• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is it wrong for the IDF to use human shields?

Is it wrong for the IDF to use human shields?

  • Yes. It is wrong.

    Votes: 11 78.6%
  • No. It is not wrong.

    Votes: 3 21.4%

  • Total voters
    14
They do say, "All is fare in love and..."
 
Onion Eater, your misrepresentations have already been debunked on another thread.
 
Just so there's no goose and gander crap...

This is just disgusting!
IDF to appeal human shield ban

The Israeli Defence Ministry will appeal against a supreme court ruling banning the use of Palestinian human shields in raids, officials said

Defence Minister Shaul Mofaz is prepared to make a personal appearance in court to defend the practice, ministry officials added.
What's even more disgusting is Israel claiming they need to do this.

**** like this makes the UN sorry it ever created the state of Israel.
 
I am not in favor of this tactic. Civilians in war zones should not be used as shields by anyone. While Hamas certainly loves to use civilians as shields whenever they can, that doesn't excuse the IDF for the same behavior. Obviously war zones are chaotic and its hard to figure where fire is coming from, but deliberately putting civilians in harms way should be discouraged.
 
No, Billo, I said that his misrepresented assertion was debunked in another thread. Here is the link to the post:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/1057879964-post638.html

There is a difference between what he is asserting and what is occurring.
It depends on how you define "debunk". His article also said...
...human rights groups insist the IDF continues to use it, although they acknowledge the number of instances has dropped sharply
And I posted 3 examples of them doing it in Gaza recently.

Did someone forget to tell the IDF about the Supreme Court decision?

And who in their right mind in Israel would protest their banning?
 
Last edited:
It depends on how you define "debunk".

Indeed.

For reference, here is my original post:

It is well known that the IDF uses captured civilians as human shields when raiding a house. They tie them together and push them forward, firing their M-16s over the prisoner's shoulder. Wikipedia has a lengthy article about this, including links to videos of it being done: Human shield - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Does Hamas launch rockets from positions near civilian structures like schools? Maybe. I have no way of knowing. But, I should point out, the Gaza Strip and particularly Gaza City is one of the most densely populated areas on Earth. At Gaza we read, "Covering a land area of 360 sq. km (approximately twice the size of Washington, DC) with a population of nearly 1.4 million, the Gaza Strip is a narrow sliver of land."

Within such tight confines, it is hard not to be near a school or some similar civilian structure.

And here is the so-called "debunking" of it:

See, this is the problem with only posting half the information. You come across as stating a valid position, but upon further examination, your position is faulty and easily dismissible. If you read the article you quote, you would notice that not only has the practice been outlawed by the Israeli Supreme Court, but Israeli commanders have been arrested and suspended for such actions since.

Of course, Palestinians still use their civilians as human shields, and of course the Palestinian government does nothing to reprimand or consequence them for it. You conveniently forgot to include all of these salient points. Your position on this has now been sufficiently watered down to hold no merit towards your claim.

In 2002, the IDF dropped a GBU-24 on an apartment building in the middle of the night, which killed eight children and seven adults, and injured over 150 other people. See the description of this attack at Matar et al v. Dichter.

You tell me, oh master debunker, was Salah Shehade "hiding behind civilians" when he was assassinated in his own home with a 2000-pound bomb? Rhetorical question: If I went to your home at three in the morning and throw grenades through your windows, killing your entire family, and then appeared in court saying, "It's not my fault that he chose to hide behind civilians," would I skate like Dichter?

While he received a slap on the wrist for this assassination, Avi Dichter is still a free man and is, in fact, working closely with the US Department of Homeland Security, who is interested in emulating is success at assassinating people without any messy legal complications. That would make their job so much easier, you know!

"In the international arena, Dichter believes that it is essential to build a network of nations dedicated to counter-terrorism and crime-fighting to confront the emerging network of international terror and crime. In this capacity Minister Dichter has led the warming of professional relations with many partners across the globe including the signing of cooperation agreements with the US Department of Homeland Security as well as with other counterparts from Canada and countries in the European Union." - Wikipedia
 
Last edited:
[youtube]eTGbP55HGi8[/youtube]

At least Israeli soldier's get punished by their own government when they use human shields. Does the Hamas?
 
Last edited:
Indeed.

For reference, here is my original post:



And here is the so-called "debunking" of it:



In 2002, the IDF dropped a GBU-24 on an apartment building in the middle of the night, which killed eight children and seven adults, and injured over 150 other people. See the description of this attack at Matar et al v. Dichter.

You tell me, oh master debunker, was Salah Shehade "hiding behind civilians" when he was assassinated in his own home with a 2000-pound bomb? Rhetorical question: If I went to your home at three in the morning and throw grenades through your windows, killing your entire family, and then appeared in court saying, "It's not my fault that he chose to hide behind civilians," would I skate like Dichter?

