A former senior security official tells Fergal Keane that Israel might be committing war crimes in northern Gaza.
  • Nougat@fedia.io
    881·
    2 months ago

    It’s always “ex” and “former,” never “current.”

  • OccamsTeapot@lemmy.worldEnglish
    352·
    2 months ago

    Israelis concerned about morality should refuse to serve in the IDF at all and take the jail time instead.

    For those who didn’t, they obviously believe in what they’re doing to some extent and I’m not convinced that the incentives are really there to do the right thing. What is the consequence for committing the war crime? It is non existent. Straight up. So if you risk punishment by refusing, why would you?

    Again, if you have morals you should lay down your arms and fucking leave Gaza immediately. Refusing one order is pointless when there are war crimes committed every day.

    • CorkyskogEnglish
      63·
      2 months ago

      If all the people did that you would only have the most bloodthirsty lunatics

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
      11·
      2 months ago

      So if you risk punishment by refusing, why would you?

      Moral convictions? Jesus Christ, people…

  • BougieBirdie@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
    272·
    2 months ago

    Yeah, I’m sure a soldiers don’t normally face reprisal for refusing to follow orders. /s

    Maybe… don’t issue orders that may be war crimes?

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
      15·
      2 months ago

      Yes, it’s a very sticky wicket. In Israel’s case you can just be a conscientious objector and either make up an excuse for non-service, or take the jail time. In places that don’t even pose as Liberal democracies that’s not an option, and you’re best off trying to defect to someone else. If you can’t manage that either, it’s basically just time to survive while choosing kindness wherever you can, even if it means some loss and some risk. The soldier in The Pianist giving the guy cake comes to mind.

    • Akasazh@feddit.nlEnglish
      3·
      2 months ago

      I believe it was Chris Browning who showed that German Wehrmacht soldiers, who refused to be in Einsatzgruppen didn’t get punished for it.

  • ShinkanTrain@lemmy.mlEnglish
    272·
    2 months ago

    I was going to joke and say they’ll have to just stay at home, but those homes are likely illegal settlements

  • TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.comEnglish
    7·
    2 months ago

    Gee I don’t know … they call themselves the Chosen People and require everyone else to do that too or they levy accusations of antisemitism.

    How can a Chosen Person TM do a war crime ? Unpossible.

  • ATDA@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2·
    2 months ago

    Some of them, others I think uh monster trucked through un facilities with tanks?

  • atro_city@fedia.io
    211·
    2 months ago

    And face being dragged before court for refusing to follow orders. The army is very well known for giving soldiers freedom to interpret orders.

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
        7·
        2 months ago

        Which honestly might be one of the most underrated democratic safeguards, on top of just helping prevent atrocities towards other people.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.worldEnglish
          7·
          2 months ago

          Rules-based order > Ruler-based order

          I always think, though not in the context of war crimes, how two friends of mine related in Basic Training that the drill instructors would give them strict orders to not let anyone through on guard duty who didn’t meet some criteria or another, and then other instructors would come by and attempt to badger and bamboozle the poor trainee soldier into letting them through (and God help any who was stupid enough to let them through).

          Rules can be inflexible, but they’re also a barrier against arbitrary abuses. Our abuses have to be regular and systemic, dammit!

      • GiveMemes@jlai.luEnglish
        32·
        2 months ago

        Not in the US military, and I’m sure others as well. What civilized nations are you referring to? I can only speak to the US, but enlisted soldiers here take a pledge to follow orders, while the officers are actually the ones to take a pledge to uphold the US constitution.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.worldEnglish
          5·
          2 months ago

          Not in the US military

          Yes, in the US military.

          I can only speak to the US, but enlisted soldiers here take a pledge to follow orders,

          To follow orders in accordance with the UCMJ.

        • Saleh@feddit.orgEnglish
          2·
          2 months ago

          US soldiers are not pledging to defend the constitution?!

          In Germany for instance every soldiers pledges on the constitution. I thought this was the normal way for countries with a democratic constitution.

          • MirthfulAlembic@lemmy.worldEnglish
            3·
            2 months ago

            No, they absolutely do pledge and affirm that. Not sure what that person is talking about. It’s definitely, at least on paper, expected for individuals in the military to refuse to follow unlawful orders. What happens in practice is another story. See: entire history of US military action.

    • LavenderDay3544@lemmy.worldEnglish
      3·
      2 months ago

      You are not required to obey an unlawful order and in most militaries you are required not to. If you get court martialed it shouldn’t be a problem since you were in the right and not the officer issuing the unlawful order.