It’s amazing how often the Israeli military does that. They’re all just Mavericks. Loose cannons. Not you know in the heroic kind of way where they defy orders to save their comrades or rescue civilians though. In the commit war crimes type of way.
Can you be more specific? What do you mean by It’s amazing how often the Israeli military does that? Are there any other recent instances where they tied people on the hoods of vehicles?
The article states they did stuff like this in the second intifada but were banned from doing so by the Israeli Supreme Court. Although there have been “reports” of similar incidents since then.
So what’s the required number of videos to convince galactic geniuses such as yourself? 2? 12? Or do we just move the goalposts after every bit of information comes out that doesn’t support your opinion? That seems to be how it works, or you just switch to “lalala, I can’t hear you”…
Israel will be on the wrong side of history on this, and it won’t even take long.
What? That’s literally a confirmation‽
You can only do something in violation of orders by actually doing it. Therefore -> “in violation of orders” translates to “they did X in violation of orders”
It’s amazing how often the Israeli military does that. They’re all just Mavericks. Loose cannons. Not you know in the heroic kind of way where they defy orders to save their comrades or rescue civilians though. In the commit war crimes type of way.
Can you be more specific? What do you mean by It’s amazing how often the Israeli military does that? Are there any other recent instances where they tied people on the hoods of vehicles?
The article states they did stuff like this in the second intifada but were banned from doing so by the Israeli Supreme Court. Although there have been “reports” of similar incidents since then.
Based on the rest of the comment, I think they were referring to how often members of the Israeli military defy orders.
That’s what I figured but I wanted more info and sources to those claims.
Here an easy resource from a website that usually have receipt: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_war_crimes?wprov=sfti1
Here is some notes to help you with wikipedia.
you read the overall sentence. Usually it ends with a source or multiple. Usually news article, research paper, books, blogs and many other form.
sometimes you can open the link to it is own specific page which usually have more details.
if you are not sure about a specific incident or don’t like the wordings, you can:
I’m sorry that the IDF war crimes have been creatively diverse enough that they don’t need to do the same exact thing twice for your liking.
And now we have so-called “videos” of them doing it. Before you know it, there’ll be actual “proof” and stuff.
We have a video of speculation. I understand how that’s enough for the dumdums
So what’s the required number of videos to convince galactic geniuses such as yourself? 2? 12? Or do we just move the goalposts after every bit of information comes out that doesn’t support your opinion? That seems to be how it works, or you just switch to “lalala, I can’t hear you”…
Israel will be on the wrong side of history on this, and it won’t even take long.
We also have statements from the IDF that this actually happened. It’s in the linked article. In the first sentence.
Omg thank you!
This claim is miles away from saying they committed a war crime. Thank you so much!
What? That’s literally a confirmation‽
You can only do something in violation of orders by actually doing it. Therefore -> “in violation of orders” translates to “they did X in violation of orders”