Palestinian says Israeli soldiers used him as human shield in West Bank

[David__77]

DURA, West Bank (Reuters) - A Palestinian shop owner said Israeli troops used him as a human shield to protect themselves during a raid on the town of Dura in the occupied West Bank.

Mobile phone footage showed Baha Abu Ras being marched up a street by a soldier who guided him from behind with one hand and kept a rifle resting on his shoulder with the other. Two Israeli soldiers advanced carefully behind them, their rifles raised.

Abu Ras said he had been taken from his mobile phone shop on Monday in Dura, near the city of Hebron, after Israeli soldiers searched the premises during a raid in which Palestinian officials said two Palestinians were shot dead.

"He (the first soldier) told me that he will use me as a human shield, that young people shouldn't hurl stones," Abu Ras told Reuters. "'You will walk in front of me.' That's what happened and he took me toward the centre of the town."

…

https://www.aol.com/news/palestinian-says-israeli-soldiers-used-124220121.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAGWfHn-7Fsa_w9xn6pbc9RmvFTxJKVp6IDR1jHx5WNQwE763SNdWJ_11MIrl5c1_8kxkKr4OZjbIcf3vo5pQ5b6DmtaunLG8fuqSYjWNuAJ19RTwyyXAm5_HvqhSRD76G0xi7UISDeMgwN4AZ4BqDF5tASEi1Dpsx3yvfIAoXDuM

[Beastly Boy]

1. Why the sudden interest in Palestinians being used as human shields?

It has been happening for months in Gaza, on a huge scale, and no media coverage whatsoever. And, if the Hamas health ministry is to be believed, over 30,000 of the civilians, including women and children, who were being used to shield military targets in Gaza did not survive the ordeal.

[David__77]

2. Thank goodness there is interest rather than complete indifference.

[Beastly Boy]

3. Complete indifference by the media to Hamas using human shields in Gaza for seven months.

Over 30,000 human shields dead.

Thank goodness for a single account alleging the use of Mr. Abu Ras as a human shield finally making it!

[David__77]

4. This article does pertain to an incident in the West Bank portrayed on the man's phone video.

[Beastly Boy]

5. Indeed it does. And I am grateful to the media for publishing it, as I am for Mr. Abu Ras making through it unharmed,

as I am reminded by the appearance of this article of the otherwise deafening silence by the media in acknowledging 30,000 instances in which human shields perished. Something that makes me wonder what kept them so silent for so long.

[Eko]

6. I think there is a bit of a difference between a soldier physically putting an enemy

in front of him to protect himself and Hamas embedding with civilians to protect themselves. As you have told me many times that is a war crime. Ergo Israel is now committing a war crime. I am sure you will call them out on it.

[revmclaren]

7. Not when you compare 30,000 to one.

Or even 15,000 to one...or even 1,000 to one...whatever is comfortable for you to believe.

The 'suddenly human shields are important, but only for Palestinians 'is blatent hypocrisy.

[Eko]

8. That is a fair point.

I would still say that there is a bit of a difference. One would be using civilians from the other side as a human shield. It would also be fair to point out that Hamas might be doing the same with Israeli civilians as well though with their captors. Two would be using them to advance on what they perceive as possible enemy as the IDF soldier did. Three would be there is video of it. As I said I think that is a bit different but in all cases using human shields is just plain wrong and a crime on both sides.

[Beastly Boy]

9. Assuming the facts match the account, this is indeed a crime.

Otherwise, there is absolutely no difference whether a human shield is used in front of a military target, behind it, on top of it or below it, or if the military target is a human, a tank, a building or any other military asset.

[Eko]

10. Yes, assuming the facts match the acount

But there is one difference you did not mention, that of using a enemy civilian to protect yourself while moving into danger. That is different indeed.
https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/ZiewtkbZJLXBiw9QWLP2Cw--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTEyNDI7aD04Mjc-/https://media.zenfs.com/en/aol_reuters_29/83d794c6de45de2dfacbc535a1c401ea

[Beastly Boy]

11. Well, if you need me to spell it out:

Assuming the facts match the account of an enemy civilian being used to protect an IDF soldier while moving into danger, this is indeed a crime.

Better?

[Eko]

12. No, you agreed with that in post 9.

If the difference I have stated is not important to you then you are free to say so. No need for you to keep saying the same thing.

[Beastly Boy]

13. No, a made up difference without distinction is not important to me at all.

But feel free to keep beating a dead horse while I enjoy the rest of my day.

Buh-bye.

[lapucelle]

15. The difference is that this is two rogue soldiers, not a military strategy implemented by a government.

Hope that helps!

[lapucelle]

14. Indeed there is a difference: Here, two individual soldiers appear to be committing a war crime, not "Israel".

Using human shields is not an Israeli military strategy, and there is no Israeli government policy that calls for the military to install itself in, around, and under civilian infrastructure. Israel protects all of its citizens from any strategy that deliberately puts them in harms way, including the 2,100,000 Palestinian citizens of Israel.

Court martial the two soldiers to ensure that this does not become a pattern, but to conflate these two soldiers with "Israel" as a whole is, at its very best, a hasty generalization.

[Eko]

16. I can agree with that.