MI: IDF needs new ethics code for war on terror

If I could afford it I would go to Mexico and fire a few rockets into USA. Although you have a limp wristed president I dont think it would be long before special ops were called.

Did Sri lanka use them, or pakistan,or Russia,or Geogia,or Zimbabwee,or Bosnia,or USA, or Chechnya, or Iraq,or egypt,or Jordan, NO, SO WHY ASK ISRAEL

When were you there Raphael, I didnt see you!!!! The code of ethics of warfare were initiated for TWO countries fighting a war in uniform. You can have a certain amount of ethics against guerillas but your losses will be heavy. Both peoples should sign an act of war,THEN you can hold them to principles....NOT before

... under current discussion is how to ethically conduct belligerent encounter with those who are weaker and less well equipped than we are... ... how far we should excercise the punitive approach... ... you are evading the issue...

but isn't the occupier required to protect the welfare of his forces and people? I say resistance to resistance is also sanctioned to the same degree.

"What ethics code does hamas, hezbollah and al aska martyrs use?" The ethics code used by your declared enemies is not your concern! Do you want to degenerate into the same catagory? If so, follow their example. If not, lift yourself to a more ethical level of behavior. Doing something just because someone else does it is strictly for adolescents, not mature adults. And certainly not for the ministers of a government!

"In 2003, Yadlin and Kasher published an article titled "Ethical Counterterrorism," in which they justified assassinating wanted terrorists even if it injured or killed Palestinian civilians" The assassination of terrorsts must be replaced by their capture, trial, conviction, sentencing, and execution before, and on the order of, a legitimate criminal court. The entire process must be open and transparent. Anything less reeks of crime. Hence the bad reputation of persons or organiztions which specialize in assassination, and the secrecy surrounding their activities.

But what the IDF needs is a Rules of Engagement. It is the Defense Ministry and the Prime Minister's Cabinet that most needs a Code of Ethics on warfare. More important still, the Rules of Engagement and the Code of Ethics must be binding upon all who engage in any aspect of making war. As for title, forget about calling it The Spirit of the IDF. That is no more than a campaign slogan for recruitment. War must be considered by all as the most sinful, unethical, most devasting and destructive, least desirable decision made by any government official. You need to drive that point home. The title is a good place to start.

religion and the inability for humans to recognize the oneness of humanity. The White race, the so called "civilized" race, is the major offender. That's what history has taught me, Tobias. Who owns the land in Palestine - not Europeans, that's for sure!

In the prosecution of war the aim is to defeat the enemy, not procure "Brownie points." In WWII a no-holes barred allied campaign of massive deadly saturation bombing of enemy "civilians" and infrastructure across Germany (and even "innocents" in Nazi occupied lands) as well as the non-stop firebombing of Japan's resulting in hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths and culminating in the dropping of 2 nuclear weapons on Japan in August 6/9 1945 that cremated nearly 200,000 civilians in a fraction of a second. No "idiots," spoke of winning the hearts & minds of the innocent enemy populations - only of bringing the war to an end. Did anyone ask the legal beagles about this legality? But ended that war with a resounding finality? PERIOD. And most of all - no more killing in Europe or Japan. Look at Germany & Japan today! Common sense recognizes that propaganda is a key weapon used by criminals, terrorists and murderers with a ghastly/ghoulish ideology who attempt to seize the moral high ground by posing as freedom fighters or humane nationalists. Unfortunately, many good meaning people lack such common sense. Incidentally, since WWII (when the US effectively quashed Nazi/Japanese propaganda), the U.S. has found itself in continuing interminable and costly struggles because although having the means it does not have the will to bring wars to a definitive conclusion (e.g. Viet Nam, Iraq, Afghanistan). Incompetent political leadership, fueled by propaganda organs of the ?sanctimonious? around the world have enabled such conflicts to continue. Similarly, Israel has followed in the footsteps of the U.S. in such indecisive battles of Lebanon I, II, Gaza 2009. Now Israel wages this absurd war of defending against the same propaganda of those duped or manipulated by those who understand its value.

In the prosecution of war the aim is to defeat the enemy, not procure "Brownie points." In WWII a no-holes barred allied campaign of massive deadly saturation bombing of enemy "civilians" and infrastructure across Germany (and even "innocents" in Nazi occupied lands) as well as the non-stop firebombing of Japan's resulting in hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths and culminating in the dropping of 2 nuclear weapons on Japan in August 6/9 1945 that cremated nearly 200,000 civilians in a fraction of a second. No "idiots," spoke of winning the hearts & minds of the innocent enemy populations - only of bringing the war to an end. Did anyone ask the legal beagles about this legality? But ended that war with a resounding finality? PERIOD. And most of all - no more killing in Europe or Japan. Look at Germany & Japan today! Common sense recognizes that propaganda is a key weapon used by criminals, terrorists and murderers with a ghastly/ghoulish ideology who attempt to seize the moral high ground by posing as freedom fighters or humane nationalists. Unfortunately, many good meaning people lack such common sense. Incidentally, since WWII (when the US effectively quashed Nazi/Japanese propaganda), the U.S. has found itself in continuing interminable and costly struggles because although having the means it does not have the will to bring wars to a definitive conclusion (e.g. Viet Nam, Iraq, Afghanistan). Incompetent political leadership, fueled by propaganda organs of the ?sanctimonious? around the world have enabled such conflicts to continue. Similarly, Israel has followed in the footsteps of the U.S. in such indecisive battles of Lebanon I, II, Gaza 2009. Now Israel wages this absurd war of defending against the same propaganda of those duped or manipulated by those who understand its value.

