|
||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
Topic Review (Newest First)
|
| Oct 1st, 2003 10:58 AM | |||
| kellychaos |
Quote:
|
||
| Sep 30th, 2003 10:31 PM | |||
| Zhukov | I think the Israeli military was built based on the US one. | ||
| Sep 30th, 2003 10:24 PM | |||
| Perndog |
For some reason I fail to see the relevance of US military law in a situation involving Israeli pilots. EDIT: It doesn't really matter, since the article says they were ordered to attack "militants," not "innocent civilians," and I'm sure it's lawful in war to attack anyone who is a perceived or possible threat. The case may be made that the militants in question WERE innocent civilians, but that wouldn't hold up in a legal dispute. |
||
| Sep 30th, 2003 03:32 PM | |||
| The One and Only... |
The key word is "lawful". If the command that was given would leave to a direct violation of "order or regulation", I would argue that such a command is not truly "lawful". Hereby, it follows that I should be a lawyer. |
||
| Sep 30th, 2003 12:00 PM | |||
| kellychaos |
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
| Sep 30th, 2003 11:37 AM | |||
| Perndog |
Glad to know we're on the same page. 
|
||
| Sep 30th, 2003 11:24 AM | |||
| mburbank | Okay. I think that pretty much means you'd have to be nuts to volunteer, but that's what I already thought anyway. | ||
| Sep 30th, 2003 11:16 AM | |||
| Perndog |
Right. Which is why he either shouldn't have become a soldier if he had any say in the matter or should have prepared himself to be able to carry out such an order. Quote:
|
||
| Sep 30th, 2003 10:01 AM | |||
| mburbank |
But you also said that a soldier has no right to disobey an order. This is where I get confused. If a soldier is order to commit a crime, his refusal to do so would be a crime, and obedience would also be a crime? |
||
| Sep 29th, 2003 11:12 PM | |||
| Perndog |
Quote:
Quote:
Unless that commander in chief is keeping his army together through force, no. Every crime is on the head of the man who committed it, as well as on the man who gave the order. |
||
| Sep 29th, 2003 09:44 PM | |||
| The One and Only... |
Hopefully, if your army told it's soldiers to kill innocent children, you wouldn't join it. At any rate, there should be a written policy as to what officers can order their subordinates to do. Killing soldiers in cold blood is necessary; killing children is not. Were these pilots supposed to kill innocents? I didn't read it that way. "Militant" seems like a violent word... |
||
| Sep 29th, 2003 05:00 PM | |||
| ranxer |
last i heard the isreali army is mandatory, conciencous objectors have trouble over there. i agree that dissent is tough for any military but if i was a soldier and i was ordered to kill children i'd hope that the guy giving orders would be disobeyed and removed from the ranks.. and i'd be tempted to turn the gun the wrong way in the melee.. or refuse to follow orders and tell my story to the courts martail board. dissent is not always frowned on in the service there is always some mention of a higher law to follow. |
||
| Sep 29th, 2003 04:58 PM | |||
| mburbank | So then you guys would figure the only person capable of being guilty of war crimes would the commander in chief? | ||
| Sep 29th, 2003 04:22 PM | |||
| The One and Only... |
Armies that tolerate dissent are armies that fail. You follow orders, or you are the enemy. That should be the Army's dogma. On the other hand, I don't believe in the draft. |
||
| Sep 29th, 2003 03:22 PM | |||
| Perndog | I didn't say acting on orders is absolution for a crime. I said a volunteer soldier has no right to disobey (I will add "unless he is in a position to get rid of whoever gave the order" to be a little clearer). If you don't want to be a murderer or have atrocities on your conscience, you shouldn't put yourself in a situation where you will be made to do those things. | ||
| Sep 29th, 2003 10:50 AM | |||
| kellychaos | Well, they give medals to those who risk their lives and possibly defy orders to ensure a victory or to save a few lives for the good guys. What kind of reward is to be given for those who take a morale stand for the diametric opposite in the interest of being a good human? To be allowed to live is probably the most you can expect, methinks. Toward that end, those guys should be glad they received the press coverage they did, else ... ? | ||
| Sep 29th, 2003 10:38 AM | |||
| mburbank |
I disagree it doesn't help. A statement of concience, especially coming from soldiers who may well face penalties, sends strong message and my well inspire others. A statement of concience is also something one may feel required by their own morality of religion to make, regardless of it's percieved effectiveness. "a soldier who chose to be a soldier has no right to refuse an order." -Perndog Did nobody here ever watch Judgement at Numrembergh? Anyone here familliar with the Mai Lai Massacre? There are lines to be drawn, even in war, and getting an order does not obsolve you, even if you are soldier, even if you are a volunteer, from concience or God for any and all acts. |
||
| Sep 26th, 2003 08:25 PM | |||
| The_Rorschach | I wasn't attempting to justify Israeli intitiative, or trivialize Palestinian casualties, only trying to lend perspective. Every life is indeed precious, regardless of gender, race or creed, but the truth of the matter is that their refusal to fly does not help the situation any and may potentially even add to the relentless perpetuation of injustice within Israel. | ||
| Sep 26th, 2003 08:02 PM | |||
| Perndog | Were they volunteers? (it said reserve, so..) If they are, then they shouldn't have joined up in the first place. I can sympathize with an unwilling conscript, but a soldier who chose to be a soldier has no right to refuse an order. | ||
| Sep 26th, 2003 12:25 PM | |||
| mburbank |
Thanks Li'l Gracy Brownshirt. Jews should know better thn anyone not to hide behind "I vas only following orders". And shach. "And every month Israel loses an equivilent amount of non-combatants to terrorist action." I'm just simple country boy, but I'm pretty sure a fella can be against one side killin' without being in favor of the other side a killin. |
||
| Sep 26th, 2003 12:21 PM | |||
| VinceZeb | They are failing to take orders. If they get charged, then so be it. | ||
| Sep 26th, 2003 12:17 PM | |||
| kellychaos | Admittedly, this subject has been "off my radar" a bit but I did hear a NPR show the other day wherein both the hosts took each side of the issue. To make a long story short, one of the host's main argument was about "intent"; claiming that while, "Yes, the Israelis did inflict a number of civilian casualties, those casualties were accidental while in pursuit of military targets (I forgot the term that's often used. Collateral damage? )." He also countered that the Palestinian's civilian casualty rate was based on their intent to actually inflict harm on civilians. Like I said, this is not my opinion but just kind of a paraphrase of what was said. | ||
| Sep 25th, 2003 04:55 PM | |||
| Anti-Xocial |
Quote:
Someone ALWAYS has to jump out and say "oh poor Isreal" when in fact they should be saying "STOP THIS MADNESS ALREADY!!!" |
||
| Sep 25th, 2003 04:32 PM | |||
| The_Rorschach |
"In the past three years, some 140 wanted men have been killed in targeted raids. . ." And every month Israel loses an equivilent amount of non-combatants to terrorist action. |
||
| Sep 25th, 2003 02:08 PM | |||
| Zhukov |
I find It sounds alot more violent and destructive when they are refered to as 'air-strikes', as opposed to counter-attacks or just 'strikes'. :/ At least people know about them now, so they wont just dissapear. The seeds of resentment are showing in armies all over the world, hopefully it can continue. |
||
| This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread. | |||
