Hebron massacre

[maelgwyn]

I cannot approve of his actions, but he saved lives!

[IsraeliGovtAreKapos]

You don't kill someone because he's a Nazi who wants all Jews put in microwaves?

[IsraeliGovtAreKapos]

Occupation of a place that does not belong to you should be punished by expulsion, not by death.

If a burglar breaks into your house and start raping your wife (your one is not yours but you got the point), would you expel him or eat him?

Thieves must be killed, period. Especially invaders who turn our heart into a filthy Nazi Mosque.

That's what Rabbi Kahane wanted : to expel the Arabs from Israel, not to massacre them.

Rabbi Kahane didn't say what he (and any other Jew with minimal sanity) wanted to do to them them because it was illegal and because most Jews at that time would not accept that, so he was using any other method to get rid of the Arab subhumans.

[Yaakov Mendel]

You don't kill someone because he's a Nazi who wants all Jews put in microwaves?

No. You can kill him if he tries to implement his "ideas", but as long as he has not touched a Jew's finger you don't have the right to kill him.

[Yaakov Mendel]

If a burglar breaks into your house and start raping your wife (your one is not yours but you got the point), would you expel him or eat him?

Of course I would eat him alive. But the comparison is not valid : the Muslims that Baruch Goldstein killed were not attacking Jews.
Again, I have no compassion for the slain Muslims and all my heart goes for Baruch Goldstein who, I believe, was a great Jew, and if there is one loss of life I regret in this case, it's his. But I am trying to be fair. That day, Baruch Goldstein did not act in self-defence. Furthermore, I am not sure that what he did can be entirely justified as a form of pre-emptive strike. Personally, I do not condemn him, and, to be honest, I am happy that he must have ridden this world of a few vicious snakes. But my feelings are biased. If I stop thinking as a Jew, then I have to admit that his actions, that day, were questionable.

[maelgwyn]

I would hunt down all old & new NAZIS!   OPERATION ATILLA!

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

No. You can kill him if he tries to implement his "ideas", but as long as he has not touched a Jew's finger you don't have the right to kill him.

 And which Mishna or Braita are you quoting that from? War is WAR. Bottom line is their are no "innocent" civilians. Haven't you even watched any war movies? It is the "good" ones who'm are let go that in the end stab you the worst way. This happened before even with Israel where a whole Israeli unit was whipped out because they had mercy on an old Arab Shepard- who they discovered and let go, and then who went and told the other Arabs that these Yehudim were there. They were out numbered and butchered all because of "Jewish mercy" as usual. Had they just killed him they would probably all be alive.

[Yaakov Mendel]

And which Mishna or Braita are you quoting that from? War is WAR. Bottom line is their are no "innocent" civilians. Haven't you even watched any war movies? It is the "good" ones who'm are let go that in the end stab you the worst way. This happened before even with Israel where a whole Israeli unit was whipped out because they had mercy on an old Arab Shepard- who they discovered and let go, and then who went and told the other Arabs that these Yehudim were there. They were out numbered and butchered all because of "Jewish mercy" as usual. Had they just killed him they would probably all be alive.

I wasn't referring to a war context. If you were less arrogant, you might manage to listen to what the others say and understand it. But since you bring up the question of war, I have to remind you that there are rules of war. Not all ennemies can be equated with Amalek so you don't just exterminate every living creature in a war. The Torah provides several examples of these rules of war in various circumstances. You might want to have a look at them since you claim to stand for Torah Judaism.

[Rubystars]

And which Mishna or Braita are you quoting that from? War is WAR. Bottom line is their are no "innocent" civilians. Haven't you even watched any war movies? It is the "good" ones who'm are let go that in the end stab you the worst way. This happened before even with Israel where a whole Israeli unit was whipped out because they had mercy on an old Arab Shepard- who they discovered and let go, and then who went and told the other Arabs that these Yehudim were there. They were out numbered and butchered all because of "Jewish mercy" as usual. Had they just killed him they would probably all be alive.

That's one of the saddest things about human nature, that evil people don't know how to show gratitude when shown kindness but instead respond with more evil, and that good people have to limit their kindness in certain situations.

[Dr. Dan]

I wasn't referring to a war context. If you were less arrogant, you might manage to listen to what the others say and understand it. But since you bring up the question of war, I have to remind you that there are rules of war. Not all ennemies can be equated with Amalek so you don't just exterminate every living creature in a war. The Torah provides several examples of these rules of war in various circumstances. You might want to have a look at them since you claim to stand for Torah Judaism.

