6 ms·

[flagged]

by MomsAVoxell 1y ago

[flagged]

vladgur 1y ago
[flagged]
- MomsAVoxell 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - hersko 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - MomsAVoxell 1y ago
      Literally a violation of Common Article 3; GC I Art. 12 & 18; GC III Art. 13; GC IV Arts. 27, 32 & 51; AP I Arts. 48, 51(2–5), 57 & 54; CCW Amended Protocol II Art. 7(2) of the Geneva Conventions. Common Article 3 was breached by carrying out lethal attacks against persons taking no active part in hostilities (including off-duty medics and civilians) without individual assessment; GC I Articles 12 and 18 were violated when medical personnel and facilities were hit by exploding devices carried by wounded or off-duty health workers; GC III Article 13 was infringed because many victims instantly became hors de combat through injury yet were subjected to further maiming by shrapnel designed to cause maximum harm; GC IV Articles 27, 32 and 51 were contravened by the indiscriminate killing and mutilation of civilians (including children and bystanders) and by imposing collective punishment through mass, simultaneous detonation regardless of individual status; Additional Protocol I Articles 48, 51(2–5), 57 and 54 were violated through the failure to distinguish combatants from civilians, the inherently indiscriminate and disproportionate nature of detonating thousands of devices in populated areas, and the use of treachery/perfidious means to kill; finally, Amended Protocol II to the CCW Article 7(2) was directly breached by transforming ordinary civilian pagers into prohibited booby-traps specifically designed and constructed to contain concealed explosives. The use of treachery/perfidious means to kill is particularly disturbing, since it sets the precedent for similar means to be used in retaliation, very likely to result in yet more unjustifiable acts of terror.
      - jameshilliard 1y ago
        You're really playing up the false narrative that the spicy pagers were indiscriminate, which just isn't factually accurate, they were sold exclusively to terrorists and used exclusively by terrorist organizations for communications, there weren't any non-terrorist affiliated medics that got caught up in the attack from my understanding. Even in cases where they were detonated in populated areas bystanders were essentially unaffected due to the design of the explosive payload.
        MomsAVoxell 1y ago
        [flagged]
        jameshilliard 1y ago
        There are interviews with the Mossad agents that ran the operation that clarify how the operation was carried out: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-former-mossad-agents-detail-explosive-pagers-hezbollah-terrorists-plot-60-minutes-transcript/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-former-mossad-agents-det... The claims made in the interview align with various other sources, including videos of the explosions showing that bystanders were unaffected. Likewise none of the spicy pagers were found to have been sold to the general public. You claim: > “sold exclusively to terrorists” - false. > “used exclusively by terrorist organizations for communications” - false. > “weren't any non-terrorist affiliated medics ” - false. From the interview > Lesley Stahl: Did people other than Hezbollah want to buy this based on what was being said about it online? > Gabriel: Yes. We received several request from regular potential customer. Obviously we didn't send to anyone. We just quote them with expensive price. You claim: > “bystanders were essentially unaffected due to the design of the explosive payload” - false. From the article: > In order to put explosives inside. But not too much. Using dummies, Mossad conducted tests with the pager in a padded glove to calibrate the grams of explosive needed to be just enough to hurt the fighter -- but not the person next to him.
  - xdennis 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - MomsAVoxell 1y ago
      [flagged]
  - mrguyorama 1y ago
    >Extra-judicial murder through out of control deployment of weapons via subterfuge is terrorism, also. No? The slave workers in Nazi germany who purposely fucked up equipment to get german soldiers killed were not committing a war crime. Sabotage is legitimate warfare. The french people getting the trust of german soldiers and then slitting their throats were not committing war crimes. >Civilians died in those indiscriminate attacks - which were terrorist in nature and deed. Civilians die in every war because war is messy and the geneva conventions, which only considered prisoners of war until the 4th, do not prevent civilian causalities. They are not intended to. The Geneva conventions were updated after world war 2 and were STILL not made to prevent things like the London Blitz or infrastructure attacks, and indeed things like Russia trying to freeze Ukraine to death by blowing up it's electrical infrastructure is not a war crime. If hezbollah are legitimate combatants, then