[arista]

Originally Posted by parmnion

The video of the shooting is too horrific for the page...should have been done for murder in my opinion.

No Manslaughter
is Correct

It a good step Forward for Israel

[y.winter]

So about that...

• This Palestinian (and his friend) has been neutralized as they stabbed an Israeli soldier without the latter triggering anything. You know, this is how we say hello to each other on the streets here in Israel. Israeli soldiers are occasionally being confused with tomatoes and the Palestinian guys just craved a salad hence the knife.
• Yeah, they were terrorist.
• Elor (the Israeli soldier) shot the remaining terrorist dead (as the IDF judges declared today) and as being seen in this footage and another one.
• Did he have a good reason? He defends himself by saying it was self-protection and that he saw the terrorist trying to reach out for a weapon when he was on the ground. The judges have dismissed this claim.
• What would have happened had he not shoot him? The terrorist would have been driven to the Israeli hospital, getting medical care, recovering, going to jail where he'll get better living conditions than he'll ever get from the Palestinian Authority, keep promoting his idea from within the jail accompanied by his fellow Palestinian terrorists prisoners who were lucky enough to kill a few Israelis (damn it, he would've looked like such an amateur next to them), getting released from the jail back to where he came from just to get ready for his next terror comeback (hopefully a successful one this time).
• No Israeli would've received such treatment from the other side (terrorist or not).
• The soldier didn't act according to his commanders instructions. That's wrong. He's not there to do whetever he wants.
• However, the Palastenian is a terrorist and I can asure you he would've killed Israelis had he stayed alive, give it a year, give it a decade, it will happen. It happened before, not once, not twice.
• There was a massive media coverage in the local media, the people are divided whether he was right or wrong to do so. People have opinions and they are not afraid to say them out loud (unlike over the border).
• He has been found guilty by the IDF. The same ministry of defense which should have been "in his favor". But no, it doesn't work like this here - surprise surprise!
• The BBC can keep on bashing Israel/not calling a terrorist by his name. It's nice and easy to cluck while you sit in your office, watching the Thames flowing. I can tell you that - the Europeans are very naive, but the Islamic terrorism has started knocking on your doors too. I can tell you where this is all going.
• In general, not about the whole soldier-terrorist shebang. Israel is located in a problematic area (whether it's right or wrong, that's a whole new story). In 68 years it achieved more than any other country in the middle east, present and future. You can say a lot of bad things about Israel. Believe me, I can too. But it's the best place to find yourself in when in the middle east. The UK couldn't have dealt with the Palestinian situation any better. No one can be a saint and stay clean in a dirty game. I hope for the UK and the rest of Europe to never know how it really feels and have the comfort of shouting their tsk-tsk-tsk as loud as they can while they sit on the couch and watch the BBC.

*I'm Israeli, more left wing than right, agree with the soldier being guilty but at the same time I believe he saved lives. Yes, reality is complicated.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by y.winter

So about that...

• This Palestinian (and his friend) has been neutralized as they stabbed an Israeli soldier without the latter triggering anything. You know, this is how we say hello to each other on the streets here in Israel. Israeli soldiers are occasionally being confused with tomatoes and the Palestinian guys just craved a salad hence the knife.
• Yeah, they were terrorist.
• Elor (the Israeli soldier) shot the remaining terrorist dead (as the IDF judges declared today) and as being seen in this footage and another one.
• Did he have a good reason? He defends himself by saying it was self-protection and that he saw the terrorist trying to reach out for a weapon when he was on the ground. The judges have dismissed this claim.
• What would have happened had he not shoot him? The terrorist would have been driven to the Israeli hospital, getting medical care, recovering, going to jail where he'll get better living conditions than he'll ever get from the Palestinian Authority, keep promoting his idea from within the jail accompanied by his fellow Palestinian terrorists prisoners who were lucky enough to kill a few Israelis (damn it, he would've looked like such an amateur next to them), getting released from the jail back to where he came from just to get ready for his next terror comeback (hopefully a successful one this time).
• No Israeli would've received such treatment from the other side (terrorist or not).
• The soldier didn't act according to his commanders instructions. That's wrong. He's not there to do whetever he wants.
• However, the Palastenian is a terrorist and I can asure you he would've killed Israelis had he stayed alive, give it a year, give it a decade, it will happen. It happened before, not once, not twice.
• There was a massive media coverage in the local media, the people are divided whether he was right or wrong to do so. People have opinions and they are not afraid to say them out loud (unlike over the border).
• He has been found guilty by the IDF. The same ministry of defense which should have been "in his favor". But no, it doesn't work like this here - surprise surprise!
• The BBC can keep on bashing Israel/not calling a terrorist by his name. It's nice and easy to cluck while you sit in your office, watching the Thames flowing. I can tell you that - the Europeans are very naive, but the Islamic terrorism has started knocking on your doors too. I can tell you where this is all going.
• In general, not about the whole soldier-terrorist shebang. Israel is located in a problematic area (whether it's right or wrong, that's a whole new story). In 68 years it achieved more than any other country in the middle east, present and future. You can say a lot of bad things about Israel. Believe me, I can too. But it's the best place to find yourself in when in the middle east. The UK couldn't have dealt with the Palestinian situation any better. No one can be a saint and stay clean in a dirty game. I hope for the UK and the rest of Europe to never know how it really feels and have the comfort of shouting their tsk-tsk-tsk as loud as they can while they sit on the couch and watch the BBC.

