U.S. May Study Israel Occupation Tactics

[Herschel]

- In an apparent search for pointers on how to police a hostile population, the U.S. military that's trying to bring security to Iraq is showing interest in Israeli software instructing soldiers on how to behave in the West Bank and Gaza, an Israeli military official said Thursday.

Using animated graphics and clips from movies like "Apocalypse Now," the software outlines a "code of conduct" for avoiding abuse of civilians while manning roadblocks, searching homes and conducting other activities, said Lt. Col. Amos Guiora, head of the School of Military Law.

cut

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030...

Another benefit of Israel as an ally. This may help our soldiers deal with Iraqis, particularly those that are attacking.

[ex_jew]

1. I hope they include the part about defecating in the

cultural offices of occupied countries. That was SO impressive.

But seriously, the Israeli occupation seems to have accomplished little in 36 years (besides antagonizing the captive population). Why is this a model to emulate ?

[Darranar]

2. Great idea!

Let's continue the occupation of Iraq for another thirty-six years, build settlements there, bulldoze Iraqi houses, target militants resisting the unjust US occupation in the middle of crowded streets, and otherwise make inhumanitarian nuisances of ourselves.

GET THE US OUT AND THE UN IN - NOW!

[cherryperry]

4. Oh, come on!

There is absolutely no comparison in the 2 situations in the way you have posted.

We have a refuge; it is called the USA.

One parallel here, of course. We did get rid of the Native population quite quickly and stole Mexico.

However, we have no claim on Iraq.

Israel was granted statehood by your beloved UN. They gratefully accepted it with the two-state solution and all. The Palestinian Arabs did not; the Arab armies all descended on Israel and Israel won. Please get over it.

[Darranar]

5. I was comparing Iraq to the WB and Gaza...

not Israel itself. If you look at the thread about the justification for Israel's existence, you'll see that I defend its existence - however reluctantly.

[IndianaGreen]

14. Our troops will resort to poison gas if need be to keep the colonies

in line, as the British troops did in Iraq in the 1920s.

Our last occupation

Gas, chemicals, bombs: Britain has used them all before in Iraq

Jonathan Glancey
Saturday April 19, 2003
The Guardian

No one, least of all the British, should be surprised at the state of anarchy in Iraq. We have been here before. We know the territory, its long and miasmic history, the all-but-impossible diplomatic balance to be struck between the cultures and ambitions of Arabs, Kurds, Shia and Sunni, of Assyrians, Turks, Americans, French, Russians and of our own desire to keep an economic and strategic presence there.

Laid waste, a chaotic post-invasion Iraq may now well be policed by old and new imperial masters promising liberty, democracy and unwanted exiled leaders, in return for oil, trade and submission. Only the last of these promises is certain. The peoples of Iraq, even those who have cheered passing troops, have every reason to mistrust foreign invaders. They have been lied to far too often, bombed and slaughtered promiscuously.

Iraq is the product of a lying empire. The British carved it duplicitously from ancient history, thwarted Arab hopes, Ottoman loss, the dunes of Mesopotamia and the mountains of Kurdistan at the end of the first world war. Unsurprisingly, anarchy and insurrection were there from the start.

The British responded with gas attacks by the army in the south, bombing by the fledgling RAF in both north and south. When Iraqi tribes stood up for themselves, we unleashed the flying dogs of war to "police" them. Terror bombing, night bombing, heavy bombers, delayed action bombs (particularly lethal against children) were all developed during raids on mud, stone and reed villages during Britain's League of Nations' mandate. The mandate ended in 1932; the semi-colonial monarchy in 1958. But during the period of direct British rule, Iraq proved a useful testing ground for newly forged weapons of both limited and mass destruction, as well as new techniques for controlling imperial outposts and vassal states.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,939608,0...

[The Magistrate]

22. This Fellow Does Need Rather To Slow His Breath

And perhaps do a little research.

Not one of the things he claims were developed during the Iraqi "Air Control" operations had not been in use long before the end of the Great War. The thing was far from a laboratory of modern weapons, as virtually all equipment used during the Mandatory period was of Great War design: the nearest thing to a real innovation was the transport of troops by air, in modifications of a heavy bomber type, that could carry ten men each. In 1920, the use of gas was viewed as a perfectly legal and routine part of warfare: Europeans, after all, had for years been immersing one another in it by the hundreds of thousands not long before.

There is, however, one small overlapping relevance to the current predicament. The great revolt of 1920 was triggered by the attempt of the English administration to collect taxes; a report in the paper yesterday on the new economic program being promulgated by our puppet regime said that this features the imposition of an income tax on Iraqis, commencing January next. Collection might be fun indeed.

[Jackie97]

9. The two state solution suggested by the UN.

It was one where Israel would get most of the land considered to be Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza Strip. Palestinians were left with little of the land that was ORIGINALLY THEIRS.

They want the right to return and to actually be treated like equal citizens. Get over it.

It's not that I'm against Israel's right to exist, but I will not fall for some bullcrap idea about how the Zionists were supposedly the good guys in the forties. They weren't. They were wanting to take a land for their own, which the Arabs knew would lead to them being second class citizens. They were right. Even Arab Israelis are treated second class.

