The article says that the only repercussions will be "talks" with the soldiers.
Just a few bad apples, right?
Remember when they shot a journalist in the head and provided a fake investigation into it that they then took back but still concluded in the end that the journalist was at fault for getting shot?
Remember when they crushed a 23 years old woman from the US to death with a bulldozer because she was protesting the demolition of palestinian homes, then they started an "investigation" where they found out they hadn't done anything wrong because they didn't see her even though the woman has been protesting there for hours and the soldiers that were there testified that she was being a nuisance for hours?
Remember the laws they passed that let the IDF destroy palestinian homes if they deem by internal investigation that they're somehow connected to "terrorism"?
Remember the laws that let IDF soldiers shoot kids if they throw rocks at soldiers in occupied territories?
There's actually more, but man i will be very depressed and angry if i keep looking.
Remember the march of return? That was fun. /s
In response to the evidence, the IDF said that “the [soldiers’] conduct that emerges from these scenes is grave and inconsistent with the values of the IDF. The incidents are under investigation. The IDF commanders will hold talks with all the soldiers on the front. One soldier has been dismissed from reserve service.”
Being dismissed from service is too little for actual murder.
Better than transfered to another department.
Agreed, but none of these incidents involve murder.
shot a journalist in the head
crushed a 23 years old woman from the US to death with a bulldozer
You suck.
Hey look it's some asshole who didn't read the fucking article and they're quoting some other asshole who didn't read the fucking article and who's somehow oblivious to the comment from the person I replied to that says "oh I didn't read the article." (emphasis added)
Although I'm awed by your commitment to being the dumbest motherfucker on the planet, you could've spared yourself getting so upset about this water-is-wet statement of fact by just reading for a minute before opening your dumb mouth.
Your previous comment was pretty vague about what you were responding to. You should have made it clear you were responding to the article and not the comment you actually replied to because that's what it sounds like. You really don't have a right to respond this aggressively.
I disagree about the clarity. It's a thread of replies that begins with a direct quote from the article. Any vagueness could be cleared up by either asking a question or reading the article.
When someone replies directly to me quoting something completely irrelevant and unrelated saying "you suck," I reserve the right to mock them. Especially when my original comment should be as controversial as saying the article was published in the Times of Israel on November 1st.
On top of making a shit ton of incorrect assumptions that were unjustified you doubled down on proving you suck.
Keep up the good work champ.
I'll stand by my assessment that you suck.
Meh. I'll live.
I made a single, well-founded assumption that you didn't read the article. If you did read it, it's worse. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that, had you read it, you would have actually replied to what I said and not posted something completely irrelevant.
Care to elaborate on how videos not depicting death of any kind are evidence of murder? Or what the IDF's very specific response to the very specific crimes shown on these very specific videos has to do with what you quoted? Or what that has to do with my very narrow (and true) statement that the videos in question don't depict murder?
Oh I hadn't read the article; so this time it's not murder. My point still stands but I guess that's a relief.
Just imagine if Hamas were investigating humiliation of Israeli civilians by its fighters and having any punishment for that.
Just imagine trying to use a terrorist mob as a yardstick to excuse the misdeeds of the advanced 21st century military of a modern democracy.
I wouldn't go as far as to claim Israel is a modern democracy.. but I agree with the advanced 21st century military part.
No excuses, but it helps to remember context. People are people, and there are always shitty people in any state. It is what considered acceptable is important. What more do you want from IDF? Execution without investigation?
Also this is honestly goes as nitpicking. Yes, there are always bad apples. But as far as I can see IDF reacts correctly. It is disturbing in my opinion that there is so much anti-Israel propaganda (not even criticism) is ongoing and supported by clearly more than half of the fediverse (judging by upvoting), where even correct behavior is criticized, and completely ignores the realities that Israel has to deal with. Not even criticizing the use of Himan shields by Hamas, for example.
What more do you want from IDF? Execution without investigation?
Oh, heavens no. That's not what I want from the idf. At this point, that's what I want for the idf.
It's worrying for me that you're confusing anti-israel propaganda with anti-terrorism discussion. At this point, Israel is a terrorist state. It shouldn't 'disturb' you that people discuss about it and find that they don't agree with their actions. People are rarely alright with mindless murder for any reason, let alone for land-grabbing masked as religion. Bombing civilians and hospitals, humiliating people because you're holding a gun and get off on being "powerful", raping people and committing war crimes, ethnically cleansing a region for the past 70 years, holy shit, this is what you see from a terrorist organization masquerading as a legitimate state and you draw the conclusion that it's disturbing to be against that? Maybe you should be disturbed by your misshapen world view where all of this is acceptable.
