IDF soldiers kill armed Palestinian in West Bank

[azurnoir]

A Palestinian was killed by Israeli soldiers on Thursday at an army post near the settlement of Mevo Dotan in the northern West Bank.

The man was shot and killed by Israel Defense Forces soldiers after he opened fire on them, the IDF spokesman said.

No IDF soldiers were wounded in the operation.

The circumstances under which the Palestinian was killed are currently being investigated.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/idf-soldiers-kill-armed-palestinian-in-west-bank-1.338107

[Countdown_3_2_1]

1. Moral of the story: Don't open fire on the IDF

Good for the IDF.

[ixion]

2. Of course, the soldiers were armed, too...

so the article is lop-sided in that regard.

[oberliner]

3. What country has un-armed soldiers?

Seems pretty self-evident.

[ixion]

4. I was being rhetorical, but you make my point

How else would one combat a hostile, armed occupier? :shrug:

[oberliner]

5. How do you feel about attacks on American soldiers stationed in Iraq?

Just curious.

[ixion]

6. We illegally invaded Iraq, thus

I believe we deserve what we get. Can you blame the Iraqi people for defending their nation? Could you imagine the insurgency that would rise if someone tried to 'liberate' the US?

[oberliner]

9. Thanks for sharing your opinions

I do appreciate your consistency on these matters.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

7. Less justifiable.

The American presence in Iraq has the support of the nearest thing Iraq has to a legitimate government, making it's legitimacy somewhat cloudy.

The Israeli presence in Palestine does not; its legitimacy is in no way cloudy.



Incidentally, if pressed to clarify what I meant my "legitimacy" beyond "justifiability" I would struggle, I think - I don't thing the UN is worth the paper it is printed on; while I'm happy to point out that e.g. Israel's occupation of Palestine is illegal to those who care about these things, I don't think that that fact is necessarily a clincher. The US invasion of Iraq was clearly illegal; I don't know for sure (or very much care) whether its continued presence now that there's a different government which supports it in place is, but I assume it is.

[oberliner]

8. Absolutely stunning comment

Americans invaded a country that is nowhere near the US and posed zero military threat to America in any respect.

Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have been killed as a result of this illegal and unwarranted invasion and continued occupation.

To claim that there is any kind of potential legitimacy to the American presence in Iraq in light of the means by which that invasion of occupation occurs boggles the mind.

Israel was actually invaded in 1967 by Jordan and Egypt. The West Bank and Gaza respectively were occupied by those two countries at the time of that invasion. Thousands of Israelis were killed or wounded in this conflict.

This in stark comparison to the Iraqi invasion which was predicated on nothing of the kind.

[azurnoir]

10. In 1967 Israel started the war by attacking Egypt under the IMO

dubious claim that Egypt's blockade of the strait Tiran justified an attack, the same sort of blockade that Israel is imposing on Gaza today

It should also be noted that Israel has since signed treaties with both Egypt and Jordan, to claim that continued occupation of the WB is justified based on events of 44 years ago is ridiculous

[Donald Ian Rankin]

11. You don't think the government of Iraq gets a say in the matter? N.T.