Why we fight

[DUIC]

It is natural for soldiers to continually wonder why they fight, but I spent last week with several Israeli soldiers who were in no doubt about their mission. University students, in their mid-20s and all active reservists, were recalling their battle experiences prior to a major speaking tour of campuses around the world.

Yair told me about being in a pitched battle with Hezbollah terrorists during the Second Lebanon War of 2006.

Hezbollah fighters do not wear uniform and operate specifically from civilian areas, where ordinary residents are essentially human shields. On this day, Hezbollah decided to make the situation more complicated. A truck arrived in the middle of the battle. Ten boys, about eight years of age, got out of the truck, armed with guns.

They had been driven into the conflict. In the middle of battle, Yair saw the moral depravity of the enemy and knew in that moment why he fights.

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Editorials/Article.aspx?id=258645

[orpupilofnature57]

1. Tyranny ,is only " moral depravity "

when our Enemy uses it ,ask Goliath. There is no reason to fight ,except in self protection.

[leveymg]

2. "Israeli soldiers" . . . "Hezbollah terrorists." Propaganda framing - morally depraved, indeed.

The transparency of the propaganda, as propaganda, diminishes its effectiveness.

[shira]

3. So you think they're lying? Or that they should just shut up? n/t

[leveymg]

4. I don't think they're lying, or should shut up. I commented that this is propaganda

and marks itself as such by the use of biased language. Less effective in its message than it would be otherwise. Also, propaganda is offensive and a form of unethical discourse that is morally depraved.

[pelsar]

5. but the actual stories are true....

and there are many many more like them, that simply don't get heard that would shock any one concerned with the concept of western morality.

[orpupilofnature57]

6. Is there a difference?

[pelsar]

9. it depends on ones morality...

for those how believe in the wests version of morality there would be shock and surprise, for those who believe in the "eastern morality" that is prevalent in the arab culture, then it would be less so...

there are two different moral compasses being used here....

[orpupilofnature57]

13. I'm appaled at people using children for effect

but I also see how the exploitation runs both ways and in both hemispheres ,because one is more blunt and vulgar ,doesn't make the vast number of " Collateral damage " deaths of children us and Isreal have caused more honorable or Moral.

[leveymg]

8. If the actual stories on both sides were told, the message would be more powerful, which is why

there's so much effort made to control images and perceptions, on both sides.

Let's face it, propagandists are probably the most amoral people in the world. It all operates on the basis of emotions, and when facts get in the way, they're selectively abandoned. Selective use of facts to evoke emotions is dishonesty. I also have a visceral response to propaganda - I hate being propagandized to, no matter who does it. It's just insulting to the audience and a particularly offensive form of unethical behavior.

[pelsar]

44. actually i agree with you...how information is used selectively

.....but its not "insulting" to the audience, the audience from what i read just hear alone does not want to hear or read all the information and in fact wants only that partial information.

if i were to write what i've actually seen or what i actually know, i will be declared a liar, a propagandist etc, since what i do know will not sit well with certain ideological viewpoints.

[leveymg]

45. It depends upon the audience - I assume the audience is knowledgable and reasonable

enough to take into account new facts. If there are contrary facts offered that refute my message, I benefit from getting other sides and new information in response. That often helps me to refine my message before I take it to the next intended audience.

That's also the difference between dialogue and propaganda - one is a form of exchange (trade of ideas), while propaganda is theft or violence to the truth. It's okay to be wrong in your facts or conclusions (occasionally), but you only lose your credibility once.

Propaganda and intentional shaving of the truth is insulting, and usually counterproductive.

[Crunchy Frog]

16. You do know, don't you, that there are plenty of shocking stories from your side of the conflict

as well? Nobody in this conflict is on the side of the angels, no matter how badly they may want to believe it.

[orpupilofnature57]

7. I agree ,Highly biased

[azurnoir]

10. I felt this passage particulary rich

They stumble across a concentration camp. This scene, the discovery of such an evil place, is the most vivid and discomforting. The people they find are starving, emaciated and close to death. They question the prisoners about who is being held here. One US soldier translates the answers. “Criminals?” he asks. “No,” comes the reply, “musicians, artists, teachers: Jews.” The evil of the Nazi project that they have been fighting against for so many years is no longer abstract: the soldiers realize why they fight.

so we are to think Nazi's when Arabs are mentioned? and then this-

“They save lives”, she told me, asking me to consider the case of a pregnant Palestinian woman who was brought to a checkpoint in an ambulance which, once inspected, was found to be carrying concealed explosive devices. “Take a second,” she asked me, “to understand what kind of dilemma an 18- year old soldier is presented with when on the one hand she sees a heavily pregnant woman, apparently desperate to go to hospital, but at the same time, fears it is a hoax that will cost others’ lives.”

