6 ms·

On the flip side, in this war many of the Gaza combatants are either irregular forces or militants deliberately wearing civilian clothing. So if some guy in a

• ein0p 3y ago
  Children and women do not shoot up tanks
  • kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 3y ago
    [flagged]
    • ein0p 3y ago
      Doesn’t mean it’s true. Remember the source. A toddler can’t even lift an RPG
      • bloaf 3y ago
        The Palestinians have a well documented history of using children in combat. See for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_child_suicide_bombers_by_Palestinian_militant_groups https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_child_suicide_bombers_b...
        • mandmandam 3y ago
          From your own link: > At the height of the phenomenon, Avraham Burg, former chairman of the Jewish Agency for Israel, speaker of Israel's Knesset and interim President of Israel, stated his view that, given Israeli indifference to the tortured lives of Palestinian children under occupation, suicide bombings come as no surprise. ... Palestinians have been tortured from birth for decades. Acting surprised when they fight back is either disingenuous or stupid, or both.
          • gryzzly 3y ago
            [flagged]
            • mandmandam 3y ago
              Lol, are you even reading your own quoted text? > "a desire to avenge relatives or friends killed by the Israeli army". Yeah. If your relatives and friends were killed by an occupying force you might fight back. That's my whole point. It's as if Palestinian lives are worth so little to you the words don't even reach your cognition... Besides which, Amnesty International have been very clear and vocal about Israel's genocidal campaign, eg, https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/israelopt-israel-must-comply-todays-icj-ruling https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/israelopt-israel-m...
              • gryzzly 3y ago
                it says "may", and the social science seems to believe it is far from main reason people join islamist extremist groups – https://mwi.westpoint.edu/who-really-chooses-to-become-a-suicide-bomber/ https://mwi.westpoint.edu/who-really-chooses-to-become-a-sui... https://www.eip.org/why-do-people-join-terrorist-organisations/#:~:text=People%20join%20extremists%20organisations%20for,al%20Shabab%20for%20economic%20reasons https://www.eip.org/why-do-people-join-terrorist-organisatio.... As long as PA pays pension to terrorist families, UNRWA teachers teach math with "how many jews killed" and Iran and Qatar actively sponsor islamist terror, the society will remain the way it is now.
      • klipt 3y ago
        Does child soldier only mean toddlers though? I thought it was more commonly 16, 17 year olds. Presumably recruiting 17 year olds is against international law. But for a guerrilla fighting group that doesn't care about international law, a 17 year old is almost the ideal recruit. They can fight almost as effectively as an 18 year old can, and if they die in combat you can also claim, technically truthfully, that the enemy is deliberately targeting children.
        • ein0p 3y ago
          Does Israel care about international law? Because I’m seeing a lot of dead and wounded toddlers.
          • YZF 3y ago
            Israel does care about international law. A lot. The IDF has lawyers involved in many targeting decisions and other decisions. There is a department dedicated to it: https://www.idf.il/en/mini-sites/military-advocate-general-s-corps/international-law-department/ https://www.idf.il/en/mini-sites/military-advocate-general-s... podcast: "The Lawyer who Advises the IDF on Law of War issues in Gaza" https://law-disrupted.fm/idf-lawyer-advises-war-gaza-military-operations/ https://law-disrupted.fm/idf-lawyer-advises-war-gaza-militar... Now whether the right-wing soldier who has seen his friends murdered in a music festival and has been sent in with a tank into Gaza care? Very likely less so. Does every member of this right wing government care? Likely less. However the independent court system in Israel can also enforce the various conventions Israel is a signatory to (e.g. the Geneva convention). The situation where young soldiers are in Gaza armed to the teeth fighting an enemy that blends in with civilians is the creation of Hamas. If Israel follows international law 100% you will still see a lot dead toddlers in this kind of warfare. So just that fact doesn't prove much.
          • sgjohnson 3y ago
            If Israel didn't care about international law, all of Gaza would now be a smoking crater and the death toll would be an order of magnitude higher.
    • Avicebron 3y ago
      I wonder if we track this sentiment how far back it would go, I'd suspect it goes back about as far as there have been public complaints about child deaths.
  • leptons 3y ago
    [flagged]
    • ein0p 3y ago
      You are aware you’re parroting war propaganda, right? I mean sure, this does happen in some cases I’m sure, for that matter I have seen the IDF _on video_ use Palestinians as human shields. But the entire article is about the fact that nobody is even looking if there are civilians there before dropping bombs, and 20K+ of women and children are now dead as a result.
      • p3rls 3y ago
        [flagged]
        • ein0p 3y ago
          That too is war propaganda though.
        • wahnfrieden 3y ago
          [flagged]
          • gryzzly 3y ago
            [flagged]
            • wahnfrieden 3y ago
              [flagged]
      • leptons 3y ago
        [flagged]
        • ein0p 3y ago
  • andsoitis 3y ago
    > women do not shoot up tanks There’s quite a bit of literature, history, statistics on women terrorists as well as soldiers.
    • goatsi 3y ago
      In the linked article the only check the IDF was still using on the target list provided by the AI was discarding any and all targets it selected who were women, as they don't believe Hamas would use them as fighters.
