[DemolitionRed]

But Y.Winter is an Israeli and you are Jewish Livia and so you are bound to have a bias.

Can you see both the Jewish and the Arab side to this story?

I'm not a Jew or a Muslim; in fact I think all religeon is a nonsense so this is how I view the Israli army.... For too long, in fact since 29th November 1947 the day that the United Nations accepted the resolution to patrician Palestine to a Jewish state and an Arab state; the Isralis along with help from the West are responsible for massive ethnic cleansing.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I'm not for a moment saying I don't understand why it happens, if someone killed a friend of mine there's no doubt in my mind that I *would* kill them, and I'd probably shoot them in the stomach instead of the head to make it slow. Which is one (of a few) reasons that I could never be in the armed forces.

What I'm saying is, that no matter how personally justified and understandable the action was, it can't go unpunished, because of the wider implications of freely allowing soldiers to make executive decisions against the chain of command, and the disorder and chaos that would follow. You get that, surely?

I'm not saying he should be flayed alive, I'm not even saying that he should be charged with murder and jailed... but I do think he should be discharged. Because he is a soldier. Who executed a prisoner without orders or permission to do so. Simple as that.

It can't go unpunished for some. For others... it's carte blanche, it seems. We have to be understanding of the struggle of the terrorist... we have to keep the denial going.

Soldiers are human beings, they are not automatons. If a punishment is to be handed out it should be done within the Military.

If I could find the person who set the bomb that killed my husband, I would be happy to watch him incapacitated and then shot in the head.

[Crimson Dynamo]

the terrorist tried to stab his colleague and so was terminated. Time to pardon the soldier and move on.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

But Y.Winter is an Israeli and you are Jewish Livia and so you are bound to have a bias.

Can you see both the Jewish and the Arab side to this story?

I'm not a Jew or a Muslim; in fact I think all religeon is a nonsense so this is how I view the Israli army.... For too long, in fact since 29th November 1947 the day that the United Nations accepted the resolution to patrician Palestine to a Jewish state and an Arab state; the Isralis along with help from the West are responsible for massive ethnic cleansing.

I am Jewish, and I work in Israel a lot. yes I have a certain amount of bias, but mostly because I know the truth of what goes on there, in Israel and in Palestine. You've asked me before if I've seen it from the Palestinian side and the answer is still yes.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

B............For too long, in fact since 29th November 1947 the day that the United Nations accepted the resolution to patrician Palestine to a Jewish state and an Arab state; the Isralis along with help from the West are responsible for massive ethnic cleansing.

Israel didn't just happen in 1947. The thought of going home to Israel was what kept some people alive during the Holocaust and it makes me laugh to think people imagine that Jews wouldn't have gone to Israel if it wasn't for the Mandate. Jews were always going to return to Israel.

But anyway, that isn't what this is about.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Livia

It can't go unpunished for some. For others... it's carte blanche, it seems. We have to be understanding of the struggle of the terrorist... we have to keep the denial going.

Soldiers are human beings, they are not automatons. If a punishment is to be handed out it should be done within the Military.

If I could find the person who set the bomb that killed my husband, I would be happy to watch him incapacitated and then shot in the head.

It isn't carte blanche and again it isn't even about the moral justifications for the action, it's about modern military powers maintaining order and discipline within their ranks. Your argument is that because an undisciplined, disorganised, primitive and barbaric guerilla-style military wouldn't think twice about killing an unarmed soldier, it should be open season for the militaries of supposedly more civilised countries to disregard the chain of command at will and do whatever they want, motivated by snap judgements and emotions, rather than their learned rules of engagement? Like I said, I'm not saying he should necessarily be "punished" in terms of being branded a murderer or put in jail... but a soldier who has lost control to that extent should clearly not be a soldier any more, for one, and again - more importantly - the message has to be sent to other soldiers that they can't carry out actions like this without fear of consequences. It sets an extremely dangerous precedent.

[y.winter]

Yes, I had full disclosure at the end of my post. I might be biased, yet I'm far more knowledgeable when it comes to this issue probably more than someone from the UK (vice versa you, British current affairs and I).
Not qualifying a dangerous men with a knife going in for the kill and stabbing as a terrorist just because the BBC said so - I find it disturbing not less than my biased opinion.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Livia

Israel didn't just happen in 1947. The thought of going home to Israel was what kept some people alive during the Holocaust and it makes me laugh to think people imagine that Jews wouldn't have gone to Israel if it wasn't for the Mandate. Jews were always going to return to Israel.