If Germany had won the war would their papers carry stories about the "terrorists" in France, Holland or Poland ? As others have said one mans "terrorist" is anothers "freedom fighter". Didnt terrorists murder British servicemen in 1947 ? Or what about the King David hotel ?

But you can't expect the military to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Politicians have to stand up and take responsibility for not moving the inevitable political sol'n forward faster - and that includes Mr Abbas. The IDF should not have to be involved so deeply in an occupation.

A code of ethics is needed for "true" civilians and disabled combatants. The rest is spontaneous between the combatants.

You are spot on in your description of what Israel did during the 7 years it "held back" in view of the Qassam missiles. I was in Gaza several times during that period. Israeli military aircraft was swooping low over the Strip going through the sound barrier by day and by night terrorizing children in their bed and making them wet. This is the kind of heroism the Israeli airforce was involved in. I recall the provocative actions the Israeli army undertook every time a cease-fire was holding: assassinating yet another Hamas leader with predictable results. This and the unilateral pullout from Gaza with Israel closing the door and condemning the people of Gaza to economic hardship - a deliberate ploy as explained by government advisor Weisglas at the time - with Europe and the USA watching from the sidelines explain the context in which the Qassam missiles kept on flying. They do not fly out of thin air!

Dino hits the nail on the head. What is most apalling is the silence of the general Israeli public (with the exception of a small group of courageous Israelis) in the face of the war crimes committed by its army. The silence speaks loudly: it says that the general public does not care whether war crimes have been committed. Thanks, Roo, for your eloquent post, detailing some of these war crimes, including the systematic and wanton destruction of Gaza's agriculture and economic base. That people here are prepared to defend conduct like this is apalling.

History tells you that the Arab natiins started the wars and lost. That meant land. Please tell me whose lamd it is and why.

kasher says that there is ''no logic to comparing the the number [of Israelis] killed by Qassam [rockets] compared to the number of civilians killed in Gaza.'' so it follows that it is logical that Israel is justified in killing 100 innocent arab civilians to save 1 israeli life. this is a sick logic indeed. In the eyes of Kasher arab lives are indeed cheap.

When your enemuy shots from urban area,hospotals. schools how can you escape not killing civilianss. They should change their rules.

Stop being childish, Fist. You are not fighting a nation of terrorists, althought some are among them. The majority of Palestinians want to regain their properties in the West Bank, confiscated by the settlers, and to be able to breath freedom. Same as the Israelis, who wanted to regain their ancestral land, but without encroaching on those Arabs who lived in the land before they came. Some of the methods employed by the terorist groups are abominable, but the secret of victory is that you gain the good will of the native people by sharing with them the land.

We don't want the IDF to continue some of the practices that our ancestors fled from.

Once again, these discussions are just another cynical manipulation by the Palestinians, seeking to use the court of international opinion to accomplish what they could not through legitimate means. Is there any doubt in anyones mind that no matter how Israel reacted to Hamas and endless qassams, that these exact same people would still condemn Israel?

The Hague, Geneva & UN war codes do not contemplate nor encompass terrorism. They relate to conduct among nations, not terrorist organizations. Thus the codes are out of date for asymmetric-terrorism. Israel is world leader in promulgating rules for this method of war; they will be used as reference points by the international community. Once again Israel leads the world improving morals and ethics in keeping with its 3,000+ years higher standards

I agree that Israel needs better training to deal with massive crowds of terrorist and to deal with terrorist in civilian areas but the ethics of the IDF are the highest in the world. I think the IDF do need more police training to deal with Arab rioters, looters, land thieves, organized mobs and other threats to national security.

You best address your remarks to your US government which has admitted the other day it has been trying to assassinate Ben Ladin and Al Quietude leaders

Unfortunately, you are totally wrong. Israel cannot copy the "code of ethics" of Arab terrorists. This is not our guide to victory. Israel's policies cannot be revenge or reciprocation but the end of conflict. Note Curious' quoted interview of McChrystal on Afghanistan. It's very applicable to Israel. As long as the local population supports the terrorists the war is unwinnable. Forget the childhood fantasies of good guys vs. bad guys. We are dealing with a distressed Arab population that will support extremist because it does not believe in the good will of Israel. Our settlers are adding to this trauma daily by making the life of the peasants in the West Bank unbearable daily based on some religious fantasy that their land belongs to them.

