The English language addition took extensive liberties with the Hebrew language article, no more so than the “killing fields” headline. Yet you are also distorting the facts. The Hebrew language article has been confirmed. Frightened IDF soldiers, confronting an enemy indistinguishable from civilian, having been tasked to do something they are not trained and which runs counter to their experience in Gaza fired on unarmed aid seekers. Soldiers do not maintain peace. Soldiers wage war.
I am not going to provide a complete rebuttal. It would take too long and this is a comment with character limitations. Haviv Gurr has an English language podcast available on YouTube that does a much better job at analyzing HaAretz, this article in Hebrew and the distortions and liberties taken in the English language edition than I can offer or this Substack post. Moreover, he observes that the stories told in the Hebrew language HaArretz edition were confirmed by the military’s investigation. Orders to troops were changed, as a result.
No, it was not a killing field. It was frightened soldiers untrained to perform the task assigned who responded to perceived and real threats who used lethal force.
I think Gurr’s point should be acknowledged. Israel can win the war and lose the peace. Using soldiers to maintain order during a war without special training will result in these situations. The intent was not to shoot at those seeking aid but it also happened.
The Israeli military did not want this job and this is why. Troops will make these errors in asymmetrical, urban conflicts. For Gurr, the lesson is not the distortions in the English language edition pandering to the confirmation biases of its English language audience. It is the absence of a grand strategy in the conflict that has some idea of the end and how that ending will be achieved.
Feeding Gazans undermines Hamas’ power. Hamas understands this and will do its best to undermine an aid policy that undermines or threatens that power.
But the fact is IDF troops did shoot at those seeking aid. They did so under duress, they did so from fear, they did so because civilians appeared from an unexpected direction during a morning fog. They did so because there is a real threat from Hamas and because their orders explicitly stated that anyone within 300 yards of their position should be fired upon.
Perception is reality. It may not have been intentional but it happened. IDF leadership altered standing orders. Soldiers acting as peace officers will always result in these incidents because soldiers are not trained to maintain the peace.
My general comment: I receive Haaretz in English, despite having canceled my subscription. In fact, the Netanyahu government had floated the idea of banning the publication altogether. I find its constant Bibi and government bashing, at least in the English version, almost entirely indistinguishable from Qatar’s Al Jazeera.
I would suggest finding the Ask Haviv Anything podcast and listen to his analysis of Haaretz and this story. I found it illuminating.
According to polling 2/3 of Israeli voters dislike Bibi.
The point is the strategy.
According to Haviv Gurr Haaretz, because it is elitist, will cover stories no other paper will bother covering. The Hebrew language story is important because it shows there are no tactics to support and protect dispensing aid. If dispensing this aid to civilians is successful it could break Halmas’ hold on Gaza.
The mistranslation into English is a problem. Getting the tactics of aid right is more important to achieving the grand strategy of defeating Hamas totally
You mixed up two topics in your post. Haaretz's lies and Israel's strategy. This article is about the newspaper's coverage of the situation, and you can't mix it up with the general strategy of protecting objects with the help of the army and the methods of waging war. This is incorrect on your part and on Haviv Gur's part.
Either we look at the coverage of the situation, or we look at the situation itself. Together, we get a mess.
Since the beginning of this story, I have read several Haaretz articles in Hebrew and English. First of all, the Hebrew articles are pure propaganda aimed at the few Israeli fans of this newspaper. Normal Israelis have either stopped reading Haaretz or read it out of habit, understanding its bias. Ten years ago, it was a respected publication that followed the facts. Now it is pure propaganda, falsifications and manipulations. The headlines do not correspond to the content, the facts are presented as vague and allow for different interpretations of the events, inconvenient facts (such as the fact that the army itself is not located at the aid distribution points) are omitted, allowing for a distortion of reality.
The fact of the incidents themselves is also omitted, when it seems that such incidents occurred, but only the giving of orders and intentions is mentioned, without mentioning whether they actually happened. Therefore, the reader himself associates an incident that occurred in other places, in other conditions, with a specific place.
It is clear that Haaretz's sources are anonymous, but we do not know to what extent Haaretz interprets the words of those to whom it refers, and here there are serious doubts. Well, and the already cited distortions in the translation and inconsistencies between the headline and the content in the English version. The English-speaking reader is the main target of Haaretz, and this is mostly an anti-Israeli reader. This is exactly what Haaretz is focused on. And how the army should react and how it should be prepared for such situations is a separate conversation, and it is much more complicated than you presented it.
And one more thing. I did not understand why you noted that 2/3 of the population do not support Netanyahu? This is indeed so, but I did not understand what this confirms or refutes.
They only lied in their English language edition mistranslating from the accurate Hebrew article. The Hebrew article demonstrates that IDF soldiers were given a task that would eventually lead them to shoot at civilians because there was not grand tactics thought through the mission.
On the one hand we have a translation to English that mistranslates the Hebrew in order to attract eyeballs. On the other, the article in Hebrew points out huge deficiencies in how the troops are being used. The two are inextricably linked.
Thank you for clarifying, NPR had Steve Bannon on for 30 minutes to further the laments, just learned that he's a member of Opus dei which is the same Catholic sect that Robert Hansen the infamous known spy Church guy and Bill barr of the doj's father who anointed Epstein
People speak of the Jesuits and I've seen piles of intertwining Jesuits throughout American history
The English language addition took extensive liberties with the Hebrew language article, no more so than the “killing fields” headline. Yet you are also distorting the facts. The Hebrew language article has been confirmed. Frightened IDF soldiers, confronting an enemy indistinguishable from civilian, having been tasked to do something they are not trained and which runs counter to their experience in Gaza fired on unarmed aid seekers. Soldiers do not maintain peace. Soldiers wage war.