But anyway, that isn't what this is about.

But that was a different generation, should they not just get over it?

If they had have gone back to usurp those living there without a mandate it wold have just been genocide.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

If they had have gone back to usurp those living there without a mandate it would have just been genocide.

If they had gone back to usurp those living there without the support of other major Western powers, they wouldn't have gotten a foot in the door .

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Livia

Israel didn't just happen in 1947. The thought of going home to Israel was what kept some people alive during the Holocaust and it makes me laugh to think people imagine that Jews wouldn't have gone to Israel if it wasn't for the Mandate. Jews were always going to return to Israel.

But anyway, that isn't what this is about.

Why not? its all to do with this.

I'm well aware that conflicts have gone on for thousands of years but I'm also aware of the day that the United Nations accepted the resolution to patrician Palestine to a Jewish state and an Arab state was the cause of what we are witnessing today. It was such a ridiculous resolution because the UN decided to give the biggest portion of land to the smaller community (The Jews) and the smaller portion of land to the larger community (The Arabs) and then the West said and are still saying, “It’s the Arabs fault because they didn’t accept the partition plan”.

You say that the Jewish people wanted to go home but it was to a home they had never been to in a land they weren't born in and this was all based on their religeous belief. If we talk about the right of return then it has to work both ways, meaning it has to work for Palestinains as well as Israellis but instead the Palestiniains had their keys removed and their houses turned to rubble, whilst we, the West cheered on.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Livia

Says a man who has never been in a war zone, let alone on active service, but is insisting on a code of conduct from our troops, which they can never lapse from, despite circumstances and who are serving in an active war zone. You see a couple of mates with their legs blown off you're not going to be that concerned about shooting a terrorist in the head. A terrorist. Not a bystander.

There is nothing more dangerous than a wounded enemy.

Neither have you from what I know so does that mean we should discount what you have to say as well? It's a silly and lazy argument that's designed to discount opinions that someone can't argue against.

TS has the right of it, it doesn't matter who the killed party was. All that matters is that they were apprehended. Killing someone in combat situations is fine but executing them without due course when they've been detained is not and the court obviously agrees.

You can't have soldiers that act out like that, order must be maintained within the troops or it all falls apart, you don't need battlefield experience to understand that.

[Beso]

Originally Posted by y.winter

Yes, I had full disclosure at the end of my post. I might be biased, yet I'm far more knowledgeable when it comes to this issue probably more than someone from the UK (vice versa you, British current affairs and I).
Not qualifying a dangerous men with a knife going in for the kill and stabbing as a terrorist just because the BBC said so - I find it disturbing not less than my biased opinion.

Thats the crux of it though. All i have to go on is a video and the reporting by all news channels..none of which deacribed the original attacker as a terrorist..he could have had mental issues for all i know. So i can only use the sources at hand and describe the assailant as those sources describe him.

I do emphasise with people and how it obvioisly is an issue closer to their hearts than mine, but i can only comment on what i see and in my opinion what i saw was a cold blooded murder.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Neither have you from what I know so does that mean we should discount what you have to say as well? It's a silly and lazy argument that's designed to discount opinions that someone can't argue against.

TS has the right of it, it doesn't matter who the killed party was. All that matters is that they were apprehended. Killing someone in combat situations is fine but executing them without due course when they've been detained is not and the court obviously agrees.

You can't have soldiers that act out like that, order must be maintained within the troops or it all falls apart, you don't need battlefield experience to understand that.

for all you know the perp could have been about to get up and attack and so the soldier terminated him before he could do that, that is what he is trained to do - to see potential threat before joe public does

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

for all you know the perp could have been about to get up and attack and so the soldier terminated him before he could do that, that is what he is trained to do - to see potential threat before joe public does

Except that the court, who had all the facts, threw that idea out. You can't justify actions with events that didn't happen. Imagination doesn't overcome facts, no matter how hard you try LT.

[Beso]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

for all you know the perp could have been about to get up and attack and so the soldier terminated him before he could do that, that is what he is trained to do - to see potential threat before joe public does

That would work uf he hadnt spent the last 15 mins in the back of an ambulance with his injured partner before walking out and calmly handing his helmet to another soldier before cocking his gun taking aim and firing...you would think some of the ten plus soldiers milling around feet from the assailant would have made sure all was neutrelized...surely!!

