IDF Soldiers Dismissed for Refusing to Expel Jews

[Lipush]

Two IDF combat soldiers were dismissed on Thursday night from their roles in the Nahal Brigade's Regiment 50, after they put photographs on Facebook of themselves with signs vowing to refuse orders to expel Jews from their homes.

The identities of the soldiers were revealed through an investigation ordered by Col. Yehuda Fuchs, commander of the Nahal Brigade, who decided to react harshly to the new protest in which soldiers from various units photographed themselves with similar signs opposing the expulsion of Jews, posting the pictures on Facebook.

Soldiers taking part in the protest came from a variety of units aside from the Nahal infantry unit, including Givati, the Border Police and Air Force, reported the Hebrew-language site 0404 News.

The protest follows the eviction and demolition of homes in the town of Ma'ale Rehavam, in Judea's Gush Etzion region, on Wednesday. The town, along with the two Samaria communities of Givat Assaf and Ramat Gilad, was slated for dismantling by next Sunday by the Supreme Court. Residents in Givat Assaf agreed to dismantle their own homes to avoid a similar expulsion as occurred in Ma'ale Rehavam.

IDF Soldiers Dismissed for Refusing to Expel Jews - Defense/Security - News - Arutz Sheva


This is getting rediculous

 

[Beelzebub]

Interesting.

You cannot have soldiers deciding policy of course.
And settlement clearance is a matter of government policy, just as settlement expansion is.

As they expel Palestinians under orders, I don't see why they shouldn't do the same here.
Ethnic bias?

 

[Lipush]

Interesting.

You cannot have soldiers deciding policy of course.
And settlement clearance is a matter of government policy, just as settlement expansion is.

As they expel Palestinians under orders, I don't see why they shouldn't do the same here.
Ethnic bias?

Lets start with the fact that the IDF's foundation is defending Jews, not Palestinians. That's one thing. I think that IDF expelling any Jew is sad, but what's even more sad is the panic-like state the military is in. They dismissed a soldier for defending himself against stone-throwers, after simply cocking his rifle in warning.

What that really necessary?

The soldiers cannot determine the policy? That's very much correct. But I think the system is not doing enough to help those things from happening. Do we really expect a soldier comming from a settlement to go expel his own family? I think there's a limit.

Besides, even if all of this is correct, dismissing a s soldier over political opinion is not enough. In field, they didn't refuse order, their 'crime' was a facebook protest.

The punishment is totally without proportion, in that case.

 

[Beelzebub]

Surely the soldier who was dismissed for "cocking his rifle" was actually dismissed for beating his officer up? All suggestion that he was being punished for the incident with the Palestinian boy was denied by the IDF. And they made a point of telling his actual crime, against the officer...

And soldiers are tasked with doing what they are told.
They are there to protect a state, not to protect individuals. A state (sadly) may say, "these thousands of our people have to die, because it will prevent these others from making a strategic loss.

If they want to protect individuals, they should get jobs as body guards.

As to the punishment for a facebook post being excessive: I disagree. Insubordination is bad but PUBLIC insubordination is much worse. World wide media covered insubordination must be met with an example being made of the soldier. He is lucky to get off so lightly.

I think any effective first world army would do the same. Maybe more.

 

[Beelzebub]

Ahem.
Lipush. Just leave this if you don't want to answer. Have you done your military service?
I only ask, as I am not sure you have reflected a close understanding of how an army operates.

(And that would be no bad thing, I hasten to add.)

 

[Lipush]

Surely the soldier who was dismissed for "cocking his rifle" was actually dismissed for beating his officer up?

That's not true. An IDF who beats up his soldier won't continue serving after his trial.

So that excuse is a sorry one, no-one bought that for a second.

In the IDF once you're having problems with the guy in charge, they change your location, not your force and role in the military.

I happen to know that first hand, I almost passed a precisure called "Kvila" which in Hebrew means "to tie up". It's when a soldier calls to put his or her commander into discipline procedure because of a wrong order made.

I almost asked for that in time of my service, the officer in charge of me obligated me to stay in my post alone, while being very sick, for over 12 hours. The only reason why I didn't do it was because I didn't want further problems with anyone, and I known had it been the case, they'd remove me from my position, probably to another base in the navy.

But they don't expell soldiers or commanders who have problems with other soldiers or commanders. It's only in the past 3 years or something that they tend to go through that, which is more than redundent. It's crazy and unjustified.

All suggestion that he was being punished for the incident with the Palestinian boy was denied by the IDF. And they made a point of telling his actual crime, against the officer

They exchanged versions at least 3 times in less than 48 hours. Why should any sane person believe the only one sounds most crazy?

And soldiers are tasked with doing what they are told.
They are there to protect a state, not to protect individuals.

The army is made of individuals. Once you get drafted you're turning in to what we call "Rechush Tzahal", the IDF property. I believe this youth is tired of this definition. Should we really wonder why?

If they want to protect individuals, they should get jobs as body guards.

While I can see your point, what drives those soldiers to do what they do is to put themselves in the place of this individual. The system needs to take that in mind.

As to the punishment for a facebook post being excessive: I disagree. Insubordination is bad but PUBLIC insubordination is much worse. World wide media covered insubordination must be met with an example being made of the soldier. He is lucky to get off so lightly.

I think any effective first world army would do the same. Maybe more.

Maybe, but again, if speaking of the previous incident with the Nahal soldier, those who dared to show support were trialed to prison. So again, proportion is needed. Sitting in military jail effects your life afterwards.

 

[Lipush]

Ahem.
Lipush. Just leave this if you don't want to answer. Have you done your military service?
I only ask, as I am not sure you have reflected a close understanding of how an army operates.

(And that would be no bad thing, I hasten to add.)

I believe I answered your question above, but to do it further, yes. I got drafted on September 20th, 2007, and my release was after full service in September 17th, 2009.

 

[Beelzebub]

I would still say that any army which cherishes the individual soldiers opinions and feeling has misunderstood what an army is about.

But then, a conscript army is an issue which tends to lead to bad feeling, unprofessionalism and a desire in the conscripts to 'express their individuality'. And each new generation has new ways to do this more publicly.

Thank you Lipush.

Your stories add colour to my appreciation of life over there.

 

[Lipush]

I would still say that any army which cherishes the individual soldiers opinions and feeling has misunderstood what an army is about.

But then, a conscript army is an issue which tends to lead to bad feeling, unprofessionalism and a desire in the conscripts to 'express their individuality'. And each new generation has new ways to do this more publicly.

Thank you Lipush.

Your stories add colour to my appreciation of life over there.

I'm glad I can be of help.

 

[Phoenall]

Interesting.

You cannot have soldiers deciding policy of course.
And settlement clearance is a matter of government policy, just as settlement expansion is.

As they expel Palestinians under orders, I don't see why they shouldn't do the same here.
Ethnic bias?

What have the P.A. done that is similar, apart from give their soldiers a 6 year holiday on full pay and pension.