NationStates Jolt Archive

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purity_of_Arms

Note the bold part. I wouldn't have believed it myself, but I went to the Israeli military's web site (linked to in the article, but posted here anyway... http://www1.idf.il/dover/site/mainpage.asp?sl=EN&id=32) and it says the exact same thing.

Purity of Arms - The IDF servicemen and women will use their weapons and force only for the purpose of their mission, only to the necessary extent and will maintain their humanity even during combat. IDF soldiers will not use their weapons and force to harm human beings who are not combatants or prisoners of war, and will do all in their power to avoid causing harm to their lives, bodies, dignity and property.

Now... I'm not a big fan of Israeli policies towards the Arabs and Palestinians, but somehow I doubt that even if they had a written policy of executing prisoners of war (unlikely, they only ever executed one guy, and they put him on trial first) they would have the unmitigated chutzpah to label it "Purity of Arms."

Does anybody have the text in its original Hebrew? (I can't read Hebrew, but I can at least run it through a translator and see if it means what the English translation says.)

On the other hand, would the Israelis have hired a translator incompetent enough to totally distort the meaning of an official policy?

chutzpah-mela!!!

I don't understand how you are interpreting this. They call it "Purity of Arms" because they only use their arms and force against combatants, not civilians. That doesn't make this a policy that accepts the killing of prisoners of war. Besides, they are still bound by the Geneva Convention. So, basically, they purely use their weapons against other soldiers.

IDF soldiers will not use their weapons and force to harm human beings who are not combatants or prisoners of war,

oh no i understand the 150 or so children that israel killed in Lebanon during the past 2 weeks must have been hezballah combatants...
The red-cross vans bombed by israel was transporting rockets to be launched on northern israel and the UN PEACEkeepers killed today were disguised terrorists.

Israel is a rogue bloodthirsty nation and it will continue being so as long as it has the blind support of the US.

they are still bound by the Geneva Convention.

geneva convention is more or less just guidelines.

there is no country that follows them exact. you hear about the large countries always having issues that "might" not follow the geneva convention and such.

i always found it funny that if your going to war with someone that your going to follow specific rules during that war. (and expect the other person to be following them)

its a rather silly idea.

i always found it funny that if your going to war with someone that your going to follow specific rules during that war. (and expect the other person to be following them)

its a rather silly idea.



So silly that it is a long established notion in international law whose origins stretch far back in history...

I am sure we will never know for what possible reasons civilised nations desire to develop a set of laws of war designed to limit or mitigate the most terrible and awful aspects of armed conflict by ameliorating, in even the most basic way, the horror inflicted on innocent civilians, the wounded, or captured soldiers.

So silly that it is a long established notion in international law whose origins stretch far back in history...

I am sure we will never know for what possible reasons civilised nations desire to develop a set of laws of war designed to limit or mitigate the most terrible and awful aspects of armed conflict by ameliorating, in even the most basic way, the horror inflicted on innocent civilians, the wounded, or captured soldiers.



What 'far back into history' are you talking about? The idea of universal laws of war gos back no further than the late 19th century, and barely there, with the Hague Conventions. Prior to that, all you had were the occasional "gentleman's agreements" as to proper care of prisoners - and which almost invariably applied only to officers. As late as the American Civil War, ordinary soldiers who were captured faced horrific conditions, bordering on deliberate attempts at extermination. And that was in a war of "brother upon brother".

The (absurd) idea that these treaties form some kind of international law is a fallacy of strictly the last few decades. There is no international law, and never can be.

i always found it funny that if your going to war with someone that your going to follow specific rules during that war. (and expect the other person to be following them)

its a rather silly idea.

Both sides want to be treated fairly, and if the other side breaks the rules they face the consequences of the other side not following them either.

oh no i understand the 150 or so children that israel killed in Lebanon during the past 2 weeks must have been hezballah combatants...
The red-cross vans bombed by israel was transporting rockets to be launched on northern israel and the UN PEACEkeepers killed today were disguised terrorists.

Israel is a rogue bloodthirsty nation and it will continue being so as long as it has the blind support of the US.
I think you're missing Kahanistan's point.
It's not that they're stating they won't use their weapons against combatants, it's that they also stating that they have the right to use their weapons against POWs.
In other words, the IDF feel they the right to shoot, and presumably kill, people who have stopped fighting, have surrended, are disarmed and are no longer a threat, clearly in violation of the Geneva conventions.

IDF soldiers will not use their weapons and force to harm human beings who are not combatants or prisoners of war

I would imagine that it is meant to be interpreted as:

IDF soldiers will not use their weapons and force to harm human beings who are not combatants or are prisoners of war.

I assume that it is just bad English as it can be read both ways.

I may not like Iraeli foreign policy but I find it hard to believe that they would tell their soldiers to kill POWs in an official document.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purity_of_Arms

Note the bold part.
Just to note that I've unbolded that sentence and added a POV template to the Wiki article, for reasons noted on its talk page.