60 thoughts on “IDF Killed Unarmed Palestinian at West Bank Checkpoint – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. “Even after being shot in the leg, he did not lie down as he was ordered”.

    “During the questioning the soldier said that he felt his life was in danger when he decided to fire his weapon”

    I can’t blame the soldier for feeling threatened. He probably didn’t violate the rules of engagement which, in the territories, typically require “means or intent”. The fact that he shot him in the leg first indicates he was following procedure.

    The question that really should be asked in light of this tragic event is what Israel has to do in the territories in the first place

    1. Maybe he did violate the rules of engagement. At least this is what a witnesses say on Ma’an Net:

      Eyewitness Dr Hatim Froukh said Dharaghma was shot at close range by three soldiers.

      “I was standing at the eastern side of the checkpoint waiting for the bus when I heard screaming. As I turned, I saw a young man wearing jeans and a brown jacket and raising his hands. Two male soldiers and a female soldier were three meters away from the young man and started shooting at him,” Froukh said.

      Other witnesses said they saw Dharaghma trying to approach the checkpoint with a Coca-Cola can in his hand. As he came close to a female soldier, witnesses said, she started shouting at him, and immediately two other soldiers showered him with gunshots.

      An Israeli military spokeswoman said soldiers shot dead a man because he approached the checkpoint in an unauthorized lane, and was holding a glass bottle.

      A female soldier ordered him to stop, and when he continued to proceed, soldiers “operated according to IDF rules of engagement” and opened fire, the spokeswoman said.

      Media reports later revealed doubt over the issue of proper protocol. Israel’s Ynet news site said an initial inquiry revealed several issues with the incident, with two soldiers who were not in harm’s way firing on Dharaghma, a shot hitting him in the leg, debilitating him, and then further shots to his upper body which he sustained after soldiers saw he was unarmed.

      According to the report, the soldier said that he felt his life was in danger when he decided to fire his weapon, while two other soldiers said they were firing to help their friend.

      1. ” Maybe he did violate the rules of engagement. At least this is what a witnesses say on Ma’an Net”:

        Oh; so that’s all right then; “breaking the rules of engagement” justifies killing a young lad.

        What kind of a woman are you? What kind of a HUMAN are you?

        I’ll answer my own question. Scum!

    2. Yeah, and then he walked right up to him, saw he wasn’t armed and pumped 7 more bullets into him along w. his 2 buddies. It was a cold blooded execution which we know is common in similar situations like the one in E. Jerusalem in which a driver was murdered by the police for nudging a police car in traffic. Or didn’t you bother to read the Ynet story at all? If you didn’t read it, do. If you did read it & can still write trash like this–for shame. You’re like Pharaoh & have lost your humanity & heart.

      1. “Yeah, and then he walked right up to him, saw he wasn’t armed…”
        The rules of engagement don’t require the subject to be armed.

        They require the subject to be armed or act suspiciously, either one of them is sufficient to engage.

        I’ve read the article, and it says the following:
        1. “Dragma reportedly acted suspiciously when he bypassed the line of people waiting at the checkpoint and arrived at a spot that was closed for traffic”
        2. “he did not respond when the soldiers ordered him to
        3.”Even after being shot in the leg, he did not lie down as he was ordered”

        All of this indicate the soldier acted legally under the rules of engagement. Nothing cold blooded about it.

        The soldier got scared and felt that basic human desire to stay alive. He acted according to his training and to his orders.

        That’s not to say that the result isn’t tragic. It is. I feel sorry for Mohammad Dragma that died needlessly. But the soldier (if he’s account is true) is innocent. He did the best he could in a bad situation.

        1. Do you Yakov really believe it happened so like the soldiers are telling?

          During Gaza war IDF destroyed a Finnish clinic for women and babies. The official explanation by IDF that Finland got after several months, was that Hamas had a weapon cache in the building and IDF did not know that there was a clinic in the building. They did know about the clinic even it had been there for years and there was a huge red cross painted on the roof, but they knew about a hidden secret weapon cache. IDF also mentioned that if they had know about the clinic they would not have destroyed the building. Do you think that anybody here takes such a stupid explanation full of logical holes seriously?

          Of course the soldiers who are caught for killing civilians invent a story that is near their rules of engagement even the real story is completely different. So did German soldiers, US soldiers in Vietnam and Iraq and so have Israeli soldiers done for decades. It is also astonishing that IDF can some times produce their story in minutes or fewhours without asking the Palestinian witnesses what actually happened. I suppose that the bottle the Palestinian did hold was normal plastic water bottle, thin and weighting some ten grams (without the water). That bottle is not a threat to a one year old baby, not to mention to three fully armed soldiers.

