Does Hamas kidnap Israeli soldiers?

[Loren Pechtel]

There has been some attempts to muddy the waters by pretending they're just taking prisoners of war.

They admit the objective is kidnapping:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvF_il0WFXk

(Yes, this is about their tunnels, not kidnapping. The relevant bit is they said they used the tunnels to kidnap an IDF solider.)

 

[laughing dog]

In other news, the earth still revolves around the sun.

 

[arkirk]

There has been some attempts to muddy the waters by pretending they're just taking prisoners of war.

They admit the objective is kidnapping:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvF_il0WFXk

(Yes, this is about their tunnels, not kidnapping. The relevant bit is they said they used the tunnels to kidnap an IDF solider.)

And you discount the importance of religion in this conflict. When you make war on someone, he digs in and tries all his military skills out. You make far too much of the kidnapping of ONE IDF SOLDIER. Blowing up people in houses and buildings logically leads to people living in tunnels and shelters. BFD!

 

[Warpoet]

Stop spamming the forum with bullshit propaganda threads.

 

[Jayjay]

Who ever claimed that Hamas does not try to kidnap Israeli soldiers (and apparently, civilians if they can't get to soldiers)? It's a nasty strategy, even if committed against legitimate targets: first, it will basically force Israel to pound on Hamas as a punishment which means dead civilians. And second, the concessions Hamas eventually gets have absolutely nothing to do with benefiting Palestinians... the purpose is to get Hamas activists and leaders out of jail at best. It's a war crime.

There is no easy solution. Israel would have to let its captured soldiers rot as Hamas's prisoners to break the cycle.

 

[untermensche]

Taking soldiers prisoner when you are being attacked is a legitimate military activity.

To have problems with it is just more master mentality.

I can attack you, but anything you do to defend yourself is illegitimate.

Raise your hand as the master strikes you and that is a crime.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

There has been some attempts to muddy the waters by pretending they're just taking prisoners of war.

They admit the objective is kidnapping:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvF_il0WFXk

(Yes, this is about their tunnels, not kidnapping. The relevant bit is they said they used the tunnels to kidnap an IDF solider.)

And you discount the importance of religion in this conflict. When you make war on someone, he digs in and tries all his military skills out. You make far too much of the kidnapping of ONE IDF SOLDIER. Blowing up people in houses and buildings logically leads to people living in tunnels and shelters. BFD!

I presented this because others have insisted it's not kidnapping.

The point is your beloved terrorists are committing war crimes.

 

[laughing dog]

And you discount the importance of religion in this conflict. When you make war on someone, he digs in and tries all his military skills out. You make far too much of the kidnapping of ONE IDF SOLDIER. Blowing up people in houses and buildings logically leads to people living in tunnels and shelters. BFD!

I presented this because others have insisted it's not kidnapping.

The point is your beloved terrorists are committing war crimes.

So are yours.

 

[Bronzeage]

In Europe, during WW2, it was common for the US Army to send out small patrols into the forest for the sole purpose of capturing a single enemy soldier, when immediate intelligence information was needed. The common soldier had no top secret information, but he did know his unit identification, which was valuable information. Most captives were happy to tell. Interrogators acted as if this was unimportant routine information, but it was needed to determine enemy movements and troop strength. I'm sure the same kind of thing has happened in all wars in all times. Calling a captured combatant a "kidnap victim" is silly.

 

[Jayjay]

Taking soldiers prisoner when you are being attacked is a legitimate military activity.

Taking soldiers as hostages is not. This is explicitly defined as a war crime in Geneva convention and for a good reason.

 

[arkirk]

And you discount the importance of religion in this conflict. When you make war on someone, he digs in and tries all his military skills out. You make far too much of the kidnapping of ONE IDF SOLDIER. Blowing up people in houses and buildings logically leads to people living in tunnels and shelters. BFD!

I presented this because others have insisted it's not kidnapping.

The point is your beloved terrorists are committing war crimes.

I never said Hamas was innocent. You are simply over emphasizing a minor event in the "war." I am not in love with either Hamas or its actions... In my estimation, a soldier in uniform anywhere near a military engagement in which his organization is involved CANNOT BE KIDNAPPED. He merely becomes a POW. Look at who Obama calls combatant and what he does with them. Outright blowing people up is worse than merely snatching them and making them prisoners.

 

[untermensche]

Taking soldiers prisoner when you are being attacked is a legitimate military activity.

Taking soldiers as hostages is not. This is explicitly defined as a war crime in Geneva convention and for a good reason.

Taking them is legitimate.

Killing or torturing them after you capture them is not legitimate. Even if the US says it is allowed to torture.

Using them to gain concessions is perfectly legitimate.

