• @abracaDavid
    link
    English
    1151 year ago

    The article says that the only repercussions will be “talks” with the soldiers.

    Just a few bad apples, right?

    • @febra
      link
      English
      1261 year ago

      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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      321 year ago

      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.

        • @gedaliyah
          link
          English
          -1
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          deleted by creator

          • @Sparlock
            link
            English
            10
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            shot a journalist in the head

            crushed a 23 years old woman from the US to death with a bulldozer

            You suck.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -91 year ago

              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.

              • @rambaroo
                link
                English
                101 year ago

                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.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  -41 year ago

                  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.

                  • @Sparlock
                    link
                    English
                    41 year ago

                    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.

          • NoneOfUrBusiness
            link
            fedilink
            4
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            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.

    • MxM111
      link
      fedilink
      -31
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Just imagine if Hamas were investigating humiliation of Israeli civilians by its fighters and having any punishment for that.

      • theinspectorst
        link
        fedilink
        651 year ago

        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.

        • @febra
          link
          English
          261 year ago

          I wouldn’t go as far as to claim Israel is a modern democracy… but I agree with the advanced 21st century military part.

        • MxM111
          link
          fedilink
          -17
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          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.