IDF chief Halutz faces potential U.K. war-crimes charges

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by KGB_resident, Sep 13, 2005.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:


    Are these Israeli generals really war-criminals? Can the bombing be considered as a terror act?

  2. Its a solution we should use on a few of our 'ethnic' problems!!
  3. Lets just say it was a bit ham-fisted of them to take out 14 innocent children just for one terrorist leader.

    Although sometimes the ends jusify the means.... :?
  4. It strikes me that those who quite simply dislike Israel (and don't mention it - the Jews! - *shush*) have fallen back on the option of suing the country out of existence. Yes, the Israelis have a tendency to be quite heavy-handed, but then, had they adopted the softly-softly approach the country would have ceased to exist in 1948. If this sort of stunt is successful, it will set a dangerous precedent.
  5. but dont you think it was a bit excessive when they took out one terrorist in a wheel chair with an attack helicopter?
  6. We need to get a grip on this War Crimes industry.

    Murder is murder, whether committed in peace or war.

    Ditto manslaughter etc.

    War Crimes are specially horrible. Firstly they are deliberate, not accidental or negligent. Secondly they are very specific to war. Such as industrialised killing of civilians, genocide and murder of PoWs. Trture is a war crime too, though today in our softy world we have difficulty differentiating between toughness and torture.

    When we take our corporate world legalistic approach to the technicalities of Geneva etc ad absurdam we devalue the whole concept of War Crimes.

    In the mentioned Israeli case who really is the war criminal? The general who ordered the risky bombing or the monster who deliberately hid amongst the kids? Doesn't Geneva equally makes disguise as non-combatant a war crime in itself?

    Time to get a grip on perspective here.
  7. No, I call that making sure. (Granted, that could have pushed the old terrorist down the stairs :mrgreen: )
  8. Isn't this the argument we have heard from the IRA oh so often? "Its not the IRA's fault the bomb killed scores of people -its the security forces for not responding to the warning etc" The person who plants or drops the bomb is responsible for consequent civilian casualties.

    The terrorist is a terrorist because he kills the innocent. Civilised states aren't because they don't. If they kill the innocent as a response they create a moral equivalance. Besides being illegal and immoral, its bad news in the long term, because the terrorist can use this to recruit more terrorists. Note that the July bombers were supposed to have psyched themselves up by watching footage of Iraqi civilian casualties.
  9. Couldn't agree more.
  10. So how come we (and France especially) welcomes the murdering little 5hits from the PLO, HAMAS, etc? Oh yes... could it be that a) they are not jewish and b) by toadying up to these maniacs who are responsible for brainwashing children into being suicide bombers, they hope to obtain favours from the Arab world (it doesnt work, but the arabs love playing the game).

    Was an attack helicopter too much to kill an old man in a wheelchair? Knowing what that 'sweet old man' had done, and the hundreds of women and children who had died on his apostolic rantings, the answer is yes. It should have been done by breaking every bone in his corrupted body before drowning him in acid.

    It gives me a warm feeling knowing that no matter what pit in hell I go to when I die, the leaders of Hamas will have it a thousand times worse. I hope the old man got his 72 virgins when he went to hell: at his age and paralysed he couldnt do anything for the whole of eternity! not even knock one out while Satan isnt looking :)
  11. I'd call that a 'Good Grouping'