Terrorist cell embedded itself within civilians around Al-Quds Hospital, fired from the hospital entrance at IDF soldiers, and was subsequently eliminated
Go for it. If it is so easy you are welcome to go put yourself in harm’s way. Don’t criticize when you have not been faced with the decisions and a lack of full awareness. Hamas is not sitting out in the middle of a field waiting to be struck.
It is neither my place, nor my responsibility to physically take part in this conflict. However, it certainly IS my place and responsibility, as a human being, to say that purposefully killing innocent civilians and blowing up functional hospitals is evil. Yes, even when there is a bad guy hiding inside.
So, in your mind, rules of engagement allow destroying civilian infrastructure that currently hosts many civilians so you can kill a handful of bad guys?
However, it certainly IS my place and responsibility, as a human being, to say that purposefully killing innocent civilians and blowing up functional hospitals is evil
It’s your responsibility to actually know what is happening before you spout false things online.
War is evil. Nothing they are doing is without military purpose. This is a justified conflict. Your perspective is naive and not based in reality and/or military law. Israel did everything they could to avoid this conflict, most of which has been misconstrued as genocide against Palestine.
Just wanted to point out a few factual inaccuracies in your comment.
This is no longer a justified conflict. A state has the right to self defence in a limited way. The right to self defence does not override the rules on collective punishment. The right to self defence does not include the right to invade a state where the enemy is a terrorist group within that state, rather than the state itself. The right to self defence does not override the rules on attacking civilian infrastructure (especially ambulances) even where there is suspicion that a terrorist organisation may be using it. The right to self defence does not override the rules on forcible relocation or blockade.
In short, the response to an enemy using a human shield must not be to eliminate the shield. It’s astounding that so many people seem to need this explained to them. This is borne out by international law, cf. the UN charters.
Israel did not do everything they could do to avoid this conflict. The one thing they had to do was to abide by the Oslo accords, yet they have built settlements in Palestine every single day since signing, and restricted Gazans every single day since signing. The two state solution has failed as a result of Israel’s actions. In terms of actions since October 7th, the usual way to go about dismantling an embedded terror organisation is to use counterintelligence, ground ops and precision strikes. The reasons are obvious, I hope. The only way to get those hostages back is either by freeing them in covert ops or by negotiation at a political level. Destroying entire city blocks from the air will not get the hostages back, as we all know.
The label genocide is not misconstrued, according to the UN genocide experts. Some say there is a grave risk that this is a genocide, based on the available facts, and some say that it already fulfills the criteria.
I can provide sources for all of my claims, if you’d prefer not to do the legwork yourself.
Okay genius, how do you kill them when they are in tunnels under neighborhoods? You cannot get into them without an explosion, even if present in person and they won’t just sit there either. This is not a war crime and I’m really questioning everyone’s collective intelligence and ability to think through problems instead of reacting to stimulus.
Specific protection of medical establishments and units (including hospitals) is the general rule under IHL. Therefore, specific protection to which hospitals are entitled shall not cease unless they are used by a party to the conflict to commit, outside their humanitarian functions, an “act harmful to the enemy”. In case of doubt as to whether medical units of establishments are used to commit an “act harmful to the enemy”, they should be presumed not to be so used.
They do limit targeting. How many strikes are you seeing in the south as compared to the north? That’s a limitation and shows proportionality. You folks may not like it but this is categorically not a war crime.
How do you take out the enemy? Answer the question. Your perspective is not useful when you have no alternative. They cannot access the tunnels without an explosive. Name a full conflict where civilian infrastructure was not hit when taking a city.
The alternative is “you don’t”, but for some reason you don’t seem to even consider that there might be a cost in civilian lives too high to kill a handful of terrorists.
You don’t have to shoot missiles indiscriminately into civilian zones. If your enemy is hiding among civilian infrastructure and/or using human shields, you need to change your tactics up to suit. Committing war crimes in order to kill your enemy isn’t how you retain the moral highground.
I’m still waiting on these tactics you are recommending. Alternatives don’t exist so your argument is absolute bullshit. The faster they can get through this, the less overall civilian suffering will occur.
Yes they are. So kill them then without leveling the entire neighborhood, as I already said.
Go for it. If it is so easy you are welcome to go put yourself in harm’s way. Don’t criticize when you have not been faced with the decisions and a lack of full awareness. Hamas is not sitting out in the middle of a field waiting to be struck.
It is neither my place, nor my responsibility to physically take part in this conflict. However, it certainly IS my place and responsibility, as a human being, to say that purposefully killing innocent civilians and blowing up functional hospitals is evil. Yes, even when there is a bad guy hiding inside.
Bless your heart, sweet summer child.
So, in your mind, rules of engagement allow destroying civilian infrastructure that currently hosts many civilians so you can kill a handful of bad guys?
It’s your responsibility to actually know what is happening before you spout false things online.
War is evil. Nothing they are doing is without military purpose. This is a justified conflict. Your perspective is naive and not based in reality and/or military law. Israel did everything they could to avoid this conflict, most of which has been misconstrued as genocide against Palestine.
They have absolutely not made any attempt to avoid conflict
https://lemmy.world/comment/5306547
Just wanted to point out a few factual inaccuracies in your comment.
I can provide sources for all of my claims, if you’d prefer not to do the legwork yourself.
Lol literally none this si accurate
How do you write so much and get everything wrong
It’s literally all verifiable and true.
It is accurate, and I can back it up with data. Is there anything in particular you think is incorrect? Or are you just annoyed with it in general.
Literally everything you wrote is wrong so yeah, start anywhere.
Okay genius, how do you kill them when they are in tunnels under neighborhoods? You cannot get into them without an explosion, even if present in person and they won’t just sit there either. This is not a war crime and I’m really questioning everyone’s collective intelligence and ability to think through problems instead of reacting to stimulus.
You heard from it this guy. Bombing hospitals is not a war crime if there’s a bad guy near there.
This is literally true.
Emphasis mine.
Proportionality is another factor you’re ignoring.
They’re also still required to attempt to limit targeting to avoid civilian casualties and yet they don’t
They do limit targeting. How many strikes are you seeing in the south as compared to the north? That’s a limitation and shows proportionality. You folks may not like it but this is categorically not a war crime.
It has to be applied per individual attack, not per region
How do you take out the enemy? Answer the question. Your perspective is not useful when you have no alternative. They cannot access the tunnels without an explosive. Name a full conflict where civilian infrastructure was not hit when taking a city.
The alternative is “you don’t”, but for some reason you don’t seem to even consider that there might be a cost in civilian lives too high to kill a handful of terrorists.
So how many festivals are you okay with being attacked? Apparently 260 per isn’t high enough for you.
Some are more equal than others, I presume
https://www.ochaopt.org/content/hostilities-gaza-strip-and-israel-reported-impact-day-39
As if the conflict started on October 7th and hasn’t been going on since even before Hamas existed.
Israel has killed far more Palestinian civilians since October 7th than Hamas killed on October 7th. Like 10x the amount.
You don’t have to shoot missiles indiscriminately into civilian zones. If your enemy is hiding among civilian infrastructure and/or using human shields, you need to change your tactics up to suit. Committing war crimes in order to kill your enemy isn’t how you retain the moral highground.
I’m still waiting on these tactics you are recommending. Alternatives don’t exist so your argument is absolute bullshit. The faster they can get through this, the less overall civilian suffering will occur.