I'm not surprised by the detainment or the retaliatory strikes into heavily populated areas (the former is terrible but obvious, and the second is at least marginably excusable due to the nature of fighting in Palestine), but the whole "human shield" thing is a blatant war crime that should bring immediate and terrible vengeace down on whoever gave those orders and every soldier who carried them out.
I don't think all the soldiers should be prosecuted. The officers certainly should, but infantrymen are specifically trained to disregard human life. Punishing them for doing what their training and job conditions them to do isn't fair.
I don't think all the soldiers should be prosecuted. The officers certainly should, but infantrymen are specifically trained to disregard human life. Punishing them for doing what their training and job conditions them to do isn't fair.
I suppose it all comes down to what the Israeli equivalent of the UCMJ says about that behavior. If the Israeli UCMJ says that soldiers are required to disregard illegal orders or anything to that effect (report the illegal orders immediately to superiors, etc.) and they didn't follow those requirements, then they should be court martialed, assuming the Israeli UCMJ does not allow the whole human shield thing.
The officers giving the orders, though, yeah, throw the book at 'em. Never going to happen though.
^^^^ Everything Lou just said, though I would also prosecute the officers (or at least whoever's generally in charge of this policy) under International Law. Using children to disarm bombs has to be some sort of war crime, right?
After some more digging, I'm not so sure about the current round of outrage against Israel.
1.The findings of the study came from Palestinian only sources in UN archives. Dug up retroactively. 2. Saudi Arabia, Syria, Bahrain, Malaysia, Egypt and Tunisia are current members of the CRC. 3. This is the UN, whose Human Rights Committee had a full half of its resolutions made against Israel in 2012, and zero against Sudan. Which was having a genocide. 4. UNICEF already released a report on this several months ago, to which Israel responded with full collaboration on correcting the problems.
Israel is the place that everybody loves to hate, basically. Nobody gives a shit that the west bank is being run by a Terrorist group that's been using women and children as human shields for years, not just on a personal level, but also for their weapons and materiel. Everybody will swallow anything coming out of Palestine, despite that it's 100% propaganda, just because it's anti-israel propaganda. Israel's no perfect little angel, no shit, they're real bastards too, but we can't just let Palestine off the hook because Israel's bad too.
infantrymen are specifically trained to disregard human life. Punishing them for doing what their training and job conditions them to do isn't fair.
That's absolutely untrue. They're trained to kill, certainly, but specifically trained to disregard human life? Not in the slightest, that's pure nonsense.
Israel is the place that everybody loves to hate, basically. Nobody gives a shit that the west bank is being run by a Terrorist group that's been using women and children as human shields for years, not just on a personal level, but also for their weapons and materiel. Everybody will swallow anything coming out of Palestine, despite that it's 100% propaganda, just because it's anti-israel propaganda. Israel's no perfect little angel, no shit, they're real bastards too, but we can't just let Palestine off the hook because Israel's bad too.
Indeed. Anytime I hear anything coming out of that area, it seems like it's a case of "which population can be bigger dicks to the other population" with both sides being full of right bastards.
infantrymen are specifically trained to disregard human life. Punishing them for doing what their training and job conditions them to do isn't fair.
That's absolutely untrue. They're trained to kill, certainly, but specifically trained to disregard human life? Not in the slightest, that's pure nonsense.
Yeah, my retired infantryman uncle would like to have a word (not my late dad, though -- he was cavalry)...
The intent behind the design of much of the training is to disregard human life. They are not usually as successful (thankfully) as intended, but the military is trying to get their soldiers to not think of humans as human.
Or, at least, so says Lt Col David Grossman, whose book on the topic I've been reading almost too much.
The same guy who is the expert behind most of the "Scholarly" references to Video games making people into killers, who has been predicting since roughly 2000 an exponential increase in mass shootings and murders by young people because of video games? Whose work is only backed by his own anecdotes and unsystematic research, and whom is widely known as a complete fucking crank?
His own research is shaky as fuck, but he also references a lot of real and good studies to back up most of his points. He talks a lot about firing rates throughout the 20th century, rates of psychiatric casualties amongst different types of soldiers (ie, bomber pilots are less likely to get PTSD than fighter pilots), specific exercises that have been added or removed, etc. and, the book I'm reading is from '95, so before Columbine started that whole "guns don't kill people vidyas kill people" thing.
His own research is shaky as fuck, but he also references a lot of real and good studies to back up most of his points.
Are they? Have you checked? As soon as someone cites a study, then you don't take them at their word - selectively citing studies that don't conclude what you lead the audience to think they conclude is one of the oldest tricks in the woo-woo book. Not to mention, his studies from S.L.A. Marshall are from mid-to-just-after WW2. They were WAY out of date even when he wrote the book - including and especially his foundational premise that people have a psychological block regarding killing, which is lifted directly from S.L.A Marshall's work, which source back to interviews with soldiers that have been thoroughly debunked by historians. To quote the bible regarding having a good foundation, don't build your house on sand because then you'll have a shit house that will fucking fall down.
