• 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!

Video shows Israeli soldier shooting an attack suspect lying in street

JANFU said:
My opinion, the world is getting tired of both sides screwing over the other. Palestinians may think the EU's boycotts - country of origin, or whatever it is called, will get them farther ahead and a better peace deal. Doubtful, the world wants a peace deal, and they will support both yet neither and cut support for both as needed.
Click to expand...

Greetings, JANFU. :2wave:

:agree: How many times should anyone be expected to meet with anyone who consistently ignores deals that were agreed upon? Once might be considered an accident - more than once would be considered deliberate in most peoples' eyes, IMO. The Palestinians have not acted honorably in years, and the world recognizes that. Perhaps if they stopped using women and children as shields when payback time occurs because of their initial aggression, people might feel more willing to listen to their alleged grievances, but I doubt that will occur any time soon. That attacker was just that - an attacker who meant to harm others! He wasn't someone just walking down the street minding his own business!
 
RetiredUSN said:
Huh?

Your words...

Not very intelligent and are thus, usually, morally handicapped?

Being morally handicapped has little to do with intelligence.
Click to expand...

You're probably right but they're not mutually exclusive.
 
polgara said:
Greetings, JANFU. :2wave:

:agree: How many times should anyone be expected to meet with anyone who consistently ignores deals that were agreed upon? Once might be considered an accident - more than once would be considered deliberate in most peoples' eyes, IMO. The Palestinians have not acted honorably in years, and the world recognizes that. Perhaps if they stopped using women and children as shields when payback time occurs because of their initial aggression, people might feel more willing to listen to their alleged grievances, but I doubt that will occur any time soon. That attacker was just that - an attacker who meant to harm others! He wasn't someone just walking down the street minding his own business!
Click to expand...

True enough, but executing him is wrong.
I strongly believe in the rule of law.
 
truthatallcost said:
I suspect the guy on the ground had reasoned that by going there that day to do violence, that death was the likely outcome for him. I don't think that the soldier should be punished.
Click to expand...

That is the answer I expected. You did not fail to disappoint
 
JANFU said:
True enough, but executing him is wrong.
I strongly believe in the rule of law.
Click to expand...

As do I, but not everyone does. The rule of law is intended to protect the innocent, not the guilty. The most recent example is the man who shot Gabby Giffords in an attempt to kill her, and is now suing her! For what, still being alive in spite of his efforts to kill her, which was witnessed by a large crowd of people? :confused: Enough is enough, and sometimes it's just too much to understand!
 
polgara said:
As do I, but not everyone does. The rule of law is intended to protect the innocent, not the guilty. The most recent example is the man who shot Gabby Giffords in an attempt to kill her, and is now suing her! For what, still being alive in spite of his efforts to kill her, which was witnessed by a large crowd of people? :confused: Enough is enough, and sometimes it's just too much to understand!
Click to expand...

Lady p
Tons of lawsuits that go no where, this is just another one. The soldier committed murder. It is not up to him to decide innocence or guilt or the penalty. Israel does not as far as I know have the DP.
 
_Sal said:
:shock: he executed a human being becoming witness, judge, jury, and executioner

that's a very wild conclusion considering you are riding on pure emotion with no facts on this happening



no reason for ethics or morality...just shoot...that is a very quick dismissal of another human being
Click to expand...

He was shot in response to his attack which wounded another soldier. I understand why the soldier needs to be prosecuted but I don't feel at all bad that he was killed.
 
reinoe said:
The soldier should be told not to do it again and that should be the end of it.
Click to expand...

Fired from the IDF and put in jail for his crimes. Just like any Palestinian who breaks the law should be tried and convicted (especially with this kind of overwhelming evidence.
 
The Israeli state's attitude toward Palestinian life has never been poorer. Unconditional support feeds it.
 
Abbazorkzog said:
No, because people who ruthlessly execute a surrendering person in the street like a dog (just like Police officers gunning down unarmed African-Americans here in the States) are generally not very intelligent and are thus, usually, morally handicapped.
Click to expand...


Why the police shooting people in America? Exactly what isn't American societies fault?

And the moral question is relative, or at least justifiable in the Israeli eyes. As far as the stabber, he knew the job was dangerous when he took it.
 
Stabbing a uniformed Israeli soldier is an act of war. If a uniformed soldier of some other nation had done it, he would have been entitled to be taken prisoner and well treated. But the Arab who almost certainly did this stabbing was not in uniform and not a lawful combatant. The laws of war generally do not protect unlawful enemy combatants.
 
coldjoint said:
Why the police shooting people in America? Exactly what isn't American societies fault?

And the moral question is relative, or at least justifiable in the Israeli eyes. As far as the stabber, he knew the job was dangerous when he took it.
Click to expand...

The ends do not justify the means.
 
Manc Skipper said:
The Israeli state's attitude toward Palestinian life has never been poorer. Unconditional support feeds it.
Click to expand...

