Talk:Refusal to serve in the Israel Defense Forces

message: It is unclear whether this page covers the phenomenon of conscientious objection.  Usually such people are not called , yet the first example (Zichroni) reads like conscientious objection.  The history of conscientious objection in Israel would be a worthy addition to this page if it was agreed that it belongs here. --Zero 03:05, 28 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: ''conscientious objection'' vs. ''refuseniks''

message: Gil Regev's comment: "He said that 18 reserve soldiers and 8 officers had been imprisoned for refusal in 2003 compared to 100 reservists and 29 officers in 2003, a decrease of 80%." Can it be fixed please?
:What should it be fixed to? Jayjg 20:28, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't know. I'm not the one who came up with these stats. If no one knows the source I guess it should be deleted. --Anton Adelson, Western Australia 15:28, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  The second 2003 should be 2002.  My typo (probably).  It says that the figures were 129 in 2002 and 26 in 2003.  26/129=0.202 so the fall is pretty close to 80%.  --Zero 15:41, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Sense in Stats 

message: I think "pacifism" or "conscientious objection" should be mentioned in the introduction. 
"Refusal to serve in the Israeli military includes both refusal to obey specific orders and refusal to serve in the Israel Defense Force (IDF) in any capacity due to disagreement with the policies of the Israeli government as implemented by the army" - this statement is (purposely?) ignoring pacifism as a motive for refusal to serve. Also, the linking of refuseniks in the paragraph does nothing to remedy this as that article does not mention pacifists or COs (conscientious objectors) either, and merely points back to this article. I propose something like this:
:Refusal to serve in the Israeli military includes both refusal to obey specific orders and refusal to serve in the Israel Defense Force (IDF) in any capacity due to pacifistic views or disagreement with the policies of the Israeli government as implemented by the army. People who refuse to serve in either capacity are sometimes called refuseniks (Hebrew: סרבנים, pronoune sarvanim).
This makes the phrase after the "or" sound somewhat lengthy. Any help is more than welcome. I think this addition is more than reasonable, if there are no objections I'll probably add it in sometime soon. -Jrka 14:33, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  conscientious objection 

message: What to do with 21 (band)? Should a See also section be created at this page, and a reference to the band placed there? It surely would look like a sore sticking out completely from the other portion of the article. Maybe, someone knowledgeable enough can create a small section on grassroots refusal movements, with other things in it as well? The reason I ask is that I unlinked 21 (band) today from the IDF page, where it was REALLY an eyesore; there was a red-link to profile 21 there, placed by the same new user User:21 that created the band page, and I assumed that if and when such a page is set up (by the same user?), it would include the link to the band. Meanwhile, my unlink created an orphaned article, and of all the places on the WP I believe that Refusal to serve in the Israeli military is the most appropriate place to link it back in. (Personally, I have never heard about the band). BACbKA 19:43, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I think I have found a perfect place for the orphaned links. This lowers the priority of the above request drastically as far as I am concerned. BACbKA 19:53, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[21 (band)]] grassroots/low profile refusal movements 

message: It seems that, in order to avoid using a term that certain people don't like, the portion of the Pilots' Letter quoted in this article had been convoluted to the point that a certain amount of guesswork and connecting of dots is required to figure out exactly what they are refusing to do.  Strong work, MPerel.  Marsden 21:57, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It has nothing to do with avoiding "terms people don't like".  And neither should it be about promoting terms people *do* like.  The point is to represent viewpoints accurately.  This is usually best done by letting people's own words speak for themselves, rather than having others put words in their mouths for them. --MPerel ( talk | contrib) 22:20, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

text: This isn't the sort of thing we should have to be arguing about.  Let's just use a quote where the group explains why they refuse to serve in the "Occupied Territories", and then explain what territories they mean under that somewhat variously-defined term (do they include the Golan, for example?).--Pharos 22:34, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly.  In the pilots letter, what they actually declared was a refusal to carry out air force attack orders against civilian population centers.  They also condemned the ongoing occupation as illegal, immoral, and corrupting all of Israeli society.  They weren't mincing words.  But it doesn't appear they explicitly declared in their letter any refusal to "serve" in the "Occupation Territories", so to state it in those terms is to make assumptions.  For example, it's not clear whether they were/are willing to fly over the territories for routine surveillance purposes (or whatever other kinds of duties "serving" implies).  Anyway it's safest not to make assumptions, but just repeat what they said. --MPerel ( talk | contrib) 23:02, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remarkable and shameful 