... my posts criticizing our government, the Likud, the extremists (ours), the abysmal Israeli politics, etc, etc? In fact, I am criticizing one-sidedness in all, the anti-Israel posters as well as our own uber-leftists and uber-rightists. But I will NEVER criticize our IDF where my children serve to keep us safe! Who fought to keep Sderot, Ashdod, Ashkelon, Beersheva, etc., safe! ... Although I am of course aware there are criminals among them as there are in any army. On the other hand, which army needs to fight cowards like Hamas hiding behind civilians in hospitals, schools and mosques?

dedicated posters. But.... 1. Israel is for the whole world not a state like others. Simply as a nuclear power she has the finger on the trigger. You are not on the Yentl Trip anymore. (The polls in Europe had shown that Israel is the danger Number 1 fair or not it is a matter of fact) 2. The unsolved Palestinian problem and the permanent troubles and resistance to peace efforts are another reason for people interested on both sides of the medal. In this light you must see Dino. But he is not an anti- semite. And - you and your "conpadres" had no velvet glovers in the swedish affair. !

...it is usually required of a country who has ethics and moral clarity. No one is asking Hamas to observe an ethics code, because it is known that they have no ethics to begin with.

Since it is OK for Israel to commit extrajudicial killings against terrorists which also cause civilian casualties, what is wrong for the Palestinians bombing a market-place close to an army compound? What is true for one side is true for another.

"justified assassinating wanted terrorists even if it injured or killed Palestinian civilians." This is one-sided nonsense. Many Palestinian suicide bombers have "targeted" IDF but killed innocents as well. Does this justify their actions or make them non-terrorists? If a Palestinian suicide bomber were to deliberately pick a cafe where IDF officers are present and get as near to them as possible before detonation, would this justify his actions and make the innocent Israelis irrelevant collateral damage? Of course not, but that is the same standard applied and proposed by the IDF. To the extent that IDF already and in the future justifies knowingly killing innocents to get a legitimate target, it has no moral standing to condemn any Palestinian who kills IDF as well as Israeli civilians. When the IDF fires a volley of missles at a car on a crowded street, knowing it will kill and injure more innocents than legitimate targets, it is engaging in terrorism.

... my posts criticising our government, the Likud, the extremists (ours), the abysmal Israeli politics, etc, etc? In fact, I am criticising one-sidedness in all, the anti-Israel posters as well as our own uber-leftists and uber-rightists. But I will NEVER criticise our IDF where my children serve to keep us safe! Who fought to keep Sderot, Ashdod, Ashkelon, Beersheva, etc., safe! ... Although I am of course aware there are criminals among them. But which army doesn't have them? On the other hand, which army needs to fight cowards like Hamas hiding behind families, hospitals and schools?

The "new ethics" puts protecting civilians on place three. The new ethics seem to conflict with the Geneva conventions. Combined with the way "terrorist" is defined it explains at lot about what happened in Gaza. With new ethics like this war crimes are almost pre-programmed.

to stop its terror wars then it wouldn't need the help of philosophers like Asa.

New ethics code for the UN would be more approppiate.Corruptions,bias,legitiamacy for dictatoreship,and atrocities. More than all the UNHRC are in desparate need of new ethics code.blind eye for the worst atrocities.They need a separation between politic and human rights,and not between Judaism and Islam.

....and reality, which makes Israel so vulnerable for criticism from all over the world. No doubt, there are many other parts of this world, where "bad stuff" is going on. But there are only a very few others, who are claiming to serve as a "shining light to humanity". That is your problem, and nothing else....

"they are right to maintain that in a situation where tzahal does not control the theatre of war, and where the enemy hides and is imbedded among the civilian population, the safety of the soldiers is more important than the safety of civilians." By your logic then, Hamas has every right to shell Sderot since there are soldiers living there. Such nonsense! Soldiers are required to risk their lives before risking the lives of civilians - you are *NOT* allowed to use the easy solution at no risk to yourself if civilians will be harmed as a result.

nonsense...so pathetic its almost funny. "israel waited 7 years before..." yada yada Israel waited for nothing. It fired over 7000 high explosive shells into Gaza during the period you erroneously presume Israel to have been waiting. It simultaneously launched countless rockets from F-16's and unmanned drones as well as launching attacks from sea and land, the last of which occurred on Nov 4th inside of Gaza which effectively blasted the hitherto successful ceasefire out of existence. During this '7 year' hiatus you speak of, Israel killed over a thousand Gazan civilians. Such patience, such reserve, such BS. No, it is not 'moral' to phone people to warn them of their impending doom whilst providing no means for their escape, shelter or evacuation and shooting at them when they attempt to flee or prevent first aid to those who you have just shelled or shot. "i mean who phones, leaflets etc before attacking" Who alerts the fish in the barrel to their impending fate? Sadists, I suppose.

