BF2S Forums Punishment Israeli Style

Must hurt like a bitch...

I dont quite know what to say about that...at least it was not a fmj to the face i guess.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Nice work guys, the Palestinian was blindfolded, handcuffed and held while being shot in the leg at point blank range (with a rubber bullet apparently, although those .223 rubber coated steel bullets are pretty harsh).
You can see the muzzle blast, he was definitely shot.
I wonder what they do when there is no camera watching?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7516406.stm

Now let's not jump to automatic conclusions. You are guilty of generalizations just like Serge was posting about in his other thread and you should do a better job of posting what actually happened and the results of this.

I, in no way condone what this guy did. Watch the video and you can even see the reaction of the other soldier and by-stander when the gun goes off, they are both surprised. This is action that can be blamed on one person and one person only....the soldier holding the gun. To state that this is "Israeli Style" is generalizing and the way you post this with absolutely no other info is very, very biased and sensationalism.
Here are some other facts about this.

"Abu Rahma (the victim) said the bullet hit his toe and that he received treatment from an army medic and was then released by the soldiers."

"It should be mentioned that Abu Rahma was inspected at the scene by an IDF doctor and was found to have sustained a light injury to his toe. The Palestinian was released to his home without requiring medical treatment"

"Abu Rahma went home with an injured toe and did not file a complaint."

"The soldier was arrested after news editions Sunday aired the video"

So let's clear this up a little. The Palestinian was shot but not in the leg, his toe was lightly wounded. He received treatment from an Israeli military doctor on site. He was released (notice that he wasn't taken to prison and held so he would not tell anyone) and he was free to go home and didn't require any further medical attention.

This is an incident that one person chose to do, this one soldier is to blame and yes it is very, very wrong on many levels. But this post is strictly to flame an already hot topic (Palestinian issue) and does nothing more than generalize all Israeli soldiers, something that the left side in these forums accuses the right side of doing all the time.....interesting! I'm not lefty or righty, I am usually on the fence about most things until I know more about what happened. I don't jump the gun and post as soon as I see something, which in fact Dilbert, you do quite often.

FEOS wrote:

Individual soldier does something stupid.

That's MUCH worse than lobbing a rocket into a civilian area or blowing up a bus full of civilians.

Now hang on a second there, there were quite a few of them around. Although it was just a rubber bullet, what's the point though? Why injure him like that, it's only gonna make it even harder to get him in the truck cos now you have to lift him. Then you have to treat him and make up a story as to why you shot him etc.. it's just long.

Also, Israel are pretty fucked up like the Palestinians tbh. It's just that they're the lesser of two evils

Mek-Stizzle wrote:

Also, Israel are pretty fucked up like the Palestinians tbh. It's just that they're the lesser of two evils

That's debatable.

Well if you want to go all the way back in history we can start off with the Islamic/Arab conquest of that region, not exactly a nice thing to do. Invade a country. They even built a mosque ontop of an important Jewish temple/site or something

Lisik wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Nice work guys, the Palestinian was blindfolded, handcuffed and held while being shot in the leg at point blank range (with a rubber bullet apparently, although those .223 rubber coated steel bullets are pretty harsh).
You can see the muzzle blast, he was definitely shot.
I wonder what they do when there is no camera watching?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7516406.stm

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite? … 2FShowFull


The soldier was arested, and going to be punished. We arent barbarians Dilbert_X, live with it.

/thread

exactly.  they go on trial and the pals get parades and gifts from iran.  how the fuck anyone can compare or use and example like this is beyond me really.

also, look out for a nazi called australian chainsaw.  He trolls to make comments about jews.

Individual soldier does something stupid.

Except one guy was holding him as the soldier levelled his rifle at him, another was standing watching, thats three soldiers.
And thats well beyond stupid, it was a deliberate cruel act.
But of course anything the Israelies do is 'stupid' 'foolish' etc. not 'bloodthirsty' or 'barbaric' like the Palestinians.

Give Canaan back to the Canaanites I say.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2008-07-21 05:54:01)

Not really, I see three Israeli soldiers involved in shooting someone restrained, blindfolded and handcuffed, not one taking a potshot at a running target from a distance.

I'm generalising as thats my perception of the IDF and what they stand for - I admit it entirely.
But anecdotal information has been pointing to this kind of thing for years, now we have a video which can't be dismissed as moslem hatemongering.

BTW please don't derail the thread or I may have a hissy fit

CameronPoe wrote:

Mek-Stizzle wrote:

Well if you want to go all the way back in history we can start off with the Islamic/Arab conquest of that region, not exactly a nice thing to do. Invade a country. They even built a mosque ontop of an important Jewish temple/site or something

Or perhaps we can go back to the Roman conquest prior to that, or the Israeli conquest of Cana'an or the Cana'anite conquest of what was originally Egypts?

PS The Dome of the Rock sits atop where Mohammed rather implausibly ascended to heaven on a winged horse. It also happens to be the 'rock' that Abraham (or Ibrahim) prepared to sacrifice his child by God's rather sick bidding. It's originally the site of the Temple of Solomon - which was destroyed by the Romans.

