4 ms·

> Israeli forces dressed in doctors’ scrubs and women’s clothes have killed three Palestinian militants in an undercover operation in a hospital in the occupied

> Israeli forces dressed in doctors’ scrubs and women’s clothes have killed three Palestinian militants in an undercover operation in a hospital in the occupied West Bank city of Jenin. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/30/israel-forces-disguised-women-medics-storm-hospital-jenin-west-bank https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/30/israel-forces-... Hmm.

HappyPanacea 9mo ago
[flagged]
- ceejayoz 9mo ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfidy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfidy > It is prohibited to kill, injure or capture an adversary by resort to perfidy… The following acts are examples of perfidy… The feigning of civilian, non-combatant status... (Assassinating a paralyzed patient in a hospital is also not typically - ahem - kosher. Even if you're in uniform!)
  - HappyPanacea 9mo ago
    Why was it decided that feigning of civilian, non-combatant status is bad? because it led to death of civilians who had no part in the fight; pretending to be your enemy's civilians bring no such issue. Although assassinating a patient is also not kosher it less relevant to the discussion about use of uniforms.
    - ceejayoz 9mo ago
      > pretending to be your enemy's civilians bring no such issue Could you clarify where in the Geneva Conventions this very important exemption is stated? > Why was it decided that feigning of civilian, non-combatant status is bad? Because people start shooting civilians thinking they're infiltrators, and even enemy civilians are protected persons.
      - HappyPanacea 9mo ago
        > Could you clarify where in the Geneva Conventions this very important exemption is stated? The spirit of the law is more important then its letter. Also I think Israel never signed that part of the Geneva Conventions. > Because people start shooting civilians thinking they're infiltrators, and even enemy civilians are protected persons. When did that happened in the Israel-Arab conflict? (When did that happened elsewhere? It sounds like it should be very rare, people don't kill their own so easily?)
        ceejayoz 9mo ago
        > Also I think Israel never signed that part of the Geneva Conventions. You, earlier: "A lot of that ambiguity would vanish if Hamas did not have a habit of not putting uniforms in combat." Now it's suddenly not a problem? I can't imagine Hamas signed the Geneva Conventions. > It sounds like it should be very rare, people don't kill their own so easily? German Jews in the 1930s/1940s would probably disagree. > When did that happened elsewhere? It sounds like it should be very rare, people don't kill their own so easily? I mean, the IDF killed three Israeli hostages in Gaza, while with their hands up and holding a white flag, because they thought they were infiltrators. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67745092 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67745092
        km3r 9mo ago
        The spirit of the law is reducing the civilian cost of war. Its hard to argue that Israel's few incidents of wearing civilian clothes for special operations increased the odds of civilian costs compared to the same operation done in uniform. Meanwhile, Hamas's lack of uniforms has led to significantly increased civilian cost.
        HappyPanacea 9mo ago