While he received a slap on the wrist for this assassination, Avi Dichter is still a free man and is, in fact, working closely with the US Department of Homeland Security, who is interested in emulating is success at assassinating people without any messy legal complications. That would make their job so much easier, you know!

"In the international arena, Dichter believes that it is essential to build a network of nations dedicated to counter-terrorism and crime-fighting to confront the emerging network of international terror and crime. In this capacity Minister Dichter has led the warming of professional relations with many partners across the globe including the signing of cooperation agreements with the US Department of Homeland Security as well as with other counterparts from Canada and countries in the European Union." - Wikipedia

As I said in my original post, you only posted half the information, in an obvious attempt to vilify Israel. This is a gross misrepresentation of the situation. Fortunately for you, I was here to correct you and clarify things. Hence, your position was debunked. In the future, try to present the entire picture. Saves me time in correcting your information.
 
It appears that it is not Israeli policy to use human shields, but it also appears that occasionally some of the Israeli troops have done this, but that the Israeli governemnt has taken steps against the soldiers who do this.

Anyone using civilians as human shields is wrong, regardless of what side they are on. If Israel at least tries to punish those who do so, they are acting appropriately.
 
[youtube]eTGbP55HGi8[/youtube]

I post four videos of IDF soldiers taking neighborhood children hostage and forcing them to open doors while the IDF aims their rifles over the child's shoulder and the best response that you can come up with is a mawkish propaganda piece showing some Palestinian children playing with toy guns while "twinkle, twinkle little star" plays repetitively in the background?

Pathetic.

If it is really wrong for Hamas to "indoctrinate" young Palestinian boys, is it also wrong for the Boy Scouts of America to give American boys militaristic uniforms and teach them basic soldiering skills?

Teaching boys soldiering skills is, after all, one of the principle reasons that the Scouts were formed in the run-up to WWI. The Army complained that they were spending too much time teaching 18-year-old recruits basic skills that they could have learned themselves just by going on camping trips.

I'm not knocking the Scouts. It is a great program that helps boys grow up to be productive and honorable members of society. They have a lot of fun on their camping trips and - if they later choose to join the Army - they can pitch a tent and cook a meal without any hand-holding. They don't waste their sargeant's time by requiring a lot of basic instruction in such mundane tasks.

I saw the Palestinian children shown in your propaganda piece doing nothing significantly different than American boys do in the Scouts. Unlike WWI, which we fought on distant shores, Hamas is defending their own territory. It would be negligent on their part not to prepare their children for the reality of war.

Do you think it would be better for those children if they were kept in the dark about the existence of war until, one day, some IDF soldiers grabbed them from the playground and forced them to act as human shields? Would you prefer that a child's first experience with war was being pushed forward with an M-16 resting on her shoulder while the IDF soldiers cowered behind her?

YouTube - Piper JROTC

Oh no!!!! They are indocrinating those innocent little boys and girls! Waaa!!!!!!!!!!

Where are the bleeding heart liberals when we need them? Strike up the band! A rousing rendition of "twinkle, twinkle little star" should fix things! C'mon, kiddies! Let's all hold hands and sing.

Twinkle, twinkle little star...

:rofl
 
Last edited:
It appears that it is not Israeli policy to use human shields, but it also appears that occasionally some of the Israeli troops have done this, but that the Israeli governemnt has taken steps against the soldiers who do this.

Anyone using civilians as human shields is wrong, regardless of what side they are on. If Israel at least tries to punish those who do so, they are acting appropriately.

The IDF regularly and extensively used Palestinian civilians in its raids on Palestinian homes to arrest people in the west bank and Gaza. They used the civilians to open doors, get neighbors out. Basically, the IDF soldiers will force the civilians to do their work under the threat of force putting these civilians in front so they can protect themselves(Hide behind kids). This was not just few soldiers doing it on their own. It was the policy set by the IDF. Human Right groups filed a complaint to the Israeli supreme court in 2002 against the IDF and a favorable judgment was rendered in October 2005. It was not the government that stopped the practice but the supreme court after HRW initiated the law suit. To the contrary, the government represented by the army argued for its continued use as the quotes below indicate. This practice was used for many years.

Israel's Supreme Court on Thursday banned the military's practice of using Palestinian civilians as "human shields" in arrest raids, saying it violates international law.

The ruling was a rare instance in which the court agreed to take a stand in Israel's conflict with the Palestinians.

The Supreme Court has often deferred to security arguments, despite international condemnation of Israel. For example, the high court thas upheld practices such as targeted killings of Palestinian militants.

Human rights groups filed the petition in May 2002, in response to the army's use of Palestinian civilians in dozens of instances during West Bank arrest operations. In August 2002, the court issued a temporary injunction against the practice. Human rights groups have said the military has repeatedly violated the ban since then.

In Thursday's final ruling, the court said the practice amounts to a "slide down the slope toward a severe violation of international law."

