• Madison420@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It doesn’t give them the right to bomb the hospital point blank period, proportionality clauses kick in and it’s arguably reason to ground assault it but they cannot ignore the civilian cost of life when they’re are other ways to go about clearing the garrison.

    Ed: Jesus Christ, 3 seconds on Google prior just can’t seem to do.

    The principle of proportionality prohibits attacks against military objectives which are “expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated”. In other words, the principle of proportionality seeks to limit damage caused by military operations by requiring that the effects of the means and methods of warfare used must not be disproportionate to the military advantage sought.

    • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      Unfortunately as soon as they garrisoned it it became a legitimate military target and yes, they literally now have a right to bomb it. Level it, no, you are right on a proportional response and that would still be a war crime, but bombing what is now a legitimate military target prior to any invasion (like any other military target) can absolutely be justified.

      Hamas knows this, and are deliberately trying to put the global blame on Israel when THEY GARRISONED A FUCKING HOSPITAL.

      • prole@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Lol “garrisoned”. This isn’t Age of Empires. Gaza is one of the most densely populated area on the planet. They have no freedom of movement, and the area is completely blockaded. Anywhere anyone in that area tries to stage a defense is a “civilian area.” They’re literally prohibited from having anything else.

        So there is nowhere they could defend from that you wouldn’t consider “human shield.”

        But you know that.

        Edit: Corrected. Because fascist apologists love getting honest interlocutors hung up on semantics. I misspoke, and it’s “just” one of the most densely populated areas. Because that changes my argument in any real way whatsoever.

        • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Uhh… military forces holding a building and using it as a base is literally called a garrison.

          • prole@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I know what the word means. If you want to get all semantic about it, Hamas isn’t a “military force,” they’re an insurgency. I’m not sure an insurgency “garrisons”.

            • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              As the elected representative of Palestine they are indeed a military force, operating in a state to state conflict. Like the taliban in Afghanistan - they are the controllers of the country, no longer an insurgency. How “good” they are, morally or militarily, is irrelevant.

              Its like saying the US of A is actually an insurgency because they toppled the British government and established their own. Nope - government.

              How fair the elections were is up for debate, and how they stopped elections but they are thr government of Palestine.

              Furthermore, why are you bring up that I’m being semantic with a word that you had a problem with using?

        • Apollo@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          Gaza is not even close to being the most densely populated area on the planet, what is your source for that?

          Also have you seen a map of gaza? There are many open areas hamas could use to launch attacks from, but it chooses (rather rationally I might add) to site its materiel in places where israeli retaliation will cause civillian casualties.

          • prole@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I apologize that I forgot to add “one of the” before “most.” The point still stands.

            Oh, you looked at a map of Gaza, and because of that you are an expert on the land and you know the best strategic locations for them to set up? Fuck off.

            Israel made an open-air prison, and when a group of extremists react, they bomb the entire fucking prison (strangely aiming at the hospitals, and the areas where they instructed refugees to go).

            Edit: After re-reading this comment, i’d like to correct something. I don’t think it’s even accurate to say Israel created an open-air prison, or to call Gaza a prison. The word “prison” heavily implies that the people there did something to deserve their punishment. I wonder if anyone could let me know all the terrorist acts those Gazan children performed… Was it “throwing rocks at IDF”? Because that’s usually punishable by death.

          • Madison420@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Open areas, you know! Those places everyone can see, who needs operational security when you have all that room for activities!

              • Madison420@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Hedging doesn’t change your idiotic point. No one uses open areas because… They’re open fucking areas. It’s like saying “why don’t you go play baseball in that lake over there.”

                • Apollo@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  6
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Are you retarded or just incapable of reading? Do you think I said their decision to not use open areas was rational because I thought it was dumb?

                  • Madison420@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I read just fine bud, your point is still shit. It doesn’t matter that there are open areas because no one would use them certainly not an insurgency that can’t mass troops. It’s nothing, why bring it up.

      • Madison420@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        18
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        No the fuck they don’t!

        You just ain’t right bud, do some fucking reading before you spout Israeli talking points.

        The principle of proportionality prohibits attacks against military objectives which are “expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated”. In other words, the principle of proportionality seeks to limit damage caused by military operations by requiring that the effects of the means and methods of warfare used must not be disproportionate to the military advantage sought.

        • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          Medical establishments and units enjoy protection because of their function of providing care for the wounded and sick. When they are used to interfere directly or indirectly in military operations, and thereby cause harm to the enemy, the rationale for their specific protection is removed. This would be the case for example if a hospital is used as a base from which to launch an attack; as an observation post to transmit information of military value; as a weapons depot; as a center for liaison with fighting troops; or as a shelter for able-bodied combatants.

          Source - International commitment of the Red Cross. Hamas is doing all of these.

          Are you telling me you know better than the biggest humanitarian organization on the planet? I have been studying this for two years, read well over 150 peer reviewed articles on conflict and the effect it has on the civilian population, and studied multiple places where International law was not followed. I’ve done enough fucking reading on the topic and don’t need to reply with pro-anyone agenda to discuss it.

          • Madison420@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            https://casebook.icrc.org/a_to_z/glossary/proportionality

            The principle of proportionality prohibits attacks against military objectives which are “expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated”. In other words, the principle of proportionality seeks to limit damage caused by military operations by requiring that the effects of the means and methods of warfare used must not be disproportionate to the military advantage sought.

            Same source, you know that’s theres like thousands of laws in relation to war correct?

            I don’t know better boss, but I can use the search bar and read, you don’t need much more than that to know you’re objectively wrong and your source agrees.