"If the IDF or Israel had any evidence to the contrary they didn`t provide it to the Goldstone Mission as the report vividly points out." The IDF and Israel have evidence supporting thier claims. The reason they did not prvide them is due to the fact that the investigators had an pre-established bias. Dont worry, all facts will be known when Israel conducts yet another another internal investigation...

Your dead on point, now let me add, Ask youselves how many soldiers does hamas and their ilk have in their prisons [besides kidnapped soldiers that is], compared to Israel's prisons?, everyone knows the answer, and why? because these terrorist leaders which by proxy are the government kill whom ever they capture, which is why Ralph #58 may have a valit poin, maybe the IDF should adapt what Ralph stated into the code. Now do a search on the charters of Palestinians Hama's, Fatah, hezbo, the arab brotherhood in general. They fight to win and so should we. Then read this; The Spirit of The IDF http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Society_&_Culture/IDF_ethics.html

You are right, maybe we should copy the NATO bombing of Sarajevo in the 1990's. Many thousands killed and made homeless. Perhaps like Russia killing 70,000 in Chechnya or Georgia killing 2,000 in one day last year in August?

It is more shocking the indifferrence of the vast majority of Arabs when it comes to the conduct of Hamas.From Qassams launching,to the use of lethal bomb against children/youth that didn't even throw a stone.Why all of that didn't put the Palestinians at the bottom of worldwide public opnion polls?appesement submissions and hate of Jews that why.Where is the outrage in the"enlightened"countries about Darfur Tibet Sri-Lanka,Kabul,Baghdad.The silence in those countries about the world worst atrocities is placing them in the dark age and the need of soul searching is much bigger there than here.

Ethics mean moral! We have no lesson to receive from anti semite.

boring boring .....nato's ethics.... just a bigoted israel basher

No more prisoners! Noothing to exchange!

boring,,,israel waited 7 years before launching operation cast lead..... and the ratio of civilians to combatants killed show the idf to be the most moral army on earth.... i mean who phones, leaflets etc before attacking ? roo roo u roooooong.

The Americans and the rest of NATO forces might need a new ethics code.Civilians killed rapes,torture,drug and human trafficking. The Russians and Chinese are in need too, Chechnia,Tibet.The African,and Muslims,in Darfur,Somalia,Congo..... The Arabs,well you know all about them. The posters from those countries are in need of a new ethics code.We need a global ethics code!

...it`s not "terrorism" - it`s resistance against decades of brutal occupation. Who wants to occupy Israel or the Arab side? Don't change everything upside down. You the Arab part wants to occupy Israel, when they think they have the power to occupy Israel they don't miss any opportunity to attack. History is full of with this examples. 1948,1967,1973,1982, 2009 all the wars. This is not a fighting for freedom but this fighting is all about for to occupy Israel. On the eve of Gaza war HAMAS was saying we are going to give a lesson to Israel. They were no different from the past. They wouldn't change anything in the Arab side in 60 years. I doubt if they could take any from the past . Freedom to Israel. Aby

A code of ethics for a "war on terror" is fine. But did any of these people mention this is an "occupation"? What is the code of ethics for those under occupation? And how about ending the occupation? Has that already been taken off the table? How sad this all is. Zionism is a failed experiment.

those laws are archaic and don't provide a method of self-defense except sending soldiers into a death trap.

Israel should adopt the ethics code of Hamas and Hizbollah,and all those that defends their ethics,and they are many.would have to accept that.

The enemy side's monstrosities get endless coverage by media and politicians who do exactly as you do when asked this question: point the accusing finger at others. When does a little self-examination get a look-in with you? Take a look around you, which is by definition here in Israel, and see how while standards of living rise, standards of being fall. Look at our education results. Look at rising lack of consideration for neighbors, road rage, neglect of the environment, domestic violence and negligence, crime and ask yourself who loses by this. Ethics are educated into a society from birth. You need look no further than Pirkei Avot.

ethics as Hamas is fundamentally flawed. There is only ONE code of ethics for uniformed armies and that is set out in the Geneva Conventions. Soldiers are not allowed to shoot civilians, prisoners, people under white flags, to shell civilian areas, etc. That is the world standard and any who don't comply risk a lengthy visit to the ICC. Israel has a uniformed army and therefore MUST follow the rules - or take the consequences. The ethics are non-negotiable. It is accepted in the military that insurgents (no officer is bothered by meaningless labels like 'terrorist' or 'freedom fighter') 'will fight a different kind or warfare, not in uniform, not using conventional tactics and not always according to the Conventions. Nonetheless, Hamas and Hezbollah leaders and operatives are just as likely to appear before the ICC as anyone else who breaks the rules. This Israeli quest for moral equivalency with Hamas is a legal and ethical irrelevance.