Except according to many Rabbinical authorities, anyone who wishes to destroy the Jewish people are Amalek.  The "Palestinians" are not willing to live in peace...they want to finish Hitler's job. The same goes with the rest of the Muslim world.  They deserve to have done to them what they want to do with Gd's people.

[Dr. Dan]

That's one of the saddest things about human nature, that evil people don't know how to show gratitude when shown kindness but instead respond with more evil, and that good people have to limit their kindness in certain situations.

So true..especially with righteous Jews and gentiles who only want to live in peace and quiet and improve the world.

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

I wasn't referring to a war context. If you were less arrogant, you might manage to listen to what the others say and understand it. But since you bring up the question of war, I have to remind you that there are rules of war. Not all ennemies can be equated with Amalek so you don't just exterminate every living creature in a war. The Torah provides several examples of these rules of war in various circumstances. You might want to have a look at them since you claim to stand for Torah Judaism.

 Well what do you think we are in now, if not a war? Are you brainwashed to believe that it is only a few "terrorists" and not a whole group of people fighting against the Jewish nation?
 Like I said instead of you having emotional outbursts against what I am saying (and it doesn't bother me, its just funny) go ahead and prove your point with actual texts you claim exist.

[Yaakov Mendel]

Well what do you think we are in now, if not a war? Are you brainwashed to believe that it is only a few "terrorists" and not a whole group of people fighting against the Jewish nation?
 Like I said instead of you having emotional outbursts against what I am saying (and it doesn't bother me, its just funny) go ahead and prove your point with actual texts you claim exist.

First of all, before you decide to take anybody's life, I suggest you think about these three passages :

1) "And G-d created a human [being] in [G-d’s] image. In the divine image G-d created the human… And G-d saw all that [G-d] had made, and found it very good."
Genesis 1:27, 31

2) "Whoever sheds the blood of a human being by human beings shall his blood be shed, for in the divine image did G-d make humanity"
Genesis 9:6

3) "When one destroys a single individual, it is as if that person destroyed the whole world"
(Sanhedrin 4:5)

Next, during a war, I suggest you think about these two passages :

1) "When you approach a city to do battle with it you should call to it in peace. And if they respond in peace and they open the city to you, all the people in the city shall pay taxes to you and be subservient. And if they do not make peace with you, you shall wage war with them and you may besiege them"
Deuteronomy 20:10-12

2) "Joshua, before he entered the Land of Israel, sent three letters to its inhabitants. The first one said that those that wish to flee should flee. The second one said that those that wish to make peace should make peace. The third letter said that those who want a war should prepare to fight a war"
Maimonides, Kingship 6:5

It is also codified in Jewish law that, when in battle, a Jewish army must not completely surround the enemy on all four sides. The army must leave one side open in order to allow non-combatants to flee and needless bloodshed to be avoided.

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

1) Okay
 2) Okay
  3) Talking about a Jew. But okay as well.
- All of these are not talking about a time of war.

1) Talking about a Milhemit Reishut NOT a Milhemit Mitzwah
2) "Joshua, before he entered the Land of Israel", today the third part is taking place now.

3)  Soo? Well let them flee no problem, but if a building has terrorists or whomever else shooting at me, I would shoot back at the building destroying all of it. If some of the people flee before-hand, fine. If not their blood is on their hands.

[Dr. Dan]

First of all, before you decide to take anybody's life, I suggest you think about these three passages :

1) "And G-d created a human [being] in [G-d’s] image. In the divine image G-d created the human… And G-d saw all that [G-d] had made, and found it very good."
Genesis 1:27, 31

2) "Whoever sheds the blood of a human being by human beings shall his blood be shed, for in the divine image did G-d make humanity"
Genesis 9:6

3) "When one destroys a single individual, it is as if that person destroyed the whole world"
(Sanhedrin 4:5)

Next, during a war, I suggest you think about these two passages :

1) "When you approach a city to do battle with it you should call to it in peace. And if they respond in peace and they open the city to you, all the people in the city shall pay taxes to you and be subservient. And if they do not make peace with you, you shall wage war with them and you may besiege them"
Deuteronomy 20:10-12

2) "Joshua, before he entered the Land of Israel, sent three letters to its inhabitants. The first one said that those that wish to flee should flee. The second one said that those that wish to make peace should make peace. The third letter said that those who want a war should prepare to fight a war"
Maimonides, Kingship 6:5

It is also codified in Jewish law that, when in battle, a Jewish army must not completely surround the enemy on all four sides. The army must leave one side open in order to allow non-combatants to flee and needless bloodshed to be avoided.

