17 bullets in a young girl

I heard something on the news last night which really made me sick. An eight year old palestinian girl was shot 17 times by an Isreali soldier. There were no clear reasons for this, other than she was in a restricted area of some sort. The Iserali then said to his fellow colleages that she should have been shot even if she was three. This on its own is horrific, but the crux of the news story was about how this soldier has been aquited by an Isreali court of all charges, essentially on the grounds that he has done nothing wrong.

I suppose this is the epiphony of my frustration with the situation in Palestine. In the fifties, after the Holocaust, the surviving Jews fled to 'their promised land' and, with the help of Britain and America, annexed the land of Palestine as their own Isreal. The fact that Palestine was already occupied, and had been for many, many years didn't seem to bother them. The result was that the Palestinians were suddenly being oppressed by the Iserali's who claimed, and still do claim, that the land was theirs because it was promised to them by God. This in itself is appaling, that something as feeble and unproveable as religion could be used to justify the illegal takeover of a country, and the immense suffering placed on the Palestinians. And yes, there has been suffering. Backed by the seemingly omnipresent U.S. of A, the Isreali's have a huge army consisting of American tanks, fighters jets and guns. With these tanks, the Isreali's perpertrate things such as bulldozing entire villages, often killing people inside the buildings.

Of course there is the other side of the coin. Now I'm no terrorist sympithiser, there is never an excuse for killing, but I despise the way people never seem to contemplate why suicide bombers do what they do. As the Palestinians have no army, especially not one to match up to the might of the American funded Isreali army. This means that the only form of resistence the Palestianins have is to blow themselves up. This has led to an endless spiral of an eye for an eye. Isreal respond to each terrorist attack by using their planes to bomb residential areas. They seem to always say that these attacks are an attempt assassinate Hamas leaders, but the reality is that the Hamas leaders are often either not there, or they merely survive the bombing, while many civilians are killed and injured. In response to these assassination attempts the terrorist groups will respond with another suicide bomber, and so the vicious circle goes on.

The wider issue here is to do with the so called 'global war on terror.' Evidence has shown that there was no such group as Al-Quaeda until George Bush mentioned the name in a speech just before 9/11. Until then Al-Quaeda was nothing more than a very small group of Islamic extremists headed by Osama Bin-Laden. After the term Al-Quaeda was used, this group adopted the title for themselves. Since 9/11, we have been told that there are Al-Quaeda ''sleeper cells' across the world, waiting for a chance to launch an attack against the west. The reality is that there is no global network of terrorists. Attacks such as the July 7th ones in London etc. are often perpertrated by lone sympathisers who turn extremist for many different reasons.

The reasoning behind these horrific attacks comes from Americas clearly biased backing of Isreal. That America and its allies are launching some kind of assault against the Islamic world. This view stems from, like I said, the backing of Isreal and and things like the invasion of Iraq. If the world could just see that the real threat is not from Al-Quaeda sleeper cells, but the idea of America and its allies, primarily Britain, as being against the Middle East, it is this idea which is turning people into terrorists, and there is a very simple soloution: change foreign policy. Don't meddle with things which don't concern us. I'm not saying revert to a completey isionationalist policy, like the one in North Korea, just that the west shouldn't go off on illegal and costly invasions, costly in both a monetary and life sense. Don't start stirring up trouble for no reason, like the trouble in Iran, a country which doesn't have the money or technology to develop nuclear weapons, and even if it did it would be around five years before they had a single warhead.

In general, be a good and peace loving. Armies are for defense, not attack.

The problem is, the chances of the west doing anything along these lines when there are still terrorist attacks happening is highley unlikely, and so we're back to the old "I'll put down my gun if you put down yours" situation.

Apologies if you feel I'm not asking any specifeic questions. I just want to see what other people think.

That'll teach you to be little!

I'd probably care more if I didn't already know this would happen ANYWHERE there was a goverment resitrcted area. Wether it be dictatorships like N. Koreia or Pakistan, or democracies like The United States and "sortof" Britian..

When the goverment doesn't want you near a landscape, they'll make sure you're not near that landscape and make an example out of you..

I'd like to hear what source this news has.

Originally Posted by Magister

That'll teach you to be little!

I'd probably care more if I didn't already know this would happen ANYWHERE there was a goverment resitrcted area. Wether it be dictatorships like N. Koreia or Pakistan, or democracies like The United States and "sortof" Britian..

When the goverment doesn't want you near a landscape, they'll make sure you're not near that landscape and make an example out of you..

Do you honestly believe that an American soldier would shoot a three-year-old American girl 17 times and kill her? If you do, you're out of your mind. Then again, I suppose it would depend on the race of the child, but that's another topic.

I do agree that the West needs to change its foreign policy. These terrorists groups are a reaction to our past actions. They're not the aggressors. Granted their means are not to be supported, but what they're fighting for is understandable.

Originally Posted by Mrs Ganondorf

I'd like to hear what source this news has.