So terrible...it is hard to believe, intead of questioning ourself we want to be more brutal. Ashame of us!

infantry battle needed in asymmetric warfare, instead choosing air strikes, indiscriminate shelling and skulking about in armoured vehicles? It is the complete opposite of every counter-insurgency manual. The argument that it saves troops' lives is false. All it does is take civilian non-combatant lives instead, in considerable numbers as per Cast Lead, hardly a very moral basis on which to operate. One is left with the uncomfortable conclusion that, to Israel's leaders, civilian deaths are not a big concern. They are only Arabs, they voted for Hez or Hamas, they deserve what they get and should be collectively punished to teach obeisance. This view is clearly shared by many Israelis. Any code of military ethics that puts safeguarding the lives of civilians in 3rd place would be ripped up in a NATO army. It is a basic tenet of service that the soldier protects the civilian at all times and is not open to downgrading. Israel needs a lesson in war ethics via the ICC.

ethics when it comes to warfare...that way we can kill 20 civilians to every 1 combatant instead of 1 civilian for every 1.5 combatants. Alterantively, we could try the russian or chinese approaches ....or if we really want to let our hair down the arab approach.....after all, Yemen are doing a pretty good job at the moment bombing displaced persons camps of their own people in sparsely populated desert areas..

What kind of code will it take for Israelis as a people to realize they are invalidating their place in the Middle East today by occupy-ing Palestinian land and displacing them as a people? This was the argument for the partition of Palestine in 1947 and Israeli officials and settlers are undoing it. Dutch P.S Don't think for a minute anyone is losing sight of this irony today and what it means for the children of Israel.

appears to have no interest in learning how to fight an asymmetrical war. Indiscriminate, stand-off shelling of civilian areas from land, sea and air is the least acceptable or successful route. It is of limited use against insurgents ((cf Lebanon and Gaza) who fire and move if they're smart. It inevitably only leads to heavy civilian casualties, causing anger and fueling the resistance. And as targeting civilians is a war crime, it promptly brands Israel and its forces as amoral at best. In counter-insurgency warfare, the troops have to get out of their protected APCs and tanks, park the artillery and clear an area house by house or field by field, hunting down the insurgents and never opening fire where civilians may be at risk. Hard dangerous work for the infantry, but that's the only way to do CI. If the IDF were serving in Afghanistan, they would be pulled out of the line for retraining and an ethics transplant.

"Where Israel does have effective control," the thug says that "assassination that might cause civilian casualties" are not justified. He is only half right. No assassinations are justified. The man is a murderer, plain and simple. He does not believe is a justice system. He is a terrorist just like so many Israeli leaders, such as Begin and Shamir, actual mureders and Netanyahu who celebrated the King David Hotel massacre by holding apart and erecting a plaque on the 60th anniversary of that horrific crime. Gen. Yadlin mirrors exactly the darkest side of Zionism - terrorism as a policy. There can never be peace with this sort of leaders. A people who elevate such to high office do not want peace. Words are cheap, morality is priceless.

"At last there is at least an admission of asymmetry..." Like: Shalit for 1,000 Palestinan prisoners, some with blood on their hands... or Some murdered soldiers's bones for Kuntar, remember? or The asymmetry of your mentioning only IDF's faults and nothing on the enemy side.

Why the labeled to be terrorists by all the international organisations ? So a little wrong comparation with so called "the most moral army in the world?

Ethics went out of fashion after the middle ages. The IDF never revived it. It is a lie. Israel has no concern about such matters as ethics in war [as demonstrated by the Rabbis who distributed their pornographic interpretations of morality amongst the IDF prior to cast lead] but Israel does recognise the damage done to its already sullied reputation by further bad publicity. So it invents concepts such as 'purity of arms'. Yet we have been reliably informed such concepts allow for demolition of apartment blocks by F-16 rockets to hit high value targets. The use of torturous white phosphor in built up areas without regard for civilians, the use of civilian shields in Cast Lead by the IDF in order to approach buildings where armed men may be ensconced. The use of exploding flechette shells[4 inch darts] in urban areas to rip flesh to pieces over wide areas. The use of unreliable cluster munitions amongst villagers of South Lebanon [a million bomblets in the last 72 hrs of conflict, still killing and maiming children today]. The almost complete and deliberate destruction [90%] of Gazan agriculture in Cast Lead, ostensibly so as to deny cover for Hamas should they wish to leave urban areas where they are condemned for fighting, but in reality so that Gazans should be yet further impoverished so that they may regret marking their crosses in the wrong box at the last election. ie: collective punishment. So purity of arms is not so much a myth as a blank cheque drawn up in the form of a protean carte blanche set of guidelines to wreak death, injury and vengeance on an industrial scale with complete serenity and satisfaction.