Yaacov, your quotes from the Torah only prove Tag's point of view as correct:  Let's start with the first three statements from Genesis.  Certainly if someone were to commit murder out of the blue, those three statements apply.  But you neglect to mention another very important Jewish law...if someone comes to slay you, you should slay him first....does that mean it is the destruction of the world to save yourself or the Jewish people?

now for the second part, you wrote: 1) "When you approach a city to do battle with it you should call to it in peace. And if they respond in peace and they open the city to you, all the people in the city shall pay taxes to you and be subservient. And if they do not make peace with you, you shall wage war with them and you may besiege them"
Deuteronomy 20:10-12 "

And guess what?  Israel has offered peace not once, not twice, not three times, but a ton of times and still they want war...so guess what? We are at war.

Next:

 "Joshua, before he entered the Land of Israel, sent three letters to its inhabitants. The first one said that those that wish to flee should flee. The second one said that those that wish to make peace should make peace. The third letter said that those who want a war should prepare to fight a war"
Maimonides, Kingship 6:5 "


Guess what? The "Palestinians" don't want peace.  They want war. 97% of the civilian population voted for Hamas...so yes, they want war.

Finally:

You wrote: "It is also codified in Jewish law that, when in battle, a Jewish army must not completely surround the enemy on all four sides. The army must leave one side open in order to allow non-combatants to flee and needless bloodshed to be avoided."

Guess what?  Jordan is to the east...and a lot of Falestinians live there now...So it's an opportunity for the Falestinians to save themselves unless they decide to die fighting which is fine with me.

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

Yaakov- All of these things are discussed by Rav Kahane ZTKL HYD in his book Or Harayon (The Jewish idea). Available in Evrit and English. He ripps apart those leftists and also "Rabbis" who bring half quotes from here and there, and promoting the idea that "we are all equal" and things like that. Just read this book.

[Yaakov Mendel]

Yaacov, your quotes from the Torah only prove Tag's point of view as correct:  Let's start with the first three statements from Genesis.  Certainly if someone were to commit murder out of the blue, those three statements apply.  But you neglect to mention another very important Jewish law...if someone comes to slay you, you should slay him first....does that mean it is the destruction of the world to save yourself or the Jewish people?

now for the second part, you wrote: 1) "When you approach a city to do battle with it you should call to it in peace. And if they respond in peace and they open the city to you, all the people in the city shall pay taxes to you and be subservient. And if they do not make peace with you, you shall wage war with them and you may besiege them"
Deuteronomy 20:10-12 "

And guess what?  Israel has offered peace not once, not twice, not three times, but a ton of times and still they want war...so guess what? We are at war.

Next:

 "Joshua, before he entered the Land of Israel, sent three letters to its inhabitants. The first one said that those that wish to flee should flee. The second one said that those that wish to make peace should make peace. The third letter said that those who want a war should prepare to fight a war"
Maimonides, Kingship 6:5 "


Guess what? The "Palestinians" don't want peace.  They want war. 97% of the civilian population voted for Hamas...so yes, they want war.

Finally:

You wrote: "It is also codified in Jewish law that, when in battle, a Jewish army must not completely surround the enemy on all four sides. The army must leave one side open in order to allow non-combatants to flee and needless bloodshed to be avoided."

Guess what?  Jordan is to the east...and a lot of Falestinians live there now...So it's an opportunity for the Falestinians to save themselves unless they decide to die fighting which is fine with me.

I don't have to be reminded that the Arabs don't want peace. What do you think I'm doing here ?

[Nekama]

These arabs are trespassers and have no right to step foot in the Macpelah.  After the 6 day war the so called Mosque should have been fully dismantled.  How appropriate with this week's sedrah being Chaye Sarah.  I don't feel sorry one ounce.  Midah Keneged Medah with the Arab massacre in '29.  I think the Arabs got off lightly.

Nekama

[Dr. Dan]

I don't have to be reminded that the Arabs don't want peace. What do you think I'm doing here ?

So why do you choose quotes from the Torah that only prove your point wrong? 