I am not going to provide a complete rebuttal. It would take too long and this is a comment with character limitations. Haviv Gurr has an English language podcast available on YouTube that does a much better job at analyzing HaAretz, this article in Hebrew and the distortions and liberties taken in the English language edition than I can offer or this Substack post. Moreover, he observes that the stories told in the Hebrew language HaArretz edition were confirmed by the military’s investigation. Orders to troops were changed, as a result.
No, it was not a killing field. It was frightened soldiers untrained to perform the task assigned who responded to perceived and real threats who used lethal force.
I think Gurr’s point should be acknowledged. Israel can win the war and lose the peace. Using soldiers to maintain order during a war without special training will result in these situations. The intent was not to shoot at those seeking aid but it also happened.
The Israeli military did not want this job and this is why. Troops will make these errors in asymmetrical, urban conflicts. For Gurr, the lesson is not the distortions in the English language edition pandering to the confirmation biases of its English language audience. It is the absence of a grand strategy in the conflict that has some idea of the end and how that ending will be achieved.
Feeding Gazans undermines Hamas’ power. Hamas understands this and will do its best to undermine an aid policy that undermines or threatens that power.
But the fact is IDF troops did shoot at those seeking aid. They did so under duress, they did so from fear, they did so because civilians appeared from an unexpected direction during a morning fog. They did so because there is a real threat from Hamas and because their orders explicitly stated that anyone within 300 yards of their position should be fired upon.
Perception is reality. It may not have been intentional but it happened. IDF leadership altered standing orders. Soldiers acting as peace officers will always result in these incidents because soldiers are not trained to maintain the peace.
My general comment: I receive Haaretz in English, despite having canceled my subscription. In fact, the Netanyahu government had floated the idea of banning the publication altogether. I find its constant Bibi and government bashing, at least in the English version, almost entirely indistinguishable from Qatar’s Al Jazeera.
I would suggest finding the Ask Haviv Anything podcast and listen to his analysis of Haaretz and this story. I found it illuminating.
According to polling 2/3 of Israeli voters dislike Bibi.
The point is the strategy.
According to Haviv Gurr Haaretz, because it is elitist, will cover stories no other paper will bother covering. The Hebrew language story is important because it shows there are no tactics to support and protect dispensing aid. If dispensing this aid to civilians is successful it could break Halmas’ hold on Gaza.
The mistranslation into English is a problem. Getting the tactics of aid right is more important to achieving the grand strategy of defeating Hamas totally
You mixed up two topics in your post. Haaretz's lies and Israel's strategy. This article is about the newspaper's coverage of the situation, and you can't mix it up with the general strategy of protecting objects with the help of the army and the methods of waging war. This is incorrect on your part and on Haviv Gur's part.
Either we look at the coverage of the situation, or we look at the situation itself. Together, we get a mess.
Since the beginning of this story, I have read several Haaretz articles in Hebrew and English. First of all, the Hebrew articles are pure propaganda aimed at the few Israeli fans of this newspaper. Normal Israelis have either stopped reading Haaretz or read it out of habit, understanding its bias. Ten years ago, it was a respected publication that followed the facts. Now it is pure propaganda, falsifications and manipulations. The headlines do not correspond to the content, the facts are presented as vague and allow for different interpretations of the events, inconvenient facts (such as the fact that the army itself is not located at the aid distribution points) are omitted, allowing for a distortion of reality.
The fact of the incidents themselves is also omitted, when it seems that such incidents occurred, but only the giving of orders and intentions is mentioned, without mentioning whether they actually happened. Therefore, the reader himself associates an incident that occurred in other places, in other conditions, with a specific place.
It is clear that Haaretz's sources are anonymous, but we do not know to what extent Haaretz interprets the words of those to whom it refers, and here there are serious doubts. Well, and the already cited distortions in the translation and inconsistencies between the headline and the content in the English version. The English-speaking reader is the main target of Haaretz, and this is mostly an anti-Israeli reader. This is exactly what Haaretz is focused on. And how the army should react and how it should be prepared for such situations is a separate conversation, and it is much more complicated than you presented it.
And one more thing. I did not understand why you noted that 2/3 of the population do not support Netanyahu? This is indeed so, but I did not understand what this confirms or refutes.
They only lied in their English language edition mistranslating from the accurate Hebrew article. The Hebrew article demonstrates that IDF soldiers were given a task that would eventually lead them to shoot at civilians because there was not grand tactics thought through the mission.
On the one hand we have a translation to English that mistranslates the Hebrew in order to attract eyeballs. On the other, the article in Hebrew points out huge deficiencies in how the troops are being used. The two are inextricably linked.
They lie
I once threw a punch toward someone, but it wasn’t really “at” them.
https://apnews.com/article/palestinians-israel-gaza-contractors-aid-distribution-fe27f3ea83e06a09d66424eed7a5d56f
Erev rav at hitleretz
Thank you for clarifying, NPR had Steve Bannon on for 30 minutes to further the laments, just learned that he's a member of Opus dei which is the same Catholic sect that Robert Hansen the infamous known spy Church guy and Bill barr of the doj's father who anointed Epstein
People speak of the Jesuits and I've seen piles of intertwining Jesuits throughout American history
Fwiw 🤔