they have to wear a uniform during hostilities to be protected by the conventions/protocols/hague. If they do not wear a uniform, they are considered defectors to lawful war and have less protections than actual combatants. If China puts backdoors in all the chips we buy from them, and we build weapons with those chips, and China pressed a button that self destructs all things made with those chips, that is also not a warcrime. War crimes are pretty much only treating POWs incorrectly by doing medical "experiments" on them or genociding them. If you are not a POW yet, the Geneva conventions don't say much about you. Do you people think anyone would have signed a treaty that says "You can't kill more than 1 innocent person per bad guy"? >Tell me you don't care about the Geneva convention without telling me you've probably never read the Geneva convention. Big words from someone who doesn't seem to recognize that they geneva convention they've "totally read" doesn't say what they seem to think it says. Please quote the part where blowing up a civilian with your target is called a war crime
    - MomsAVoxell 1y ago
      >sabotage is legitimate warfare Show me the Article in the CCW which supports this claim. And do you mean sabotage against civilian infrastructure, or military materials? Again, show the Article, either way. >If hezbollah are legitimate combatants, then they have to wear a uniform Yes, true. Just as those responsible for the pager attacks had to identify themselves as combatants, also. > If China puts backdoors in all the chips we buy from them, and we build weapons with those chips, and China pressed a button that self destructs all things made with those chips, that is also not a warcrime. If this were to occur, it would be considered a war crime under one or more of the following articles: - Perfidy (Art. 37 AP I) - Indiscriminate attack (Art. 51(4) AP I) - Excessive incidental civilian harm / disproportionality (Art. 51(5)(b) AP I) - Treachery (broader Hague prohibition) - Superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering (Art. 35(2) AP I) - Failure to take feasible precautions (Art. 57 AP I) Any of these 6 violations can constitute war crimes. >“War crimes are pretty much only treating POWs incorrectly by doing medical "experiments" on them or genociding them.” Okay, this is just plain, ignorant, crazy talk. >”Please quote the part where blowing up a civilian with your target is called a war crime,” Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions and from the Rome Statute of the ICC.
- wahnfrieden 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - dralley 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - wahnfrieden 1y ago
      42 people were killed 4000 civilians were injured There were two waves of attacks. You're ignoring the second one.
      - dralley 1y ago
        [flagged]
        galagawinkle489 1y ago
        [flagged]
- thenaturalist 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - avh02 1y ago
    actually i think those that have the most beef with israel are very much in the region.
  - MomsAVoxell 1y ago
    Who are these “Israel haters” on HN you’re referring to? There are plenty of us on HN who believe in the Israeli peoples’ human rights just as seriously as we support those of the children of Gaza, too. Those of us who actually care about civilized society, human rights, and international law also consider that there are plenty of Israeli citizens who are, themselves, victims of their own states acts of terrorism as well. You are responsible for the crimes of your state, citizen. No amount of chicken-waving is going to absolve you of that fact. The point of discussing the heinous nature of the pager attack is to prevent the precedent set by that attack from taking further victims. It is not in the interests of Israeli citizens to have their war-crime committing state subjugate their societies’ commercial institutions to commit further atrocities.
  - ebbi 1y ago
    When you increasingly lose the court of public opinion, you resort to this sort of gaslighting. Because the Israeli Hasbara is now failing at this gaslighting strategy, you're leveling ad hominems towards people who see this as what it is - decades of war crimes and a humanitarian crisis. So either come up with a proper argument, or stay quiet. Gaslighting us into thinking we're being biased, or that we're ill informed, just isn't going to work anymore.
    - galagawinkle489 1y ago
      The war crime is when Hamas and Hezbollah fire rockets indiscriminately into Israel to kill innocent civilians. Any and all means are and will always be justified to prevent that.
- potatototoo99 1y ago
  It wasn't a targeted attack since they had no way of knowing where the pagers would end up in the second-hand market, as they were only activated years later.
  - thenaturalist 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - themafia 1y ago