[muman613]

This article discusses many issues regarding War according to Jewish Halacha:

http://www.jlaw.com/Articles/war1.html

.
.
.
II. Grounds for Starting War
A. Jewish Law's View of Secular Nations at War

Jews have historically been a people living in the diaspora and were (and still are) citizens of countries where Jewish law was not the ethical or legal touchstone of moral conduct by the government. As citizens of a host country, it is necessary to develop a method for determining whether the host country's military activity is permissible according to Jewish law.4

Two distinctly different rationales are extant to justify the use of military force. The first is the general rules of self-defense, which are as applicable to the defense of a group of people as they are to the defense of a single person. The Talmud5 rules that a person is permitted to kill a pursuer to save his own life regardless of whether the person being pursued is a Jew or a Gentile. While there is some dispute among modern Jewish law authorities as to whether Jewish law mandates or merely permits a Gentile or bystander to take the life of one who is trying to kill another, nearly all authorities posit that such conduct is at the least permissible.6

It is obvious that the laws of pursuit are equally applicable to a group of individuals or a nation as they are to a single person. Military action thus becomes permissible, or more likely obligatory, when it is defensive in nature, or undertaken to aid the victim of aggression. However, using the pursuer paradigm to analyze "war" leads one to conclude that all of the restrictions related to this rationale apply also.7 War, if it is to exist legally as a morally sanctioned event, must permit some forms of killing other than that which are allowed through the self-defense rationale; the modern institution of "war" cannot exist as derivative of the self-defense rules alone.

There are a number of recent authorities that explicitly state that the institution of "war" is legally recognized as a distinct moral license (independent of the laws of pursuer and self-defense) to terminate life according to Jewish law even for secular nations. Rabbi Naphtali Zevi Yehudah Berlin,8 argues that the very verse that prohibits murder, permits war. He claims that the words "from the hand of a man, your brother"9 prohibit killing only when it is proper to behave in a brotherly manner, but at times of war, killing that would otherwise be prohibited, is permitted. Indeed, such an opinion can also be found in the medieval Talmudic commentary of Tosaphot.10

Other authorities disagree. Rabbi Moshe Sofer (Chatam Sofer11) appears to adopt a middle position and accepts that wars of aggression are never permitted to secular nations; however, he does appear to recognize the institution of "war" distinct from the pursuer rationale in the context of defense wars. A number of other rabbinic authorities appear to accept this position also.12

B. A Jewish Nation Starting a War

The discussion in the commentaries concerning the issues involved in a Jewish nation starting a war is far more detailed and subject to much more extensive discussion than that of secular nations going to war.13

The Talmud14 understands that a special category of permitted killing called "war" exists which is analytically different from other permitted forms of killing, like the killing of a pursuer or a house robber. The Talmud delimits two categories of permissible war: 1) Obligatory; and 2) Authorized.15 It is crucial to determine which category of "war" any particular type of conflict is. As explained below, many of the restrictions placed by Jewish law on the type of conduct prohibited by war is frequently limited to Authorized rather than Obligatory wars.16 Logic would dictate, and Jewish law accepts, that a specifically divinely mandated conflict has certain ethical rules not found in any other type of military engagement.17

According to the Talmud,18 Obligatory wars are those wars started in direct fulfillment of a specific biblical commandment, such as the obligation to destroy the tribe of Amalek in biblical times. Authorized wars are wars undertaken to increase territory or "to diminish the heathens so that they shall not march" which is, as explained below, a category of military action given different parameters by different authorities.19 Maimonides, in his codification of the law, writes that:

The king must first wage only obligatory wars. What is an obligatory war? It is a war against the seven nations, the war against Amalek, and a war to deliver Israel from an enemy who has attacked them. Then he may wage authorized wars, which is a war against others in order to enlarge the borders of Israel and to increase his greatness and prestige.20

Surprisingly enough, the category of "to save Israel from an enemy..." is not found in the Talmud. In addition, the category of preemptive war21 is not mentioned in Maimonides formulation of the law even though it is found in the Talmud.22

What was Maimonides' understanding of the Talmud and how did he develop these categories? These questions are the key focus of a discussion on the laws of starting wars. The classical commentaries, both ancient and modern, grapple with the dividing line between "a war to deliver Israel from an enemy who has attacked them" and a war "to enlarge the borders of Israel and to increase his [the king's] greatness and prestige." Each of these approaches underlies different understandings of when a war is obligatory, authorized or prohibited and the ethical duties associated with each category.

Ibn Tibbon's translation of Maimonides' commentary on the Mishnah suggests that Maimonides' felt that an obligatory war does not start until one is actually attacked by an army: authorized wars include all defensive non-obligatory wars and all military actions commenced for any reason other than self-defense.23 According to this definition, the use of force prior to the initial use of force by one's opponents can only be justified through the "pursuer" or self-defense rationale. All other military activity is prohibited.