          This is not the first time IDF soldiers tell absurd stories and the “system” finds them not guilty. When that famous captain R murdered that 13 year old schoolgirl they shot 17 bullets in her small body. Two in her head after they already had checked that she did not have any explosives.
          Defence said even that ‘confirming the kill’ is standard Israeli practice.

          What is a bit disturbing is that “you” still fiercely demand justice be given to those old men who served on concentration camps. They also followed their orders, their rules of engagement and ‘confirming the kill’ was also their standard practice. Why are your rules of engagement and confirming the kill legal and right and theirs were wrong and illegal? The end results were the same, the only difference is (still) in the amount of bodies, but that is not relevant. Why should captain R and others walk free and continue living without the justified punishment?

          1. # Paul)
            “Captain R was promoted after this murder”.
            But if you read the testimonies from his trial, he DID cry and screamed: “I said I was innocent.”

        2. we are asked to accept that the IDF rules of engagement are legal and fair to palestinians in occupied palestine … what about the SS rules of engagement against the french in occupied france … were they enacted to protect the SS, the deutsche soldiers, and the DeutcheReich against those barbaric uncivilized jews that have infected europe and must be eliminated …
          i am sure many brave and pure of heart israeli soldiers dwell on this question and harbor unbearable guilt when they shoot and kill unarmed palestinian cockroaches to defend GearterIsrael theFatherland …

        3. The rules of engagement permit killing an unarmed man? If so, then the rules of engagement permit murder & hence are immoral & illicit rules. YOu should not be permitted to kill a man because he walks up to a part of a checkpoint where he is not authorized to be. That is murder.

          You conveniently have omitted fr. yr account the portion of the story which says the soldier walked up to the wounded man, saw he was unarmed & then promptly killed him.

          The soldier is guilty as sin. And if you continue in a similar vein you will make me so sick to my stomach that I won’t be able to bear the site of one of you comments. There is a stench rising fr. them right now.

          1. In a time of war, the enemy walking, where knowingly not allowed, is typically punished by instant death.

          2. In time of war, a commenter commenting knowingly & offensively is typically punished by instant banning. I only wish it were you or someone you loved who made the mistake that Dragma made. Then you might regain some of the humanity that drained out of you so long ago.

          3. Well said, Richard. I wish I hadn’t JUST eaten before reading some of the nauseating comments on here.

            Pass the sick bucket.

  2. “Even after being shot in the leg, he did not lie down as he was ordered”.

    When you are shot in the leg, you fall. It isn’t possible to remain standing if a bullet tears into your flesh and bone. at fairly close range at that. The justification doesn’t ring true – it sounds as though they are trying to cobble together a hasty story to quieten suspicions. It’s not the first time this has happened.

    “And then there was this boom, we heard a shot and of course I was on patrol so we ran over to see what happened, and there’s a girl soldier standing like this, facing an Arab bleeding on the ground, and she says something like: ‘He tried to attack me. He tried to attack me.’ We look at him and he’s shot in the belly, and we tell her – I mean he has a bullet hole in his stomach – we ask her: What did he do? How did he attack you? What do you mean he tried to attack you? The soldier who was there with her was all confused and didn’t know what to say: ‘Whatever she says, whatever she says.’ Something like that…And she told some story about her asking him for his ID and he wouldn’t show it, and then he attacked her and somehow she tried to get away and turned around
    and shot him in the belly, something of that sort. You look and see an Arab who’s been shot at point-blank range and he’s holding his ID. And you say to her: Listen, this is impossible. Your story just doesn’t add up. And what happened to that other soldier that he’s so afraid to talk? Then there were inquiries and stuff. Apparently she
    had asked to see his ID and he approached to hand it to her and he got too close – that’s what came out in the last briefing we had. She then shoved him off with her
    rifle and a bullet shot out right in his belly. Now, first thing we hear, instead of ‘Oh no! What have I done!’ – we hear her saying ‘He tried to attack me.’ This girl finally admitted he really got too close to her, and the bullet was already in the barrel and she shoved him away in the belly so he got shot in the belly…This incident shocked me. A girl shoots a guy in the belly and the first thing she says is ‘he attacked me.’ What did the guy attack you with? His ID? He was holding his ID, what did he attack you with? (…) I remember that right after that soldier shot the Arab in the belly and we all got there, I kept asking her: What do you mean, what did he try to do to you? And everyone – at some point suddenly the commander who was with me, who got there very quickly, said to me: ‘What do you want? What is this? Just stop it! Stop asking her what she means! Enough of this! She’s telling you he tried to attack her, what’s there not to understand?’ And I said, OK.”

