Israelis, Among Most Enthusiastic Supporters of Torture, Red Cross Survey Says

[Valar Dohaeris]

Responses put Israelis in a group with Nigeria and the United States in justifying torture of a captured enemy combatant.

Only in Israel, Nigeria and the United States do more people advocate torture of an enemy combatant than oppose such behavior, according to a new survey by the International Red Cross.
The survey on war covered 15 countries and the Palestinian territories; these included the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Switzerland. Most of the countries are involved in violent conflicts.
Respondents were asked, “Can a captured enemy combatant be tortured to obtain important military information?” Israelis supported the use of torture in such a situation by 50 percent to 25 percent, with the rest unsure or preferring not to answer. The survey’s average was against by 48 percent to 36 percent.

Only Nigerians endorsed torture more enthusiastically than Israelis, at 70 percent to 29 percent, while Americans backed torture by 46 percent to 30 percent.
People from the other countries were against the use of torture by the following percentages: Yemenis 99-0, Colombians 85-15, Swiss 72-18, Chinese 71-15, French 71-26, Syrians in Lebanon 65-20, Russians 62-20, South Sudanese 56-18, Afghanis 56-39, Palestinians 53-33, Ukrainians 52-21, Iraqis 51-44 and Britons 50-26.
Israel was also near the bottom regarding whether torture is wrong or part of war. Israelis said it was wrong 44 percent to 38 percent, while the survey’s average was 66 percent to 27 percent.

 

[T-72]

lol @ headline.

 

[Prince of Dorne]

I bet every single one of PDFer support torturing the enemy to pull out secret information, and our respective countries do that as well, probably on a daily basis, it's extremely stupid to single out Israelis, however intentional attack on civilians is no way acceptable

 

[Mugwop]

Responses put Israelis in a group with Nigeria and the United States in justifying torture of a captured enemy combatant.

Only in Israel, Nigeria and the United States do more people advocate torture of an enemy combatant than oppose such behavior, according to a new survey by the International Red Cross.
The survey on war covered 15 countries and the Palestinian territories; these included the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Switzerland. Most of the countries are involved in violent conflicts.
Respondents were asked, “Can a captured enemy combatant be tortured to obtain important military information?” Israelis supported the use of torture in such a situation by 50 percent to 25 percent, with the rest unsure or preferring not to answer. The survey’s average was against by 48 percent to 36 percent.

Only Nigerians endorsed torture more enthusiastically than Israelis, at 70 percent to 29 percent, while Americans backed torture by 46 percent to 30 percent.
People from the other countries were against the use of torture by the following percentages: Yemenis 99-0, Colombians 85-15, Swiss 72-18, Chinese 71-15, French 71-26, Syrians in Lebanon 65-20, Russians 62-20, South Sudanese 56-18, Afghanis 56-39, Palestinians 53-33, Ukrainians 52-21, Iraqis 51-44 and Britons 50-26.
Israel was also near the bottom regarding whether torture is wrong or part of war. Israelis said it was wrong 44 percent to 38 percent, while the survey’s average was 66 percent to 27 percent.

The list should be more like this
1:india
2:old caucasian Americans and their republican stooges
3:israelis
4:nigeria

 

[Solomon2]

I bet every single one of PDFer support torturing the enemy to pull out secret information, and our respective countries do that as well, probably on a daily basis, it's extremely stupid to single out Israelis, however intentional attack on civilians is no way acceptable

While the debate about torture in Israel is an active one, my guess is that torture is something more Israelis fantasize about in their minds than support in deed.

The ICRC is an extraordinarily anti-Semitic organization. It has an ugly history of hiding crimes against Jews going back to WWII. It took decades to pry the death camp transport records out of them - they closed the archive on the grounds of "protecting" the dead victims, that is, they were keeping the relatives of the dead in emotional agony. And that's just for starters...

 

[AshishDelhi]

The list should be more like this
1:india
2:old caucasian Americans and their republican stooges
3:israelis
4:nigeria

Why Nigeria?

 

[Hamza913]

To be honest, what's the problem in believing that you should hurt your enemies to get information out of them? I'm assuming this survey is talking about enemy troops, not civilians.

 

[500]

Poll answers depend a lot on way you ask question.

You can ask: "do you support torture of POWs". And you can ask "do you support harsh interrogation (like preventing sleep) in ticking time bomb scenario". I guarantee you hat you will get completely different answers among same public.

 

[Mugwop]

While the debate about torture in Israel is an active one, my guess is that torture is something more Israelis fantasize about in their minds than support in deed.

The ICRC is an extraordinarily anti-Semitic organization. It has an ugly history of hiding crimes against Jews going back to WWII. It took decades to pry the death camp transport records out of them - they closed the archive on the grounds of "protecting" the dead victims, that is, they were keeping the relatives of the dead in emotional agony. And that's just for starters...

The concept of Semitic ethnicity doesn't apply to hebrews alone.It applies to Arabs also

 

[Prince of Dorne]

The list should be more like this
1:india
2:old caucasian Americans and their republican stooges
3:israelis
4:nigeria

Allow me to elaborate why the list should be like what you have posted.

1: India (Kafir,infidels, idolaters, super pegan nation so no surprises there)
2: old caucasian Americans and their republican stooges (How uncool are they? Hate poor immigrants)
3:israelis (Scary Jews, eat baby muslims for breakfast)
4:nigeria (Half of them are Christian and how dare they torment poor Boko Haram people btw?)

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

To be honest, what's the problem in believing that you should hurt your enemies to get information out of them? I'm assuming this survey is talking about enemy troops, not civilians.

Last week, Mad Mike informed Donald Trump that You get more information by handing over a beer to a prisoner,
than by torturing him.
It is good if facts support decent behaviour.

Egypt is prominent in reports on torture released by the Swedish government, and Sweden has apologized
to people extradited to Egypt, which subsuquently have tortured them, even though Egypt gave guarantees
of proper treatment. They also received compensation, and no more people will be extradited to Egypt in the future.

 

[Desertfalcon]

an enemy combatant

Non-uniformed insurgents and terrorists are NOT "enemy combatants. Not legally, not morally, and it is utterly disrespectful to the brave soldiers of the British, Mexican, Spanish, German, Japanese, Chinese, etc., armies my country has fought, to put human scum in their company. And even if one assumes that the OP is not the utter hogwash it is, my country for one, could and maybe should deal with such non-uniformed insurgents and terrorists, in by the method that has been accepted under the rules of war for centuries of time, i.e., whenever we find them, we simply shoot them in the back of the head, and leave their bodies to rot like the savages they are.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Non-uniformed insurgents and terrorists are NOT "enemy combatants.

I hear you but your on very slippery ground there. Should the American 'rebels' have been shot by the British Army?

They were "non-uniformed insurgents". Ditto for Haganah, Irgun in Palestine?

 

[T-123456]

If you would ask Turks about torturing PKK terrorists,99% would be enthusiastic and Turkiye would top this list so,it all depends on the situation.
This list is worthless.

 

[Desertfalcon]

I hear you but your on very slippery ground there. Should the American 'rebels' have been shot by the British Army?

They were "non-uniformed insurgents".

British Army formally surrenders to the American Continental Army at Yorktown.


Nope. They were a uniformed army, fighting by the codes and conventions of war, recognized as such by foreign powers, the British included. It is not simply what they wear, it is their conduct and status.