<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote">Not sure if this is for Avodah or Areivim, so I'm sending it to both.
</div><div class="gmail_quote"><span style><br></span></div><div class="gmail_quote"><span style>From Areivim:</span></div><div class="gmail_quote"><span style>"Yesterday on Galei Tzahal, a soldier who served in the Nachal Chareidi </span><br style>
<span style>spoke about his service. He mentioned three incidents in which he and </span><br style><span style>his buddies needed to call a rav. 1) They were to protect some citizens </span><br style><span style>on Shabbat who were doing some Chillul Shabbat (they were told that they </span><br style>
<span style>would be doing this on Friday). 2) They were searching for a terrorist </span><br style><span style>in the Beqqa on Tisha B'av and the officer, after several hours in the </span><br style><span style>field, ordered them to drink 3) They had to get on a helicopter to </span><br style>
<span style>pursue a terrorist and upon getting in they saw that the pilot was a woman.</span></div><div class="gmail_quote"><br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#ffffff"><div>In the first they consulted with Rav Elyashiv who told them to
refuse.<br></div></div></blockquote><div>Presumably there are other, non-frum soldiers, who would have been able to take over the watch, and R' Elyashiv felt it was important to not actively enable Chillul Shabbos. There is a big difference between protecting people who are mechallel shabbos and actually providing those people with the ability to do so. </div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#ffffff"><div>In the second they consulted with some rav who told them that it was
OK to drink</div></div></blockquote><div>I'm surprised this is even a shaila at all. Why weren't they drinking all day? It would make sense to me that soldiers doing active operations would be required to drink and eat. I would even be unsurprised if soldiers who were "on-call" and not in the middle of actual operations were allowed to eat and drink. </div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#ffffff"><div>and in the third the officer forced them to get on board and didn't give them a chance to call."<br>
</div></div></blockquote><div>I echo RJK's request for someone who actually served to pipe in here, as I'm confused. On the one hand, the army seems to have failed their obligations to these soldiers by not providing them a male pilot. This is an issue which needs to be taken up with the army after the fact. But if you are actively chasing a terrorist, and every second is precious, why would there even be a question as to whether you should ask a shaila at the moment?</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#ffffff"><div></div>
<div>RJK wrote:</div></div></blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#ffffff"><div>I am sure that all of the armchair soldiers sitting comfortably thousands
of miles away have opinions about the issues raised by this. But what
I'm interested in is the opinions of those on this list who have
served, or are still serving, in the IDF. Help me out, please.</div></div></blockquote><div> </div></div>-- <br><div dir="ltr"><div>Liron Kopinsky</div><div><a href="mailto:liron.kopinsky@gmail.com" target="_blank">liron.kopinsky@gmail.com</a></div>
</div><br>
</div>