I should also note his knowledge of the act of killing seems shaky, too - I recall at one point he states an efficient method of killing someone is to stick your thumb through their eye and into their brain - yeah, good luck with that one, buddy.
He talks a lot about firing rates throughout the 20th century,
Oh yeah, including the habit of cops, HRT, etc to empty their magazines, right? So, where do his numbers come from? How is he analyzing it - after all, back in WW1, you were expected to be able to hit a decent amount of targets in a short time with your bolt-action rifle - firing rate doesn't matter a whit until you figure out what each of those rounds is doing. After all, which is more likely to have an effect, according to Grossman, the bloke laying down hundreds of rounds and hitting nothing(or never knowing if he hit something), or the guy laying down one round, and making a solid kill? Or does he not even discuss it?
Or is this the prattle he lays out about how cops are conditioned to kill, and empty their magazines into people, which the Police policy studies council took a massive issue with because it didn't match the data?
rates of psychiatric casualties amongst different types of soldiers (ie, bomber pilots are less likely to get PTSD than fighter pilots)
Something you're not going to get from that book - PTSD rates have dropped like a goddamn stone in a millpond. We've gone from rates around 30% for all Vietnam vets to around 7% for troops that have seen combat, and 4% for those that haven't. Nor will it mention Comprehensive soldier fitness, or "Battlemind" training. Not will it mention that we didn't know very much about PTSD in 1995, or that we'd barely started to be able to treat it.
specific exercises that have been added or removed
The world marches on, if you'll pardon the expression. As we find out more over time, and as technology and equipment change, so too do our training methods. Even from 1995 to now, training within the military has changed significantly. Even from 2005 to now, there's been changes.
etc. and, the book I'm reading is from '95, so before Columbine started that whole "guns don't kill people vidyas kill people" thing.
Man, you are way behind the times on that one. That whole theory is so old, it was first popularized when being applied to D&D. Death Race, not just a bad Jason Statham flick, also widely accepted as the first controversial supposedly violence-causing video game. And of course, Mortal combat was subject to a huge amount of controversy for the same reason. Grossman didn't start that train, he just leapt on board, pushed the throttle to full, and started shoveling coal to the boiler, riding that fucker all the way to his 15 minutes.
His own research is shaky as fuck, but he also references a lot of real and good studies to back up most of his points.
Are they? Have you checked? As soon as someone cites a study, then you don't take them at their word - selectively citing studies that don't conclude what you lead the audience to think they conclude is one of the oldest tricks in the woo-woo book. Not to mention, his studies from S.L.A. Marshall are from mid-to-just-after WW2. They were WAY out of date even when he wrote the book - including and especially his foundational premise that people have a psychological block regarding killing, which is lifted directly from S.L.A Marshall's work, which source back to interviews with soldiers that have been thoroughly debunked by historians. To quote the bible regarding having a good foundation, don't build your house on sand because then you'll have a shit house that will fucking fall down.
Really? I had asked my dad about that one specifically, and he said it checked out.
He talks a lot about firing rates throughout the 20th century,
Oh yeah, including the habit of cops, HRT, etc to empty their magazines, right? So, where do his numbers come from? How is he analyzing it - after all, back in WW1, you were expected to be able to hit a decent amount of targets in a short time with your bolt-action rifle - firing rate doesn't matter a whit until you figure out what each of those rounds is doing. After all, which is more likely to have an effect, according to Grossman, the bloke laying down hundreds of rounds and hitting nothing(or never knowing if he hit something), or the guy laying down one round, and making a solid kill? Or does he not even discuss it?
Actually, I was referring to the rates of soldiers who fire (ie %15-20 in WWII, %55 in Korea, %90 in Vietnam), which makes your argument kinda N/A,
rates of psychiatric casualties amongst different types of soldiers (ie, bomber pilots are less likely to get PTSD than fighter pilots)
Something you're not going to get from that book - PTSD rates have dropped like a goddamn stone in a millpond. We've gone from rates around 30% for all Vietnam vets to around 7% for troops that have seen combat, and 4% for those that haven't. Nor will it mention Comprehensive soldier fitness, or "Battlemind" training. Not will it mention that we didn't know very much about PTSD in 1995, or that we'd barely started to be able to treat it.
I did know most of that. Not certain what you're trying to prove or counteract with it, though.
etc. and, the book I'm reading is from '95, so before Columbine started that whole "guns don't kill people vidyas kill people" thing.
Man, you are way behind the times on that one. That whole theory is so old, it was first popularized when being applied to D&D. Death Race, not just a bad Jason Statham flick, also widely accepted as the first controversial supposedly violence-causing video game. And of course, Mortal combat was subject to a huge amount of controversy for the same reason. Grossman didn't start that train, he just leapt on board, pushed the throttle to full, and started shoveling coal to the boiler, riding that fucker all the way to his 15 minutes.
Well, of course I knew that. We can't forget the 1908 killing spree caused by hoop and stick. I wasn't saying that Grossman started it. I do know about Mazes and Monsters, but I was just under the impression that Columbine popularized it because it was such a collective cultural shock.