    This is an excerpt from a testimony given to Breaking the Silence (Testimony 22 in the document ‘Women Soldiers’ Testimonies’, available on the website). According to this soldier’s testimony, the matter was investigated and the soldier who shot that man in the stomach was punished: she got a transfer to the military police. There are dozens of similar reports available to read.

    I daresay many of the people featured in them might say that they felt threatened – in which case the level of PTSD and related illnesses in the IDF is much higher than currently thought, or the soldiers are lying. I’d guess at both.

    1. “When you are shot in the leg, you fall. It isn’t possible to remain standing if a bullet tears into your flesh and bone.”.

      You don’t know that. Neither do you know exactly what injury he sustained to his leg. There are countless accounts of wounded soldiers who carried on despite their wounds which suggest the possibility of the victim not falling.

      I agree that investigations are biased towards the soldiers. Yet, the soldier may be telling the truth. Nothing in the article Richard linked to says otherwise.

      1. Vicky: “Dad, David, assuming you were on checkpoint duty and somebody approached whom you felt was a threat – maybe they were carrying a weapon. If you shot them in the leg, would they be able to keep on walking?”
        Dad: “Well, obviously this would have to be fairly close-range. I’d say it’s highly unlikely. It depends on the kind of bullet you were using. If it was a 7.62, then no way. That would stop an elephant. If you’re talking about a 5.something, then yes, it’s possible, providing the wound was just a flesh wound.”
        Vicky: “So with a small bullet, it’s possible to receive the gunshot wound and carry on walking without falling over?”
        David: “No, of course not! I thought you were supposed to be good at physics and that?”
        Dad (clarifying): “You’d be knocked off your feet by the impact. It’s like being kicked in the leg by a bull. But if it was just a flesh wound, you could probably get up again.”

        My father is ex-RAF, and my brother is currently a serving soldier in the British army. My father used to deliver weapons training. I have no reason to doubt what they tell me, especially as they don’t share my interest in Palestine and I presented the question as a purely hypothetical one. I have every reason to doubt the truthfulness of the IDF, given past experience and the fact that they have issued contradictory statements about this particular incident. The claims they are making don’t add up. First the dead man had a knife. Then it morphed into a bottle! Then he was shot in the legs, but he managed to defy the laws of physics and not fall over, so the only safe alternative was for multiple soldiers to turn him into a colander. Their story has more holes in it than this poor man’s remains.

        1. You are assuming they shot and hit, but there are a few other options to consider. It is possible that the bullet grazed the leg, went through the man’s pants or completely missed, in which case the story is credible. Is is also possible that the bullet never existed, the soldiers aimed to kill and only shot his leg after he was dead so as to produce a credible version of events.

          In either case, knife or broken bottle, the shooting is criminal, not justified and benefits nobody.

          1. You’re right, of course. My point was that even if you give the soldiers the benefit of the doubt and assume they’re telling the absolute truth when they say that they were threatened by this man and that they shot for his legs first, their story STILL doesn’t hold.

      2. How pathetic. EVERYTHING in the article points to the fact that the soldier’s “explanations” is patent fraud. Again, they murdered the guy for holding a drink. It’s plain & simple. They didn’t like the fact that he was approaching part of the checkpoint where he shouldn’t have been & instead of communicating that to him they shot him. Easier to kill someone than explain to them the rules. That’s it in a nutshell.

        1. There’s nothing “plain and simple” about it, except your interpretation.

          “Easier to kill someone than explain to them the rules”. How would you know? Why is it easier?

          You have this presumption that whatever the soldier says is automatically a lie. I deeply disagree with you on this. Yes, sometimes people lie. But usually, they’re telling the truth. Moreover, the soldier in question has no motive to lie – he acted according to his training and orders (according to him) and there’s no direct evidence that he didn’t.

          1. Additionally, the Palestinian in question knew that he was where he should not have been. Not the first person to commit suicide by police.

          2. Why is it easier?

            Because that’s what they did. They shot first and asked question later or never.

            whatever the soldier says is automatically a lie.