The article says that the only repercussions will be "talks" with the soldiers.
Just a few bad apples, right?
Remember when they shot a journalist in the head and provided a fake investigation into it that they then took back but still concluded in the end that the journalist was at fault for getting shot?
Remember when they crushed a 23 years old woman from the US to death with a bulldozer because she was protesting the demolition of palestinian homes, then they started an "investigation" where they found out they hadn't done anything wrong because they didn't see her even though the woman has been protesting there for hours and the soldiers that were there testified that she was being a nuisance for hours?
Remember the laws they passed that let the IDF destroy palestinian homes if they deem by internal investigation that they're somehow connected to "terrorism"?
Remember the laws that let IDF soldiers shoot kids if they throw rocks at soldiers in occupied territories?
Yeah... just a few bad apples.
Remember when IDF used life round to disperse the protestor for protesting their land being taken over, and to make it a point they fired a shot right at the innocent 9 years old boy that's not in the scene?
There's actually more, but man i will be very depressed and angry if i keep looking.
Remember the march of return? That was fun. /s
Being dismissed from service is too little for actual murder.
Better than transfered to another department.
Agreed, but none of these incidents involve murder.
You suck.
Hey look it's some asshole who didn't read the fucking article and they're quoting some other asshole who didn't read the fucking article and who's somehow oblivious to the comment from the person I replied to that says "oh I didn't read the article." (emphasis added)
Although I'm awed by your commitment to being the dumbest motherfucker on the planet, you could've spared yourself getting so upset about this water-is-wet statement of fact by just reading for a minute before opening your dumb mouth.
Your previous comment was pretty vague about what you were responding to. You should have made it clear you were responding to the article and not the comment you actually replied to because that's what it sounds like. You really don't have a right to respond this aggressively.
I disagree about the clarity. It's a thread of replies that begins with a direct quote from the article. Any vagueness could be cleared up by either asking a question or reading the article.
When someone replies directly to me quoting something completely irrelevant and unrelated saying "you suck," I reserve the right to mock them. Especially when my original comment should be as controversial as saying the article was published in the Times of Israel on November 1st.
On top of making a shit ton of incorrect assumptions that were unjustified you doubled down on proving you suck.
Keep up the good work champ.
I'll stand by my assessment that you suck.
Meh. I'll live.
I made a single, well-founded assumption that you didn't read the article. If you did read it, it's worse. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that, had you read it, you would have actually replied to what I said and not posted something completely irrelevant.
Care to elaborate on how videos not depicting death of any kind are evidence of murder? Or what the IDF's very specific response to the very specific crimes shown on these very specific videos has to do with what you quoted? Or what that has to do with my very narrow (and true) statement that the videos in question don't depict murder?
Oh I hadn't read the article; so this time it's not murder. My point still stands but I guess that's a relief.
Just imagine if Hamas were investigating humiliation of Israeli civilians by its fighters and having any punishment for that.
Just imagine trying to use a terrorist mob as a yardstick to excuse the misdeeds of the advanced 21st century military of a modern democracy.
I wouldn't go as far as to claim Israel is a modern democracy.. but I agree with the advanced 21st century military part.
No excuses, but it helps to remember context. People are people, and there are always shitty people in any state. It is what considered acceptable is important. What more do you want from IDF? Execution without investigation?
Also this is honestly goes as nitpicking. Yes, there are always bad apples. But as far as I can see IDF reacts correctly. It is disturbing in my opinion that there is so much anti-Israel propaganda (not even criticism) is ongoing and supported by clearly more than half of the fediverse (judging by upvoting), where even correct behavior is criticized, and completely ignores the realities that Israel has to deal with. Not even criticizing the use of Himan shields by Hamas, for example.
Oh, heavens no. That's not what I want from the idf. At this point, that's what I want for the idf.
It's worrying for me that you're confusing anti-israel propaganda with anti-terrorism discussion. At this point, Israel is a terrorist state. It shouldn't 'disturb' you that people discuss about it and find that they don't agree with their actions. People are rarely alright with mindless murder for any reason, let alone for land-grabbing masked as religion. Bombing civilians and hospitals, humiliating people because you're holding a gun and get off on being "powerful", raping people and committing war crimes, ethnically cleansing a region for the past 70 years, holy shit, this is what you see from a terrorist organization masquerading as a legitimate state and you draw the conclusion that it's disturbing to be against that? Maybe you should be disturbed by your misshapen world view where all of this is acceptable.