Knowing she faces an enemy that would use a pregnant woman about to deliver as a decoy and the clear and present danger that Israeli citizens face from this threat; Lital was clear why she fights.

it happened but now because it happened it is moral to hold pregnant women Palestinian women at checkpoints even when it endangers the lives of both her and the baby

IDF's moral philosophy seems based on if one did they are all guilty for ever

and note that the clip stops short of whether Yair gunned down the Lebanese children but skips to another passage where ansoldier saves the life of a single Palestinian boy leaving us to draw our own conclusions

[pelsar]

11. you asked....

IDF's moral philosophy seems based on if one did they are all guilty for ever

and the answer is yes.....it means the method used once to bring in bombs or attempted to bring in bombs means that method is added to the "list" of ways to always be checked....always no exception.

no responsable soldier would risk having a bomb slip through and the resultant killing of people by not checking.
________

and yes that is definitely part of the IDF and Israels moral philosophy ...

any other foolish questions?
____

and i"m sure Yair gunned down the kids....thats also part of our philosophy....we get extra brownie points for killing 10yrs olds (their organs fetch more on the international market)

[azurnoir]

12. so every Palestinian or is it Arab in general is guilty of what one individual Palestinian or

again is it any Arab does? that explains much, it wasn't foolish question it was something I wanted a confirmation or denial on that so thanks

as to this

"and i"m sure Yair gunned down the kids....thats also part of our philosophy....we get extra brownie points for killing 10yrs olds"

I am not sure whether or not it was sarcasm but if true Yair would not gain points however he would not lose any either but it leads to a question does Yair suffer from PTSD as a result of his actions? we're lead to believe that IDF is free from such 'moral weaknesses', well unless your a leftist who sucks at the teat of 'foreign' moneys such as Breaking the Silence does

[pelsar]

14. of course its a foolish question....

i shall explain this for those who have trouble understanding how security at checkpoints work:

1) israels are not mind readers
2) people who bring in bombs try to hide them from the soldiers
4) the soldiers job is to not let bombs get through
3) if a soldier fails to find a bomb and its slips by, people will be killed
4) all past attempts and methods are recorded and taught to all soldiers at checkpoints
5) the solders use that list plus their own intelligence to discover any and all attempts to bring in bombs
6) hamas an friends will be trying old and new methods as they attempt to bring in bombs
7) exceptions to the rules have led in the past to dead people-hence no exceptions

you seem to have trouble with no 7 so i shall repeat it:
exceptions to the rules have led in the past to dead people, hence no exceptions
___________

if you believe we gun down children for their organs, than i believe its best i let you believe that and not try to convince you otherwise

[Crunchy Frog]

17. Did you just accuse azurnoir of posting a blood libel

when he very clearly did not (and I checked the edits to be sure)? There was nothing in that post about shooting children for their organs. You just put that in your post as an underhanded accusation of anti-semitism.

If you want to accuse somebody of being an anti-semite, you should just come right out and say it, instead of hiding behind cutesy little insinuations.

[pelsar]

18. its just a repeat of what azurnoir has claimed to be true in the past...

the newspaper article in sweden that claimed that IDF troops would kill Palistenian for their organs (later recanted by the author) its a claim that Azurnoir as i understand still believes (after a rather long discussion), hence it was appropriate to repeat the belief here.

If Azurnoir no long believes that the IDF actually killed Palestinian to harvest their organs (or in Haiti) than it would appear i misunderstood the long set of posts that azurnoir wrote explaining how it may be true, and i will apologies for my misunderstanding....

as far a ant-semitims goes....i generally accuse azurnoir of the new version, the one that replaces the classic anti semitism with the new vaguer mutant version that singles out israel amongst the nations of the world as being particularly evil, but i don't believe its defined officially as "anti-semitism.

[azurnoir]

20. lol if I remember correctly what I said about about the Swedish tabloid Afterbladet article was

that it was just that a tabloid article and should have been taken as such and that what really made it news was Avigidor Lieberman's heavy handed reaction to it by demanding that the Swedish government change its freedom of speech laws that made it international news, not the contents of the article itself

[pelsar]

21. so if i now understand...

you don't believe the the IDF was killing Palestinians for their organs? or in abu kabir the Pathologist. was not specifically taking Palestinians organs for his research without permission?


is that what your stating?