I wonder why? And support here is not the worlds attitude, which is an unfortunate one.
 
JANFU said:
Video shows Israeli soldier shooting attack suspect - CNN.com


Thoughts are?
Click to expand...

Murder.

Apocalypse said:
Morally speaking I find nothing wrong with that.
It does go against the IDF rules of engagement since he shot a neutralized target which is why he really should be punished, but I find the fact that they're charging him with murder to be disgusting.
Just my personal thoughts here.
Click to expand...

Next thing you know they'll charge people who illegally take other's property with theft . . .
 
matchlight said:
Stabbing a uniformed Israeli soldier is an act of war. If a uniformed soldier of some other nation had done it, he would have been entitled to be taken prisoner and well treated. But the Arab who almost certainly did this stabbing was not in uniform and not a lawful combatant. The laws of war generally do not protect unlawful enemy combatants.
Click to expand...

Their is no law that allows a person who has already been neutralized to be killed at the scene. I would probably support his execution, had he been taken alive, but this soldier was not authorized to put criminals to death.
 
Paleocon said:
Next thing you know they'll charge people who illegally take other's property with theft . . .
Click to expand...

This is hardly a case of classic murder where you can refer to the person killed as a victim.
 
Apocalypse said:
This is hardly a case of classic murder where you can refer to the person killed as a victim.
Click to expand...

It is an unlawful intentional killing of another person. That is the definition of murder. The person killed is a murder victim in that a murder was committed against him. The term "murder victim" doesn't imply anything about his character, there are unsavory murder victims all the time.

...

It occurs to me though, that in English-based legal systems, this would arguably constitute manslaughter, due to immediate great provocation. Though I'm not familiar with Israeli law and how much it inherits from English law.
 
Paleocon said:
Their is no law that allows a person who has already been neutralized to be killed at the scene. I would probably support his execution, had he been taken alive, but this soldier was not authorized to put criminals to death.
Click to expand...

It doesn't take long with that kind of thing until you're into asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Israel is at war with people who do not respect the laws of war. I don't know if killing them instead of capturing them is right, but I understand why those things happen. There were several incidents where Germans executed prisoners by the dozens during the Normandy campaign, for example, and some allied troops answered them by shooting Germans who were trying to surrender. American troops sometimes did the same to Japanese, for instance after they had learned that Japanese troops had committed a war crime against Americans. Sometimes giving people a dose of their own medicine is the only way to get their attention.
 
truthatallcost said:
Look janfu, this is Israel we're talking, not Canada. They don't have time to play footsies with terrorists.
Click to expand...

No trial, no legalities involved. Execution on the spot by the soldier at the coal face? Yes?
Would that include known members or supporters, regardless of country, of a terror group, execution when apprehended??
 
matchlight said:
It doesn't take long with that kind of thing until you're into asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Israel is at war with people who do not respect the laws of war. I don't know if killing them instead of capturing them is right, but I understand why those things happen. There were several incidents where Germans executed prisoners by the dozens during the Normandy campaign, for example, and some allied troops answered them by shooting Germans who were trying to surrender. American troops sometimes did the same to Japanese, for instance after they had learned that Japanese troops had committed a war crime against Americans. Sometimes giving people a dose of their own medicine is the only way to get their attention.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what relevance angels dancing on the head of a pin has to the issue. But "they're doing it too" has never been a defense, morally or legally.

I also understand why someone would do what the soldier did in that situation, but as a matter of law and morality, extrajudicial execution of the captured cannot be allowed. BTW, do you know offhand of provocation manslaughter is a thing in Israeli law?
 
JANFU said:
No trial, no legalities involved. Execution on the spot by the soldier at the coal face? Yes?
Would that include known members or supporters, regardless of country, of a terror group, execution when apprehended??
Click to expand...

While I don't personally favor those things, we might see them happen if Islamic terrorism continues.
 
Paleocon said:
I'm not sure what relevance angels dancing on the head of a pin has to the issue. But "they're doing it too" has never been a defense, morally or legally.

I also understand why someone would do what the soldier did in that situation, but as a matter of law and morality, extrajudicial execution of the captured cannot be allowed. BTW, do you know offhand of provocation manslaughter is a thing in Israeli law?
Click to expand...

I don't know anything about Israeli law. Lex talionis, maybe. The problem with sticking to the rules when the people who are trying to kill you habitually ignore them is that it puts you at a big disadvantage--and maybe one you can't afford, when you're fighting for survival. I think you'll find there were fewer incidents of British, Canadian, and American soldiers being murdered by members of SS divisions in the Normandy campaign, once some of the Allied soldiers started shooting Germans who were trying to surrender. If I had been there, I would have done anything to try to protect guys on my side from being murdered in cold blood--and that happened to a couple hundred Allied soldiers--by Nazi sons of bitches. Since the only way to do that was to start returning the favor, I would have done that. Better the other guys die than your own, and no one can be bound to an agreement the other party has breached.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom