All unnamed, citing undocumented incidents, and not naming anyone AT ALL that may have been invovled. Until they actually say who saw and did this, I treat it as propaganda. All of it right now is unfounded.
there's a link in the article that leads to another, more coprehensive one. It has some names too.
They did mention other offenses and things like being ordered to destroy whatever they can or shoot everyone.
No. They said that they felt like they could vandalize things "just because they could," and even that is suspect to me. Granted, shooting everyone would be a war crime if you knew that every person in that building was innocent and in no way involved. RoE are made to protect one kind of person, either civilian or military. Given the Hamas and Gaza penchant for using civilians as suicide bombers, the RoE was completely justified.
No. They got orders to destroy the houses. To throw everything out the windows. Break everything of value so tthat the people really have nothing to return to.
See last sentence above.
I have. Unwaranted. Always was, always will be. not to mention that the children and woman were going away from the soldiers. If they were bombers you'd reckon they'd go towards them.
If I was in the army and my superior gave such an order, I would shoot HIM.
And be court martialed, found guilty, and SHOT. Just because he gave such an order is no grounds for shooting him.
And I'd die a happy man if need be.
And I reckon such an order is sufficient grounds for shooting children?
Israel is believed to be using controversial white phosphorus shells to screen its assault on the heavily populated Gaza Strip yesterday. The weapon, used by British and US forces in Iraq, can cause horrific burns but is not illegal if used as a smokescreen.
I've seen videos of white phosphorous rockets fired on
houses, in the middle of a city, with people running away. No soldiers were even near.
If that is giving your troops a smokescreen, then the IDF is doing it wrong.