Death Race with Jason "You slag" Satham is an amazing piece of cinema that is sorely under appreciated. It has the right mix of character development and strikes at the hart of the issue. Also if you have big thumbs, like any proper Englishman, then the first port of call is the old thumb in the eye. Why thats right up there is the first lesson of Rugger, thumbs to the eye and watch out for the randy 6th formers.
Really? I had asked my dad about that one specifically, and he said it checked out.
It's been at least twenty years since that was debunked. The Combat Studies Institute debunked his fire-rate claim in the 80s. David Hackworth wrote in his memoir "About Face" regarding Marshall's methods, which he observed first hand - he considered him a "Voyeur warrior" who "Never let the truth get in the way of a good story". Here's an article from the CMJ that addresses both Grossman and Marshall, by This chap, noted military historian Robert Engen.
I did know most of that. Not certain what you're trying to prove or counteract with it, though.
Precisely nowt. It's just interesting, and didn't know if you knew.
Well, of course I knew that. We can't forget the 1908 killing spree caused by hoop and stick. I wasn't saying that Grossman started it. I do know about Mazes and Monsters, but I was just under the impression that Columbine popularized it because it was such a collective cultural shock.
And that's why you said, quote, "the book I'm reading is from '95, so before Columbine started that whole "guns don't kill people vidyas kill people" thing." While I can understand that you may have misspoke(well, after a fashion, not really speaking, is it?), I'm sure you understand my confusion as to your point and can forgive it, since you so clearly stated exactly the opposite of what you're saying you said.
While I think that Zimmerman probably incited the confrontation, and the kid was probably defending himself against a creepy dude who was following him around, there isn't any physical evidence of anything that happened before Zimmerman was "on the ground and shot him." I really can't wait until passive, personal cameras (think Google Glass) have saturated society. Relying on witnesses just seems so primitive (and even that isn't available all the time, as we saw in this case).
Comments
The officers giving the orders, though, yeah, throw the book at 'em. Never going to happen though.
1.The findings of the study came from Palestinian only sources in UN archives. Dug up retroactively.
2. Saudi Arabia, Syria, Bahrain, Malaysia, Egypt and Tunisia are current members of the CRC.
3. This is the UN, whose Human Rights Committee had a full half of its resolutions made against Israel in 2012, and zero against Sudan. Which was having a genocide.
4. UNICEF already released a report on this several months ago, to which Israel responded with full collaboration on correcting the problems.
Or, at least, so says Lt Col David Grossman, whose book on the topic I've been reading almost too much.
Not inclined to go with his word on that one.
I should also note his knowledge of the act of killing seems shaky, too - I recall at one point he states an efficient method of killing someone is to stick your thumb through their eye and into their brain - yeah, good luck with that one, buddy. Oh yeah, including the habit of cops, HRT, etc to empty their magazines, right? So, where do his numbers come from? How is he analyzing it - after all, back in WW1, you were expected to be able to hit a decent amount of targets in a short time with your bolt-action rifle - firing rate doesn't matter a whit until you figure out what each of those rounds is doing. After all, which is more likely to have an effect, according to Grossman, the bloke laying down hundreds of rounds and hitting nothing(or never knowing if he hit something), or the guy laying down one round, and making a solid kill? Or does he not even discuss it?
Or is this the prattle he lays out about how cops are conditioned to kill, and empty their magazines into people, which the Police policy studies council took a massive issue with because it didn't match the data? Something you're not going to get from that book - PTSD rates have dropped like a goddamn stone in a millpond. We've gone from rates around 30% for all Vietnam vets to around 7% for troops that have seen combat, and 4% for those that haven't. Nor will it mention Comprehensive soldier fitness, or "Battlemind" training. Not will it mention that we didn't know very much about PTSD in 1995, or that we'd barely started to be able to treat it. The world marches on, if you'll pardon the expression. As we find out more over time, and as technology and equipment change, so too do our training methods. Even from 1995 to now, training within the military has changed significantly. Even from 2005 to now, there's been changes. Man, you are way behind the times on that one. That whole theory is so old, it was first popularized when being applied to D&D. Death Race, not just a bad Jason Statham flick, also widely accepted as the first controversial supposedly violence-causing video game. And of course, Mortal combat was subject to a huge amount of controversy for the same reason. Grossman didn't start that train, he just leapt on board, pushed the throttle to full, and started shoveling coal to the boiler, riding that fucker all the way to his 15 minutes.
Death Race with Jason "You slag" Satham is an amazing piece of cinema that is sorely under appreciated. It has the right mix of character development and strikes at the hart of the issue. Also if you have big thumbs, like any proper Englishman, then the first port of call is the old thumb in the eye. Why thats right up there is the first lesson of Rugger, thumbs to the eye and watch out for the randy 6th formers.
http://imgur.com/gallery/jYEf9nZ
Comments on this I support.
Found without help from the Random Questions thread, thank you very much.