this post was submitted on 30 Jan 2024
174 points (92.6% liked)

World News

38506 readers
3558 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 17 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Assuming the 3 killed were Hamas, this is still a warcrime. You don't bomb hospitals, and you don't send hit squads into hospitals to murder people.

[–] HappycamperNZ -3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

(Still assuming those killed were hamas)

No its not - and to whoever calls me anti or pro something stop hiding behind insults. Stick with the events that actually are war crimes - there are enough to go around from both sides.

It is a war crime to attack a hospital being used for purpose. A hospital (and other protected places) lose their protection when they are used for military purposes, including housing combatants, storage of munitions or logistics and command.

What Israel failed miserably at (and I hope those responsible are held to account) is proportional response, as even without protection the response must be proportional and minimize civilian casualties and wider damage. A small hit team that targeted specific military personnel hiding in a hospital is a much more measured response than bombs through the roof.

If they killed non combatants (either civilians or injured, non combat capable combatants) then a different story.

[–] Geobloke 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Well, one of them was in a wheel chair so yeah they assassinated a non combatant in a hospital

[–] HappycamperNZ -1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Non combatant doesn't just mean not running around with a rifle shooting things - its ability and conduct.

If im planning an attack, then walk into a hospital im still a combatants - I become a non combatant when I stop, surrender or am no longer capable of engaging due to my ability... out of the fight so to speak. You don't magically become impervious when you walk (or wheeled) in the door then vulnerable when you walk out.

[–] Geobloke 11 points 7 months ago (1 children)

He was in hospital because shrapnel had severed his spine. In the west bank. You can throw semantics at it, but going by the context I'd put money on him not being actively engaged in combat as he was incapable by your words

[–] HappycamperNZ -1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

I think the best way to explain it is take the example to the extreme end - would bin laden have been capable of planning the 9/11 attacks from a hospital bed while not able to walk?

Law and precident are literally semantics - the difference between a war crime with the penalty of death and a frowny face is literally the details.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

So then literally no one is protected then. According to you anyone could be a terrorist committing thought crime.

[–] HappycamperNZ 2 points 7 months ago

Feel like I'm talking with people trying to find a reason to be offended. Take 5 seconds

Is every protected person

  • a known member of a terrorist organization

  • been wounded conducting what are considered terrorist actions

  • in proximity to two other terrorists

  • before considering what other information may be held by IDF.