An Uzi? Sua, the Uzi’s a chick’s gun.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by hapaXL *
**
Thank you. Just calling 'em as I sees 'em.
More indication that the hardliners are equal-opportunity bullies:
http://news.yahoo.com/h/p/nm/20010404/wl/mdf30559.html
http://news.yahoo.com/h/p/nm/20010325/wl/mdf27575.html
And of course the ever-popular bulldozings of Palestinian homes:
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/p/nm/20010404/ts/mdf30518.html
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/p/ap/20010404/wl/mideast_israel_palestinians_jrl104.html
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/p/ap/20010404/wl/mideast_israel_palestinians_jrl106.html
Meanwhile, the Israeli government only talks about considering thinking about maybe bulldozing illegal Israeli “settlements” that spring up under cover of darkness on lands that the Palestinians have been given domain over, rather than actually doing it without warning. . . .
Nah, Sua, the M-16 has a longer barrel and is much easier to aim accurately. I mean, you wouldn’t want to be shooting for the rock thrower’s temple and end up merely blowin his jaw off, would you?
Besides, the Uzi is just so passe’… of course, M-16’s aren’t exactly the rage anymore, either. For true fashion sense, you can’t beat an MP-5 SMG, or if automatic weapons aren’t your thing, a trusty ol’ Desert Eagle… now available in Forest Green, Hot Pink, or Royal Blue.
Oh, wait, what were we talkin’ about…? Oh yeah, Israel…
Man, them Israeli’s just don’t have any fashion sense at all, do they? 
Well, fuck, Green, I resent that. That’s a snide, thoughtless, and above all wrong remark.
Let me give you a little scenario. Four, maybe eight young soldiers, with light arms, plastic helmets and armored vests (the kind that is mainly useless against knives and stones) find themselves in front of an angry mob of some five-hundred men and boys. This mob is throwing stones (which can be very dangerous) and firebombs (which can be lethal). So first of all, the soldiers respond with teargas. Unfortunately, teargas isn’t very useful against an experienced opponent, who’ll just wrap a wet rag around his face, pick up the canister and throw it right back. So the soldiers – after asking for approval via radio – start shooting what the US media gleefully calls “rubber-coated steel bullets”. These thimble-sized projectiles are about as dangerous as, well, a thrown rock.
But the mob keeps on advancing. Now, these soldiers know that if they get their hands on them, they’ll rip them to shreds – the two unarmed reservists who were beaten to death in Ramalla proved that. Or maybe there’s one guy in the mob with 10 pounds of plastic explosives strapped to his waist. So yes, sometimes the soldiers will shoot out of panic or hot-headedness, and yes, occasionally you get a bigot or a sadist who’s a bit to light on the trigger finger. The army tries to weed these traits out through training, but unfortunately, you can’t get them all. And besides, who can blame nineteen-year-old who shoots a man or boy with a lead pipe in his hand and murder in his eyes?
And that, by Palestinian PR standards, is the best-case scenario. After all, this has been mostly a hot war, with the Palestinians using AK-47s and M-16s to fire at Israeli troops. So what do you do if somebody shoots at you from a window? From behind a wall, over the heads of a mob? From among the crowd itself, hiding behind their own twelve-year old children, hiding the gun until the proper moment shows itself? I’ll tell you what: you fire back. You fire at the house, even though there may be civilians inside; you fire at the wall; and yes, if you have to, you fire at the mob – single shots, carefully aimed, meant to kill the shooter and the shooter alone, even though in many cases once the shooter is down the man standing next to him will pick up his rifle and keep on shooting. because the harsh truth in, a soldier’s first responsibility is to his own civilians, then to himself and his comrades-in-arms, and only then to hostile enemy civilians. I’m sorry, but that’s how it works. This Intifada is not a police action, like those riots you had in Seattle; it’s a low key war.
Achmed – I’ll get to you immediately.
What the fuck are you talking about, Alessan? Is there some part of my “shoot the rock throwing bastards in the forehead” posts that you didn’t understand?
Alessan, I’m siding with minty green. What the fuck you talking about? The post that pissed you off was part of the sick-joke tangent the three of us went off on about Uzis v. M-16s. Chill.
Achmed, you’ve made some interesting posts that are completely irrelevant to the OP. Simple question, and let’s take this out of the Mid-East context:
Some soldiers and/or civilians are being shot at with AK-47s. Back at the base, you have a helicopter gunship. If you use the helicopter to kill the people with the AK-47s, have you acted “disproportionately”?
Sua
Um, sorry Minty. I read your post very late last night, and not only did I not connect it with your previous post, it sorted mingled with Achmed’s in my sleep-deprived mind. I then typed up my little rant this morning, without actually reviewing the thread.
As for the “sick joke” - I actually didn’t realize we we were joking. I mean, you said something about M-16s, Sua responded with something about Uzis, and I corrected him with a sub-witty line of my own (which, BTW, is factually true - the Uzi is the wepon issued by the Israeli Army to female non-combat enlisted soldiers; it hasn’t been used in combat since the mid-seventies). Then Minty added his line, which, as I said, I misunderstood (although I still think it was in bad taste; killing a rioter is something nearly no soldier does willingly, or with much pleasure).
Can anyone spare a dime for the humor-deprived?
Sleep deprivation is a terrible thing, Alessan. I’ve had more than my share of it this week, so I can sympathize.
But hey, if it wasn’t for bad taste, I’d have no taste at all.
A rock is to a rifle as a mortar is to a helicopter gunship.