[The Magistrate]

10. Actually, Jackie

The United Nations partition envisioned a Jewish Zone noteably smaller than the current boundaries of Israel, based on the Armistice Line at the end of the war in '48. None of the territories over-run in '67 were allocated to the Jewish Zone. The west of Galilee, at the north of the country, was allocated to the Arab Zone, as was the whole area around Jerusalem, and in addition, the coastal area at the south now known as the Gaza strip stretched farther north, and a good deal farther inland. The west of Galilee, the approaches to Jerusalem from the west, and areas around Gaza, all were conquored during the course of the war in '48.

Someone will doubtless be able to produce, or direct you to, an adequate map to supplement my verbiage.

[Aidoneus]

12. ask and thou shalt receive..

map of exactly what Magistrate describes at:--
http://www.passia.org/palestine_facts/MAPS/1947-un-part...

(general response to some things from other posts in this thread, mostly the 4th)

A map of land ownership and population breakdowns at the time is pretty staggering also, such that even the UN Partition map is overly generous in itself to the Israeli side (well, I also think partition itself was a bad idea, but that's a whole other discussion..). The irony of the "partition" matter is that General Assembly resolution 181 was just as non-binding as the dozens of resolutions that generations of Israeli governments have thumbed their nose at for sport, picking and choosing moments of UN 'relevance'.

Those fond of mentioning the Arab-Israeli state of war following May 15th tend to mysteriously leave out entirely the organized pre-Israel/Zionist paramilitary operations in the lands outside of Jewish-designated "partition" lands well before the other Arab states got involved, attacking Arab villages in the area south of Lebanon/Acre-Nazareth, and in the Jaffa/Ramleh/Lydda region between Tel Aviv & Jerusalem in preperation for later attacks on the Jerusalem area itself (the most widely known and mentioned, of course, being the paramilitaries combining their effort in the assault on Deir Yassin and the massacre that transpired, though this was only one of hundreds of villages to be overrun and demographically altered in the period).

An argument from another side could quite easily be made that, considering these active and expansionist demographic-altering operations well outside of partition-designated lands, the war that followed was aimed at preventing the catastrophe that would follow anyway, it having been well underway before the involvement of the other Arab states.

There was, of course, some reciprocal activity on the part of the Palestinian nationalists during the wars, but it was hardly "gratefully accepting it" on the part of the pre-Israeli/Zionists as a whole as the poster above put it. I guess mileage tends to vary as for what such terms mean.

[The Magistrate]

19. Thank You, My Friend

A small caveat concerning the preliminaries to the mobilization of the Arab states, and the March offensive of the Palmach and Etzel.

In Jerusalem, a sizeable community of Jews, in both the new and old cities was under effective siege by Arab irregulars of the Mufti's Fuutawa militia. In the Galilee, isolated Jewish communities were in a similar state, due to activities of the Syrian-sponsored Liberation Army irregulars. The operations were aimed at clearing communications and rescue of these communities. How things might have developed in the absence of further hostilities it is impossible to say, of course. That Ben-Gurion wanted more than he was alloted is probably true; it is certainly true these operations laid the groundwork for some of the later gains won by Israel in the course of the war. Most commentaries pitched to one side or the other tend to ommit any recognition that there was already an effective state of war even before the partition was declared.

One point that seems overlooked to me, also, concerning the possible binding nature of the United Nations partition. In partitioning Mandatory Palestine, the United Nations General Assembly was not directing any state in a matter concerning its sovereignty: it was disposing of United Nations property. England ruled there by Mandate from the League of Nations, in a relation roughly analogous to a lease-holder and a land-lord, and the United Nations inherited the latter status from the defunct League it replaced. No state was ordered to do anything: there was no state of any kind west of the Jordan, and England was certainly not sovereign there, but present only as the agent of the international body.

[Jackie97]

25. Okay.

Sorry about my mistake. The map still looks like the Zionists were still getting an unfair amount of land though, and of course several Arabs would have to leave if they wanted to be in a country that wasn't ran by another culture that might discriminate against them.

Thanks for the extra information.

[Darranar]

26. It's important to remember terrain as well and area population levels..

All the areas that were given to the Zionists had a Jewish majority. In addition, large sections of the Negev were given to the Jewish state, some of which weren't developed and have yet to be developed - in essence, worthless land. That, too, is counted in the total land area given to the Zionists.

In addition, immigration to Israel was something that was sure to happen; actions taken wth reagrd to only the present can have severe consequences in the future.

[Jackie97]

35. Mostly Jews in the area of land given to the Zionists?

Where did you read this? I know that there were Jews there, and were immigrating there since the 1800's, but that's new information to me.

[Darranar]

36. I don't remember exactly...

where I read that particular statistic, but I believe that it's accurate. Can anyone show me evidence to the contrary?

[The Magistrate]

37. Speaking Roughly, Sir

About a half million Jews, and about three-fifths that number of Arabs, were resident in the Jewish Zone of the original Partition. In the Arab Zone of the original Partition were about three quarters of a million Arabs, and about 20,000 Jews. In terms of land area, the Jewish zone was slightly larger but, as you pointed out, a very large proportion of this was Negev desert.

