Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Remsen, answer this question...

IIRC, although you’re an American, you went back and served in the Israeli Army out of a sense of cultural duty.

How would the Israelis be handling our current situation? Separating Arsonists, Antifa terrorists, and looters from peaceful protesters?

😎

U Z I

Chit, their school marms are packin'. I think I can predict the outcome here

But Interested in the response

Dual citizen - Dual loyalties.

Am not Remsen, but am correct...

That wasn't even remotely Beav's question.

The question was, how would Israel handle this.

Not the question.

Question is based on Remsem’s first hand knowledge dealing with violent protests, and worse in the Israel Army.

😎

Jews are bad m'kay?

Eye for an Eye...Golda Meir?

😎

Uh, he addressed him as an American, mighty sure Remsen has dual-citizenship.

Plus, you remain an idiot.

What about Moshe Dayan?

One eye.

Shut up, dipchit.

Even Beav corrected you.

I'll take a dual citizen Isreali, and I have a few friends that are, over a 1000 brain dead American born white bread mid west middle class Antifa puppet any day.

There is no constitution in Israel and no real analog to the first, fourth or eighth (for the duck) amendments, and since it's been a state of war since 1948 the military and police have vast powers. And it's a small country, so it's easier to get Intel on troublemakers.

Those in charge of the violence would be detained and they'd be held until the authorities were sure the threat was over. If the thugs got violent, hospitals would be full gut shot thugs.

Isrealis understand how to deal national security threats and that's why I admire them. No watered down PC bulscit in their threat assessments. They don't irely on attorneys as much as we do and the safety of the citizenry comes first.

Enjoyed working with them

As much as I cherish the US Constitution, sometimes it provides a little too much protection to folks.

The ups and downs of being "free" I guess.

Oh, my...Shooting real bullets at thugs to remove them from the checker board. A crazy concept that make some Americans tummy’s turn...

But, we’re ok with people being victimized, assaulted, killed, and financially ruined by criminals with intentions other than peaceful protest.

Liberal America on display to the world.

Thanks, Brother Remsen.

😎

I'll respectfully disagree.

I think the US Constitution is damn near perfect.

3 letter gov't agencies that pass "regulations" (that become defacto law, a la EPA) supreme court rulings that become defacto law (never their charter), local and state liberal leaders that pass unconstitutional regulations...............

I could go on for an hour.

The Constitution is *not* to blame. Mankind, and their agendas, *are* to blame.

Try to keep up.

Cap'n Runaway Nuclear Reaction...

That is funny. You haven't actually really comprehended this thread from the start.

I've corrected you twice and even the OP had to re-state the premise.

GO TO BED. You are embarrassing yourself.

I think I've alluded to this before, but part of my legal practice is related to defending against claims of war crimes and crimes against humanity filed at the international criminal court. I've been working on a case brought against Israel for the way IDF soldiers shot rioters who breached the Gaza border and tried to enter Israel. For me, it's a bit personal, as my buddy's three sons are all in a unit that fights in Gaza.

In the 80s, when i served, the UN was not as psycho as it is now and most countries understood that we were fighting terror as an existential matter. So we did a lot of things that today would be avoided today. The international pressure is definitely a factor, but even now the soldiers will open fire as soon as lines are crossed.

It can be brutal and offensive to principles in the Bill of Rights, but it's often life or death. Personally, I think the Bill of Rights have been weaponized and now serve as a restraint on rights, as the left and the courts prioritize radical indoctrination and suppression of dissent over the right of the people to be individuals. If only one side plays by the rules, there aren't any rules.