Ethics went out of fashion after the middle ages. The IDF never revived it. It is a lie. Israel has no concern about such matters as ethics in war [as demonstrated by the Rabbis who distributed their pornographic interpretations of morality amongst the IDF prior to cast lead] but Israel does recognise the damage done to its already sullied reputation by further bad publicity. So it invents concepts such as 'purity of arms'. Yet we have been reliably informed such concepts allow for demolition of apartment blocks by F-16 rockets to hit high value targets. The use of torturous white phosphor in built up areas without regard for civilians, the use of civilian shields in Cast Lead by the IDF in order to approach buildings where armed men may be ensconced. The use of exploding flechette shells[4 inch darts] in urban areas to rip flesh to pieces over wide areas. The use of unreliable cluster munitions amongst villagers of South Lebanon [a million bomblets in the last 72 hrs of conflict, still killing and maiming children today]. The almost complete and deliberate destruction [90%] of Gazan agriculture in Cast Lead, ostensibly so as to deny cover for Hamas should they wish to leave urban areas where they are condemned for fighting, but in reality so that Gazans should be yet further impoverished so that they may regret marking their crosses in the wrong box at the last election. ie: collective punishment. So purity of arms is not so much a myth as a blank cheque drawn up in the form of a protean carte blanche set of guidelines to wreak death, injury and vengeance on an industrial scale with complete serenity and satisfaction.

400 children massacred in camps, and scores of women, old men and cripples. Atonement is not selectible.

....and not the head of the MI. One of the most shocking things for many observers from abroad, is the total indifference of the vast majority of the Israeli public, when it comes to the conduct of her army. From operation "Cast Lead" to the use of lethal force against stone throwing chidren/youths etc.... Those are by far the main reasons why the Israeli people/army come across as incredibly indifferent ("reckless") when it comes to the protection of non-Jewish life, and it is the main reason, why Israel finds herself regularly at the bottom of worldwid public opinion polls. In most civilized, "enlightened" countries of this world, you would see at least a certain amount of public outrage, combined with an immediate demand to change the rules of engagement. Not so in Israel. Maybe the time has come for the Israeli people to do some inner "soul searching" why that might be the case....???

Gaza is not afganistan. Afganistan doesn't border the United States. The civillian population of the United States doesn't come under daily direct missle fire from Afganistan, and maybe least significantly but most interestingly, the Palestinians have always hated the Israelis anyway. There is no real way for the Israelis to "win" the support of the Palestinians.

"People fighting for freedom and self-determination and the return of their land and resources, they are not "terrorists" Israel." I heard this a thousand times...freedom fighters right? For example, 1974 Maalot massacre of 22 children was a fight for freedom from occupation? Indeed, the "occupation" of Maalot, of Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Haifa...

"Kasher said that Cast Lead was conducted in the spirt of the proposed new code he co-authored with Yadlin, and that "the norms the commanders applied in Gaza were generally proper." In places where the IDF lacks effective control of the territory, like Gaza, he explained, the commander's supreme responsibility is carrying out the mission, and second is safeguarding his soldiers; preventing harm to civilians is only third priority." Preserving civilian life is way down the IDF list of priorities. Well I guess that explains Cast Lead then. It also explains Goldstone's invitation to the IDF for a little holiday in Holland.

There is a vast difference between the Afghan population and Gaza strip. Isreal has no chance of winning the hearts and minds of Gaza's Arabs. Gaza elected hamas, supported rocket fire, and the capture of Shalit. It was only after the hamas "victory" did the rockets slow. Nearly every day the rockets are launched although fewer of them. The pattern will be the same though. Hamas launches, Israel retaliates, hamas takes casualties then complains as does the left-no change. And, Goldstone is nowhere to be found.

Why does it matter? You can have any ethics code you like -- and with no trouble at all. You won't follow it, so what's the difference? I mean, compare and contrast: 1. " A soldier must not use his weapons to harm noncombatants, it continues, and must "do everything in his power to prevent injury to [noncombatants'] lives, bodies, dignity and property." 2. The IDF's actual behavior. It wouldn't be so bad if you were merely trying to deceive others with this nonsense. However, I have a dark suspicion you're trying to deceive yourselves.

Israel broke all the 10 commandments and was not pushished by G_d yet. Will the so-called new code of ethics for the IDF absolve her of her sins. This is purely a whitewash. By the way, if there is a need for a new code of ethics, then the old cold of ethics is flawed. This proves that by own admission, war crimes have been committed.

Israel fought a brave war; hamas an evil war and then declared a victory. Some victory, so now hamas is crying to Goldstone. If hamas and Goldsone are actually concerned about the well being of Gaza, they would tell hamas to stop the firing of rockets and return Shalit.

the phraze "Gaza War" is not right. Who are you fooling. There was no war. War is when two parities fight each other. That was an aggression on Isreal's part. I am not saying Hamas is not terrible as well, but thier agression comes from you making them desperate. Come on people take one journy through the streets and homes of gaza and then into isreal and the truth will hit you rihgt away. It has been arround 60 years, is it not time to stop the imagination and admit.

Do the same to Iran Create your own Hamas and Hezbollah and Give them rockets also to fire into Iran on a daily basis. Fire about 100 rockets daily to start with, although you might consider 4 or 500 maybe a thousand daily to make up for the thousands they fired at Israel all these years. Then start complaining to human rights organizations when they start shooting back.