Rabbi Joseph Kapach in his translation of the same commentary of Maimonides understands Maimonides to permit war against nations that have previously fought with Israel and that are still technically at war with the Jewish nation - even though no fighting is now going one. An offensive war cannot be justified even as an authorized war unless a prior state of belligerency existed.24

Rabbi Abraham diBotem, in his commentary on Maimonides (Lechem Mishneh)25 posits that the phrase "to enhance the king's greatness and prestige" includes all of the categories of authorized war permitted in the Talmud. Once again, all wars other than purely defensive wars where military activity is solely initiated by one's opponents are classified as authorized wars or illegal wars. Obligatory wars are limited to purely defensive wars.

Rabbi Abraham Isaiah Karlitz (Chazon Ish) claims that Maimonides' definition of an Authorized war is referring to a use of force in a war of attrition situation.26 In any circumstance in which prior "battle" has occurred and that battle was initiated by the enemy, the war that is being fought is an obligatory one.27 According to this approach, the use of military force prior to the start of a war of attrition is prohibited (unless justified by the general rules of self-defense, in which case a "war" is not being fought according to Jewish law.)
C. Summary

Jewish law regarding wars by secular governments thus can be divided into three categories:

1) War to save the nation which is now, or soon to be, under attack. This is not technically war but is permitted because of the law of "pursuer" and is subject to all of the restrictions related to the law of pursuer and the rules of self-defense.

2) War to aid an innocent third party who is under attack. This too, is not technically war, but most commentators mandate this, also under the "pursuer" rationale, but some rule this is merely permitted. In either case, it is subject to all of the restrictions related to the "pursuer" rationale.

3) Wars (of self defense or perhaps territorial expansion). A number of commentators permit "war" as an institution even in situations where non-combatants might be killed; most commentaries limit this license to defensive wars.

So too, Jewish law regarding wars by the Jewish government can be divided into three (different) categories:

1) Defending the people of Israel from attack by an aggressive neighbor. This is an obligatory war.

2) Fighting offensive wars against belligerent neighbors (See pages 5 to 6 for the various opinions on what is belligerent).

3) The protecting of individuals through the use of the laws of "pursuer" and self defense from aggressive neighbors. This is not a "war" according to the Jewish tradition.28

Finally it is crucial to realize that there are situations where war is -- in the Jewish tradition -- simply illigal. The killings that take place in that war, if not directly based on immediated self-defense needs,29 is murder and participation is thoses wars is prohibited according to Jewish law.30
.
.
.

[Yaakov Mendel]

I am fed up being treated with contempt and arrogance. I am fed up being accused of things I never said or thought. I have raised points in this thread that are not stupid. Now have a good laugh at my latest "emotional outburst".

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

I am fed up being treated with contempt and arrogance. I am fed up being accused of things I never said or thought. I have raised points in this thread that are not stupid. Now have a good laugh at my latest "emotional outburst".

 Honestly grow up. Don't know why you are taking everything personally. You raised objections, were proven "not right",and now are complaining. What do you want us to do, to accept some of the wrong statements you have said just not to make you feel bad? If you have a point to make, make it, (try to) prove me or other people here wrong.

[Tag-MehirTzedek]

Another great shiur dealing with this topic

"Life and the Taking of Life: the Torah Perspective - Part 2

Hear how to treat "innocent" civilians in wartime. Learn why peace treaties with non-Jews in the Land of Israel are forbidden--as is marrying goyim. Find out when you can save the life of a non-Jew. Plus: hear about the danger of astrology. Who censored the Talmud and the Rambam... and why? "

http://machonshilo.org/en/eng/list-audio-shiurim/41-audiohalakha/230-life-and-the-taking-of-life-the-torah-perspective-part-2

[Dr. Dan]

I am fed up being treated with contempt and arrogance. I am fed up being accused of things I never said or thought. I have raised points in this thread that are not stupid. Now have a good laugh at my latest "emotional outburst".

Wait what?  come on yaacov.  Where ate we defaming you or treating you with arrogance?  Debate us prove your point.  If we are proving you wrong own up to it or debate back.  I have never heard if rabbis complaining with each other if they were proven wrong.

Or if we are misunderstanding you, then explain your position better.

[Yaakov Mendel]

Honestly grow up. Don't know why you are taking everything personally. You raised objections, were proven "not right",and now are complaining. What do you want us to do, to accept some of the wrong statements you have said just not to make you feel bad? If you have a point to make, make it, (try to) prove me or other people here wrong.

No, many of my objections were not proven "not right". You don't even have an idea of what a "proof" is. You've been patronizing me in an arrogant and contemptuous manner, whether about my family situation or about what I said in this thread, but that doesn't in the least "prove" that all I said is pointless.
Your personal judgements on what I do and the way I think, you can shove them up where you know. I was stupid enough to keep talking to you, I won't make the same mistake again.