        > Now it's suddenly not a problem? I can't imagine Hamas signed the Geneva Conventions. As I already alluded to earlier, the principles and spirit are more important to me than the literal conventions and if somebody signed it. I will note that you brought up the Geneva Conventions not me. > German Jews in the 1930s/1940s would probably disagree. I'm confused to what you refer to and why you brought it up? > I mean, the IDF killed three Israeli hostages in Gaza, while with their hands up and holding a white flag, because they thought they were infiltrators. This is not an example to what I asked for, this wouldn't have happened if Hamas wore uniform, IDF wore uniforms, the held hostages civilians didn't but because they were in combat they mistook them for Hamas. What I want is Israeli citizens mistaken for an enemy combatant in Israel in a non-active-combat environment or Palestinians citizens mistaken for an IDF soldier in Palestine in a non-active-combat environment.
  - nickff 9mo ago
    As it stands, the Geneva convention only applies to acts when both countries are signatories, or one is, and the other follows the convention (which Hamas unfortunately does not): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions#Common_Article_2_relating_to_international_armed_conflict_(IAC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions#Common_Arti... Is there another treaty which proscribes perfidy, which Israel has ratified?
    - ceejayoz 9mo ago
      If Israel wants to take that position, they’ll need to denounce the Nuremberg trials. “Crimes against humanity” were invented for them, as the Holocaust was legal under German law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F%C3%BChrerprinzip https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F%C3%BChrerprinzip). As the article indicates, prohibitions against perfidy and other war crimes predate the Conventions. (And I’d note that, as occupying power, Israel is subject to other requirements.) (And if this is truly your argument, “Hamas doesn’t have to follow the rules either” is the logical conclusion. Which makes whining about their uniforms a bit odd; there is no scenario where "Hamas has to follow the Conventions, but Israel does not" is a coherent position.)
LorenPechtel 9mo ago
Yeah, Israel has done some infiltration like that. Not proper, but you're pointing out a molehill while ignoring the mountain.
- ceejayoz 9mo ago
  When the molehill is a war crime, sure.
  - anderber 9mo ago
    So is the mountain, though
    - ceejayoz 9mo ago
      Yes. You will not find me defending Hamas war crimes, of which there are many too.
      - eli_gottlieb 9mo ago
        [flagged]
        SiempreViernes 9mo ago
        Not falling for an obvious distraction from the extremely blatant pattern of dehumanising Palestinians. > In leaked recordings, Maj. Gen. Aharon Haliva — then head of Israeli military intelligence — stated that for every person killed on Oct. 7, “50 Palestinians must die,” adding that “it doesn’t matter now if they are children.” He described mass Palestinian deaths as “necessary” to send a deterrent message. > Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant’s declaration of a “complete siege” on Gaza — cutting food, electricity, fuel, and water — was accompanied by explicitly dehumanizing language. Announcing the policy on Oct. 9, Gallant stated: “We are fighting human animals, and we are acting accordingly.” Israeli President Isaac Herzog’s assertion that “an entire nation out there is responsible” further blurs the institutional line between civilian and combatant. > Such statements do not determine individual targeting decisions, but they shape the environment in which those decisions are made: how civilian life is valued, how much civilian harm is expected to be scrutinized, and how much is implicitly excused.