[azurnoir]

22. ah I sense someone has spent some time digging aroiund DU2 for some sort of what entrapment?

actually I do not remember anything specific about abu Kabir but I do remember that an in the aftermath of the Aftenbladet kerfuffle it was revealed that an Israeli pathologist had been taking organs without permission of the next of kin, so if that is what your talking about then yes I will say I 'believe' that albeit that is different from the original Aftenbladet story as the people the organs were taken were not killed specifically for that purpose

[pelsar]

24. no digging just remembering...

i thought it was fascinating how the original author recanted and you were still claiming that there is truth to his claims.....and then you diverted to the Pathologist stealing organs.


so are you still......claiming that the IDF/Israeli govt was specifically taking organs from Palestinians....
either in the field with the IDF or on the table at Abu Kabir?

[azurnoir]

26. are yoiu speaking about Dr Yehuda Hiss?

if so he said himself he took organs and I believe he did work at the abu Kabir Forensic Institute so yes I will state that much is true

[pelsar]

25. i do owe you an apology....

i did do the searching in the old DU (as per your hint), the actual posts i was remembering was with shaayecanaan

oops

sorry.....so i take back what i wrote, since i clearly confused the posts

[azurnoir]

27. Thank you

and BTW it was in no small part my denial of IDF killing Palestinians for their organs that got me called an Israeli apologist in the real world

[pelsar]

29. GOOD!

i'm "glad" to hear that you "got it from your end as well".....

i'll dive into my own psychology a bit later to figure why i so enjoyed reading that.....

[pelsar]

31. congrats....a little soul searching on my part....

about why i enjoyed reading that were called an israeli apologist...forces me to change my opinion about u and your views.

clearly we interpret the events differently.....

unfortunately that leaves me with less people to get all "pissed about over here"

[azurnoir]

19. ok so every Palestinian is guilty of what any one Palestinian does? you've confirmed that thank you

as to your last quote

"if you believe we gun down children for their organs, than i believe its best i let you believe that and not try to convince you otherwise"

I asked if Israeli soldiers suffer PTSD, perhaps I take such a ridiculous statement as also an affirmative?

[pelsar]

23. do israeli soldiers suffer PTSD?

of course many do....soldiers involved in combat all over the world do.......why would you think IDF soldiers are any different?

they aren't superhuman as many seem to believe they are
_____

as far as security goes, i've just confirmed that the IDF soldiers can't read minds, perhaps you believe we can, hence when we check everybody were just doing it for "fun" and were just all sadist at heart. (i assume that is what your trying to say?)

____________
and for those other readers....when every israeli enters a mall, govt building, there is a security check, the security guards at times may be druze, muslim or jews-but everybody gets checked-always, because of what some Palestinians did.

i guess that makes israel a racist country for checking everybody for what a few Palestinians did years ago..... (we must be racist to the core_)

[azurnoir]

28. well IDF is sometimes presented as 'super human'

there is quite a bit published about US soldiers suffering from PTSD, but not so IDF which from what is for the most part published we could almost believe are bred on special steroid farm somewhere in the Negev or something

now as to the second part

"and for those other readers....when every israeli enters a mall, govt building, there is a security check, the security guards at times may be druze, muslim or jews-but everybody gets checked-always, because of what some Palestinians did.

i guess that makes israel a racist country for checking everybody for what a few Palestinians did years ago..... (we must be racist to the core_)"

now in the US everyone gets checked when entering government buildings, airports, and sometimes schools it's annoying indeed but part of fabric

however my statement referred more to the 'checkpoints' at which generally only Palestinians are searched perhaps that has changed a bit very recently do to rightist settlers attacking IDF but nothing I have read would indicate that and that is what in the US is called ethnic profiling and yes here it is generally thought to be discriminatory

[pelsar]

30. as far as i know.....

its just the Palestinians at the check posts..though there was as "incident" with a settler being stopped...so clearly things are changing.

it reminds me of many years ago, when before the busses were being blown up, the Palestinians were stopped on information only, i.e. those that were being looked for, the others just had an ID/pass check and continued on their way.

i'm assuming that is now happening with the settlers, but i have no real info, just what i read i the papers.

we do ethnic profiling here, its considered a more efficient use of resources and its very discriminotry 5 year olds and grand moms in wheel chairs don't get "felt up".....and the difference between the security personal is stark-

israeli security personal at the airport are not "minimum wage" earners, but highly trained and picked, vs what i've seen at the US airports

[orpupilofnature57]

32. So Saudi Arabians are the same?

[pelsar]

33. same as what?

same as other people?...yes.

same as martians?...probably not

same culture as the west? no

[orpupilofnature57]

35. And a hell of a long way from " All Arabs "

Closer to martians ,than most Palestinians.Sorry sticking up for Isreal constantly ,sometimes causes debate.