As far as Israeli soldiers being endangered, there’s a simple solution. Go home! This is a military occupation and can end at any time (well I guess it could have if they hadn’t insisted on pushing the settlers into the Occupied Territories). The soldiers can be safe and sound on Israeli land and never have to be threatened by rock-throwing youths. Or even a mortar barrage–yep, there’s a military move that’s sure to drive the Israelis out.
You don’t stand on somebody’s neck for 50 years and then get mad when they react. If I enter a lion’s cage, poke him with a stick, get scared when he jumps on me and then shoot him with a gun, was that an appropriate response? I put myself in danger. I provoked a response. My response saves me but how did I get into danger in the first place?
Only Israelis can feel “threatened” by a people so disenfranchised and powerless that their major form of fighting back is throwing rocks. The Israelis are in total control of the situation at all times. If this is truly a war, why are so few Israelis killed? Why are soldiers confronting 500 angry protesters? Leave before you have to kill somebody.
As for the OP, I think it is absolutely “disproportionate” to use modern weapons on a people so weakened by oppression. I think you need to see Palestinian response as more self-defense than agression: where are these skirmishes taking place? Palestine or Israel? Who is truly threatened: civilians in their homeland or soldiers taking part in a military occupation? I think the vast majority of the world agrees (except for Israel and the US) if the voting of the United Nations is any evidence.
All over the world, I see people protesting, throwing rocks at policemen, fire-bombing them. Rarely do I see said policement shoot protesters. And I do think it’s fair to call Palestinian actions “protest.” They obviously won’t change things–they are meant as symbolism rather than strategy. If they are more aggressive than “traditional” protest, I think that can be attributed to the incredible level of degradation than Israel has foisted upon them.
And Alessan:
““rubber-coated steel bullets”. These thimble-sized projectiles are about as dangerous as, well, a thrown rock”
“The army tries to weed these traits out through training”
“a soldier’s first responsibility is to his own civilians”
WTF?
I would caution HapaXL and others to remember that what is theory for you is everyday reality for Alessan. Remember that he lives in Israel and I suspect that his posts on the intifada come from first-hand knowledge. After all, every Israeli (except for the ultra-orthodox who got a bye from the Knesset)is required to serve in the Army, so I’ll just bet that Alessan has faced down a crowd of bloodthirsty Palestinians or two in his time.
For my money, the Palestinians should be stoning Arafat. If he had accepted Barak’s concessions, they would have had East Jerusalem for their capital and could now be scheming to snag the rest of the country. As it is, now they have the intractable Ariel Sharon to deal with, with no prospect of ever having any more concessions. In addition, Arafat’s grandstanding has completely discredited the Israeli peace advocates, leaving him with no allies on the Israeli left.
Before you feel too sorry for the Palestinians, remember that when the British left Palestine, they handed over all their buildings and ammunition to the Arabs, not the Jews. The Palestinians lost the war, and the war in 1956, and the one in 1967 (and they had Jordan, Egypt, and Syria to help), and the one in 1973. They have refused to compromise or share land peacefully. The Palestinians had the best offer they will ever get when Barak offered to share Jerusalem. That they refused the deal just shows how unreasonable they are. The Israelis have the tiger by the tail, and they can’t let it go without getting clawed to death.
Yeah. What Goboy said. Remember, Israel is completely surrounded by countries that make no secret of the fact that they want Israel pummeled out of existence and all its citizens killed.
Besides, haven’t those “rocks” been amply helped out lately by suicide bombers?
Where’s Sue Jo? I’m still wallowing in bigotry here!
Sua
No they can’t. The the Israeli’s believe that the land that’s being fought over is their land.
Ok, lets assume Israel pulls out of the Occupied Territories. Do you really think the PLO or whatever they’re calling themselves nowadays will be happy? Since the PLO was founded, I’ll give them credit, they haven’t made any secret of what their goals were. They want a Palestinian state made up of what is now Israel. They’ve said repeatedly that they want the inhabitants of Israel to leave, either by plane, ship, or bodybag, and they’ve never made any secret of that. So, why doesn’t anybody believe them? Look, the Palestinians are treated like shit, I’ll admit. Israel treats them like shit, and before that, Jordan and Egypt treated them like shit. I feel bad for their situation and would like to see it change, but throwing stones and Molotov cocktails, or shooting soldiers and launching mortars at Israeli settlements isn’t going to help them.
Aw, shit. I just spent the better part of an hour typing up a response to HapaXL before my computer froze up and sent my post to electronic limbo. Perhaps it’s for the best - you guys don’t deserves to be subjected to too much of my ramblings. Besides, Goboy, Eve and the captain seem to have covered my more coherent bases. Still, Hapa:
-
If we could be sure that withdrawing would end the conflict, we’d probably do it. but we can’t. Over the last few months, Palestinians have been openly calling for the destruction of Israel. Why should we give an inch to someone who wants us dead?
-
You should read some more newspapers, as well as look at a map every now and then. The Palestinians have been using a lot more than rock, and always have. And a weapon is a weapon is a weapon. If someone is trying to kill me, i don’t care too much about details.
3 WTP?
In reference to the Jerusalem issue I think that the Dome of the Rock was not in the section that was offered; Alessan can correct me on this. It’s the second or third most important religious site in Islam.
IMHO, another of the problems is that a part of the conflict involves religion, which is a topic that people have a hard time compromising on. Again, I think that there’s an important Jewish religious site (the Wall?)that is very close to the Dome- and neither side wants to give the area up to the other, for what each sees as compelling reasons. True, there are other reasons for the fight, but adding religion into the mix makes folks pretty inflexible on ‘negotiating’ points.
Frustration can lead to escalation, too.