Yeah, show us where you heard this. There are a lot of Nazi websites making false news about Isreal.

General study, none of it was from nazi sources anyway. If you want a good source on this subject then there's this three part documentry sereis called the power of nightmares. It explains alot. If you can get it on DVD, do so.

Originally Posted by Shadowhand

General study, none of it was from nazi sources anyway. If you want a good source on this subject then there's this three part documentry sereis called the power of nightmares. It explains alot. If you can get it on DVD, do so.

When alleging a specific incident, i.e., an Israeli soldier pumping 17 bullets into a Palestinian girl, it is best to have a specific source. Locked until sourcing is provided.

Reopened. Epyon found a source.

Originally Posted by superdude

Thats just horrible. How could anyone do such a thing to a little girl.

For all the Israeli knew she had a bomb and was trying to blow something up. Thats the only way the Palestinian's can fight. Its that and stones....
Also seems a bit of a waste... Why 17 bullets? Thats more than half of his clip... 2 would of done the job.

Oh, yeah, because a three-year-old would have a bomb strapped to her AND know how to operate it.

Originally Posted by Ogmios22188

Oh, yeah, because a three-year-old would have a bomb strapped to her AND know how to operate it.

A three year old can bearly speak. So I doubt they are stupid enough to send one out.
And they don't exactly need to know how to control the bomb.. It can be done via cellphone.

Guys, one sentence statements aren't going to cut it anyone. Especially when they simply condemn or support, and don't discuss at all!

Can you tell already that I don't like this topic, and I'll take any excuse to lock it? Let's raise the level of discussion here.

It seems that the soldier was one of the sort who blindly follows orders. The soldier seemed to be convinced that he was innocent, further cementing my conviction. Seeing as how he only recieved minor charges, I'm guessing the military there CONDONES this behavior. That is something much more disgusting and frightening than the murder itself.
It makes me wonder if they would go so far as genocide if they thought they could get away with it.

I wonder, why wasn't this a major story on the news? Why didn't civil rights groups raise an outcry at this travesty? Why did everyone turn a blind eye? These are questions that I doubt anyone will answer.

Originally Posted by Evil Tomato

It seems that the soldier was one of the sort who blindly follows orders. The soldier seemed to be convinced that he was innocent, further cementing my conviction. Seeing as how he only recieved minor charges, I'm guessing the military there CONDONES this behavior. That is something much more disgusting and frightening than the murder itself.
It makes me wonder if they would go so far as genocide if they thought they could get away with it.

I wonder, why wasn't this a major story on the news? Why didn't civil rights groups raise an outcry at this travesty? Why did everyone turn a blind eye? These are questions that I doubt anyone will answer.

To assume that the military condones this is unjustified. The military has to try the man based on what happened and what could be expected of him.

When you're weilding a gun and you think there is a problem, you have a split second of time to act. When you do make that action, you act to kill. There is no such thing as shooting to wound, there is only shooting to kill.

The other unfortunate aspect of human nature is the adrenaline. There are people who, at crime scenes, claim they only shot "one or two shots," who in reality have shot many more, perhaps even reloading. When you get into situations like these, your brain isn't working normally. When you're weilding an automatic gun, it's even easier to spray out seventeen shots quickly.

If the military finds that he deserves a light sentence, he likely does. I think his punishment is enough, having to live with himself for the rest of his life, knowing that he accidently slaughtered a young girl.

As for why civil rights activists don't raise this-- it isn't a case of racism or genocide. It's just an instance of a horrible tragedy in the sad human story of history.

(Oh, and, thanks for your thoughts! )

Originally Posted by Shadowhand

I heard something on the news last night which really made me sick. An eight year old palestinian girl was shot 17 times by an Isreali soldier. There were no clear reasons for this, other than she was in a restricted area of some sort. The Iserali then said to his fellow colleages that she should have been shot even if she was three. This on its own is horrific, but the crux of the news story was about how this soldier has been aquited by an Isreali court of all charges, essentially on the grounds that he has done nothing wrong.

I'm sorry, but, if your in a restricted area, then you risk getting yourself killed. Law is law, no exceptions.

Originally Posted by Ogmios22188

Oh, yeah, because a three-year-old would have a bomb strapped to her AND know how to operate it.

Being young doesn't mean that she can't have a bomb on her. Remote detonation, timer-detonations, the range of choice to detonating a bomb is endless.

Originally Posted by Ogmios22188

Oh, yeah, because a three-year-old would have a bomb strapped to her AND know how to operate it.

Being young doesn't mean you can't be used as a suicide bomber. The people over there will literally stop at nothing to teach their opposers a lesson. I don't think he did much wrong because of the simple fact that even young children are strapped up with bombs and sent in to do the dirty work. WE don't think that's possible because of our "love the children!" philosophies. However, those who live in the Middle East are desparate and will use desparate measures to get the job done. Even if it means the death of a child.