[Darranar]

38. Thank you for the clarification...

That's pretty much what I expected.

[mitchtv]

3. bwahahahahaha. half of the shit they do

would put our military up for war crimes.

[DuctapeFatwa]

7. If the US or Israel does it, it's not a war crime

It is, however both a war crime and a terrorist act to oppose any action of the bush or sharon regime or their gunmen.

[sushi]

32. That's right

If the US or Israel does it, it's called self-defense.

[Flying_Pig]

6. This was already posted last week......

Oh yes, and perhaps Sharon can give Bush more points on fascism. He's almost got it down now. Gheesh, if there was ever any country we DON'T need to help us in Iraq, with advice or anything else, its Israel.

[Jackie97]

8. Israel is such a good friend.

Since their soldiers have been occupying and ethnically cleansing the Palestinians for years (while making themselves look like the main victims), they're going to teach the US soldiers how to do the same.

Does it ever occur to the United States or Israel that if they don't want their soldiers to be attacked, that they need to get off of people's land? I know for a fact that if occupiers came to the United States, then we would run them straight off of the land. Why should we consider the Iraqis or Palestinians bad for wanting to do the same to defend the land that they live on?

How did we ever get to a point where occupying invaders were considered the victims of people defending their land?

[cherryperry]

16. Yes, that would be

before or after the U.N. made Israel a State?

Oh, "How did we ever get to a point where occupying invaders were considered the victims of people defending their land?" Quite a while ago. You live in the USA, right? Talk to some Native Americans or some people who used to "own" Texas...

[Jackie97]

20. Good point.

And everyday, I'm ashamed of the fact that we committed genocide against the Native Americans for land. I'm definately ashamed to learn the truth about the Alamo.

How did two wrongs start making a right?

[Trajan]

11. Once again .....

A poster identifies more closely with our opposition party's policy than with with the views of MOST Democrats: .... that the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza are WRONG ... and that the Likud stance is abhorent and 'counter productive' to say the least .....

If one wants to find support for the Likudnik policies of the current White House in DU ... one only need visit the I/P forum ....

There are PRO Likud views aplenty here .....

Instead of learning how to occupy a foreign people's land, we should learn how to get along with ALL the people of the world, and treat them with the same respect we demand for ourselves .....

Even arabs .....

[IndianaGreen]

13. US is now targeting civilian homes as the IDF does (LBN story)

and like Israel, the US is kicking the independent press out of Iraq:

Deadly U.S. strike near Fallujah

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Iraq council 'to ban Arab networks'

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[dudeness]

15. cough..cough..

pardon my obvious lack of knowledge in this area of world affairs..but i was lead to believe by our democratically elected leaders that we would be leading the sadly oppressed iraqis down the road of freedom ..prosperity and democracy..which leads to the question..why do the coalition of the willing need to employ israeli "occupation tactics" on a welcoming ..overjoyed population?

btw ..may i suggest rambo iv as an appropriate training tool..

[cherryperry]

17. Your, dudeness,

may I suugest you look at USA history for pointers?


Before you accuse me
Why don't you
Take a look at yourself? (courtesy Eric Clapton)

[dudeness]

21. and what by chance ,would a tacit look at US history do?

btw..I much prefer claptons instrument playing abilities..his lyrics I find somewhat banal..cheers

[SOS]

18. "Another benefit of Israel as an ally."

What a great benefit for the US! A piece of software with clips from Apocalyse Now (an appropriate choice) on how to operate a checkpoint .

[MariMayans]

23. our soldiers will do the same as the IDF with these instructions

completely ignore them.

The officers will issues orders absolutely at ends with what is presented in this little circle-jerk morality propaganda exercise and no one will say boo.

We will use it the same way the Israeli's do. If someone actually catches us busting skulls and breaking arms or just straight up lynching civilians someone will show how they recieved their little video and should have known better and that it was just an ugly abberation.

[bemildred]

24. CYA all the way.

[quilp]

27. Code "for avoiding abuse of civillians at roadblocks". What does the

Isreali army know about that? The US army already knows how to blow buildings up, don't they?

[Darranar]

28. This whole idea is so stupid, isn't it?

The last thing we need are more oppresive regulations against the Iraqi people. This plan of the US's will simply make those.

[quilp]

29. I can't imagine the ammunition this is giving Bin Laden and his merrie men

Not to mention the Bathists.

[Darranar]

30. Oh, yes...

the consequences of the Iraq war and its aftermath will surely involve a strengthening of Al-Qaeda.

This co-operation in occupying Arab territory between the US and Israel will add even more to strengthening Al-Qaeda.

Speaking of stupid...

[UserNamesAreFree]

31. If we hadn't been foolish enough to go

nation building in Iraq, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

[sushi]

33. This is so weird

Why study occupation tactics? Didn't they go there to liberate, not occupy?

[bemildred]

34. An unfortunate lapse into candor,

I'm sure it will not be repeated.