• BradleyUffner@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Hamas is literally in this video firing missiles.

    Yes they are. So kill them then without leveling the entire neighborhood, as I already said.

    • galloog1@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

      • BradleyUffner@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        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.

        • galloog1@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

          • crapwittyname@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Just wanted to point out a few factual inaccuracies in your comment.

            1. 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.
            2. 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.
            3. 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.
            • SCB@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Lol literally none this si accurate

              How do you write so much and get everything wrong

              • crapwittyname@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                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.

                  • crapwittyname@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Ok let’s start with this one:

                    “Israel has built illegal settlements in Palestine every day since signing the Oslo accords”

                    Go ahead. Prove that wrong.

            • Hatsune Miku @lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Hamas were the first to violate the accords. They launched an attack because they weren’t being included in the negotiations.

              the usual way to go about dismantling an embedded terror organisation is to use counterintelligence, ground ops and precision strikes.

              israel has been doing that for a few decades but Hamas continues to attack until they call for a ceasefire. In which Israel agrees, and then Hamas again breaks the ceasefire.

          • dangblingus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            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?

            • Hatsune Miku @lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Article 19 of Geneva states that if a hospital is being used to store military equipment and active military combatants, then it loses its protection.

        • SCB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          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.

    • galloog1@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

        • SCB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          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
            9
            ·
            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
              ·
              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
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Correct which is why your entire narrative is false because they never told civilians to go to a specific place. Dig into it. This is exactly what I mean when I call this stuff propaganda. It’s stretching the truth and inviting you to draw your own conclusions from warped facts.

        • galloog1@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          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.

      • dangblingus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

        • galloog1@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

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

              What war crimes? There is a difference between war and war crimes and hardly anybody on this site knows the difference.

              • crapwittyname@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago
                • bombing civilian infrastructure which is likely to have families, children, non combatants inside is a war crime.
                • collective punishment is a war crime.
                • forcible relocation is a war crime.
                • ordering civilians to a new area and then bombing them en route or on arrival is intentional targeting of civilians, and therefore a war crime.
                • blockading a population within an area which you are actively shelling is a war crime.
                • depriving a population of non combatants of food and water and fuel is a war crime.
                • bombing a convoy of ambulances is a war crime.
                • bombing a refugee camp is a war crime.
                • killing reporters is a war crime.
                • use of white phosphorus on civilian targets is a war crime.

                Israel has done all of these things. There is no excuse for war crimes. It doesn’t matter how evil the enemy is, you are not allowed to do these things and not be a war criminal.

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

                  Civilian infrastructure are public works dedicated solely to civilians and does not inherently include power. You do not understand war crimes.

                  Collective punishment implies no military purpose. Israel is being very careful to include military purpose in all their narratives. You do not understand war crimes.

                  Forcible relocation is only occurring if Israel does not allow them to return after the current conflict is concluded. This is not relevant right now and is actively warned against. You do not understand war crimes.

                  Israel has not ordered civilians to any specific area they have then bombed. There’s a lot of disinformation around this one in terms of hitting former routes well after they should’ve been gone. You don’t understand the information space.

                  Israel has a border. That’s not blockading a population in anymore than Egypt is guilty of the exact same thing within context. You don’t understand war crimes.

                  Not providing food is not the same thing as depriving of food and it’s been shown to go to Hamas, not the civilian population when they do. You don’t understand the information space or war crimes. This does however show why they want to end the conflict as quickly as possible. It clouds decision making.

                  Bombing a convoy of mismarked vehicles is not a war crime. Just because you through a red crescent on your logistics vehicles and then use them to transport combatants does not make it an illegitimate target. Hamas does this because it works. The IDF has shown at least some of their intelligence supporting this. https://www.idf.il/en/mini-sites/hamas-israel-war-articles-videos-and-more/war-on-hamas-2023-resources/hamas-terrorist-uses-ambulances-for-transportation-purposes/ You don’t understand war crimes.

                  Something called a refugee camp for 80 years is not an active refugee camp. You don’t understand the information space

                  Intentionally targeting reporters is a war crime. I’m yet to see anything close to intent but it is sad that reporters have been caught up and killed regardless. They are actively trying to gain more information from Gaza which does put them more at risk.

                  The IDF is not using white phosphorous munitions within Gaza City but have probably used it for illumination. This is perfectly legal. You don’t understand the information space.

                  If any of these statements are inaccurate, feel free to provide a source that has actual evidence. War crimes happen in literally every army so don’t think I don’t think they happen. The difference is when it is planned, condoned, and unprosecuted by the supporting organization. That is my burden of proof. I have seen the Hamas operations order. The IDF have so far not been acting out of accordance with what’s expected of a modern professional fighting force.

                  • crapwittyname@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Civilian infrastructure are public works dedicated solely to civilians and does not inherently include power.

                    Did I say that civilian infrastructure includes power?

                    You do not understand war crimes.

                    I can read. I can read the UN charters. I understand war crimes.

                    Collective punishment implies no military purpose

                    No it does not. There is a definition in international law. Nothing is implied, it is defined.

                    Forcible relocation is only occurring if Israel does not allow them to return after the current conflict is concluded.

                    Again, relocating is defined in the UN charters. This is where you should go if you would like to understand the definitions of war crimes.

                    Israel has not ordered civilians to any specific area they have then bombed.

                    This has been independently verified by the BBC. Israel did exactly this, repeatedly.

                    Israel has a border. That’s not blockading a population

                    And did Israel allow any Palestinians through that border after October 7th? Or did it close the border and bomb the Rafah crossing, thus blockading the entire Gaza Strip?

                    Not providing food is not the same thing as depriving of food

                    Not allowing any food in is depriving of food

                    Bombing a convoy of mismarked vehicles is not a war crime.

                    Vehicles were not mismarked, they were legit, as the Red Cross independently verified. You would also need some proof that they were mismarked before bombing them, which was not gathered.

                    Something called a refugee camp for 80 years is not an active refugee camp.

                    A “refugee camp” is not a refugee camp. What is it then? A tomato?

                    The IDF is not using white phosphorous munitions within Gaza City but have probably used it for illumination. This is perfectly legal.

                    It’s not even remotely legal to use while phosphorus in areas where civilians are present, or even where event combatants may be present. Again, check the charters (chemical weapons).

                    Sources: Red Cross International, BBC, UN charters.

              • SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                This site?

                The perfectly homogenous lemmy?

                I’m talking about intentionally targeting civilian population which is a defined war crime.

                How do you figure it is not?

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

                  Good luck providing proof of intent. That should be a red flag right there about your narrative. Israel’s narrative has never been that they are targeting civilians and they’ve shown on quite a few occasions in this current conflict that they have justification for their targets. They are at war right now. They don’t have time to justify every single target to you personally.