message: It's actually quite funny how much some editors are willing to dance around the language of the letter from the reservists to avoid a term they don't like. i.e. "Occupied Territories". The word "occupied" and "occupation" occurs a total of five times in the actual letter. In reporting this letter, it should be represented in proportion to the language it uses. and "occupied territories" is how they describe where they serve as reservists, and "occupation" is how they describe what they are being ordered to do. There is no other way to look at attempt to misquote and misrepresent this letter as anythign other than POV pushing on the part of editors who don't like the term "occupied territories". It is not our job to censor the point of view of the sources we quote. FuelWagon 22:35, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You put this article on your watchlist long ago. Remember? It was in a previous bout of wikistalking and reverting. Your personal attacks on and harrassment of other editors are simply not acceptable, please desist. Jayjg (talk) 23:03, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yawn. If you have any specific statemetns by me that are "personal attacks", please point them out. But of course, yet again, you do not. Accusations without a shred of evidence. Don't you get tired of that sort of thing? I know I do. Anyway, I took the page off my watchlist a long time ago. I thought the Courage to Refuse thing had been settled. I haven't edited, or even looked at, this article in a long time. I was looking through archives on my talk page today and had a link pointing to the page though and thought I'd check it out for old times sake. Good thing I looked. The Courage to Refuse letter is (again) totally misrepresented in the article now. They use the term "occupied" five times in a short, one-page letter, yet, their view is misrepresented by completely hiding what they call where they serve (the occupied territories) and what they've been ordered to do (occupation). FuelWagon 23:29, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: censoring the sources

message: Other article contained information better listed on the main Ometz Le'sarev article, and otherwise much more expanded already in this main article. --Shuki 20:00, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 'Refusenik (Israel)' 

message: When any government (local, national, or otherwise) or security organization (Ex: police) remove a resident from a certain domicile using the law, the proper term is evict, and/or eviction. 
EX: When a tenant doesn't pay rent and the landlord wins court proceedings, the tenant is evicted from the property. Likewise, the settlers were evicted from the area by the disengagement plan tabled in the Knesset.
On top of that, adding an adverb - 'forcibly evicted', is also legitimate and not POV since the settlers refused to move themselves. 'Forcibly' does not infer violence. --Shuki 18:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  evict vs remove 

message: I notice that at least one editor is quite intent on removing this information, since "that is the number of non-drafted, not those refusing to serve." However, the cited source, titled "Israeli 'draft dodgers' protest occupation", is clearly placing that 1/4 in the context of draft dodging and refusal to serve. If the source has made some kind of mistake, we'll need to have other sources of comparable weight which demonstrate that. <eleland/talkedits> 05:26, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You should keep the discussion to the issue, not the editor, or even editors that have also made this issue (one lousy article) controversial. ABC didn't initiate the story, they probably got it off one of the Israeli media sources. I'm sure something more lucid can be found on jpost, haaretz, israelinsider, or other. --Shuki (talk) 21:24, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  ABC source, 1/4, again 

message: It says: Right wing politicians have claimed that the refuseniks' actions are helping the enemies of Israel in their anti-Israeli incitement. Some have even accused the refuseniks of treason during war-time. This viewpoint was given some support when the book The Seventh War, by Avi Yisacharov and Amos Harel was published in 2004; it contains extensive interviews with Hamas leaders, at least one of whom explicitly stated that the actions of the commandos' and pilots' letters encouraged to promote and continue the use of suicide bombers. 
I think we should remove this statement because it's not well sourced. 
The only source provided is some relatively unknown right wing web newspaper. I don't think it's enough  to allow this claim unless there are more sources to prove that Hamas leaders really did say this. 
This newspaper has a very low rating and is VERY right wing. It ISN'T neutral judging by the language it uses. I don't think it is a good enough source (or neutral enough that is) to use for such a statement. Northern (talk) 23:49, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hamas statement 

message: I am surprised that the article does not contain any mention of celebrity refuseniks. I am Israeli, so this controversy is realy close to my heart. Celebrity refuseniks are celebritys (mostly around recruitment age) that refuse to serve not for pacifist reasons and such, but for career driven motives. [ WP:BLP violations removed. Rami R 18:24, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please note that Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons also applies to talk pages. Thank you. Rami R 18:24, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