      > You’re telling me pagers used by a terrorist organization ending up in the second-hand market. Four children were killed and dozens of _innocent_ bystanders were injured. > What do you know about Lebanon and Hezbollah? It's a conflict that's been going on for 30 years that I can remember and I don't think that more kinetic operations are going to accomplish anything other than fomenting an actual genocide. Did you think gatekeeping was going to work? This conflict has spilled out into the broader world. If it were strictly contained to Lebanon and only implicated Hezbollah then you might have a point. We're well past that. > How do people end up making such unfounded, unbiased claims so confidently?? https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/18/world/middleeast/israel-exploding-pagers-hezbollah.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/18/world/middleeast/israel-e...
      - dralley 1y ago
        >Four children were killed and dozens of _innocent_ bystanders were injured. Compared to thousands of Hezbollah members. Literally one of the most targeted large-scale attacks of all time. There are effectively zero other military means that would have been even close to as selective and discriminant. Would you prefer they drop a 500lb bomb on each of their houses instead?
        monocasa 1y ago
        The pagers killed a total of twelve people; which included four children. That's a pretty awful ratio.
- CommanderData 1y ago
  I mean the world takes the view Israel is occupying and slowly invading more regions of Palestine. I didn't make it up, the Balfour declaration makes it pretty clear, so if you're upset natives are attacking you what's your point exactly. Anyway, point is Israel has almost always lied throughout it's genocide against Palestinians. The IOF has lied or distorted the truth in almost every statement, one which always comes to mind is the attack on the Christian hospital. The Israeli government are liars, they have a whole online army dedicated to misinformation and the 5 D's. For them lying is just another effective weapon of war which must be utilised.
- nashashmi 1y ago
  27 out of 190 countries is far from “international consensus” and does not legitimize attacks on the group in sovereign territory. don’t justify the security hack as legitimate. If Israel penetrated a security perimeter of a group that breach becomes a threat to all people everywhere
  - null_deref 1y ago
    Hezoballah group itself defies the Lebanese government and the Lebanese sovereignty
    - nashashmi 1y ago
      Hezbollah is part of the political system in Lebanon
- Qiu_Zhanxuan 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - vladgur 1y ago
    Which deranged logic are you referring to? Also America is behind all sufferings in the world? That’s some amazing interpretation of reality
- dundarious 1y ago
  > Former CIA director Leon Panetta labeled last week’s deadly pager explosions in Lebanon a form of “terrorism.” > “I don’t think there’s any question that it’s a form of terrorism,” Panetta said on “CBS News Sunday morning.” https://thehill.com/policy/international/4893900-leon-panetta-lebanon-explosions-terrorism/ https://thehill.com/policy/international/4893900-leon-panett... I don't take anything Leon Panetta says as gospel, but the fact that someone like him says this shows how the position is not ludicrous in the way you and other similar replies are painting it.
- khiemdn 1y ago
  The pager operation was definitely the most impressive one I know in modern day.
xenospn 1y ago
[flagged]
matkoniecz 1y ago
[flagged]
- nashashmi 1y ago
  Targeting civilians in a sovereign country is a war crime
  - matkoniecz 11mo ago
    IIRC correctly they were not targeting civilians in this case (which is distinct and different from "no civilians were harmed")
- MomsAVoxell 1y ago
  You might want to familiarize yourself with this material before commenting further on this thread: Common Article 3; GC I Art. 12 & 18; GC III Art. 13; GC IV Arts. 27, 32 & 51; AP I Arts. 48, 51(2–5), 57 & 54; CCW Amended Protocol II Art. 7(2) of the Geneva Conventions.
  - matkoniecz 11mo ago
    Do you mean > Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices as amended on 3 May 1996 (Protocol II to the 1980 CCW Convention as amended on 3 May 1996) or some other document? IIRC for start it does not have article 18. I am quite confused by your weird unusually formatted citation style.
shuraman7 1y ago
[flagged]
- MomsAVoxell 1y ago
  You have, of course, familiarized yourself with this material: Common Article 3; GC I Art. 12 & 18; GC III Art. 13; GC IV Arts. 27, 32 & 51; AP I Arts. 48, 51(2–5), 57 & 54; CCW Amended Protocol II Art. 7(2) of the Geneva Conventions.
  - shuraman7 1y ago
    [flagged]
- tomhow 1y ago
  > jesus, you must be seriously fucked in the head to You can't comment like this on Hacker News, no matter what you're replying to. Please take a moment to read the guidelines and make an effort to observe them if you want to keep participating here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[flagged]