[user104658]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

for all you know the perp could have been about to get up and attack and so the soldier terminated him before he could do that, that is what he is trained to do - to see potential threat before joe public does

The video is pretty unambiguous. As usual, you already know that though.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

The video is pretty unambiguous. As usual, you already know that though.

where is the video of the shooting I can only find news report ones?

[Crimson Dynamo]

Ok i found it. Good job that soldier killing a terrorist, he should be rewarded not imprisoned

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he supported a pardon for a soldier who was convicted of manslaughter on Wednesday for fatally shooting a wounded Palestinian assailant.

"I support a pardon for Elor Azaria," he said.

“This is a difficult and painful day for all of us, and first and formost for Elor and his family, for IDF soldiers, for many soldiers and for the parents of our soldiers, and me among them.

"We have one army, which is the basis of our existence. The soldiers of the IDF are our sons and daughters, and they need to remain above dispute.”



http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/ve...ian-1161042616

[Beso]

There you go..even the head honcho in israel doesn't describe him as a terrorist.

[y.winter]

Originally Posted by parmnion

All i have to go on is a video and the reporting by all news channels..none of which deacribed the original attacker as a terrorist..he could have had mental issues for all i know. So i can only use the sources at hand and describe the assailant as those sources describe him.

And that's why seeing the full picture is crucial. Do a research. There are facts out there and they are more than "Israeli soldier killed a Palestinian man".
I say things that I know and live on daily basis and I'm not on auto-bias mode.

Not long ago (2016 in fact) we had a couple of crazy months where every day a Palestinian took a knife and stabbed people on the streets, on the bus, on the train station, in a bar, breaking into their houses and slaughtering entire families while they were asleep. Just like this.
So it doesn't come to us as a surprise when a Palestinian and a knife make it to the headlines. Sorry to burst the bubble, mental issues weren't part of it.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by y.winter

And that's why seeing the full picture is crucial. Do a research. There are facts out there and they are more than "Israeli soldier killed a Palestinian man".
I say things that I know and live on daily basis and I'm not on auto-bias mode.

Not long ago (2016 in fact) we had a couple of crazy months where every day a Palestinian took a knife and stabbed people on the streets, on the bus, on the train station, in a bar, breaking into their houses and slaughtering entire families while they were asleep. Just like this.
So it doesn't come to us as a surprise when a Palestinian and a knife make it to the headlines. Sorry to burst the bubble, mental issues weren't part of it.

and i have posted videos of such attacks on here and Livia has discussed them too

[y.winter]

Originally Posted by parmnion

There you go..even the head honcho in israel doesn't describe him as a terrorist.

No, he didn't. It's not the PM's quote, it's the newspaper's description.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

But that was a different generation, should they not just get over it?

If they had have gone back to usurp those living there without a mandate it wold have just been genocide.

I wondered how long it would take you to drop into and "Israel" thread and quote one of my posts.

[Beso]

Originally Posted by y.winter

And that's why seeing the full picture is crucial. Do a research. There are facts out there and they are more than "Israeli soldier killed a Palestinian man".
I say things that I know and live on daily basis and I'm not on auto-bias mode.

Not long ago (2016 in fact) we had a couple of crazy months where every day a Palestinian took a knife and stabbed people on the streets, on the bus, on the train station, in a bar, breaking into their houses and slaughtering entire families while they were asleep. Just like this.
So it doesn't come to us as a surprise when a Palestinian and a knife make it to the headlines. Sorry to burst the bubble, mental issues weren't part of it.

None of that has anything to do with my argument. Did this dead palastinian do all that?
Is all that any worse than soldiers firing live rounds at kids throwing stones? We all saw how that can end through the lens of a dead cameraman hugging a shot kid before he himself was blasted of the face of the earth as he lay desperate and helpless..an innocent man this time.

I find it amazing and diagusting that this is the first time a soldier in uniform has been brought to justice for his crimes.


Anyway.. I am not really on about the past, i'm on about this one particular event which for me shows a.soldier in uniform kill an unarmed and neatrolized assailant...

I assume you agreed with all the attrocities carried out by US GI's in vietnam, or is that a stupid thing to say!

[Beso]

Originally Posted by y.winter

No, he didn't. It's not the PM's quote, it's the newspaper's description.

They quote him and there is no word of terrorist...so until you quote him saying terrorist i will stick by what i said.