text: There's a language problem here! A distinction is clearly made and maintained based on the different reasons that otherwise fit people decline to serve in the IDF. The celebrity faction noted above by User:Rami R User:Zig-Zac is not called sarvanut/refusenik, i.e. "conscientious objection refusal to serve"—but has its own term in both languages: hishtamtut = draft dodging evading ("dodging"). A highly prominent instance (2007) in the Israeli media centered on the circumstances and subsequent remarks voiced by high-profile teenage model Bar Refaeli. Celebrity draft-dodging needs to be clearly described in this article, and the copycatting noted with supportive citations. -- Deborahjay (talk) 22:25, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You've misread. I haven't mentioned anyone at all. I only censored a WP:BLP violation as "Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons — whether the material is negative, positive, or just questionable — should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion, from Wikipedia articles, talk pages, user pages, and project space." Rami R 23:12, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry I'd misattributed; the revised formatting of the original comment and signatures makes this clear. -- Thanks, Deborahjay (talk) 00:40, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

text: I added a section addressing this issue, since it seems important and there was no disagreement here on the talk in previous discussions.  I used the incident with Bar Refaeli as the main example, so it might seem rather Refaeli-centric, but I'm not so familiar with the subject to go into other examples.  Feel free to add to it.  I also defined the term using the first commenter's explanation, so hopefully that's correct and not a copyvio.   Mbinebri  talk ← 17:52, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a present (Sept./Oct. 2009) focus that's surfaced in the Israeli media, notably in the wake of remarks made by stage director Shmuel Hasfari in Haaretz regarding a new Israeli left, in which he singled out draft-dodging actors in evident (and later confirmed) reference to Itay Tiran. I'll see about finding citable material and adding this to the page. Meanwhile, I've added a Hebrew-English dictionary citation for the term mishtamtim for "draft-dodgers" on other than c.o. grounds, and removed the  template. -- Deborahjay (talk) 01:38, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: celebrity refuseniks

message: The previous comment posted by User:Zig-Zac includes a discrepancy between its heading and content. What's called "celebrity refuseniks" is more correctly termed "celebrity draft-evaders" (or draft-dodgers), based on the motivations involved. My response to that posting clarifies upon this distinction. -- Deborahjay (talk) 00:54, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  That is, "celebrity draft-dodgers" (mishtamtim) 

message: There are two separate sections on the Shiministim - one entitled high school seniors' letter.  These should be combined by someone who understands the issues involved (i.e. not me).  209.176.79.34 (talk) 17:02, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two Shiministim sections 

message: I removed following section due to improper format, style and possibly insufficient sourcing. Feel free to add with the issues resolved.--Kmhkmh (talk) 13:36, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: temporarily removed

message: Suggest moving to Opposition to conscription to the IDF as a more appropriate term. Alernatives invitedLihaas (talk) 01:08, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page title 

message: The IP was rightly blocked, but I agree we shouldn't be using Press TV as a source and I've deleted the text and source - if there is a less partisan source than of course it can be replaced. Dougweller (talk) 10:25, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Press TV 

message: There've been lots of recent heated public debates about Haredi military service and Lapid's Haredi draft law and lots of news generated about it. Much more than hippie leftists who refuse to defend Israel in the territories. We need to expand the religious exemption section. Daviddwd (talk) 20:37, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  We really need to expand the Hareidim section 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 11 external links on Refusal to serve in the IDF. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041019032914/http://www.seruv.org.il/english/movement.asp to http://www.seruv.org.il/english/movement.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061015135946/http://www.yeshgvul.org/about_e.asp to http://www.yeshgvul.org/about_e.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060226163902/http://www.seruv.org/english/combatants_letter.asp to http://www.seruv.org/english/combatants_letter.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100308102144/http://www.seruv.org.il/english/article.asp?msgid=55&type=news to http://www.seruv.org.il/english/article.asp?msgid=55&type=news
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050920101740/http://www.seruv.org.il/english/news_item.asp?msgid=85 to http://www.seruv.org.il/english/news_item.asp?msgid=85
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050816132436/http://www.tayasim.org.il/ to http://www.tayasim.org.il/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070805043250/http://www.seruv.org.il/english/default.asp to http://www.seruv.org.il/english/default.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20031205013728/http://www.refusersolidarity.net/default.asp?content=courtmartials to http://www.refusersolidarity.net/default.asp?content=courtmartials
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041010195540/http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/ENGMDE150491999 to http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/ENGMDE150491999
*Added  tag to http://62.90.71.124/files/02/220/076/a06/02076220.a06.HTM
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061020234230/https://www.afsc.org/israel-palestine/news/Refusniks.html to http://www.afsc.org/israel-palestine/news/Refusniks.html
*Added  tag to http://www.hlrecord.org/news/israeli-conscientious-objector-speaks-out-1.779766
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091011045250/http://lauraflanders.firedoglake.com/2009/10/02/israeli-teenagers-take-a-stand-against-military-service/ to http://lauraflanders.firedoglake.com/2009/10/02/israeli-teenagers-take-a-stand-against-military-service/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:03, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified