Israel has the most moral army in the world

The lack of outrage from the Israeli kiss-ass crowd, proves that none of them have a clue as to what morality is and are not qualified to render any judgment of such on the IDF.
Just your typical, silly melodrama.
 
Making this thread was a mistake, I believe. Israel's army has to deal with situations and elements that no other army in the world has to deal with. Shusha gave the rabid anti-Semites a good excuse to begin showing these out-of-context Youtubes, which depict the brave Israeli soldiers in the worst possible light.
You see the IDF kicking and beating children. What could you possibly say that would justify what you see in the video?
.....that Pallywood Productions, Inc. appeals to slow adults such as yourself?
 
Billo has trouble with basics. Seems to think that if a terrorist hides behind a child and that child becomes frightened when the man comes to collect the terrorist that its somehow the mans fault.

yikes

And then tries to equate that with dropping chlorine bombs on civilians.

WOW
 
Making this thread was a mistake, I believe. Israel's army has to deal with situations and elements that no other army in the world has to deal with. Shusha gave the rabid anti-Semites a good excuse to begin showing these out-of-context Youtubes, which depict the brave Israeli soldiers in the worst possible light.
You see the IDF kicking and beating children. What could you possibly say that would justify what you see in the video?





No that is what you have been told you see, and you blindly go along with it. It is what you don't see that tells the full story, and by editing the footage you only see what pallywood wants you to see
 
The lack of outrage from the Israeli kiss-ass crowd, proves that none of them have a clue as to what morality is and are not qualified to render any judgment of such on the IDF.





Why should we feel outrage at terrorists getting what they deserve, or should we do as you do and elevate them to sainthood
 
The lack of outrage from the Israeli kiss-ass crowd, proves that none of them have a clue as to what morality is and are not qualified to render any judgment of such on the IDF.

The question on the table is not "Can Israel's army be even more moral than it already is?" Or even, "Is Israel's army moral enough?"

The question on the table is the charge that Israel is the MOST immoral army in the world.

Sure, it would be fantastic to develop methods of controlling and arresting people without having to perform a takedown or control their limbs or hit them or scare them, even when they are resisting. I'm not quite sure how one could do that. Some sort of paralyzing spray or dart? (Though even with that there would be the danger of harm if/when they fell). The reality is that arresting people is messy.

Would if be fantastic is very soldier in the IDF treated every combatant and every non-combatant with kindness and respect for their bodies and their property, while still safely performing their duties? Sure.

Would it be awesome if no child was ever used as a combatant (war crime); if no child ever picked up a weapon (yes, a rock is a weapon) and turned it on someone; if no child was in the vicinity of combat. Of course.

Would if be great if we could conduct warfare with no harm to any civilian? Absolutely.

But none of these goals are especially realistic. War is messy.

What we are evaluating here is the extent or level of morality and comparing one army to another. Syria is using chemical weapons -- chlorine and mustard gas -- on its civilians and children. How can you possibly be comparing Israel to Syria and having Israel come out as being the most immoral?
 
Alright, I'm going to try to take a stab at the criteria for morality when fighting in armed conflict. Please feel free to add anything I might miss as I doubt it will be comprehensive on the first go-around.

1. Any engagement of armed conflict must have a "just cause" -- in particular the protection of citizen's from physical harm.
2. There must be an overall demonstrated military goal and a reasonable expectation of success.
3. There must be explicit military objectives for each operation.
4. Non-combatants and civilian infrastructure should never be targeted.
5. Engagement should minimize harm to non-combatants and civilian infrastructure as much as possible.
6. Indiscriminate weapons should not be used where there is the presence of non-combatants.
7. Use of non-violent means (economic sanctions, etc) should be used where possible.
8. Ensure passage of humanitarian aide.

Its a start.
 
Alright, I'm going to try to take a stab at the criteria for morality when fighting in armed conflict. Please feel free to add anything I might miss as I doubt it will be comprehensive on the first go-around.