The army had argued that the practice should be permissible in some cases, in order to prevent possible shootouts and bloodshed. Israeli hard-liners said the new restrictions would make it more difficult for the army to act against militants.

However, the three-judge panel said international law clearly prevents the army from using civilians in its military activities. "No one among the civilian population should be `volunteered' to cooperate with the army," wrote Judge Aharon Barak. "The central tenet is that it is mandatory to distance innocent local residents from the area of the hostile actions."
Effie Eitam, an Israeli lawmaker and a former general, lambasted the judges.

"This ruling ties the hands of the army," Eitam told Army Radio. "The judges are cut off from reality since we are located in the center of the world struggle of terror groups against free and democratic societies."

israelinsider: security: Supreme Court bans IDF use of Palestinian civilians as 'shields' in arrests
 
Last edited:
I post four videos of IDF soldiers taking neighborhood children hostage and forcing them to open doors while the IDF aims their rifles over the child's shoulder and the best response that you can come up with is mawkish propaganda piece showing some Palestinian children playing with toy guns while "twinkle, twinkle little star" plays repetitively in the background? Pathetic.
I imagine it does happen. Much happens in war that is unsavory.

But you probably know as much. Been there done that. Right?

Your true underlying intent here is to take isolated incidents and portray these as standard practice and official policy. The same deal as those here who take isolated incidents of US misbehavior in Iraq and paint every Marine as a rapist or murderer.

You do know what a sweeping generalization is. Right?

Sleazy poll ya got goin here Eater.
 
Wouldn't the Israeli Supreme Court be an arm of the Israeli governemnt? If so, then the Israeli Government acted appropriately.

That there are some members of the governemtn who are guilty of advocating the heinous use of human shields is a reflection on those particular individuals more than the government itself, IMO.
 
I post four videos of IDF soldiers taking neighborhood children hostage and forcing them to open doors while the IDF aims their rifles over the child's shoulder and the best response that you can come up with is mawkish propaganda piece showing some Palestinian children playing with toy guns while "twinkle, twinkle little star" plays repetitively in the background? Pathetic.

Did you even watch the video? There were shots of Hamas grabbing children as they ran. There were shots of children holding real guns. But hey, don't take that video's word for it. Here's several more video's...

[youtube]RTu-AUE9ycs[/youtube]

[youtube]J08GqXMr3YE[/youtube]

[youtube]kBYtij4Q7sE[/youtube]

[youtube]uoi0TGyx_uA[/youtube]

[youtube]S2G1TZKerTo[/youtube]

And there is a far cry of teaching a child survival skills in the wilderness, against the wilderness, than there is of teaching children to carry and use automatic weapons against other human beings.

And you still failed to acknowledge that at least the Israeli Government punishes the soldiers that try to use human shields. Who punishes the Hamas for doing the same thing? Answer: no one. In fact it is encouraged.
 
Wouldn't the Israeli Supreme Court be an arm of the Israeli governemnt? If so, then the Israeli Government acted appropriately.

That there are some members of the governemtn who are guilty of advocating the heinous use of human shields is a reflection on those particular individuals more than the government itself, IMO.

I was thinking separation of powers where the executive branch is separate from the judicial branch. The IDF argued for it in the law suit.

The politician comment, the 3rd qoute was his opinion and occured after the judgement.
 
Last edited:
I was thinking separation of powers where the executive branch is separate from the judicial branch. The IDF argued for it in the law suit with.

But teh fact would remain that the Governemnt took steps to abolish teh practice, IMO. I think that this was appropriate.

The politician comment, the 3rd qoute was his opinion and occured after the judgement.

And that opinion is deplorable, IMO.
 
Your true underlying intent here is to take isolated incidents and portray these as standard practice and official policy.

Are you sure that these are isolated incidents?

Human rights groups filed the petition in May 2002, in response to the army's use of Palestinian civilians in dozens of instances during West Bank arrest operations. In August 2002, the court issued a temporary injunction against the practice. Human rights groups have said the military has repeatedly violated the ban since then.

israelinsider: security: Supreme Court bans IDF use of Palestinian civilians as 'shields' in arrests
 
I post four videos of IDF soldiers taking neighborhood children hostage and forcing them to open doors while the IDF aims their rifles over the child's shoulder....

Oh and those four video's that you posted...they are of two seperate instances...not four seperate instances as you try to imply by posting 4 video's.
 
But teh fact would remain that the Governemnt took steps to abolish teh practice, IMO. I think that this was appropriate.



And that opinion is deplorable, IMO.

That is fine, it is a little detail but important to note IMO, that the supreme court which is part of the government system in Israel put a stop to it.
 
As I said, in your other poll, Onion Eater. Disingenous, skewed, misrepresenting, with the sole intention of vilifying Israel. Little or no substance.
 
Back
Top Bottom