IDF officer: Gaza civilians risked to protect Israel troops during war

and do you think going into Gaza is fun???not knowing whom is who, some soldiers had a weoman throw a hand grenade at them, they dont know whom else is gonna try kill them next. Until either of you have fought in a war in an urban area with an enemy that booby traps buildings(ki8lling its own civilians), hides amongst civilians, makes little effort to destinguish themselves as combatants you have no relevance in this.

A little personal history: On the night before my unit entered Lebanon, we were told that even ten year old kids carried shot guns, (a fact attested to, at least in the south. by the lack of song birds and a multiplicity of flies). We were instructed to fire first, if we saw anyone carrying a weapon, and to investigate afterwords. Regarding Gaza, it seems to me that the IDF might have taken a very few more days in tracking down the armed opposition in order to avoid targeting unarmed civilians. We had the technology and the means to do so. That we did not opens to question our intentions. It is worth noting that "the good guys" have often before used terror tactics, (whether in revenge or as policy is unimportant). The fire bombing of Dresden is just one example. For what ever reason, it is a crime to kill civilians. Any attempt to justify collective punishment is outrageous and indefensible.

" the IDF was the "occupying power", and the civilian popln of Jenin were "protected persons", so the IDF was legally obliged to "protect" them."-so even according to your reasoning, the IDF did the right thing in Jenin, and also in Gaza, because there they are not "the occupying power". I see we agree on that, at least.

DNB: "In Israel`s case, how is Israel to know whether a person is a civilian or a combatant," An Islamic Jihad militant couldn't have put it any better, David. After all, when he fires that Qassam how is he to know if it will land on the helmet of an IDF soldier or on the skullcap of an Israeli civilian? After all, that civvie can also be a reservist IDF Colonel still waiting for his callup to active duty..... Is such an Israeli "military man in mufti" a legitimate target for a Qassam, David?

AA: "Isreal`s first responsibility is to its citizens and its soldiers" Actually, the IDF is still the occupying power with respect to Gaza. And the first responsibility of an army of occupation is the safety of the "protected persons" that are under its belligerent occupation. Sorry if that annoys you but, well, there you go....

RP: "It could have been done more effectively by the air force or some artillery shells, but in order to save Palestinian lifes, Israeli soldiers were sent and killed." Well, yeah, and the same job could be done even *more* effectively with mustard gas or Sarin. Heck, just drop a low-yield tac-nuke and you wouldn't even need any mopping-up afterwards. So why not, PaulR? Both would have been risk-free to all those brave, brave (and super-moral) IDF kiddies, and also be oh-so "effective". Can I give you a hint, PaulR? Hint: the IDF was the "occupying power", and the civilian popln of Jenin were "protected persons", so the IDF was legally obliged to "protect" them. Bummer, heh?

"coming out of the UK it means nothing. no names are given...which tells me that something is fishy here" Well, it tells you that the Independent was given a copy of a Yedhiot Ahronot article that was itself prevented from being published by the military censor. The Independent would not have "named names" for the simple reason that they didn't THEMSELVES speak to this guy i.e. they only have Yedhiot Ahronot's word that the quotes are attributable. "besides, some soldiers just might have left wing sympathies or agendas" Actually, if you read the Independent's report it is clear that this officer was saying these things to Yedhiot Ahronot because he AGREED with the changes to the rules of engagement i.e. he was trying to JUSTIFY them. "regardless, the IDF did a superb job in cast lead..truly superb!" That rather depends on what the "job" was, doesn't it? If you mean "traumatize a helpless civilian popln" then, yeah, they did a very professional job indeed.

The truth stated, plain and simple. G-d forbid one soldier should risk his life. What are human rights anyway? I fully understand the Israeli point of view of not wanting to risk their soldiers' lives, as these are young people who are in the army for about three years, and nobody likes to be a soldier. But utter disregard for human life: can one look oneself in the mirror, so to speak? I hope Isreal,as a society, can do better, and live up to the motto, "A light unto the nations". What is peace if there is no respect for human dignity?

to all readers, war is not picnic. Kill or be killed.

This is definitely terrorism

"The Israel Defense Forces chose to risk civilians in Gaza in order to protect its soldiers during Operation Cast Lead" Risk is not the right term here. Kill is the normal term. In practice this means shooting a tank grenade when you see someone looking through a window (investigated and deemed in line with policy). Not so good. Lucky most soldiers were wiser.

SO DOES IT MEAN THAT IF THE TERRORIST WANT TO TARGET ISRAELI CIVILIANS ITS OK. ONE GOOD TURN DESERVES ANOTHER. I THINK EACH SIDE IS MESSED UP TO TARGET CIVILIANS. IF THE PALIS DO IT ITS BAD, IF THE ISRAELIS DO IT TO SAVE THEIR SOLDIERS ITS OK. WHY THE DOUBLE STANDARD.

THAT COMMANDER IS AN ANTI-SEMITE!

coming out of the UK it means nothing. no names are given...which tells me that something is fishy here..besides, some soldiers just might have left wing sympathies or agendas..every army has turncoats willing to lie for the sake of their cause... regardless, the IDF did a superb job in cast lead..truly superb!

The army has learned from the "battle" of Jenin in 2002, where it sent in soldiers to do a job that cost some 25 solders' life. It could have been done more effectively by the air force or some artillery shells, but in order to save Palestinian lifes, Israeli soldiers were sent and killed. I do not think that ever in history there was as much lying about any conflict, like Arab lying in their relation to wars they caused against Israel. Sadly, many gullible or antisemitic Westerners fall for these lies.