vladgur 1y ago

[flagged]

MomsAVoxell 1y ago
[flagged]
- hersko 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - MomsAVoxell 1y ago
    Literally a violation of Common Article 3; GC I Art. 12 & 18; GC III Art. 13; GC IV Arts. 27, 32 & 51; AP I Arts. 48, 51(2–5), 57 & 54; CCW Amended Protocol II Art. 7(2) of the Geneva Conventions. Common Article 3 was breached by carrying out lethal attacks against persons taking no active part in hostilities (including off-duty medics and civilians) without individual assessment; GC I Articles 12 and 18 were violated when medical personnel and facilities were hit by exploding devices carried by wounded or off-duty health workers; GC III Article 13 was infringed because many victims instantly became hors de combat through injury yet were subjected to further maiming by shrapnel designed to cause maximum harm; GC IV Articles 27, 32 and 51 were contravened by the indiscriminate killing and mutilation of civilians (including children and bystanders) and by imposing collective punishment through mass, simultaneous detonation regardless of individual status; Additional Protocol I Articles 48, 51(2–5), 57 and 54 were violated through the failure to distinguish combatants from civilians, the inherently indiscriminate and disproportionate nature of detonating thousands of devices in populated areas, and the use of treachery/perfidious means to kill; finally, Amended Protocol II to the CCW Article 7(2) was directly breached by transforming ordinary civilian pagers into prohibited booby-traps specifically designed and constructed to contain concealed explosives. The use of treachery/perfidious means to kill is particularly disturbing, since it sets the precedent for similar means to be used in retaliation, very likely to result in yet more unjustifiable acts of terror.
    - jameshilliard 1y ago
      You're really playing up the false narrative that the spicy pagers were indiscriminate, which just isn't factually accurate, they were sold exclusively to terrorists and used exclusively by terrorist organizations for communications, there weren't any non-terrorist affiliated medics that got caught up in the attack from my understanding. Even in cases where they were detonated in populated areas bystanders were essentially unaffected due to the design of the explosive payload.
      - MomsAVoxell 1y ago
        [flagged]
        jameshilliard 1y ago
        There are interviews with the Mossad agents that ran the operation that clarify how the operation was carried out: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-former-mossad-agents-detail-explosive-pagers-hezbollah-terrorists-plot-60-minutes-transcript/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-former-mossad-agents-det... The claims made in the interview align with various other sources, including videos of the explosions showing that bystanders were unaffected. Likewise none of the spicy pagers were found to have been sold to the general public. You claim: > “sold exclusively to terrorists” - false. > “used exclusively by terrorist organizations for communications” - false. > “weren't any non-terrorist affiliated medics ” - false. From the interview > Lesley Stahl: Did people other than Hezbollah want to buy this based on what was being said about it online? > Gabriel: Yes. We received several request from regular potential customer. Obviously we didn't send to anyone. We just quote them with expensive price. You claim: > “bystanders were essentially unaffected due to the design of the explosive payload” - false. From the article: > In order to put explosives inside. But not too much. Using dummies, Mossad conducted tests with the pager in a padded glove to calibrate the grams of explosive needed to be just enough to hurt the fighter -- but not the person next to him.
- xdennis 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - MomsAVoxell 1y ago
    [flagged]
- mrguyorama 1y ago
  >Extra-judicial murder through out of control deployment of weapons via subterfuge is terrorism, also. No? The slave workers in Nazi germany who purposely fucked up equipment to get german soldiers killed were not committing a war crime. Sabotage is legitimate warfare. The french people getting the trust of german soldiers and then slitting their throats were not committing war crimes. >Civilians died in those indiscriminate attacks - which were terrorist in nature and deed. Civilians die in every war because war is messy and the geneva conventions, which only considered prisoners of war until the 4th, do not prevent civilian causalities. They are not intended to. The Geneva conventions were updated after world war 2 and were STILL not made to prevent things like the London Blitz or infrastructure attacks, and indeed things like Russia trying to freeze Ukraine to death by blowing up it's electrical infrastructure is not a war crime. If hezbollah are legitimate combatants, then they have to wear a uniform during hostilities to be protected by the conventions/protocols/hague. If they do not wear a uniform, they are considered defectors to lawful war and have less protections than actual combatants. If China puts backdoors in all the chips we buy from them, and we build weapons with those chips, and China pressed a button that self destructs all things made with those chips, that is also not a warcrime. War crimes are pretty much only treating POWs incorrectly by doing medical "experiments" on them or genociding them. If you are not a POW yet, the Geneva conventions don't say much about you. Do you people think anyone would have signed a treaty that says "You can't kill more than 1 innocent person per bad guy"? >Tell me you don't care about the Geneva convention without telling me you've probably never read the Geneva convention. Big words from someone who doesn't seem to recognize that they geneva convention they've "totally read" doesn't say what they seem to think it says. Please quote the part where blowing up a civilian with your target is called a war crime
  - MomsAVoxell 1y ago