What is striking is that ethics before the adoption of a code were certainly no worse and arguably considerably better than they became with the adoption of one. This indicates that within any ethical human being, and without any rules apart from the wisdoms already inherent in its culture (one talkbacker mentions Hillel), resides a very reliable meter that needs no codification. It seems that in our case, the imposition of this code stifled and deviated the instincts of many a good man. Public tolerance of the intolerable is the result.

There are no ethics code in a war. Stop this bullshit, and open your eyes. When confronting terrorists targeting specially your civilians, when yoyu fight against countries willing to commit gneocide against you, you don't need "ethics". Did the US and Britain take "ethics" when they bombed Dresden or Hiroshima. You are in total war against the Shiite axis of evil. Sen d them tenfold what they send or wish to you. period. All the rets is nonsense

... actually wins! But only when he strives fervently in prayer and deed and faith, trusting without any doubt, and cleaving to the G-d of Israel steadfastly without releasing Him until he receives His blessing, knowing that this favor alone will deliver him from his enemies. This needs to be the IDF's foremost military code of conduct when fighting any war that challenges their existence and while protecting the future of all its citizens as the Israel Defense Forces.

Courage to Refuse has shown the ONLY way to address "assymetric warfare" and the hypocritical "war on terror", a term rightly expunged from the US diplomatic lexicon. When Israel ceases to practice state terrorism, Israel can offer criticism of Palestinian resistance. The entire basis of Israeli State Terrorism against her neighbours is Israel's illegal Settlements Enterprise, in open violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. This must be stopped by International pressure. Sanctions and boycotts.

Most bizarre was the destruction of a giant chicken farm which supplied Gaza with 10 per cent of its eggs. ?Armoured bulldozers systematically flattened the chicken coups, killing all 31,000 chickens inside,? it reports. ?The destruction of food supply installations, water sanitation systems, concrete factories and residential houses was the result of a deliberate and systematic policy by the Israeli armed forces,? says the report. Justice Goldstone writes that the evidence, collected over several visits to Gaza, indicates that civilian targets were deliberately hit, a violation of the rules of war. ?There were almost no mistakes made according to the government of Israel,? the report says, describing the attacks as ?a deliberately disproportionate attack designed to punish, humiliate and terrorise a civilian population?.

You do not distort the history! You get out from the place that does not belong to you

It is timely, and it is universal. What are the ethics against Hamas' or Hezballah's total unscrupulous terror. One that is fanatic, relentless, justifies the deliberate butchery of civilians, and doesn't value the life of anybody, hides among civilian population, and is Machiavellic if not devilish. The question is universal, and should be addressed by all democracies. And yet there is acomponent of anti-Semitism disguised as anti-Israel bias, that treats Israel differently and cynically. That renders the question an issue that cannot be divorced with psychology and Public Relations.

Sir May I remind u that under international law, u r an occupying power and resistance is also sanctioned under the same law. U r probably confusing between terrorism and resistance and u need to reconsider ur steps before it is too late and before u r held accountable for ur confusion.

with all the ongoing negative publicity of the Goldstone report, hindsight suggests that Israel would have been better off dealing with it's excesses and soldiers misbehaviour on it's own immediately. whether the use of phosphorous and DIME muntions, or soldiers vandalizing houses, or firing too quickly at civilians, or holding them hostage, the negative impact would have been reduced in advance. learn from this Barak and Bibi and the IAF. deal with it quickly on your own and don't let outsiders exploit it for propaganda.

any army fights an unjust cause unjustly....the occupation and colonization are illegal according to int law...the only ethical thing to do is stop the occupation and colonization..anything less is a war crime

the "supreme importance of human life" cannot be safeguarded in conditions of war. by its very nature, war will cause civilian casualties, regardless of the precautions taken. the major question raised by kasher and yadlin is the necessity to minimise the troop casualties in a war theatre where combatants are embedded among the civilian population. they are right to maintain that in a situation where tzahal does not control the theatre of war, and where the enemy hides and is imbedded among the civilian population, the safety of the soldiers is more important than the safety of civilians. tzahal and other forces must be given more flexibility in the case where they fight terrorists who use the civilian population as a human shield. such tactics by the terrorists are meant to defeat the laws of war. they are also meant to defeat the other side's conventional military strategy. yet, there will be no greater civilian casualties since the war will be significantly shortened.

There is absolututely no need for a new code of ethics. Israel had a chance, under the leadership of Goldstone to present its' case. It chose not to. If it had then there is no doubt that the conclusions would have been different. Israel accused Hamas of firing from densely populated areas but with Hamas leading the commission by the nose in Gaza there was no way for Israel to present its' side of the case. The decision of the report was solely based on the information that was presented to it, and that is why the commision did not address this specific point. There seems to be a disconnect in Israeli policy. The government avoids any semblance of cooperation during the fact finding phase, but waits till the conclusions are made before unleashing a ferocious volley of condemnation. It would make more sense to continue what Israel was doing namely, investing the alleged crimes and meting out justice where need be.

