers were killed. You must stop denying human nature and the realities of resistance against occupation. |
|
|
| Flotser |
| quote: | Originally posted by Palestinian
The bullet in his head by Israeli soldiers wouldn't have happened if it weren't for occupation. There is nothing vague about it.
|
there wouldnt be any occupation if arbas havn't engaged a war every 10 years on israel since 1947. also there was alerady no occupation if the Oslo agreement\Camp David talkes were completed.
The terror organizaions have the biggest responsability for destdoying any chance there was for the end of occupation never stopping suiceide bombings.
the problem is, they dont realy fight occupation. they just know that the more they will kill the more israel will give them. |
|
|
| Yoepus |
Amazing the arguments Palestinian and Nic make.
First, Nic argues armies carry extra responsibility due to their inherient structure, more than any other military organizations. Nic also tells us a state carries no responsibility for the actions of its insurgents.
Next, Palestinian argues that armies carry no extra morality inherient from their structure. Palestinian tell us that despite holding their actions under the decissions of its politicians there is no moral superiority between a national army and any other military organization.
I seem to wonder, if this is the case, why does Israel even have a national army? It would fair much better off with an uncontrollable rag-tag group of highly lethal, highly psychotic, 'officially state unsupported', terror-inducing, guerilla fighters to do their dirty work with the Palestinians, no?
If there is no inherient morality from not taking that course of action, but to chose instead to prevent any such unofficial military organization from ever rising and to consolidate the nation's use of force under a civilian leadership elected by the people of that nation, then I simply don't understand your morality. It surely is not the same as mines. |
|
|
| caddyshack |
| quote: | Originally posted by Palestinian
Palestinians are fighting occupation, and they will murder civilians. This is normal. It's human nature. Without a military, they will target whatever they can to inflict pain upon the occupying enemy, even if that means killing civilians. People born in refugee camps don't really care to distinguish between civilian and soldier when they're fighting for survival, and even if they do, you make it sound like it's easy targetting soldiers, but we all know what happened in Rafah after soldiers were killed. You must stop denying human nature and the realities of resistance against occupation. |
silly goose |
|
|
| LibMe |
| quote: | Originally posted by nic01445
cool! |
Whats cool ?? |
|
|
| nic01445 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Yoepus
Amazing the arguments Palestinian and Nic make.
First, Nic argues armies carry extra responsibility due to their inherient structure, more than any other military organizations. Nic also tells us a state carries no responsibility for the actions of its insurgents.
|
Amazing misrepresentation of my argument :rolleyes:
I am saying that the IDF has the obligation to distinguish between military and civilian targets because they are, of course, a government institution.
When did I say that the state carried no action for insurgents? You assumed that by me saying that insurgents do not function under the direct authority of the state that the state has no obligation to prevent terrorist activity.
1. I never said that.
2. That is ridiculous. |
|
|
| nic01445 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Palestinian
The bullet in his head by Israeli soldiers wouldn't have happened if it weren't for occupation. There is nothing vague about it. |
You have absolutely no way to prove this, other than just saying so.
| quote: | | Palestinians are fighting occupation, and they will murder civilians. This is normal. It's human nature. Without a military, they will target whatever they can to inflict pain upon the occupying enemy, even if that means killing civilians. People born in refugee camps don't really care to distinguish between civilian and soldier when they're fighting for survival... |
If this is not a double-standard, then I don't know what is. |
|
|
| Yoepus |
| quote: | Originally posted by nic01445
Amazing misrepresentation of my argument :rolleyes: |
Hehe thank you, err I mean sorry ;)
| quote: |
I am saying that the IDF has the obligation to distinguish between military and civilian targets because they are, of course, a government institution. |
I don't think it is the IDF's obligation to distinguish between military and civilan targets - its the enemy combatant jobs to do it.
In otherwords, its not the IDF's fault that Palestinians aren't wearing their uniforms - its the Palestinians fault.
But I'm sensing I might be misinterperting this one too? :)
| quote: |
When did I say that the state carried no action for insurgents? You assumed that by me saying that insurgents do not function under the direct authority of the state that the state has no obligation to prevent terrorist activity.
|
it was implied by your statement, "You can't really expect a group of insurgents to quit killing civilians because some bureaucrat says so".
I can expect it? Why. Because if they don't listn the bureaucrat should come down on them like a hammer. |
|
|
| nic01445 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Yoepus
I don't think it is the IDF's obligation to distinguish between military and civilan targets - its the enemy combatant jobs to do it.
In otherwords, its not the IDF's fault that Palestinians aren't wearing their uniforms - its the Palestinians fault. |
I see where you are coming from, but I can't say that I agree. This is one of those issues that well, I have issues with (pun intended).
| quote: | it was implied by your statement, "You can't really expect a group of insurgents to quit killing civilians because some bureaucrat says so".
I can expect it? Why. Because if they don't listn the bureaucrat should come down on them like a hammer. |
You are right, the government should come down on them like a hammer. But, Palestinian authority has pretty much made this an unrealistic idea. So, because they haven't done a whole lot to stop insurgencies, why should we expect them to act now?
I can see how this is all going to go around in circles.. ;) |
|
|
|
|
