- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
They relish in committing war crimes, they don’t see us as people
Gee I don’t know … they call themselves the Chosen People and require everyone else to do that too or they levy accusations of antisemitism.
How can a Chosen Person TM do a war crime ? Unpossible.
They are also indoctrinated during that service to see Palestinians as vermin.
Soooo all orders
“might”.
It’s always “ex” and “former,” never “current.”
Did you see what happened to the Israeli guy who exposed Israel’s nuclear warheads?
Spoiler: the Israelis hunted him down and murdered him in Europe. You don’t say shit like this while you work for the IOF terrorists, or they’ll fucking murder you
Do you have a source for this?
Thanks. I was wrong. They only drugged, kidnapped, tortured, and imprisoned him. He’s still alive
Well that was an adventure.
That is an interesting article, and not surprising at all.
Because if they were current and said that they would become ex very quickly.
Or “late”
As in “the late Dentarthurdent”
That was the exact phrase going through my mind as I typed that haha
Israelis concerned about morality should refuse to serve in the IDF at all and take the jail time instead.
For those who didn’t, they obviously believe in what they’re doing to some extent and I’m not convinced that the incentives are really there to do the right thing. What is the consequence for committing the war crime? It is non existent. Straight up. So if you risk punishment by refusing, why would you?
Again, if you have morals you should lay down your arms and fucking leave Gaza immediately. Refusing one order is pointless when there are war crimes committed every day.
So if you risk punishment by refusing, why would you?
Moral convictions? Jesus Christ, people…
If all the people did that you would only have the most bloodthirsty lunatics
That may be true, but bloodthirsty lunatics without the numbers to back them up lose much of their effectiveness.
I think that was their point
Yeah, I’m sure a soldiers don’t normally face reprisal for refusing to follow orders. /s
Maybe… don’t issue orders that may be war crimes?
I believe it was Chris Browning who showed that German Wehrmacht soldiers, who refused to be in Einsatzgruppen didn’t get punished for it.
The only ethical option is to refuse to go when they try to enlist you.
Doesn’t Israel have required military service?
Yet there are still people who refuse to enlist.
Yes, it’s a very sticky wicket. In Israel’s case you can just be a conscientious objector and either make up an excuse for non-service, or take the jail time. In places that don’t even pose as Liberal democracies that’s not an option, and you’re best off trying to defect to someone else. If you can’t manage that either, it’s basically just time to survive while choosing kindness wherever you can, even if it means some loss and some risk. The soldier in The Pianist giving the guy cake comes to mind.
I was going to joke and say they’ll have to just stay at home, but those homes are likely illegal settlements
Wait till you learn that all of Israel is a settlement on stolen land
Might be. Just a hunch, nothing concrete to report
Weve been through that before haven’t we?
And face being dragged before court for refusing to follow orders. The army is very well known for giving soldiers freedom to interpret orders.
Also known as “courage”.
In civilized nations, obeying an unlawful order is, itself, unlawful.
Not in the US military, and I’m sure others as well. What civilized nations are you referring to? I can only speak to the US, but enlisted soldiers here take a pledge to follow orders, while the officers are actually the ones to take a pledge to uphold the US constitution.
Yeah you’re wrong though… UCMJ
Not in the US military
Yes, in the US military.
I can only speak to the US, but enlisted soldiers here take a pledge to follow orders,
To follow orders in accordance with the UCMJ.
US soldiers are not pledging to defend the constitution?!
In Germany for instance every soldiers pledges on the constitution. I thought this was the normal way for countries with a democratic constitution.
No, they absolutely do pledge and affirm that. Not sure what that person is talking about. It’s definitely, at least on paper, expected for individuals in the military to refuse to follow unlawful orders. What happens in practice is another story. See: entire history of US military action.
Which honestly might be one of the most underrated democratic safeguards, on top of just helping prevent atrocities towards other people.
Rules-based order > Ruler-based order
I always think, though not in the context of war crimes, how two friends of mine related in Basic Training that the drill instructors would give them strict orders to not let anyone through on guard duty who didn’t meet some criteria or another, and then other instructors would come by and attempt to badger and bamboozle the poor trainee soldier into letting them through (and God help any who was stupid enough to let them through).
Rules can be inflexible, but they’re also a barrier against arbitrary abuses. Our abuses have to be regular and systemic, dammit!
“Criteria”? Were clown noses involved?
You are not required to obey an unlawful order and in most militaries you are required not to. If you get court martialed it shouldn’t be a problem since you were in the right and not the officer issuing the unlawful order.
BBC News - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for BBC News:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United Kingdom
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
