- This topic has 23 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 11 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
I’m so sickened by this whole affair over Elor Azaria. As if this poor kid chose to grab a gun and go to Hevron – they gave him the gun in order to kill people if necessary and they sent him there in the first place. Then they want to throw him to the dogs for doing what they sent him to do in the first place!!!
That one of the heads of the IDF has the chutzpah to say, “He’s just a soldier, he’s not everyone’s son” makes me want to vomit. I don’t care how many falafels you have on your sleeve, I say that he IS my son! I’m personally not zionist in the least, the army didn’t want me and I have no intention of sending my kids there. But be that as it may I still feel every yid in that army is like my son or brother if for nothing else than that they are my fellow Jews. How can it be that I feel that way and the people who decide to send them into battle don’t!?!
Yalla Hashem – send us mashiach already. If this is how low we’ve fallen I don’t think we can make it much longer without him.
assurnet, Wow, that’s powerful. I agree with you wholeheartedly. Maybe I wouldn’t write “Yalla Hashem”, but the sentiment is right.
Hypothetically, if an Israeli soldier shot dead an Arab who was already arrested, handcuffed and undressed, do you think such a soldier should be jailed for 10 or more years?
“Then they want to throw him to the dogs for doing what they sent him to do in the first place”
I thought he was found guilty of shooting an unarmed injured terrorist?
Is that what he was sent to do?
NO. He shot a terrorist who was injured and alive, and suspected of having a suicide vest.
Their only mistake was not unloading a clip on the guy the first moment he appeared. Any hesitation in war is a crime to your fellow soldiers and people. The Torah demands us not to be fearful in war time, and anyone who is unable to handle it, must leave the ranks and not join the battle.
Ubiquitin, he was sent to protect Am Yisrael. Part of protecting Am Yisrael is killing terrorists.
I am behind him 100%. A go’el hadam is allowed to kill a Jew who accidentally killed his relative. We should certainly be allowed to kill our enemies who are out to destroy us and kill us deliberately.
Who knows how many lives he saved? He will receive a tremendous schar in Olam Haba for his actions.
And he certainly did not deserve to be convicted of manslaughter.
Please note: I do not know whether or not l’chatchila a person in such a situation should act as he did or not. One would have to ask a sheilah. But I think it was completely understandable, and having done it, I certainly don’t think he should be condemned for his actions and he certainly should not be treated like a murderer.
LU
“Part of protecting Am Yisrael is killing terrorists.”
Im not sure what you mean. He could be the biggest tzadik ever. The IDF operates with rules of engagment. According to those rules once a terrorist is neutralized killing him isnt justified.
Geodie
“NO, He shot a terrorist who was injured and alive, and suspected of having a suicide vest.”
Im not sure if that was directed to me. But that is not what he was found guilty of doing. (though it is possible that is what he did)
Ubiquitin – the laws do not always follow Halacha. I think that I heard that the law in this case is not according to Halacha, but I am not 100% sure.
If we are to follow halacha and not Israeli law, then anytime an Israeli soldier or jail warden shoots dead a handcuffed Arab, in Israeli jail after being convicted of murdering a Jew, the soldier or jail warden should be let off scot free every time it happens.
LU
“the laws do not always follow Halacha.”
they rarely do. And when they do it is accidental.
ubiquitin, Yes it was directed at you. The world’s most moral army doesn’t shoot unarmed injured terrorists ( – unless you believe al jazeera or the NYT).
Geordie
“unless you believe al jazeera or the NYT”
Or the millitary judges whop examined all the evidence…
Assurnet – I am the father of a soldier in the Israeli army who is very similar to Elor Azaria – he’s also a Sargent and a medic in Kfir, though in a different battalion. My son’s reaction was that while the terrorist definitely deserved to die, it was not Sgt. Azaria’s place to act as judge, jury, and executioner, and his story about how he was afraid there might be a suicide vest was not credible. As such, while I definitely sympathize with Sgt. Azaria, and on a personal level agree with what he did, it clearly seems that he violated open fire rules, and the army, as a body that only works and is able to function properly based on discipline, had no choice but to charge and try him for violating orders.
That being said, I hope the consequences to him are minimal, and that he is soon able to get on with his life – since, as you say, all soldiers are “our children”.
an Israeli Yid
He’s everyone’s son. Just like every other Chayal. and just like every other chayal, he was responsible for Tohar Haneshek, and just like every other soldier, he was responsible to follow orders and maintain a disciplined posture in all situations.
If he violated either of those responsibilities, which the judges found he did, and which the evidence seems to bear out, there is a disciplinary process that Tzahal has, and like any army must have.
Does that take away from the fact that the terrorist was scum, that killing him in the initial response would/could have been appropriate?
No.
Does that take away from the fact that Azaria acted against protocol because a friend and fellow soldier was injured by this terrorist, or because he saw killing the prone and wounded attacker would amybe deter others?
No.
He’s still everyone’s son even having acted against orders, even in jail, even if he’s done something wrong. And the terrorist is still evil even if he was filmed being killed contrary to discipline and protocol.
Assurnet – +1
The bottom line is, without necessarily blaming anyone, it is very sad and undeserved that he was convicted of manslaughter. And if there is any way that could be changed, it should be.
Ubiquitin:
“LU
“the laws do not always follow Halacha.”
they rarely do. And when they do it is accidental.”
And therefore, if he did in fact act according to halacha (which he may have), he should not be found guilty. Period. (I’m not necessarily blaming anyone – I don’t even know enough of the facts to do so – but, I can definitely say that if he acted according to halacha, something wrong is being done.)
LU
“And therefore, if he did in fact act according to halacha (which he may have), he should not be found guilty. Period.”
I disagree. but that is only tangentially related to my comment
Ubiquitin – are you saying that you think that the State of Israel has a right to make and enforce laws that are against halacha?!!!!!
LU
No I am saying that the opening statment “Then they want to throw him to the dogs for doing what they sent him to do in the first place” isnt true
As an a side arguably the stae of ISrael does have a right to make and enforce laws that are againt “normative halacha”. Much like a melech does this is especially true when it comes to an army where even many who dont recognize the medina as having a din “malchus” allow for some leeway for national defense.
See Hilchos medina volumes 1-3
LU: if I am not mistaken, it is the halachic norm to turn to a mumche in a particular issue to guide halachic decisions where the specific and current circumstances need halachic application. In this case, the mumche would be an expert in military discipline and Tohar haneshek. The IDF officer who wrote the policy would seem to be a mumche, and he came to a similar conclusion to what I wrote about this case, writing in an OP ED recently that this soldier did not act in accordance with Tohar Haneshek or his communicated orders.
Do you think that any army, let alone a Jewish one, can operate when each soldier makes all of their own decisions in a security situation? That would be incomprehensible to anyone who has served in any army or studied their actions. Each soldier does have the responsibility to question any order that violates the Tohar Haneshek policy. That is clear. But not killing the terrorist did not violate that policy.
As well, there is in application of Tohar Haneshek an active vs passive role. It is far clearer to demonstrate why one should save a life rather than why one should take one IN THESE circumstances (ie that the evil terrorist was already down, wounded and disarmed).
Israel and its army strive (sometimes, and fail, sometimes) to respect halacha; but it is not as currently constituted a halachic state as envisioned in the Torah (no melech, no kohen godol, no bais hamikdosh, and far, far removed from the agricultural society that most ste/land related halacha is predicated on). To thus expect its army to treat every enemy as Agag the Amaleki is unrealistic and frankly absurd.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.