 

[The Paul]

And you discount the importance of religion in this conflict. When you make war on someone, he digs in and tries all his military skills out. You make far too much of the kidnapping of ONE IDF SOLDIER. Blowing up people in houses and buildings logically leads to people living in tunnels and shelters. BFD!

I presented this because others have insisted it's not kidnapping.

The point is your beloved terrorists are committing war crimes.

The notion that this kind of activity can be considered a war crime is absurd.

Well, I suppose you can label it whatever you like, but if you start killing people, especially if you start killing people who have vastly weaker military strength than you, it's completely fucking insane to expect that they're going to adhere to some kind of honorable warriors code in their retaliation.

 

[Togo]

Taking soldiers prisoner when you are being attacked is a legitimate military activity.

Taking soldiers as hostages is not. This is explicitly defined as a war crime in Geneva convention and for a good reason.

My understanding is that they were simply captured, and then released in exchange for the release of similar individuals captured by the IDF. A straight prisoner for prisoner swap.

I'm not sure in what sense they are hostages rather than prisoners, or how this practice differs from the IDF's habit of capturing militants?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Duh. When the IDF does it, it's a legitimate military strategy to capture armed combatants. It's only when the dirty towelheads do it that it's kidnapping.

You can't compare the two actions when one is clearly good and the other is clearly evil.

 

[laughing dog]

Taking soldiers as hostages is not. This is explicitly defined as a war crime in Geneva convention and for a good reason.

My understanding is that they were simply captured, and then released in exchange for the release of similar individuals captured by the IDF. A straight prisoner for prisoner swap.

I'm not sure in what sense they are hostages rather than prisoners, or how this practice differs from the IDF's habit of capturing militants?

It doesn't. For example, even though Hamas did not claim responsibility for the killing of the 3 teenagers, the IDF "captured" 500 Hamas "terrorists". As far as I know (and I could be mistaken), the 500 are still in "detainment".

 

[Jayjay]

Taking soldiers as hostages is not. This is explicitly defined as a war crime in Geneva convention and for a good reason.

Taking them is legitimate.

Killing or torturing them after you capture them is not legitimate. Even if the US says it is allowed to torture.

Using them to gain concessions is perfectly legitimate.

Not according to the 4th Geneva convention, article 3:

In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:

(1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed ' hors de combat ' by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.
To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

(a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

(b) taking of hostages;

(c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment;

(d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

(2) The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.

 

[Jayjay]

Taking soldiers as hostages is not. This is explicitly defined as a war crime in Geneva convention and for a good reason.

My understanding is that they were simply captured, and then released in exchange for the release of similar individuals captured by the IDF. A straight prisoner for prisoner swap.

I'm not sure in what sense they are hostages rather than prisoners, or how this practice differs from the IDF's habit of capturing militants?

There is nothing wrong with capturing enemy combatants to remove them from battlefield, after all that's an alternative to executing them. What Hamas is doing is capturing soldiers specificly to use them as hostages, over a period of years and years that is mostly hurting not the soldiers or Israeli military but their families. Israel does the same thing to an extent, but that hardly makes it right.

 

[Jayjay]

My understanding is that they were simply captured, and then released in exchange for the release of similar individuals captured by the IDF. A straight prisoner for prisoner swap.

I'm not sure in what sense they are hostages rather than prisoners, or how this practice differs from the IDF's habit of capturing militants?

It doesn't. For example, even though Hamas did not claim responsibility for the killing of the 3 teenagers, the IDF "captured" 500 Hamas "terrorists". As far as I know (and I could be mistaken), the 500 are still in "detainment".

This is exactly the kind of tit-for-tat that hostage taking during war time leads to. One side starts to skirt the rules, so the other side retaliates. Israel knows it will have to make a lop-sided exchange, so it takes hundreds of people prisoner for bartering purposes. Ultimately neither side gains anything.

This is in no way excuses some Israeli policies, but if it weren't for the previous prisoner swap, wouldn't those people be in jail anyway?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

In Europe, during WW2, it was common for the US Army to send out small patrols into the forest for the sole purpose of capturing a single enemy soldier, when immediate intelligence information was needed. The common soldier had no top secret information, but he did know his unit identification, which was valuable information. Most captives were happy to tell. Interrogators acted as if this was unimportant routine information, but it was needed to determine enemy movements and troop strength. I'm sure the same kind of thing has happened in all wars in all times. Calling a captured combatant a "kidnap victim" is silly.

That's capture for interrogation, a legitimate tactic.

- - - Updated - - -

Duh. When the IDF does it, it's a legitimate military strategy to capture armed combatants. It's only when the dirty towelheads do it that it's kidnapping.

You can't compare the two actions when one is clearly good and the other is clearly evil.

There is no military objective in capturing for the purpose of prisoner exchanges. Thus it's kidnapping.