PPS You complain about Arabs invading a country IN DEFENCE of the Israeli conquest??!?!?!? It was the Romans who drove the Jews out btw.

At that point in history Islam was invading and expanding in all directions. The reason they invaded the Byzantine/Persian empires was to make the caliphate/religion bigger and because they were easy targets at that time because they were fighting each other. Nothing else. To say they invaded and conquered the region to help the Jews sounds like silly propaganda. Fact is, at the very least, they have no right to be there just like the Jews. So it's fair game between the two in the sense of whose land it really is.

CameronPoe wrote:

Mek-Stizzle wrote:

At that point in history Islam was invading and expanding in all directions. The reason they invaded the Byzantine/Persian empires was to make the caliphate/religion bigger and because they were easy targets at that time because they were fighting each other. Nothing else. To say they invaded and conquered the region to help the Jews sounds like silly propaganda. Fact is, at the very least, they have no right to be there just like the Jews. So it's fair game between the two in the sense of whose land it really is.

Who on earth mentioned that they conquered the region to help the Jews pray tell?

Erm. Land acquisition by force through expulsion of resident inhabitants in the modern age is very much NOT fair. It's so not fair they actually stipulated this in the Geneva Convention. On a moral level it would be deemed unjust too - it's essentially tantamount to the school bully stealing your lunch money.

Why do we need history lessons every time one of these threads pop up. No one is saying anything that no one doesn't already know about. So let's not turn this thread into another thread about who was there first, who belongs there and have maps galore to prove it.

Bottom line is that nothing has changed in thousands of years. Almost every main stream religion and its people attached to that religion is going to claim this area as there own and it is not going to change anytime soon. You see, you guys are the perfect example of why peace will be far into the future. You argue over the same things over and over and over again and it results in the same thing. People fighting, blaming and killing each other over a peace of dirt that everyone believes is theirs.

Maybe when people realize that they all deserve to be there, to share what they believe is holy, then maybe they can get to some level that is decent to each other. Do the Israelis deserve to be there, yes....do the Palestinians deserve to be there...yes. Do the Christians, Catholics, Muslims, Jews etc, etc....have the right to look at this area as part of their religions and to be able to see and feel its history...sure, why not. But when everyone, including people in these forums can't even look past history....nothing will change the status quo.

Pretty lame!!

CameronPoe wrote:

DeathBecomesYu wrote:

Why do we need history lessons every time one of these threads pop up. No one is saying anything that no one doesn't already know about. So let's not turn this thread into another thread about who was there first, who belongs there and have maps galore to prove it.

Bottom line is that nothing has changed in thousands of years. Almost every main stream religion and its people attached to that religion is going to claim this area as there own and it is not going to change anytime soon. You see, you guys are the perfect example of why peace will be far into the future. You argue over the same things over and over and over again and it results in the same thing. People fighting, blaming and killing each other over a peace of dirt that everyone believes is theirs.

Maybe when people realize that they all deserve to be there, to share what they believe is holy, then maybe they can get to some level that is decent to each other. Do the Israelis deserve to be there, yes....do the Palestinians deserve to be there...yes. Do the Christians, Catholics, Muslims, Jews etc, etc....have the right to look at this area as part of their religions and to be able to see and feel its history...sure, why not. But when everyone, including people in these forums can't even look past history....nothing will change the status quo.

Pretty lame!!

As an atheist I find religious drivers such as Zionism or Muslims seeking sovereignty over a stupid Mosque on a particular hill as abhorrent. Unfortunately human nature has not matured to such a level where people of different ethnic, religious and political persuasions can 'share' land and resources equitably and perhaps never will. Land is life, food, water, prosperity and a place to call home. The way I see it is this: the original inhabitants of the region - 16.9% of the 1931 population of which was Jewish, 8.6% of the population was Christian and 74.5% of which were Muslim - deserve to be there. All other blow-ins were not. It was the Zionist influx that destroyed the region and turned it into the cesspit it is today. It was a terrible imposition on the existing populace, the results of which we see to this very day. Religion is immaterial in this issue: political boundaries and property rights are what matters.

Totally understandable...but do you really believe it will ever change, especially the back and forth shit that continues? Is history going to change anything? They can't even agree on recent agreements or go back to the original lines after Israel won the war. The bottom line is that it will never change when so many entities claim this area and it isn't going to change any time soon, so get used to what we see in the media because its going to be a long, long time before anyone truly wakes up.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Nice work guys, the Palestinian was blindfolded, handcuffed and held while being shot in the leg at point blank range (with a rubber bullet apparently, although those .223 rubber coated steel bullets are pretty harsh).
You can see the muzzle blast, he was definitely shot.
I wonder what they do when there is no camera watching?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7516406.stm

The same thing?

CameronPoe wrote:

It does appear that the tit-for-tat violence will persist for perhaps centuries. Ultimately something completely radical would have to happen to change the situation.

Yes, when Islam invades the world, we're all be at peace because we'll all be slaves.

Last edited by The_Mac (2008-07-21 07:24:41)