So why exactly is Israeli slaughtering protesters?

[Donegeal]

I wasn't implying anything like that. Infact, I never mentioned which direction the march was from. It wouldn't matter. If 300 south koreans march north, they'd be shot. If 300 north koreans march south, they'd be shot just the same. The point is that it is a known closed and armed border. If you march (or walk or whatever) against it, you're going to get shot.

[loinburger]

Infact, I never mentioned which direction the march was from.

Which is why I allowed for it to go in either direction - either the Palestinians were marching north, in which case Israel is analogous to North Korea, or else they were marching south, in which case the Palestinians are analogous to North Koreans. Either analogy is laughable.

[Zevico]

In the Iran-Iraq war, Iran sent "protesters"--children--through mine fields. They gave them little keys and told the tikes that they were off to heaven.

The basic principle is the same here. Mass the border with expendable civilians and attack.

For the Syrians it's an excellent strategy designed to divert attention from the anti-Ba'ath uprising.
For the Palestinian volunteers it's an excellent way to die for the cause.
For the Israelis it's fubar.

What exactly are the Israelis meant to do? Arrest a mob of hundreds? Why should Israelis sacrifice their soldiers for a mob that will kill them as soon as they get within an inch of the soldiers anyway? You think these are human rights activists or something?

[Donegeal]

Laughable only on terms of scale. The point is it is a closed and armed border. You march against it, you're going to get shot. It's a darwin award waiting to happen... scratch that. It's a darwin award that has happened.

[loinburger]

What exactly are the Israelis meant to do? Arrest a mob of hundreds? Why should Israelis sacrifice their soldiers for a mob that will kill them as soon as they get within an inch of the soldiers anyway? You think these are human rights activists or something?

So the unarmed civilians were going to what, punch the Israelis to death? Even after being tear-gassed and hit with with whatever other less-lethal arms the Israelis have in their arsenal? Yeah, better just shoot them to be on the safe side.

Laughable only on terms of scale. The point is it is a closed and armed border. You march against it, you're going to get shot. It's a darwin award waiting to happen... scratch that. It's a darwin award that has happened.

The scale is what I'm questioning here. You're saying that the Israeli border is just as closed and armed as the Korean border, presumably because the Palestinians are just as much a threat as the North Koreans. I'm saying that's laughable. You can't just say "the border is closed and armed, therefore it is equivalent to every other closed and armed border on the planet (and by the way I'm going to pick the most extreme example when making this false equivalence)."

[Asher]

In the Iran-Iraq war, Iran sent "protesters"--children--through mine fields. They gave them little keys and told the tikes that they were off to heaven.

The basic principle is the same here. Mass the border with expendable civilians and attack.

For the Syrians it's an excellent strategy designed to divert attention from the anti-Ba'ath uprising.
For the Palestinian volunteers it's an excellent way to die for the cause.
For the Israelis it's fubar.

What exactly are the Israelis meant to do? Arrest a mob of hundreds? Why should Israelis sacrifice their soldiers for a mob that will kill them as soon as they get within an inch of the soldiers anyway? You think these are human rights activists or something?

1) More tear gas
2) Rubber bullets
3) Nets (don't laugh, they've been done)
4) Water cannons
5) SOUND cannons
6) Tazers

Basically, the same ****ing **** you'd use on any of your OWN civilians in a protest situation out of hand.

Are Israeli soldiers so very pathetic, by the way, that whenever these unarmed civilians get close to them, they have no hope? I thought they were trained in hand to hand, etc. They could also retreat, then return with more tear gas.

Killing indiscriminately is both callous and lazy.

[notyoueither]

In the Iran-Iraq war, Iran sent "protesters"--children--through mine fields. They gave them little keys and told the tikes that they were off to heaven.

The basic principle is the same here. Mass the border with expendable civilians and attack.

For the Syrians it's an excellent strategy designed to divert attention from the anti-Ba'ath uprising.
For the Palestinian volunteers it's an excellent way to die for the cause.
For the Israelis it's fubar.

What exactly are the Israelis meant to do? Arrest a mob of hundreds? Why should Israelis sacrifice their soldiers for a mob that will kill them as soon as they get within an inch of the soldiers anyway? You think these are human rights activists or something?

I'd like to know why they did not use non-lethal means of stopping the protesters, as they did in other places.

[loinburger]

I'm guessing that worst case it was meant to send a message about reverting to the 1967 borders, but that more likely it was a failure in local command. I'd be interested to know if they had riot gear on hand but for whatever reason decided not to use it.

[Donegeal]

I'd like to know why they did not use non-lethal means of stopping the protesters, as they did in other places.

Perhaps because it happened in a different location earlier where force was not used and the troops were overrun.

And Loin, yes, this would stand for any hostile closed and armed border.

[Hauldren Collider]

I don't think it's really relevant whether Israel uses nonlethal weapons on them or not--As Donegeal said, and as I have said, this was suicide by cop, a darwin award that HAS happened. They were warned and did it anyway--I therefore extend no sympathy.

Using nonlethal weapons to prevent death from your own stupidity or design is a nicety that Israel evidently didn't provide here, but there's no reason that they should have to.

[loinburger]

Using nonlethal weapons to prevent death from your own stupidity or design is a nicety that Israel evidently didn't provide here, but there's no reason that they should have to.

Hmm yes there certainly is no moral imperative against needlessly killing people.

[The Mad Monk]

Damn, I gotta remember to read the whole thing through.

[Docfeelgood]

So why exactly is Israeli slaughtering protesters?

maybe they can't tell one raghead from another.

[Docfeelgood]

Hey loinburger, Boris, and Asher, the word you're looking for is 'olive-skinned'

[giblets]

I don't think it's really relevant whether Israel uses nonlethal weapons on them or not--As Donegeal said, and as I have said, this was suicide by cop, a darwin award that HAS happened. They were warned and did it anyway--I therefore extend no sympathy.

Using nonlethal weapons to prevent death from your own stupidity or design is a nicety that Israel evidently didn't provide here, but there's no reason that they should have to.

I guess the Israelis shouldn't complain about rockets- trying to carve out a country in the middle east surrounded by countries who don't want you there was almost suicidal.