Show me another army who does otherwise

"a suspect must have both a weapon and a visible intent to use it before being fired at" That is "distinction", and discarding that principle is a very serious war crime. " - was discarded during Israel's Gaza incursion in late 2008 and early 2009." That is a very serious war crime. Not good, Israel, not good at all..... No wonder Ashkenazi doesn't want a judicial inquiry; if this proves to be true then his arse is well and truly in a sling....

words to effect, 'IDF are not combat soldiers.' Seems he was right.

Solders have honer. When they kill civilians to protect them selves they become cowards. And if they keep killing civilians they can become a gang or a criminal entity. That is what it is all about.

Don't send them into war. The logic is that Israel is forced to go to war because it has to protect its civilians against attacks. And in doing that it is forced to kill a whole bunch of Palestinian civilians either because they are too close to Hamas, because they cannot be differentiated from Hamas or because it would be dangerous to Israeli soldiers' lives to use a method that would kill less civilians. Now let's examine that logic... In order to protect some civilians you kill ten, a hundred or whatever times as many civilians of another ethnic group. How can that possibly be legitimate course of action? Surely you cannot claim some moral highground over an enemy if you are forced to become your enemy in order to beat him. There is nothing that says that Israel was forced to initiated Cast Lead. There were options to the fullscale assault on Gaza. E.g. Israel could have chosen not to kill all those civilians if it had instead continued to target Hamas in the usual way.

Such a stance breaches international law and is a war crime. And incidentally, protecting one's own soldiers lives at all cost to enemy civilians goes a long way towards justifying Hamas' operations against Israel.

The war was conducted in Gaza , not on a filming site in Hollywood.You should be able to recognise the difference.

You might not like to hear it, but many if not most Israelis do the army. They are our brothers, our husbands, our friends, and our children. If a soldier is not allowed to protect himself when Israel's enemies walk around in civllian clothes and shoot from peoples homes, then they cannot live to fight another day, and cannot come home to be a part of our families. Perhaps the rest of the world thinks that makes all Israelis monsters, in Israel, that makes all soldiers civllians. For when we go to war, we all go to war. For those of you complaining, come live a few months in Sderot, or take up arms and go fight in the alleways of Afganistan, then come back and complain.

You make a great case for Hamas targeting of civilians and particularly schools. Afterall those kids might grow up to join the IDF. Just reverse everything you said or better yet, take everything you said and insert Hamas for Israel or IDF and you might see the effect. The laws of armed conflict are neutral and apply to all combatants, EQUALLY. A civilian is a civilian whether an Israeli Jew or Palestinian Christian or Muslim. A child is a child, Jew, Christian or Muslim or even Buddhist.

I cant write better than you You are 1000% right.

Common sense and perfectly mormal, especially if you want the next generation to enlist.

Right, let's follow that logic for a moment. So in the end, there really aren't any civilians in war zones, just legitimate targets to be neutralized any time your soldiers' safety is compromised, which in reality, is all the time since it IS a war zone, right? What a disgusting mindset. Even with the US in Iraq, the marines didn't pile Iraqi civilians in front of tanks and platoons as human shields for the sake of "safety".

All armies in Afghanistan use the same methods,the Italians even paid the enemy not to shoot at its troops,so as body bags would not be coming home in numbers like the Americans or the British. The Americans use drones to hit the enemy,helicopter gunships and fighter aircraft, without taking into consideration civilians. In Israel's case,how is Israel to know whether a person is a civilian or a combatant,the fact that the person does not have a visible weapon,does not mean they are not armed,don't forget there are combatants who have bomb belts,Hamas combatants do not always wear uniforms,hence the question,how many combatants and civilians died in the cast lead operation? An answer to this question we will never have.

It can only be either one of the two - your philosophy or - the *most moral army in the world* but not both. Israel should make a choice rather than issuing false claims about IDF morality.

Even many Israelis can hardly deny a certain average Israeli feeling of superiority towards their Arab neighbours (most visitors,who frequently travel to Israel know,what I'm talking about). Of course that superiority complex is not at all found within the Israeli left,but is clearly a thing of the right and (big ?) parts of the mainstream in Israel. Now,every army on this planet is doing its upmost,in order to protect its own soldiers. But the lengths the IDF is going in that regard, is indeed very,very unusual,and unfortunately the price for it is often paid by the civilians on the other (Palestinian) side. But where does it come from..?? Well,it may be another rather uncomfortable truth,but of course it has to do with the Jewish belief of being a special,namely God's chosen people,whose life has to be preserved at any costs. Needless to say, that Israels willingness to release 1000 Palestinian prisoners for one Israeli goes exactly in the same direction...

Are you going to tell me that any other army in the world acts differently? It doesn't mean you're targeting civillians, it means that if you're at risk you protect yourself. And it worked. If Hamas wants to risk civillian lives by hiding behind them, that makes them the war criminal. As regarding the flour mill, it also is quickly becoming apparent that its another web of lies. read about the BS guardian report here: http://israelmatzav.blogspot.com/2010/02/al-guardian-claims-to-have-proof-iaf.html

It is correct and proper that any army protect its soldiers in the time of war, even if in doing so it puts the lives of the enemy, civilian or military, in jeopardy. Having had children and now a grandson serving in the IDF I applaud the IDF for doing everything possible to protect our soldiers.

exactly why sould we risk our soldiers just to save what theyre religion and behavior has caused

Normal countries don't send their soldiers into battle so they can die protecting the enemy. The IDF is there to protect Israeli civilians from Palestinian terrorists, who are "Gaza civilians" and who are supported, financed, and glorified by "Gaza civilians". As long as Palestinians wage war on Israel, their "civilians" can go to hell. Better they die than our soldiers.

where are those who called Goldstone report a lie? see you at the Hague.