3 ms·

Honestly the entire premise of a country defending itself from attack being required to feed those attacking them is absurd. Has it ever happened in world hist

Honestly the entire premise of a country defending itself from attack being required to feed those attacking them is absurd. Has it ever happened in world history to anyone that's not Israel? Ukraine certainly isn't expected to feed Russia...

ceejayoz 2y ago
> Honestly the entire premise of a country defending itself from attack being required to feed those attacking them is absurd. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention, to which Israel is a signatory, requires an occupying power to safeguard the civilian population they control. > Has it ever happened in world history to anyone that's not Israel? Yes; the Nuremberg trials. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_Plan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_Plan The Holodomor is another example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor > Ukraine certainly isn't expected to feed Russia... Their troops currently occupying parts of Kursk absolutely are expected to safeguard the civilian population there. Blockading food supplies there would be a war crime.
ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
> Ukraine certainly isn't expected to feed Russia... You seem to have the roles reversed. Israel is behaving like russia here: occupying another country, displacing residents, saying the land should be theirs, repressing civilians, employing sexual violence and other torture, killing resisters, etc. To your point: russia is obligated to provide food and medical supplies to civilians in occupied Ukraine, just as Israel is obligated to provide food and medical supplies to civilians in occupied Palestine.
- dismalaf 2y ago
  > You seem to have the roles reversed. Russia attacked Ukraine. Hamas attacked Israel. Those are the roles. Israel hadn't occupied Gaza in 15 years prior to Oct 7.
  - ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
    I suspect we are all smart here on HN, and probably know there is a longer backstory, dating back decades: Israel attacked Palestine after Hamas attacked Israel after Israel attacked Palestine after Hamas attacked Israel after Israel attacked Palestine, etc, etc. More to the point, both russia and Israel have engaged in occupying another country, displacing residents, saying the land should be theirs, repressing civilians, employing sexual violence and other torture, killing resisters, and that's all before Oct 7. Indeed, both present the same pretextual justification for doing all this: the occupation, displacement, repression, sexual violence, torture, and killing we see from russia and Israel are all allegedly for self defense, and because they claim the land was theirs at some point in the past.
  - ceejayoz 2y ago
    > Israel hadn't occupied Gaza in 15 years prior to Oct 7. In the same sense that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Ghetto https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Ghetto mostly wasn't occupied by the Nazis, sure. Walling off a population into a small area so you can control the people trapped inside is an occupation via any definition that matters. > Russia attacked Ukraine. Hamas attacked Israel. Those are the roles. Russia and Ukraine both hold some of the others' territory. They are required by international law to protect certain rights of prisoners of war and the civilian population of those areas under their control. Russia, in particular, is known for... varying compliance with the rule. The same is true when Hamas went into Israel; they committed clear war crimes by not treating the civilians there during their very brief occupation according to international law.
    - dismalaf 2y ago
      > Walling off a population into a small area so you can control the people trapped inside is an occupation via any definition that matters. Having a wall on your border is perfectly acceptable. Gazans were even allowed to work in Israel and many did (unfortunately lots of them provided intel to Hamas for Oct 7). And no, having a wall isn't the definition of occupation.
      - 2y ago

ceejayoz 2y ago

> Honestly the entire premise of a country defending itself from attack being required to feed those attacking them is absurd. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention, to which Israel is a signatory, requires an occupying power to safeguard the civilian population they control. > Has it ever happened in world history to anyone that's not Israel? Yes; the Nuremberg trials. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_Plan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_Plan The Holodomor is another example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor > Ukraine certainly isn't expected to feed Russia... Their troops currently occupying parts of Kursk absolutely are expected to safeguard the civilian population there. Blockading food supplies there would be a war crime.

ImPostingOnHN 2y ago

> Ukraine certainly isn't expected to feed Russia... You seem to have the roles reversed. Israel is behaving like russia here: occupying another country, displacing residents, saying the land should be theirs, repressing civilians, employing sexual violence and other torture, killing resisters, etc. To your point: russia is obligated to provide food and medical supplies to civilians in occupied Ukraine, just as Israel is obligated to provide food and medical supplies to civilians in occupied Palestine.

dismalaf 2y ago
> You seem to have the roles reversed. Russia attacked Ukraine. Hamas attacked Israel. Those are the roles. Israel hadn't occupied Gaza in 15 years prior to Oct 7.
- ImPostingOnHN 2y ago
  I suspect we are all smart here on HN, and probably know there is a longer backstory, dating back decades: Israel attacked Palestine after Hamas attacked Israel after Israel attacked Palestine after Hamas attacked Israel after Israel attacked Palestine, etc, etc. More to the point, both russia and Israel have engaged in occupying another country, displacing residents, saying the land should be theirs, repressing civilians, employing sexual violence and other torture, killing resisters, and that's all before Oct 7. Indeed, both present the same pretextual justification for doing all this: the occupation, displacement, repression, sexual violence, torture, and killing we see from russia and Israel are all allegedly for self defense, and because they claim the land was theirs at some point in the past.
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  > Israel hadn't occupied Gaza in 15 years prior to Oct 7. In the same sense that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Ghetto https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Ghetto mostly wasn't occupied by the Nazis, sure. Walling off a population into a small area so you can control the people trapped inside is an occupation via any definition that matters. > Russia attacked Ukraine. Hamas attacked Israel. Those are the roles. Russia and Ukraine both hold some of the others' territory. They are required by international law to protect certain rights of prisoners of war and the civilian population of those areas under their control. Russia, in particular, is known for... varying compliance with the rule. The same is true when Hamas went into Israel; they committed clear war crimes by not treating the civilians there during their very brief occupation according to international law.
  - dismalaf 2y ago
    > Walling off a population into a small area so you can control the people trapped inside is an occupation via any definition that matters. Having a wall on your border is perfectly acceptable. Gazans were even allowed to work in Israel and many did (unfortunately lots of them provided intel to Hamas for Oct 7). And no, having a wall isn't the definition of occupation.
    - 2y ago