    >sabotage is legitimate warfare Show me the Article in the CCW which supports this claim. And do you mean sabotage against civilian infrastructure, or military materials? Again, show the Article, either way. >If hezbollah are legitimate combatants, then they have to wear a uniform Yes, true. Just as those responsible for the pager attacks had to identify themselves as combatants, also. > If China puts backdoors in all the chips we buy from them, and we build weapons with those chips, and China pressed a button that self destructs all things made with those chips, that is also not a warcrime. If this were to occur, it would be considered a war crime under one or more of the following articles: - Perfidy (Art. 37 AP I) - Indiscriminate attack (Art. 51(4) AP I) - Excessive incidental civilian harm / disproportionality (Art. 51(5)(b) AP I) - Treachery (broader Hague prohibition) - Superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering (Art. 35(2) AP I) - Failure to take feasible precautions (Art. 57 AP I) Any of these 6 violations can constitute war crimes. >“War crimes are pretty much only treating POWs incorrectly by doing medical "experiments" on them or genociding them.” Okay, this is just plain, ignorant, crazy talk. >”Please quote the part where blowing up a civilian with your target is called a war crime,” Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions and from the Rome Statute of the ICC.
wahnfrieden 1y ago
[flagged]
- dralley 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - wahnfrieden 1y ago
    42 people were killed 4000 civilians were injured There were two waves of attacks. You're ignoring the second one.
    - dralley 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - galagawinkle489 1y ago
        [flagged]
thenaturalist 1y ago
[flagged]
- avh02 1y ago
  actually i think those that have the most beef with israel are very much in the region.
- MomsAVoxell 1y ago
  Who are these “Israel haters” on HN you’re referring to? There are plenty of us on HN who believe in the Israeli peoples’ human rights just as seriously as we support those of the children of Gaza, too. Those of us who actually care about civilized society, human rights, and international law also consider that there are plenty of Israeli citizens who are, themselves, victims of their own states acts of terrorism as well. You are responsible for the crimes of your state, citizen. No amount of chicken-waving is going to absolve you of that fact. The point of discussing the heinous nature of the pager attack is to prevent the precedent set by that attack from taking further victims. It is not in the interests of Israeli citizens to have their war-crime committing state subjugate their societies’ commercial institutions to commit further atrocities.
- ebbi 1y ago
  When you increasingly lose the court of public opinion, you resort to this sort of gaslighting. Because the Israeli Hasbara is now failing at this gaslighting strategy, you're leveling ad hominems towards people who see this as what it is - decades of war crimes and a humanitarian crisis. So either come up with a proper argument, or stay quiet. Gaslighting us into thinking we're being biased, or that we're ill informed, just isn't going to work anymore.
  - galagawinkle489 1y ago
    The war crime is when Hamas and Hezbollah fire rockets indiscriminately into Israel to kill innocent civilians. Any and all means are and will always be justified to prevent that.
potatototoo99 1y ago
It wasn't a targeted attack since they had no way of knowing where the pagers would end up in the second-hand market, as they were only activated years later.
- thenaturalist 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - themafia 1y ago
    > You’re telling me pagers used by a terrorist organization ending up in the second-hand market. Four children were killed and dozens of _innocent_ bystanders were injured. > What do you know about Lebanon and Hezbollah? It's a conflict that's been going on for 30 years that I can remember and I don't think that more kinetic operations are going to accomplish anything other than fomenting an actual genocide. Did you think gatekeeping was going to work? This conflict has spilled out into the broader world. If it were strictly contained to Lebanon and only implicated Hezbollah then you might have a point. We're well past that. > How do people end up making such unfounded, unbiased claims so confidently?? https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/18/world/middleeast/israel-exploding-pagers-hezbollah.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/18/world/middleeast/israel-e...
    - dralley 1y ago
      >Four children were killed and dozens of _innocent_ bystanders were injured. Compared to thousands of Hezbollah members. Literally one of the most targeted large-scale attacks of all time. There are effectively zero other military means that would have been even close to as selective and discriminant. Would you prefer they drop a 500lb bomb on each of their houses instead?
      - monocasa 1y ago
        The pagers killed a total of twelve people; which included four children. That's a pretty awful ratio.
CommanderData 1y ago
I mean the world takes the view Israel is occupying and slowly invading more regions of Palestine. I didn't make it up, the Balfour declaration makes it pretty clear, so if you're upset natives are attacking you what's your point exactly. Anyway, point is Israel has almost always lied throughout it's genocide against Palestinians. The IOF has lied or distorted the truth in almost every statement, one which always comes to mind is the attack on the Christian hospital. The Israeli government are liars, they have a whole online army dedicated to misinformation and the 5 D's. For them lying is just another effective weapon of war which must be utilised.
nashashmi 1y ago
27 out of 190 countries is far from “international consensus” and does not legitimize attacks on the group in sovereign territory. don’t justify the security hack as legitimate. If Israel penetrated a security perimeter of a group that breach becomes a threat to all people everywhere
- null_deref 1y ago
  Hezoballah group itself defies the Lebanese government and the Lebanese sovereignty
  - nashashmi 1y ago
    Hezbollah is part of the political system in Lebanon
Qiu_Zhanxuan 1y ago
[flagged]
- vladgur 1y ago
  Which deranged logic are you referring to? Also America is behind all sufferings in the world? That’s some amazing interpretation of reality
dundarious 1y ago
> Former CIA director Leon Panetta labeled last week’s deadly pager explosions in Lebanon a form of “terrorism.” > “I don’t think there’s any question that it’s a form of terrorism,” Panetta said on “CBS News Sunday morning.” https://thehill.com/policy/international/4893900-leon-panetta-lebanon-explosions-terrorism/ https://thehill.com/policy/international/4893900-leon-panett... I don't take anything Leon Panetta says as gospel, but the fact that someone like him says this shows how the position is not ludicrous in the way you and other similar replies are painting it.
khiemdn 1y ago
The pager operation was definitely the most impressive one I know in modern day.

