That's not saying very much. Sort of like saying so and so beats his wife less than other men. As we usually think of morality (*) the military ANYWHERE isn't particualrly moral.

* This is NOT to imply that there isn't something along the lines of "military morality". But this forum isn't the place to try to discuss "relativism" in ehtics.

Breaking a man's arms with a large rock, while other Israeli Soldiers look on (or help), is DEPRAVED.

It's evil and inhuman.

Why are you thinking that the ISRAELI military is "pure evil" for acting this way?

The point I was making was that the contrasting heading "most moral" MIGHT even still be true. Had those been American soldiers I doubt there would have been nine dead in between them and their three comrades who had been taken, might even have been more than 90 dead and many more smashed mercilessly. Do you imagine that British military would have been gentler?

Morality as we usually think of it doesn't match well with military. This is not to say that there isn't a very different sort of moral code that military folks go by (an example tenet might be "you don't leave comrades in the hands of the "enemy" and it doesn't matter how many you have to kill to get them back"). But like I said, wrong forum to discuss "relativism" in ehtics.

We see here an example of how MILITARY acts and if you want to say "military is pure evil" I wouldn't see a reason to respond. Understand the difference? Or do you really imagine that the actions of the ISRAELI military were worse than you would have expected form some other military under like circumstances?