[Crunchy Frog]

15. He fights to save the Middle Eastern Arabs from their depravity.

If only they just keep fighting and fighting and fighting and fighting, then eventually the Arabs will see the error of their ways and drop the depravity.

Maybe somewhere along the way, Israel will learn to stop using children as human shields as well.

Nah. I'm not holding my breath on any of that.

[shira]

34. No one said that in the article. Your contemptuous reaction to this article is a reminder...

...of why there must be a Jewish state today, and why unfortunately Jews have to fight for their freedom and safety.

[orpupilofnature57]

36. Bias ,like your comments ,cause Contempt.

[shira]

37. Such contempt is not dependent on people's comments. Does your own bias cause contempt....

...that otherwise wouldn't exist had you never made any comments?

[orpupilofnature57]

38. Bias - Objectivity--- --- Moral Depravity - Self Defense

I'm an American and have no contempt for either side ,but I can tell a slanted discription of a situation ,and for that I do have contempt.

[Crunchy Frog]

39. Oh, why don't you just come straight out and say

that you think I'm an anti-semite. Am I an anti-semite because I posted a contemptuous response to an article written by an Israeli Jew? Or am I an anti-semite because I posted a contemptuous response to something you posted? Or are you not accusing me of being an anti-semite, but just think that Jews need their own state because they can't handle critical receptions to their written works?

Honestly, I think you're calling me an anti-semite, but I'm not sure, and if you are, I'm not sure on what basis. And if you're not calling me an anti-semite, then I can't figure out what exactly it is that you are trying to get accross in this post.

BTW, I didn't read the whole article. I read what was posted, and that contained discussion of Arab "depravity" related to their use of human shields and armed children. My post was about the words used in the original post. Was it anti-semitic to post as I did based on the words used in the OP? Or does the Arab depravity described mean that Jews need to have a state that's smack dab in the middle of it?

[shira]

40. You don't believe Israelis are under any serious threat, do you?

Nearly everything the GOI does WRT Palestinians is malicious, has little if anything to do with self-defense, and is pretty much never justified. The "propaganda" in the OP is in no way factual and cannot be trusted.

Yes or No?

[Crunchy Frog]

41. I can't even figure out what you're trying to say in that post.

But how about I'll try to answer your question after you answer mine?

[shira]

42. I'm asking you those questions b/c I'm thinking that if you don't believe...

...Israel and its civilians are under any significant threat and that the GOI has no justification for most of its actions/policies WRT Palestinians, then you're simply naive - not an antisemite. I don't even believe that people who say or write bigoted things are necessarily bigots (or antisemites) themselves.

[Crunchy Frog]

43. By GOI, are you referring to the government of Israel?

In any event, I would say that your mind reading skills are not all that sharp and that is not an accurate description of my beliefs. It sounds like you're saying that you don't think I'm an anti-semite, but I'm not sure, as I often have some difficulty deciphering your prose.

There is a good reason that I had you on ignore on the old DU. You are not a person that I wish to engage with. I don't believe that the two of us have much of anything in common in our pictures of the world, and frankly, I percieve your posting style as hostile and combative, and with a great tendency to mischaracterize things that others say who disagree with you. I've watched other posters engage in "discussion" with you, and it looked to me like they were banging their heads against a brick wall.

I don't have you on ignore now simply because the ignore system on DU3 is different, and I would not be able to see the replies to your posts either, even if they're by people whose posting I respect.

However, I do wish to engage with you as little as possible, and for that reason, do not wish to get into a deep discussion of what my beliefs actually are and how they differ from your characterization of them. Based on what I've seen of your posting history, trying to share my actual beliefs with you and engage you in serious discussion would be an act of futility on my part, and would simply open me up to more mischaracterizations, mind reading attempts, and things that appear to me to be subtle accusations of anti-semitism. I'm just not up for it.

Can we just leave it as "no, I'm not calling you an anti-semite" or "yes I am calling you an anti-semite" from you, and a "no, that is not an accurate characterization of my views which are too complex and nuanced for me to go into in detail with you" from me?