            No, the soldier is telling the truth. He admits that he walked up to the wounded unarmed man, saw he was unarmed, & killed him. He’s not lying. As to whether he believed his life was in danger–that is a lie & a very poor one.

  3. “This is the cheapness of Palestinian life”

    In fact, Palestinian life is so cheap that the IDF is now using “tear” gas to kill peaceful protesters. In Bil’in on Friday Jawaher Abu Rahmah was tear “gassed”, died of asphyxiation and this weekend was laid to rest next to her brother Bassem Abu Rahmah, who was killed by the IDF during a peaceful protest in Bil’in last year, April 2009, after being struck in the chest with a tear gas canister.

    1. i believe there is a good reason that richard chose not to report on the death of jawaher

      there are now reports that she was not even at the event, and was meters away in her home…yet somehow was overcome by gas…while no one else was

      and the pa refuses to release the hospital records

      1. You mean except for the doctor’s report from the hospital who actually treated her and described her cause of death? Or do you automatically not trust a doctor who is Palestinian?

        I find yr comments more & more offensive. YOu’re now officially on a very short leash.

          1. This is the type of stupid-assed comment I specifically avoid in this blog. If you don’t have anything substantive to say, don’t say it. I’m not interested in yr puerile nonsense. I’ve got a trigger finger for ya, buddy. Follow the rules or you’re gone.

  4. This is the action of the Taliban.

    A friend’s son is a captain in the US Army, a captin in the Rangers who has been deployed nine times. (Rangers and US Marines go for shorter times.)

    On his in 2002 or 2003, he set up a checkpoint, and noticed — couldn’t help but notice — that the people were crying as they approached.

    He asked his interpreter, who explained that the Taliban had had a checkpoint on that spot. The Taliban had killed aout ione in ten people who passed, just to intimidate everyone.

    My friend’s son went back to the Afghans four more times (did four in Iraq) just to prove that American Soldiers don’t kill for effect.

    Even if you think that occupied Palestine is more dangerous than Afghanistan — and, if so, you are delusional — it appears that the Israeli army has adopted the Taliban’s approach to “controlling” people.

  5. Several armed soldiers versus one boy with a glass bottle. Not much of a contest there. Scale up the encounter massively and you might be observing another lopsided balance of power, the one that has characterised the Israeli – Palestinian scene for so many decades.

    Apart from what is a tragic waste of a young life, the only certain conclusion to be drawn here is this. Many more lives will be lost if nothing is done to redress this imbalance and in a very material and profound manner.

    So, should the Palestinians be supplied with F-35 warplanes, Challenger tanks, body armour, big, big guns with lots of bullets? Even a degree of nuclear parity might not be seen as too extravagant for the task.
    Somehow I can’t envisage this as providing much of an answer even if it were possible to do so. The matter has been going on for far too long; these issues cannot be decided by simply ratcheting up the potential for more death and destruction.

    But a balance of some kind must be achieved. Otherwise, all those lives, young and old, sacrificed on the altar of this endless conflict will have been eternally wasted, of such little significance in the great tapestry of life.

    Only one thing speaks louder than guns. That is an idea whose time has come. Maybe, in this new year of 2011, new ideas will come to dominate where so many old ones seem to have consistently failed.

    If we dare not hope for peaceful coexistence between those in contention here, perhaps we can look to a balancing of the dispute as our next best option.
    For all our sakes and for those of our posterity.

    1. Just in December 2010, 16 Gazans were killed and 38 injured and these figures don’t include casualties on the West Bank.

      Correct me someone if I’m wrong but only the American hiker was killed in Israel and there is yet to be conclusive proof that an Arab did it.

      “But a balance of some kind must be achieved. Otherwise, all those lives, young and old, sacrificed on the altar of this endless conflict will have been eternally wasted, of such little significance in the great tapestry of life.”

      Let’s be honest, those lives were sacrificed on the altar of Zionism and as long as Zionism exists there will be no balance and Palestinians will continue to be sacrificed at a staggering disproportionate rate.

      1. All casualities in Gaza are the result of repetitive shelling and rocketing from Gaza into Israel.
        All the Hamas has to do is stop shooting, as simple as that – stop shooting at Israel and nobody will shoot at you.

        1. Gazans and Hamas don’t merely want quiet. They want their own nation and return of their stolen lands. So recognize a Palestinian state, go back to 67 borders & share Jerusalem & Israel will have quiet too. Ready?