*I'm Israeli, more left wing than right, agree with the soldier being guilty but at the same time I believe he saved lives. Yes, reality is complicated.

Well said - I agree with every word of that. Consequences - if you fight like a coward, you deserve what you get.

[Beso]

Originally Posted by y.winter

So about that...

• This Palestinian (and his friend) has been neutralized as they stabbed an Israeli soldier without the latter triggering anything. You know, this is how we say hello to each other on the streets here in Israel. Israeli soldiers are occasionally being confused with tomatoes and the Palestinian guys just craved a salad hence the knife.
• Yeah, they were terrorist.
• Elor (the Israeli soldier) shot the remaining terrorist dead (as the IDF judges declared today) and as being seen in this footage and another one.
• Did he have a good reason? He defends himself by saying it was self-protection and that he saw the terrorist trying to reach out for a weapon when he was on the ground. The judges have dismissed this claim.
• What would have happened had he not shoot him? The terrorist would have been driven to the Israeli hospital, getting medical care, recovering, going to jail where he'll get better living conditions than he'll ever get from the Palestinian Authority, keep promoting his idea from within the jail accompanied by his fellow Palestinian terrorists prisoners who were lucky enough to kill a few Israelis (damn it, he would've looked like such an amateur next to them), getting released from the jail back to where he came from just to get ready for his next terror comeback (hopefully a successful one this time).
• No Israeli would've received such treatment from the other side (terrorist or not).
• The soldier didn't act according to his commanders instructions. That's wrong. He's not there to do whetever he wants.
• However, the Palastenian is a terrorist and I can asure you he would've killed Israelis had he stayed alive, give it a year, give it a decade, it will happen. It happened before, not once, not twice.
• There was a massive media coverage in the local media, the people are divided whether he was right or wrong to do so. People have opinions and they are not afraid to say them out loud (unlike over the border).
• He has been found guilty by the IDF. The same ministry of defense which should have been "in his favor". But no, it doesn't work like this here - surprise surprise!
• The BBC can keep on bashing Israel/not calling a terrorist by his name. It's nice and easy to cluck while you sit in your office, watching the Thames flowing. I can tell you that - the Europeans are very naive, but the Islamic terrorism has started knocking on your doors too. I can tell you where this is all going.
• In general, not about the whole soldier-terrorist shebang. Israel is located in a problematic area (whether it's right or wrong, that's a whole new story). In 68 years it achieved more than any other country in the middle east, present and future. You can say a lot of bad things about Israel. Believe me, I can too. But it's the best place to find yourself in when in the middle east. The UK couldn't have dealt with the Palestinian situation any better. No one can be a saint and stay clean in a dirty game. I hope for the UK and the rest of Europe to never know how it really feels and have the comfort of shouting their tsk-tsk-tsk as loud as they can while they sit on the couch and watch the BBC.

*I'm Israeli, more left wing than right, agree with the soldier being guilty but at the same time I believe he saved lives. Yes, reality is complicated.