1. Any engagement of armed conflict must have a "just cause" -- in particular the protection of citizen's from physical harm.
2. There must be an overall demonstrated military goal and a reasonable expectation of success.
3. There must be explicit military objectives for each operation.
4. Non-combatants and civilian infrastructure should never be targeted.
5. Engagement should minimize harm to non-combatants and civilian infrastructure as much as possible.
6. Indiscriminate weapons should not be used where there is the presence of non-combatants.
7. Use of non-violent means (economic sanctions, etc) should be used where possible.
8. Ensure passage of humanitarian aide.

Its a start.
Okay, in every one of those videos, the IDF has violated rules 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8.
 
The question on the table is not "Can Israel's army be even more moral than it already is?" Or even, "Is Israel's army moral enough?"
I'm saying the IDF is not moral at all (unless they look like Gal Gadot).

The question on the table is the charge that Israel is the MOST immoral army in the world.
Not a chance.

Sure, it would be fantastic to develop methods of controlling and arresting people without having to perform a takedown or control their limbs or hit them or scare them, even when they are resisting. I'm not quite sure how one could do that. Some sort of paralyzing spray or dart? (Though even with that there would be the danger of harm if/when they fell). The reality is that arresting people is messy.
Are you trying to justify the beating of children?

Would if be fantastic is very soldier in the IDF treated every combatant and every non-combatant with kindness and respect for their bodies and their property, while still safely performing their duties? Sure.
Why wouldn't you treat a "non-combatant" humanely?

Why would you treat them the same as a combatant?

The IDF makes no distinction between the two and that's not moral.

Would it be awesome if no child was ever used as a combatant (war crime); if no child ever picked up a weapon (yes, a rock is a weapon) and turned it on someone; if no child was in the vicinity of combat. Of course.
All the children in those videos were not combatants, they were children.

Would if be great if we could conduct warfare with no harm to any civilian? Absolutely.
The IDF doesn't even try. A moral army would.

But none of these goals are especially realistic. War is messy.
This is not a war, it's an occupation.

What we are evaluating here is the extent or level of morality and comparing one army to another. Syria is using chemical weapons -- chlorine and mustard gas -- on its civilians and children. How can you possibly be comparing Israel to Syria and having Israel come out as being the most immoral?
That's a lie. Assad didn't use chemical weapons. It has been proven, the Israeli backed rebels, are the ones who gassed Syrian citizens.
 
No that is what you have been told you see, and you blindly go along with it. It is what you don't see that tells the full story, and by editing the footage you only see what pallywood wants you to see
What you see in the videos is enough. There's nothing that happened before or what happens after, that change anything in the video seeing the IDF beating and kicking children. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, your vicious, 15 year old inhumane mouth can say, that would justify those actions.
 
Billo has trouble with basics. Seems to think that if a terrorist hides behind a child and that child becomes frightened when the man comes to collect the terrorist that its somehow the mans fault.

yikes

And then tries to equate that with dropping chlorine bombs on civilians.

WOW
There are no terrorists (or chlorine bombs), in those videos.
 
As I noted, this makes good theatre. The Pal'istanian Arab terrorists exploited Shirley Temper for as long as they could use that farce for Pallywood Productions, Inc.

These silly Pallywood Productions, Inc. YouTube videos you cut and paste are designed for you slow adult types who are willing to mouth the bait.
What do you mean when you say "cut and paste"? That's just a sound bite with no meaning behind it. It's just some bullshit innuendo on your part, because you have no valid argument.

Prove the videos are fake, whore.
 
Do you believe it is possible for an army to be moral?
Morality, is a human trait. A soldier, is moral. A soldier, is immoral. An army, is neither.

It's like saying a corporation, is evil. A corporation may be fascist, but it is neither good, nor evil. That is a human quality.

I believe it is not possible for an army to be moral, or immoral. So when I'm saying the IDF is not moral, I'm saying the individual soldiers presented in whatever evidence I post, or what incident I'm referring to, are not moral. Nor are there commanders.

Now, keep in mind, if the soldier looks like Gal Gadot, you throw out all of the above. Because everyone knows, hotties can do whatever they like.
 

Forum List

Back
Top