xenospn 1y ago

[flagged]

matkoniecz 1y ago

[flagged]

nashashmi 1y ago
Targeting civilians in a sovereign country is a war crime
- matkoniecz 11mo ago
  IIRC correctly they were not targeting civilians in this case (which is distinct and different from "no civilians were harmed")
MomsAVoxell 1y ago
You might want to familiarize yourself with this material before commenting further on this thread: Common Article 3; GC I Art. 12 & 18; GC III Art. 13; GC IV Arts. 27, 32 & 51; AP I Arts. 48, 51(2–5), 57 & 54; CCW Amended Protocol II Art. 7(2) of the Geneva Conventions.
- matkoniecz 11mo ago
  Do you mean > Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices as amended on 3 May 1996 (Protocol II to the 1980 CCW Convention as amended on 3 May 1996) or some other document? IIRC for start it does not have article 18. I am quite confused by your weird unusually formatted citation style.

shuraman7 1y ago

[flagged]

MomsAVoxell 1y ago
You have, of course, familiarized yourself with this material: Common Article 3; GC I Art. 12 & 18; GC III Art. 13; GC IV Arts. 27, 32 & 51; AP I Arts. 48, 51(2–5), 57 & 54; CCW Amended Protocol II Art. 7(2) of the Geneva Conventions.
- shuraman7 1y ago
  [flagged]
tomhow 1y ago
> jesus, you must be seriously fucked in the head to You can't comment like this on Hacker News, no matter what you're replying to. Please take a moment to read the guidelines and make an effort to observe them if you want to keep participating here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html