We dont all sit in front of the telly, and many many of us are and have been effected by terrorist activities right here in the uk...i still dont get the urge to take pot shots with my high powered rifle at kids throwing stones though, let alone a dying man laying helpless on the ground.

[y.winter]

Originally Posted by parmnion

let alone a dying man laying helpless on the ground.

Poor little innocent man.
You make it sound like he was just randomly laying on the ground gazing the sun.

[Beso]

Originally Posted by y.winter

Poor little innocent man.
You make it sound like he was just randomly laying on the ground gazing the sun.

talking ****...

[y.winter]

Originally Posted by parmnion

talking ****...

Enlighten me.

[Crimson Dynamo]

I have every sympathy with soldiers have to deal with terrorists

[arista]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

I have every sympathy with soldiers have to deal with terrorists

Of course LT
but this Young Army Officer
was filmed Killing a Terrorist who could not fight back

[Tom4784]

Terrorist or not, you don't kill people who have been apprehended just because you want to be judge, jury and executioner.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Same as the poor soldier in Afghanistan who was disgustingly jailed

[arista]

The Army fella just aged 20

http://news.sky.com/story/israeli-so...inian-10717632

[user104658]

It isn't even about what is or isn't morally justified in an individual situation, or whether or not this action hypothetically has saved lives.

He is a soldier and he let his emotions get the better of him, he was undisciplined, took things into his own hands, and executed an unarmed prisoner. It CANNOT go unpunished. You CANNOT send soldiers the message that they can play by their own rules and do whatever they feel like doing at the time. It would be an absolute disaster.

[Brillopad]

Personally I couldn't give a damn about any terrorist. When they commit such cowardly acts against innocent people they lower themselves to a level of inhumanity that makes them inhuman and therefore not worthy of any human rights.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Personally I couldn't give a damn about any terrorist. When they commit such cowardly acts against innocent people they lower themselves to a level of inhumanity that makes them inhuman and therefore not worthy of any human rights.

yep

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Personally I couldn't give a damn about any terrorist. When they commit such cowardly acts against innocent people they lower themselves to a level of inhumanity that makes them inhuman and therefore not worthy of any human rights.

It doesn't matter what they're worthy of. It doesn't matter if they deserved to die. A civilian family member of one of the victims came along and gunned him down? Great!

All of that is irrelevant. Soldiers follow the rules and follow their orders, they DON'T get to play judge and executioner outside of a combat situation with an unarmed prisoner. Full stop. Doesn't matter WHO it is or what they have done. The second you start letting soldiers get away with making executive decisions you have lost control of your troops, and that is all there is to it. He MUST be made an example of, or the army he is a part of will be in chaos.

[Brother Leon]

There were terrorists all over Aleppo killing soldiers, but we were supposed to be crying over the fact they can't have a safe passage out of there. Just saying...

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Brother Leon

There were terrorists all over Aleppo killing soldiers, but we were supposed to be crying over the fact they can't have a safe passage out of there. Just saying...

No we're supposed to be insisting that professional soldiers adhere to their army's rules of engagement and not make excuses for them when they over-step their level of authority and make executive decisions without orders. For any reason.

I'm just going to keep saying it tbh.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

No we're supposed to be insisting that professional soldiers adhere to their army's rules of engagement and not make excuses for them when they over-step their level of authority and make executive decisions without orders. For any reason.

I'm just going to keep saying it tbh.

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.

[user104658]

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.

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.

[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.

[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.

[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

[Livia]

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.

Actually, I have been in several war zones, although I was fully protected by armed guards. And I'm a military widow and that gives me some insight into it. I've worked in Israel, I've been to Palestine several times, I'vbe been to Iraq and Syria and the refugee camps in Jordan.

No one's saying people don'y have the right to say whatever they want. But I also have the right to say what I said, from a stronger, more informed position.

And as for not needing battlefield experience to understand that order must be maintained... Well, battlefield experience will teach you that soldiers are human beings with human reactions and emotions. Putting on a uniform and doing basic training doesn't make you into a robot.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Brother Leon

There were terrorists all over Aleppo killing soldiers, but we were supposed to be crying over the fact they can't have a safe passage out of there. Just saying...

They're not British though. A much higher standard is demanded from our troops from people whose first concern seems to be the Human Rights of terrorists.