Just like you.

what war on terror? does israel believe world still believes that bologna anymore? Israel needs new ethics, new ideology, new leadership, new intelligentsia, new faced lift and whole new heart.

I hardly think small boys swimming in the sea, fishermen, farmers and women armed with white flags constitute legitimate terrorist targets, but apparently the IDF butchers who shot them thought to the contrary - what IDF code of ethics will stop moral degenerates like that from murdering innocent civilians when they know they have immunity from prosecution?

Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia. The code of conduct has always been whatever it'll be changed to.

Have an understanding of cause and effect. Stop the double standards. Abide by UN resolutions. Get off Palestinian territory!

'A New Code of Ethics"? Ethics is a system of moral principles. A discipline dealing with what is good and bad, or duty and obligation. How can one need a 'different' or 'new' code of ethics? The proposition of such a need is a denial of ethical substance. Either you treat a person, a people, a nation or a situation in an 'ethical' way, or you have not hewed to any ethic. Terrorism has the ethics which maintain treating people in an evil way is justified for some other end than treating them ethically. To argue that ethics are changed because one is dealing with terrorism is to surrender to the terrorist any ethical superiority. Indeed, it is to adapt the ethics of the terrorist as one's own. I would argue the great man of Jewish Ethics was Rabbi Hillel. he would argue that ALL MEN are created in the image of God, and ALL men are to be treated with the standard one would wish them selves would be treated. What new 'ethics' is needed?

It is most important to save the lives of our Soldiers. In WW2 there was no hesitation is accepting collateral damage in order to achieve military gains. Chechyna, SriLanka, Iraq,Afghanistan proves that this is an acceptable and possibly necessary evil. I do not feel that we should accept the deaths of our shoulders to change this paradigm. Perhaps the UN should negotiate with the terrorists to limit their fighters to open fields, not in our or their cities.

I was just curious about this. From what I can see it's the kill as many innocent Israelis as possible code. When this is who you are fighting, who cares what Goldstone or the UN say. They are a joke anyway. If Israel has to attack Iran for it to survive , so be it. And if anyone thinks there will be peace if the "occupation" ends you are truly crazy. Most Arabs do not want peace.

this is very good. no army will be able to go to battle with no bad apples and I am sure 99% of the idf soldiers will comply. the crime is when politicians make war for their own political gain. gaza by chance happened a few weeks before an election after years of missiles. there is no way you can win the propaganda war when military forces are so unbalanced. this war has done israel much political and propoganda harm. barak knew this but a seat the knesset was more important than the interests of his country.

To reduce those casualties, he took drastic action, ordering a virtual ban on air strikes against residential areas, even if hostile fire is coming from the building. "We've got some things we absolutely have got to show them that we'll do differently. If we succeed, some of it will be despite some of the things we've done or failed to do," McChrystal explained. "The hallmark of American military power was its overwhelming firepower. Now you're describing a situation in which firepower is almost beside the point?" Martin asked. "You know, the favorite saying of, 'To a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail.' We can't operate that way. We can't walk with only a hammer in our hands," McChrystal replied. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/24/60minutes/main5335445_page2.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody

McChrystal's new strategy says conventional military operations designed to kill the enemy can never win this war. Destroying homes and accidentally killing civilians in the process only create more insurgents and alienates the population. In other words, for much of the past eight years, the U.S. has been sowing the seeds of its own demise. By McChrystal's count, 265 civilians were killed by American or allied firepower in the past 12 months. He said during one of the many video conferences he holds each week that civilian casualties could make or break his strategy. "I knew this was an important issue, but since I've been here the last two and a half months, this civilian casualty issue is much more important than I even realized. It is literally how we lose the war or in many ways how we win it," McChrystal said during a briefing.

The video: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=5345009n&tag=contentMain;cbsCarousel Protecting the Afghan people - many of them living in impoverished villages - is now more important than killing the enemy, even if that means taking more risks. "The parents of kids over here can't be too happy to hear that the commander is telling them to accept more risk," Martin noted. "This is something that takes a tremendous amount of understanding. What I'm really telling people is the greatest risk we can accept is to lose the support of the people here," McChrystal explained. "If the people are against us, we cannot be successful. If the people view us as occupiers and the enemy, we can't be successful and our casualties will go up dramatically." The only way to win, McChrystal insists, is to earn the support of the people.

...it's not "terrorism" - it's resistance against decades of brutal occupation. The Goldstone Report found no credible evidence that Palestinian militant groups operate amongst civilians in order to protect themselves; and as pointed out elsewhere, the IDF shows little restraint in shooting at civilians already, what "protective" factor could possibly be had? If the IDF or Israel had any evidence to the contrary they didn't provide it to the Goldstone Mission as the report vividly points out. Yadlin needs a "code" that teaches the difference between actual terrorism versus resistance to occupation. People fighting for freedom and self-determination and the return of their land and resources, they are not "terrorists" Israel. The sooner Israelis learn the difference the better.