HappyPanacea 9mo ago

[flagged]

ceejayoz 9mo ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfidy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfidy > It is prohibited to kill, injure or capture an adversary by resort to perfidy… The following acts are examples of perfidy… The feigning of civilian, non-combatant status... (Assassinating a paralyzed patient in a hospital is also not typically - ahem - kosher. Even if you're in uniform!)
- HappyPanacea 9mo ago
  Why was it decided that feigning of civilian, non-combatant status is bad? because it led to death of civilians who had no part in the fight; pretending to be your enemy's civilians bring no such issue. Although assassinating a patient is also not kosher it less relevant to the discussion about use of uniforms.
  - ceejayoz 9mo ago
    > pretending to be your enemy's civilians bring no such issue Could you clarify where in the Geneva Conventions this very important exemption is stated? > Why was it decided that feigning of civilian, non-combatant status is bad? Because people start shooting civilians thinking they're infiltrators, and even enemy civilians are protected persons.
    - HappyPanacea 9mo ago
      > Could you clarify where in the Geneva Conventions this very important exemption is stated? The spirit of the law is more important then its letter. Also I think Israel never signed that part of the Geneva Conventions. > Because people start shooting civilians thinking they're infiltrators, and even enemy civilians are protected persons. When did that happened in the Israel-Arab conflict? (When did that happened elsewhere? It sounds like it should be very rare, people don't kill their own so easily?)
      - ceejayoz 9mo ago
        > Also I think Israel never signed that part of the Geneva Conventions. You, earlier: "A lot of that ambiguity would vanish if Hamas did not have a habit of not putting uniforms in combat." Now it's suddenly not a problem? I can't imagine Hamas signed the Geneva Conventions. > It sounds like it should be very rare, people don't kill their own so easily? German Jews in the 1930s/1940s would probably disagree. > When did that happened elsewhere? It sounds like it should be very rare, people don't kill their own so easily? I mean, the IDF killed three Israeli hostages in Gaza, while with their hands up and holding a white flag, because they thought they were infiltrators. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67745092 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67745092
        km3r 9mo ago
        The spirit of the law is reducing the civilian cost of war. Its hard to argue that Israel's few incidents of wearing civilian clothes for special operations increased the odds of civilian costs compared to the same operation done in uniform. Meanwhile, Hamas's lack of uniforms has led to significantly increased civilian cost.
        HappyPanacea 9mo ago
        > Now it's suddenly not a problem? I can't imagine Hamas signed the Geneva Conventions. As I already alluded to earlier, the principles and spirit are more important to me than the literal conventions and if somebody signed it. I will note that you brought up the Geneva Conventions not me. > German Jews in the 1930s/1940s would probably disagree. I'm confused to what you refer to and why you brought it up? > I mean, the IDF killed three Israeli hostages in Gaza, while with their hands up and holding a white flag, because they thought they were infiltrators. This is not an example to what I asked for, this wouldn't have happened if Hamas wore uniform, IDF wore uniforms, the held hostages civilians didn't but because they were in combat they mistook them for Hamas. What I want is Israeli citizens mistaken for an enemy combatant in Israel in a non-active-combat environment or Palestinians citizens mistaken for an IDF soldier in Palestine in a non-active-combat environment.
- nickff 9mo ago
  As it stands, the Geneva convention only applies to acts when both countries are signatories, or one is, and the other follows the convention (which Hamas unfortunately does not): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions#Common_Article_2_relating_to_international_armed_conflict_(IAC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions#Common_Arti... Is there another treaty which proscribes perfidy, which Israel has ratified?
  - ceejayoz 9mo ago
    If Israel wants to take that position, they’ll need to denounce the Nuremberg trials. “Crimes against humanity” were invented for them, as the Holocaust was legal under German law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F%C3%BChrerprinzip https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F%C3%BChrerprinzip). As the article indicates, prohibitions against perfidy and other war crimes predate the Conventions. (And I’d note that, as occupying power, Israel is subject to other requirements.) (And if this is truly your argument, “Hamas doesn’t have to follow the rules either” is the logical conclusion. Which makes whining about their uniforms a bit odd; there is no scenario where "Hamas has to follow the Conventions, but Israel does not" is a coherent position.)

LorenPechtel 9mo ago

Yeah, Israel has done some infiltration like that. Not proper, but you're pointing out a molehill while ignoring the mountain.

ceejayoz 9mo ago
When the molehill is a war crime, sure.
- anderber 9mo ago
  So is the mountain, though
  - ceejayoz 9mo ago
    Yes. You will not find me defending Hamas war crimes, of which there are many too.
    - eli_gottlieb 9mo ago
      [flagged]
      - SiempreViernes 9mo ago
        Not falling for an obvious distraction from the extremely blatant pattern of dehumanising Palestinians. > In leaked recordings, Maj. Gen. Aharon Haliva — then head of Israeli military intelligence — stated that for every person killed on Oct. 7, “50 Palestinians must die,” adding that “it doesn’t matter now if they are children.” He described mass Palestinian deaths as “necessary” to send a deterrent message. > Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant’s declaration of a “complete siege” on Gaza — cutting food, electricity, fuel, and water — was accompanied by explicitly dehumanizing language. Announcing the policy on Oct. 9, Gallant stated: “We are fighting human animals, and we are acting accordingly.” Israeli President Isaac Herzog’s assertion that “an entire nation out there is responsible” further blurs the institutional line between civilian and combatant. > Such statements do not determine individual targeting decisions, but they shape the environment in which those decisions are made: how civilian life is valued, how much civilian harm is expected to be scrutinized, and how much is implicitly excused.