  • gryzzly 3y ago
    [flagged]
• mitthrowaway2 3y ago
  > On the flip side, in this war many of the Gaza combatants are either irregular forces or militants deliberately wearing civilian clothing. I'd be more inclined to believe that this was all it was, if the IDF didn't just blow up a convoy of foreign aid workers who had already received clearance and pre-registered their route with the IDF. Sure, accidents happen, but it speaks volumes to the general level of diligence that goes into approving each strike, and this makes me very skeptical that other incidents that get coverage are simply attacks on plainclothed militants. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/article-israel-air-strike-on-gaza-kills-foreign-aid-workers-hamas-run-media/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/article-israel-air-str...
• singleshot_ 3y ago
  While perfidy is a violation of the law of war, summary execution is not a generally-acceptable penalty under IHL.
  • bandrami 3y ago
    Huh? Summary execution has always been the punishment for perfidy under the laws of war.
    • elygre 3y ago
      Do you have a reference for that? Even as perfidy is a war crime, we do not generally allow for summary execution for war criminals.
      • bandrami 3y ago
        ICRC says perfidy places you outside of the bounds of protection of international law: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule65 https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule65
        • singleshot_ 3y ago
          How would one know perfidy occurred? The search term that might help here is “previous judgment, pronounced by a regularly constituted court.” Also: if one is outside of the protection of IHL/LOAC, might other laws protect him?
          • bandrami 3y ago
            This is my fault; I hadn't read the whole thread. There's two acts that constitute perfidy: one is wearing false uniforms or displaying false colors; I agree that isn't usually met with summary execution. The other one is taking back up arms after signalling a surrender. That is absolutely met with summary execution.
        • elygre 3y ago
• Quanttek 3y ago
  > Speaking of international laws of combat: no protections apply to non-uniformed combatants pretending to be civilians. None. They can be tortured, executed on the spot, whatever. Speaking of "armchair international law experts", this is completely wrong. BLUF: Failing to distinguish does not deprive you of fundamental guarantees of humane treatment, including the prohibition of torture and summary execution - both of which are war crimes. The individual obligation to distinguish is linked to Prisoner of War (POW) status - those who do not distinguish, do not get the protections of that status. That is the only consequence of the failure to distinguish. All those persons who are not POWs are automatically civilians, as made clear by the residual clause in Article 4(4) Fourth Geneva Convention (GC IV). While civilians can be interned for "imperative reasons of security", they are entitled to their own detailed treatment obligations (Articles 79-135 GC IV). In any case, even if they are somehow not entitled to that treatment, the fundamental humane treatment guarantees of Art 27 GC IV [1] and Art 75 Additional Protocol I [2] (which, as customary law, applies to all parties to a conflict) nonetheless apply. If we argue that it is a non-international armed conflict (which knows neither POW status nor the obligation to distinguish), Common Article 3 [3] similarly obligates humane treatment. Humane treatment is also a norm under customary law [4]. Under these rules, you cannot torture people and you cannot summarily execute people [4]. Read the provisions yourself. In fact, summary execution and torture are actual war crimes [5]. If you want to punish a person, you need to give them a fair trial (IHL does not prohibit the death penalty). You seem to be hinting at the Bush-era "illegal enemy combatant" theory but even the Bush Admin never argued that those persons are not entitled to humane treatment (it was mostly about fair trial rights), and the US (as its lone defender) has long since abandoned the position. Whether Hamas is actually subject to such an obligation to distinguish is highly controversial. On one level is the issue of conflict classification, since POW status and the obligation to distinguish only exist in the law of international armed conflict (IAC). If we accept that there is an IAC (e.g. because of the military occupation), then the question still arises if Hamas somehow "belongs" to the State of Palestine or if they should just be seen as civilians directly participating in hostilities or as being in a parallel non-international armed conflict between Hamas and Israel. In turn, if we accept that there is an obligation to distinguish applicable to Hamas, then Israel also needs to treat Hamas fighters that distinguished as POWs (and, as set out above, if they failed to distinguish, as civilians). [1]: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949/article-27?activeTab=1949GCs-APs-and-commentaries https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949/art... [2]: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/article-75?activeTab=1949GCs-APs-and-commentaries https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/arti... [3]: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949/article-3?activeTab=1949GCs-APs-and-commentaries https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949/art... [4]: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule87 https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule87 https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule89 https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule89 https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule90 https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule90 [5]: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule156 https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule156
• doom2 3y ago
  > However, the Internet is full of armchair international law experts that are being played like a fiddle by Hamas’ propaganda arm. And Israeli hasbara? I see a lot of this take, that everyone is just blindly trusting, eg, casualty counts from the Gazan health ministry, but there seems to be very little questioning of and critical thinking about the propaganda the IDF is spreading in this conflict. Why should we take their word for it that killing a bunch of aid workers[1] was just a mistake, for example? [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/02/israel-idf-air-strike-gaza-foreign-aid-workers-palestinian-translator-killed https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/02/israel-idf-air...