Arete

If true they cut off Internet to themselves, some powerful Arab neighbors, and Mumbai. Seems like a spectacularly stupid move. The bar is low for these idiots and yet they keep finding ways under it.

You did not read correctly:

Israel says it will establish 15 camp villages... Each with 25000 tents

It would be about 3 to a tent. I doubt any of this is real though unless Israel has half a million tents laying around.

I'm not disputing anything in this article. I'm criticizing the presentation of a source rated as "low credibility" with reasoning "Propaganda, Hate Group, Misinformation" on this community.

The reason we even have this community rule is so people don't have to go in and individually pick apart articles to separate facts from propaganda. Websites that aren't rated as credible can and should be ignored.

The community rules state that sources with a "low or very low" MBFC rating may be removed. This source has that rating, and so I'm pointing it out.

Mondoweiss.net? Where do you guys find these ridiculous websites?

MediaBias: QUESTIONABLE SOURCE

Reasoning: Propaganda, Hate Group, Misinformation

Bias Rating: LEFT

Factual Reporting: MIXED

Country: USA

MBFC’s Country Freedom Rating: MOSTLY FREE

Media Type: Website

Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic

MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY

This is simply not true when IHL is looked at as a whole.

Hospitals do receive special protections. As a rule a hospital can never be attacked unless it becomes co-opted for military purposes or represents a legitimate military objective. At that point, the hospital must be notified prior to attack if doing so is at all reasonable. Further, all proportionality calculations must still be made regarding collateral damage.

The hospital became a legitimate target when Hamas militants, under military orders, brought in hostages.

Notifying the hospital was clearly unreasonable, as that would allow Hamas to remove the hostages, the recovery of which was the primary military objective.

Proportionality considerations dictated what was a reasonable attack. Israel didn't bomb the building into dust - they staged a controlled siege (to prevent the hostages from being moved) followed by a methodical taking of the facility.

Nothing about this was unreasonable or illegal given the full context.

I do, but in the few last rounds of talks Hamas has consistently demanded full Israeli withdrawal as a condition to release any hostages, and a permanent peace prior to releasing all hostages.

Since Israel is obviously not going to agree to withdraw leaving Hamas to reassert full control, and further would never make a peace treaty with a terrorist organization holding their citizens hostage, I don't see any path forward here.

4 is covered under "shit I never said or contested"

For 3 you're just going to have to accept that you can't always personally view US intelligence information.