          1. Personally I’m more then ready, however – if you shoot, sdon’t cry when you get backfire.
            If you want to be safe – don’t shoot and nobody will shoot at you.

          2. Personally I’m more then ready

            I don’t believe you. Everything else you’ve said here is in direct contradiction to this statement. Can you provide a link to any other place in which you’ve made such a statement online?

          3. Richard,

            What Maurice doesn’t consider is the shepherds, farmers and rubble collectors also killed close to the buffer zone, both in December and throughout 2010.

            Rubble collecters risk their lives to collect the rubble left behind by Cast Lead so they can sell it since Israel refuses to allow cement through and this rubble helps them feed their families.

          4. Let me make it clear – I don’t care if you beleive me or not, what I know for sure is that you dont like me and my comments.
            I think Mr. Silverstein that you have to get to the idea that there are some people who are absolutely against the Israeli policy towards the Palestinians, but unlike you and some other commentators it this site, they dont hate Israel.
            I am one of them, I dont hate Israel and I dont buy easilly all the anti Israeli propaganda that some people bring here.

            However, and since you ashed for it, here are some links to what I said online on this and related matters:
            Those are only very recent few out of thousands of posts and articles in doesns of sites.

          5. unlike you and some other commentators it this site, they dont hate Israel.

            Nor do I. ANd since you didn’t bother to read the comment rules & violated them again w. the claim that I hate Israel (absolutely prohibited since it is a lie–and one I refuse to allow here), you’re gone.

      2. The reason that last month “only” one tourist was killed vs. 16 Gazans is because of the counter terrorist activities of Shabak, not because of lack of trying on the Palestinian side.

        You may disagree with Shabak methods for counter terrorism (some are indeed draconian), but they are very effective in preventing suicide and other attacks.

        The numbers game proves nothing.

        Interesting tht you wrote: “there is yet to be conclusive proof that an Arab did it.” Shouldn’t that have read “Palestinian” rather than “Arab”? Also interesting that you assume it will be “an Arab” but not yet proven…

        1. The reason that last month “only” one tourist was killed vs. 16 Gazans is because of the counter terrorist activities of Shabak

          What utter nonsense. The Shabak is good for nothing except terrorizing Palestinians and Israeli citizens. It’s very good at torture, at violating basic civil & human rights, & railroading prisoners into “confessions.”

          Funny you should mention that Shabak methods are “very effective at preventing suicide…” when Prisoner X, if you believe the gov’t’s version of events, did precisely that [committed suicide]. I maintain he had a little help fr. those same Shabak/Mossad personnel who’re doing such a cracker-jack job of keeping you guys safe over there fr yr. own shadows. Yes, I did take a few liberties w. yr syntax, you’ll have to forgive me.

      3. Then isn’t it up to all of us to provide some sort of balance; even to insist upon it?

        Look around. Who else is there? There’s nobody here but us chickens.

        Why is this business taking so long to wind down? Each new day only seems to reinforce the conflict, each new year begins with remarkably little to show for so much effort expended on one small piece of God’s good Earth.

        Why should this be so? Why should it always be this way?

        The reason is simple. There is, as yet, no yardstick with which to measure how much progress has been made; nothing to define the path or the direction taken. Without a stiff wind in our sails, we become becalmed; we lose forward motion, we navigate by the light of constant setbacks. Eventually, we drift back to where we began, to start the journey all over again but with even less hope or purpose than before.

        If we cannot establish a proper route, not know how far we’ve sailed and are uncertain of our heading, we really have no business embarking on this expedition in the first place. Without defined markers put down to show us our course, we become lost and unsure of our destination and of our ability to get there.

        At all times we must know where we want to go and how we want to get there. And, seeing how things stand at the moment, we would be well advised to use the shortest route and the fastest possible speed.

    2. “Several armed soldiers versus one boy with a glass bottle. Not much of a contest there”

      It is not a contest. It is not a game. There is a war going on. War sucks.

      1. It is ‘occupation’ not ‘war’. You should have said: ‘Occupation sucks’.
        Israel should get out of there. Agree?

      2. Was the 20 yr old boy drinking fr. a bottle participating in the war? I don’t think so. Someone should have told him he’d be killed for drinking from a bottle because there was a war going on. Then he might’ve stood in line & not brought about his own murder.

        1. Well, I suppose it is always easier to be wise after the event; if only the same could be said of the process leading up to it.

