Talk:Israeli security forces

Individual Organization Entries

To keep everything neat and organized, each entry should follw the following order: Acronym or Common Name if no acronym; Common Name in "(brackets)" if Acronym was used; italicized Transliteration and/or Hebrew word; Colon ":"; definition. For example, Aman (Directorate of Military Intelligence) Agaf ha-Modi'in: Definition...blah, blah, blah. Mg196 21:40, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Not only is this biased...

But it's also full of terribly broken English. I don't have much info on the ISF, but I will reword the information already in the article to be at least a tad bit more neutral, if not coherent. Sheesh. PaZuZu 09:23, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Please describe what you see as "biased," and we can work on fixing things up to a higher standard. Mg196 18:17, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

---

This article is far from NPOV.

I not conviced that a security force that need to shot real bullet against demonstrators armed with stones is the best in the World. I think our CRS in France were somewhat superior in 1968. Ericd 21:50, 11 Sep 2003 (UTC) --

Ericd, what you or I think is irrelevant. Fact of the matter is, when most people think of the Israeli security forces, they do think "kickass". -134.198.241.50 06:10, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

huh?, who in his right mind thinks "kick ass" when it comes to armies?, what an irresponsible and childish thought.

The argument of whether security institutions are "good" or "bad" is relative. A better way to be more objective about that statement is to look at how other international security forces view the Israeli apparatus. Ericd, whether YOU are convinced or not doesn't matter. What matters is how the Israel security apparatus is viewed in the eyes of its peers. You then say, "I think our CRS in France...in 1968," which is completely subjective, you cite no sources/references, give no reasons, forget that 1968 is 40 years ago and has nothing to do with "today," and in general post an empty statement. Legitimate references mean EVERYTHING. Mg196 18:15, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

---

This article needs a serious rewriting, almost from scratch.It mixes real organizations (like the IDF) with mere concepts (like "kabat"). It includes all sorts of bizarre Hebrew acronyms like "MASHAZ", when the appropriate term should just be the "civilian guard". The list should be more hierarchical (e.g., MASHAZ, MAGAV, YAMAM are all units of the Israeli Police (which needs an article!). The mossad is strangely missing, and also missing are the Israeli security research institutions (although these are not "forces" per ce). The "Shin Bet" is an archaic term, "Shabak" is the term used in Israel now. Nyh

Re Shin Bet/Shabak: I've seen both used fairly recently, including in the Israeli press (at least in English). I see Shin Bet more often, actually. -134.198.241.50 06:10, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Doh. Uh, yes, 134.198.241.50 there is me. I gotta remember to login.:-) -Penta 06:11, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The term SHABAK שב"כ is used in Hebrew inside Israel while press in English (both foreign and domestic) use the archaic term Shin-Bet. MathKnight 22:12, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Points taken. MAGAV and MASHAZ are indeed sub-ordinate to the police but deserve special attention as they differ from "classic" police. MathKnight 22:12, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Rewrite - agreed.

By the way, Hessed Shel Emet ("True Grace") ... Hessed is usually translated as "loving-kindness", in the sense of a noble kindness, a heart's kindnmess, humanitarianism, doing good as a part of a humans being. It doesnt actually mean "grace". Its a small point, I know, but can someone suggest a better translation? FT2 09:55, Aug 21, 2004 (UTC)

Israelie Army medic insignia?

Does any one know what insigna Israeli combat medics wear to identify themselves as combat medics(prior to the Red crystal)? Would it be the red Star of David? did it still protect them under the Geniva convention eventhough it was not recognized? We're trying to figure this out over at Talk:Combat medic. Any help would be apreciated. Mike McGregor (Can) 14:59, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Are policemen "combat security personnel"??

This seems to be very strange breed of article, where military, police and various emergency services (like fire-fighters) are bunched together and collectively called "security forces". The whole article seems to be a home-made concept, including the acronym ISF. Can anyone verify if that acronym is used outside Wikipedia, except by people who have been inspired by Wikipedia to use it? Also, please have a look at the very strange collection of excternal links!

The notion of categorizing the regular police force and the prison service as "combat security organizations" is very scary, and to classify fire stations, ambulance services and organisations that help lost tourists as "non-combat security organizations" is a blatant misuse of the word "security". I think this article should either be scrapped altogether, or limited only to military and intelligence organizations, as well as any SWAT-type teams within the police force. Thomas Blomberg 15:03, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I have never heard of the acronym ISF. I agree with you completely, the article should be re-sorted (military/security/emergency?).

Some of the services can be classified under multiple headings. ZAKA, for example, is considered to be part of the security apparatus and is trained by the police and Magen David Adom. They also perform first aid, search & rescue, and disaster relief. ZAKA is now an international organization as well, based in both Israel and the US (in New York). Mg196 18:06, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Insignia

Toward the bottom of the article, there are a bunch of unexplained insignia. Could someone caption them? --Eyrian 15:40, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I removed all of the logos/insignia for two reasons. First, they were jumbled all over the page and gave the item an extrmely sloppy look. Secondly, they were not labled, giving the reader a difficult time. A better place to have the logos would be on the individual "main" pages. Mg196 15:35, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Nuclear Capabilities?

I removed the line, "The Israeli military is widely believed to be nuclear capable. No Israeli officials have officially confirmed or denied the existence of an Israeli nuclear arsenal," for two reasons. First, there are no references/citations. Secondly, the first line of the page states this article is about organizations, not military capabilities.Mg196 16:03, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Self reference

WP:SELFREF would seem to clearly prohibit a sentence that starts "For the purposes of Wikipedia...", let alone its presence at the beginning of the article. This would probably be the textbook definition of self reference. Alansohn (talk) 18:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)