Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
My Military's Moral Low
Since the major military operations in Gaza stopped last week, the full effects of the heavy-handed assault that my country conducted there have become increasingly clear. Our leaders' responses to the carnage are shocking: after each "misfire" of our artillery, hitting a school or hospital, some high-ranking general or politician apologizes for the "mistake." Usually they talk about a Hamas militant firing from the area or using civilians as human shields.
As a former soldier in the artillery forces of the Israel military, I watch and shake my head in disbelief. From the Qassam rockets falling on Sderot and other Israeli cities in the South, we know that Hamas intentionally targets civilians with their bombs, but I wonder how the men and women of my country's artillery corps can do what they are doing while our leaders speak with such cynicism. I wonder what has happened to the moral compass of the Israeli military.
Drafted into the Israeli military in 2000, I served in the artillery corps as a gunner in artillery crew M109. The bombs we used, which are also being used today in Gaza, have a 50 meter kill radius. Anybody caught within 200 meters is likely to be wounded. Because these bombs are imprecise, our military regulations prohibited firing them to within a 350 meter radius of fellow soldiers in an open area (or within 250 meters if they were in an armored vehicle). To fire these shells into a heavily populated area like Gaza City carries a known risk of injuring and killing civilians within this range.
Experts reviewing the evidence have also concluded that soldiers in Gaza have also fired white phosphorus shells, which were in the arsenal when I served in the army as well. These shells contain 116 small wafers of phosphorus. To maximize their effect, the shells explode some tens of meters before they hit the ground, sending 116 flaming wafers over an area up to 250 meters.
Since the beginning of the current incursion, I have been watching the news with anger and shock. I am stunned that the soldiers of my country are firing artillery into a densely populated city, and that the ammunition they are using appears to have involved white phosphorus. With the high number of Palestinian civilian casualties in this incursion, my military has outdone itself in cultivating disregard for the loss of civilian life. Even if our political and military leaders cannot know the precise civilian cost of each shell, we do know well in advance that the weapons are using now in Gaza will have severe consequences for the human beings in a wide radius around them.
As a soldier who used these weapons in Lebanon, I am outraged at our leaders' apologies and explanations for loss of innocent civilian life. Minister of Defense Ehud Barak is a decorated former head of military who should know what every combat soldier learns in basic training. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert led an unsuccessful war in Lebanon only two years ago, and we remember the dire civilian consequences (still unfolding) of our military's use of cluster bombs there.
I want to know what goes on in the heads of these experienced leaders when they decide to use such weapons in the field, this time using artillery fire in a densely populated urban area. I wonder whether they think they can get away with their claims that they were aiming only at terrorists.
Challenging them, we must quote not only the numbers of dead civilians, many of them women and children, but we must also say openly that the methods used by our military were ones with known results. Our government knew in advance that the artillery shells would result in hundreds of civilians dead and wounded and thousands of homes destroyed. When they decided to move forward anyway, they did so in complete disregard of international law, dragging our military to a new moral low.
- Posted in

15 Comments so far
Show AllIt always the case that those countries that claim to be combatting terrorism and people that are barbaric and "Target Civilians" justify their own savagery against Civilians with words like "Collateral Damage".
Apologists for America in Vietnam and Iraq, NATO in Afghanistan and the Balkans, Israel in Lebanon and the Gaza strip all hide like cowards behind those same platitudes.
Sniffle sniffle, we are so sorry for the civilians killed sniffle sniffle, we do not TARGET civilians. Sniffle sniffle, we are so soryry and will investigate at the HIGHEST levels. See does this sniffling not proove us their betters?
The FACT is they DO target civilians.
If you KNOW a bomb kills everyone in a 50 meter radius and you KNOW it will wound people 200 meters out, and you drop it in a crowded place like Hanoi, Baghdad, Beirut or the Gaza strip...you are doing so DELIBERATELY and your are killing Civilians DELIBERATELY.
You are so in love with your own DOGMA your own belief system and the smell of your own shit, you are willing to murder children to demonstrate your superiority.
You are the definition of immoral.
Our science and technology has led to the situation where we can basically destroy all civilization with our weapons of war. Yet we have not advanced to the point where we can end our tribalism, our nationalism and our pig headed short term self interest to ensure such a war never occurs.
We have to move beyond that and I will continue to rail against those self proclaimed "patriots" and those "nationalists" who continue to elevate the lives and well being of "Their own" be it their own skin color, nationality or religion , over those of the "other".
The "better 10 of "theirs" then one of "ours" philosophy is far too dangerous and too immoral to embrace.
Gw, Bravo!!!
I second that.
It's good to see these reasonable voices among former Israeli soldiers. If only there were more of them, many many more of them. Polls during the Gaza slaughter showed popular support in Israel being between 80 and 85 percent for the attack. How does one get through to so brainwashed a populace? These Israeli dissidents are brave souls indeed and deserve massive foreign support so their number and influence can grow within Israel. But so long as the US govt gives political coverage to the thugs running that country, these moral voices will remain isolated in the wilderness.
"we know that Hamas intentionally targets civilians with their bombs,"
"our military regulations prohibited firing them to within a 350 meter radius of fellow soldiers in an open area (or within 250 meters if they were in an armored vehicle)"
Exactly, Israel tries to minimize civilian casualties and Hamas tries to maximize them.
"As a soldier who used these weapons in Lebanon"
Perhaps you have problems with the military tactics used by your superiors, but I doubt you question Israel's right to self defense. How does it feel to think that most of the people on this sight would call you a war criminal and want you sent to the Hague simply for defending Israel?
You __ J O E H O P E __,
are ___ e x p o s e d ___
by your typical English as a 2nd language error of CD
_____ as a " s i g h t ",
_____ instead of correctly as a " s i t e ".
Thereby the illusion that you voted for Obama ( as a "Progressive" ) is equally bankrupt.
I could be right, but otherwise you are just ignorant -- which is it ?
Good work CD proof-reader! Have you come across any other misplaced homophones today? Any dangling participles? Subject-verb disagreements? What an exciting life you must live!
Your detective work has exposed quite a mystery! Is English secretly my second language? Am I a Turk? A Bolivian? When at home, do I speak in Esperanto? Did I really vote for Obama? Hmmmm...
...or did I get sloppy while typing too quickly and did the spell-check fail to catch my misplaced homophone? Yes, it is embarrassing, "site" vs. "sight" is pretty careless typing. And it's also a rather boring theory isn't it?
I like your version better, especially with your fancy fonts, and strange theories about my identity.
"To fire these shells into a heavily populated area like Gaza City carries a known risk of injuring and killing civilians within this range."
Any war carries a known risk of injuring and killing civilians.
Lets put your family in Gaza and let us know what is acceptable?
… so perhaps that's the reason it's considered a war crime to instigate attacks against civilian populations ( or other countries even ):
___ 'crimes against the peace'
Namaste
Aaaah the voice of unreason appears!!!!
Joehope, the swiftboating, Zionist wannabe, shill really whines when truth outs.
But I could be wrong !
"But I could be wrong !"
Yeah.
BTW, "swiftboating"? I voted for Kerry. Did you? You are so anti-military that you probably agreed with the "swiftboaters".
"Zionist wannabe"
I support Israel. I don't call myself a Zionist, but other people call me one as if it's some kind of insult. I have no problem if people want to call me a Zionist. Biden calls himself a Zionist and he's not even Jewish. What's wrong with being a Zionist?
You are not only a zionist. You are a racist too.
Where did that come from?