          And yet that does remain the fundamental problem.
          How to contain this pressure cooker of a conflict so that incidents like this are avoided in the future. Unless some means is found to release the pressure, there can be no good result from all this constant stoking of furnaces already at danger level in terms of hate and pain.

          To live permanently with this state of affairs has been the lot of both Israelis and Palestinians for generations. To say that this is far too long a time is merely stating the obvious.

          To cool matters down sufficiently, to return to within tolerable limits of interaction, must now require a dousing agent of considerable strength and scale. Maybe that should have been the remedy all along; the equivalent of a cold-water bath in which to immerse this entire region; a sudden sharp shock to the system might still turn this whole situation around. Or cause it to hibernate long enough for cooler heads to mediate and produce a solution that best accommodates the many viewpoints contained within communities of such diversity.

          To try something new, even with only the smallest chance of success, is forgivable should it fail. To do nothing, or little more than what has already been done, is not.

  6. Another great headline by journalist Richard Silverstein. The impression that one gets is that there is a cowardice in the media to report on Israel’s sinister misdeeds. Richard is a brave lion amongst sheep.

    This man’s death is a microcosm of everything that was wrong with the last decade. We want change, and we want it now! It’s not yes, we can… it’s yes, we WILL!!!

    1. Yes, change is definitely required here. And on a massive scale if this matter is not to descend to a depth even deeper than the one wherein it now dwells.

      But where, when, what, who, how to change?
      These are questions that need answers if what happened on Sunday near Nablas is not to happen again. And again.

      WHERE? What about here, right here; unless there’s a better place; in which case, please inform?

      WHEN? Right now, as soon as possible, even sooner if it can be arranged; someone else might be found dying tomorrow; and on every other tomorrow if no remedy for this condition of permanent conflict can be found.

      WHAT? The whole cycle of violence has to be completely locked down in almost every conceivable way; an absolute control in some tangible and forthright manner that brooks of no delay and little debate. A delivered judgement with no possibility of evasion or appeal; the equivalent of an impending nuclear exchange but without the need for that type of weaponry or its attendant fall-out. Hey, don’t act so surprised. In the old days, this was the accepted method. Still is, to some extent; both sides so scared of the possible consequences that each was/is very, very careful not to push things too far, to step slowly and softly when the need arose. As it sometimes did.
      If that type of motivation had been in evidence yesterday, young Mohammad Dragma might still be with us today. As well might be a lot of other men and women, young and old .

      WHO? I’m afraid it will have to be all of us. No exceptions, no special pleading, no deferments. We all have to sign on for this one together. Total commitment by (almost) the totality of mankind. Nothing less will do.

      HOW? I think my views on that are a matter of record. If you can suggest another means of accomplishing the task with some certainty of success, then please feel free to do so.

      I say it’s time we unlimber what may be our very last big gun and bring it to bear on the situation. To do anything less is to visit yesterday’s pain on tomorrow’s victims. And, with only six degrees of separation distancing us all from those very same, the prospect of that pain should flood our minds with far more clarity and concern that might otherwise be the case.

  7. Such tragedies happen mostly with unexperienced young soldiers. Most of the soldiers on those jobs stand there terrified and shaking, afraid to be hit by a suicide bomber or being stabbed. Being so afraid they cant act logically and when one of them panicks, all of them start shooting.
    When they are trialed they weep at courts like bunch of babies.

    1. Why does their nation even have to put them in such jeopardy when it could compromise w. the Palestinians & end the Occupation? I’d wager that most of the IDF is composed of 19-20 yr olds like the ones who shot Dragma (who himself was their age), & that most of them would react similarly in the same circumstances. Which reflects poorly on the IDF & Israel, but is to be expected when you’re maintaining such an odious system.

        1. those terrible events are not the result of cruelty and carelesness for human life on the side of the soldiers.

          Of course they are. You may argue that the soldiers are not ultimately the worst offenders or most culpable, but that their leaders who give the orders are. That’s legitimate. But the soldiers on the ground fire the bullets and take the lives. So of course they are careless & cruel & routinely so. They may not be the worst monsters, but they do monstrous things nonetheless.

    2. # Maurice)
      “When they are trialed they weep at courts like [a] bunch of babies”
      Yeah, particularly when they are relased without charges, like Captain R who killed Iman al-Shams in the buffer zone in Gaza with more than 15 bullets. Actually he cried, but not for Iman al -Sham.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link