214
Israel bombs UN school in third major attack on Gaza’s Jabalia refugee camp
(www.aljazeera.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2023
214 points (92.8% liked)
News
23281 readers
4242 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
You know that bombing schools and hospitals is STILL a heinous war crime even IF (gigantic if) it's true that Hamas is hiding under every single one of them like you genocide apologists keep claiming, right?
Both sides here 100% want to genocide the other. They will both continue to try to do so, they're leadership has said exactly that. Is it just to blame Israel just for winning?
Massacring civilians to accomplish nothing except temporarily sating blood lust isn't winning. Not when Hamas does it and not when Israeli forces do it.
Besides, it's not like Hamas has anything near a thousandth of the military power that Israel does. As the stronger of the parties and the ones who make all the rules, they bear the majority of the responsibility and thus the majority of the blame.
They are taking that responsibility, and using it to ensure a permanent end to the conflict. It's the same thing Palestine would do if they could.
If you truly believe that, I have oceanfront property in Lichtenstein to sell you 🙄
They're at least doing their best.
It's adorable that you think so but no, they're not. They're making everything worse.
Most things get worse before they get better. Once Palestine is gone, there won't be a conflict anymore. At least not an Israel / Palestine conflict.
And yes, this is horrible. Palestine wants the same for Israel. It's all horrible. There can't be peace there, it's impossible. There can only be a winner.
I'm saying if they don't, Palestine will never stop trying to genocide Israel. This will end with one of the two wiped off the map. Not before.
Those people are the ones who need therapy. All of them. I'm just keeping a realistic attitude about it. I'm not saying it's not horrible - it's gut wrenching - just saying it's inevitable. Protest against inevitable fate all you want. Good luck.
Were poor, maligned decisions made all over the world that led to this? Absolutely; but nothing can stop it now that it's got to this point. These mass protests should have happened back then. A cease fire now would just consist of Palestine rebuilding their forces and attacking back. They've said as much. Israel or Palestine will perish, or there will be an indefinite bloody conflict. Is that last one what you're voting for?
The war crime is hiding there in the first place.
No. Even IF that's true (again, enormous if), the war crime is definitely the bombing of civilians, not hiding from people who want to kill you. I'm not saying that the Hamas aren't heinous terrorists, but that doesn't excuse the wholesale slaughter of innocents.
Especially since it only INCREASES hostilities, leading to more civilian deaths on both sides of the border.
Um, you're wrong, it's known as Perfidy and is a violation of Protocol 1 Article 37 of the Geneva Convention
That's not what they're doing, though. And even if they were, that would still NOT excuse the war crimes of the IDF.
This response is the equivalent of a child saying nuh uh and walking off. Also, no one said that it did excuse the war crimes committed by the IDF. The problem I have is that you're clearly misrepresenting Hamas as innocent.
You want me to elaborate about how false what you're saying is? Walking off rather than continuing to waste my time and effort on the likes of you sounds tempting, though.
That's not true. You heavily implied as much and the other apartheid defender flat out said so.
I'm doing no such thing. I'm always clear about the fact that Hamas are heinous terrorists guilty of atrocities.
That doesn't justify any of IDF's atrocities like you're pretending that you're not implying, though.
Hiding isn't a war crime. Trying to blend in with a civilian population while you're an active combatant, however, is. Precisely because it makes strikes with mass civilian casualties a military necessity.
First of all, no it isn't. Second of all, nobody's forcing the IDF to go through with the bombings anyway, sacrificing thousands of civilians while gaining nothing but the potential deaths of a few replaceable terrorists.
Oddly enough it's not a war crime to attack a military target that is using a civilian population as cover. The military action has to use the principle of proportionality to limit risks to civilians, but doesn't ban the attack. Attacking such a site would only be a war crime if there is no valid military target.
The use of a civilian population as soft cover (as in not actively being human shields, but not getting out of the way) could be a war crime depending on the amount of obfuscation the hiding party is using. In the instance of Hamas they built their bases directly under hospitals so I'd say that meets the bar for war crimes.
Also, the current news is that Hamas is blocking evacuations from this region. So that moves it from soft human shields to forced human shields.
It absolutely 100% is.
Which Israel doesn't do either, not even close
Which we only have the word of a notoriously dishonest government that there always is
You mean like when Israel told Palestinians to go somewhere and then bombed them as they complied?
You can try all the whataboutism you'd like to excuse the atrocities of the apartheid regime but, apart from the fact that the atrocities of Hamas doesn't justify any of those of Israel, most of the time the IDF have done the same thing (including for example using human shields) or something even worse.
The Geneva Convention disagrees: "Geneva Convention IV: Article 28 of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides: 'The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations.'"
"Additional Protocol I: Article 51(7) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides: The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations. The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations"
That's not true, obviously Israel is using the principal of proportionality or else they would have just leveled the entire place. Whether this constitutes a war crime would be if their level of response was appropriate enough, that's why people say it "may" constitute a war crime. The truth is that this is a subjective argument that would need to be determined in an international court of law to be certain of.
Amnesty International reported the same in 2014 (https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2015/05/gaza-palestinians-tortured-summarily-killed-by-hamas-forces-during-2014-conflict/) and the Palestinian Health Ministry in 2009 (www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3668018,00.html).
Maybe you should actually check the news, Hamas leadership has been telling it's people to stay and, while you don't believe the IDF, they have satellite and surveillance footage of vehicles and barricades to block travel in Gaza. Also, reporters inside of Gaza are reporting that Hamas is shooting evacuating people.
https://www.ynetnews.com/article/ryjyna7qa
I've not tried to excuse any atrocities, I'm clearly pointing out that the term "War Crime" has a specific meaning of which you have twice incorrectly used. Throughout our discussions I have used a number of reasonable sources and references. It funny you accuse me of an argument I haven't made and for using whataboutisms, but the only whataboutisms have come from your own post. I don't like what the IDF is doing either, but you can't call things war crimes that would literally take a prolonged international league case to determine (principle of proportionality). Likewise when something is very clearly defined as a war crime, you can't say that it isn't (perfidy). Also, it's a really poor argument to say that sources (albeit biased) are illegitimate because they came from Israel (I showed that an outside entity and the Palestinian Health Ministry backed up the IDFs claims a decade earlier).
Aaand we've reached the point where you repeat bullshit I've already refuted and insist that two war crimes would make a justified military action. We're done here, genocide apologist.
1.) Presented with sources, definitions, and a fairly detailed description of war crimes.
2.) Presented with third party sources about claims.
3.) Clearly told that the person they are arguing with doesn't support the IDF
4.) Uses strawman attacks on the person they are arguing with
5.) Provides no real source, argument, or rebutall
6.) Says they refuted my argument
7.) Puts words in my mouth
8.) Calls me a genocide apologist when I clearly am not
You're clearly a troll and I'm done feeding you
Two things can be war crimes.