• SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      This is literally true.

      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.

      Emphasis mine.

      • Natanael@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        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

        • galloog1@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

    • galloog1@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.