Let the Soldier Go .Bullets are cheap lives are irreplaceable in Zion

If your first shot only wounds him..... tough... the Geneva conventions kick and everything possible must then be done to ensure he lives to be a number in a godforsaken future disproportionate  prisoner swap  or simply because the pressure of the next John Kerry or US President demands the releasing murders , attempted  murders or wanna be Islamic terrorist martyrs . Hey don't try trick shots  go for that spot between the eyes and plural ...shots  not shot. Bullets are cheap .....lives are irreplaceable in Zion.In the meantime . LET THE SOLDIER GO. The outpouring of public support for the IDF soldier who shot an immobilized terrorist in Hebron last week may very well indicate the imminent end of the IDF's status as the heart of the Israeli consensus. We are waging a battle for our future. The controversy surrounding the soldier who shot an immobilized terrorist in Hebron last week represents a breaking point, a watershed moment, in the relations between Israeli society and the Israeli military. After this, nothing will ever be the same. If we adopt an optimistic outlook (and it is not easy to be optimistic right now), then we can surmise that the shock waves currently rocking the Israel Defense Forces will eventually settle and the IDF's untouchable status will ultimately be restored. If we're being realistic, however, we can see that the military is no longer at the center of the Israeli consensus. From now on, it will be like the rest of the public sectors: divided and torn apart both politically and ideologically. Anyone who thinks that the realistic conclusion is apocalyptic or detached is welcome to peruse the social networks. The nature of the comments posted over the last week has been different than anything we've seen before. The harshness, the sheer scope and above all the identity of the posters have been unprecedented. We are not talking about the usual fringes -- the messianic, delusional or the ideologically indoctrinated either on the left or on the right. We are talking about the heart of the mainstream. People who unwittingly and collectively drove the final nail into the metaphorical coffin of the last remaining Israeli consensus. One could argue that this is the inevitable result of progress and that in the past, the IDF operated within a sheltered bubble. Soldiers went on missions but were only partially exposed to what was happening outside the military. And even when they were exposed, the influence of their commanders far outweighed the influence of the outside world. Today, every soldier is connected to the outside world around the clock via technological devices. They are both influenced by it, and influence it. It is impossible to shelter soldiers from political, media or social goings on. When rabbis or ministers urge soldiers to kill terrorists -- because that is the right thing to do regardless of what the IDF chief of staff says -- there are those who will take note. And when an individual soldier's actions spark a national protest movement, it is mutiny against the military, its authority and its values. Most of the Israelis who joined the outpouring of support for the soldier who shot the terrorist this week do not understand this delicate dynamic. They probably didn't stop for a moment to separate the legitimate, emotionally charged question of whether one really should rise up and kill whomever tries to kill them (the answer is complex -- it is not clear cut) from the private issue concerning the individual soldier who was found to have violated protocol, and explained why he did so to his friends in real time. The rationale behind not killing incapacitated terrorists is not just humane, it is also rational: it can prevent revenge killings, copycats, and may in some way contribute to ending the wave of terrorism. But the public debate on the issue has become one vocal, sticky mess, and there were those who were quick to take advantage of the public state of mind -- ideologues and irresponsible politicians who feel that they are allowed to do whatever they want, even step on the IDF chief of staff, if it will get them a few more likes on Facebook. Order within the chaos Such public debates often tend to disregard the facts. And still, for the sake of being informed, there are a few points that need to be settled. The event: Two terrorists assaulted a commander and a soldier (who was lightly wounded). The two reacted appropriately and neutralized their attackers. Then the commander examined the terrorists to make sure that they weren't armed or wearing explosives belts. He flipped them over from their stomachs to their backs and removed a knife that he found. When the medic arrived, he was sent to coordinate the evacuation of the wounded soldier. When the evacuation was complete, about 11 minutes in, the medic gave his helmet to another soldier, cocked his weapon and shot the terrorist. He explained to a soldier and officer who were shocked by his actions that "this is what you do to someone who stabs your friends. At that point he didn't say a single word about feeling threatened or fearing that the terrorist was wearing an explosives belt, as he would later claim in his defense. The inquiry: The unusual incident was immediately reported to the soldier's superiors, and within minutes, GOC Central Command Maj. Gen. Roni Numa, who was touring an induction center, dispatched Kfir Brigade commander Col. Guy Hazut to the scene of the shooting to launch an inquiry. Hazut concluded that the shooting was a violation of orders and immediately suspended the shooter. Since the shooting resulted in the terrorist's death, Hazut consulted with the military advocate general (the two had studied together at the National Security College) who made it clear that the incident had to be investigated by the Criminal Investigations Division of the Military Police Corps due to suspicion that the law had been broken. All of this happened before the video documenting the incident was aired on national television and had nothing to do with the video. The murder charge: Regardless of the soldier's version of events (which has not been corroborated by his comrades and commanders), it is the investigator's' duty to inform the suspect of the most severe charge he could potentially face. This is a legal obligation. In reality, he won't be charged with murder. Certainly if the autopsy of the terrorist's body reveals that he was dead before the shooting. In that event, the shooter would only face a charge of illegal firing of a weapon. The public announcements: Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon was briefed on the inquiry during a meeting with the IDF chief of staff that afternoon. At that point, the video had already been made public. They decided to make public announcements (as did the prime minister, at their recommendation) condemning the soldier's actions for three main reasons: To prevent a wave of Palestinian revenge attacks; to diffuse any international criticism and allegations that the IDF commits extrajudicial executions of Palestinian terrorists; and to clarify to the Israeli public and to the IDF that this is not the accepted norm -- this was an unusual event that will be handled. The claim that they should have come out in support of the soldier is ridiculous. As the IDF chief himself emphasized, support is given to soldiers who make mistakes, not violations. On Sunday, in the heat of the political and public debate, the chief of staff was summoned by the cabinet to present the findings of the inquiry into the incident. What the ministers heard, which was "not black and white, but rather black and black," as one participant put it, may have served to moderate the criticism some of the ministers had initially expressed. But it is impossible to put the genie back in the bottle now. The damage has already been done. It was not just the body of a terrorist and a soldier's freedom that bled to death in that Hebron neighborhood that day, it was the IDF's honor as well. This incident has taught us some difficult lessons. Some people compare this to the destruction of the Temple. Some have said that under the cover of a terrorist wave, Israel is losing its values. A public that gives its support to a soldier who shot a terrorist rather than to the IDF chief of staff is doomed to exist in anarchy, with various militias operating in accordance with the worldviews of various groups. Some have said that in the next war, it will not be the chief of staff who gives out orders -- it will be the rabbis and MKs. In order to prevent such a scenario, the IDF is focusing first on itself. The conclusions drawn from the inquiry have been circulated among all the combat units and all the training courses, in an effort to explain and prevent the next occurrence. At the same time, the commanders are holding individual meetings with the soldiers and talking, guiding, educating. The obvious concern is that more soldiers will be influenced by this event and the public support it has garnered. That is why the IDF plans to better monitor its soldiers' Facebook activity -- in contrast with the clear divide between soldiers and commanders in previous years, now commanders will befriend their underlings to make sure they are not being pulled in by the wrong ideas, and, more importantly, that they are not bringing those ideas into the IDF. But that will not be enough. In order to really change course, the IDF needs a clear, sweeping statement of leadership, and that is, sadly, missing. It needs a statement that makes one thing very clear: We are not just fighting a battle against Palestinian terrorism. We are fighting for Israel's character and the future of its military