•

it'sjustamemepleasedon'thurtme

45 comments

See all comments

hoxbug

•

Oh no a professional army is doing something to protect its civilians, how dare they shoot back.

WorkIsSlow

•

There is a difference between doing something and doing war crimes.

Something doesn't need to include callous indifference to the killing of civilians and children.

DoomBot5

•

There is a difference between war crimes and what the internet calls war crimes. Did you know it's actually not a war crime to shoot at a hospital if there are military assets in it? That's actually in the Geneva convention. Same goes for civilians if there are military targets present. On the other hand, using hospitals and civilians to protect military assets is a war crime.

Yes, there is the moral aspect of it, but one side here is being called out for war crimes it's not actually doing.

tryptaminev

•

The Geneva convention still requires that all possible measures are taken to limit civillian casualties and that the harm of civillians need to be in relation to the military goal achieved.

There is many reasons to question that Israel is taking these steps. It starts with the medical system of Gaza already being past its limits, so any hit on a hospital is especially severe, as it renders the medical system even more unable to provide basic health care to people. It continues with deliberate cuts to telecommunication, so warnings are not reaching the civillians at targeted hospitals, regular attacks of designated evacuation corridors by the IDF, including targeting ambulances and the simple fact that you cannot evacuate an overburdendend ICU in 15 minutes if you have no place to take the patients or ambulances to get them there.

It goes on with there being no independant evaluation if Israels claims of military targets are actually factful, while there is plenty of reports where it seemed that only civillians have been it. Furthermore the language used by the IDF and Israeli government speaks opposite of protecting civillian lifes. From fighting against "human animals" to discussing nuclear attacks on Gaza by a government minister, who is still in his position afterwards.

Finally and most evidently the total blockade of Gaza in the first weeks and the continued limits to basic goods such as drinking water, food and medical supplies, with a continued blockade of fuel and targeting of electrical and water infrastructure is a huge fucking war crime. There is no basis in the Geneva convention that could justify depriving more than two million people of the immediate necessities for survival. It is a war crime through and through. Even after four weeks of international pressure the amount of food and water that gets to Gaza is still far too little to keep the population from starving.

DoomBot5

•

It goes on with there being no independant evaluation if Israels claims of military targets are actually factful, while there is plenty of reports where it seemed that only civillians have been it.

So you're trusting the terrorists to tell you Israel has hit their members, but not a western country to tell you that they hit the terrorists?

with a continued blockade of fuel

Hamas has plenty of fuel. Nobody is condemning them for not sharing it with their own people

and targeting of electrical and water infrastructure is a huge fucking war crime.

Can you source that? So far Hamas has been the biggest destroyer of water infrastructure by digging up all the water pipes to use for rockets. As for electrical, Israel didn't need to hit it. They simply stopped giving free resources to their enemy and Hamas stole whatever fuel was left.

tryptaminev

•

So you’re trusting the terrorists to tell you Israel has hit their members, but not a western country to tell you that they hit the terrorists?

Nowhere did i say that. I thought it obvious that in a war claims from either side are to be taken with scepticism and best confirmed independantly. Also UNRWA and international medical staff aren't terrorists.

Hamas has plenty of fuel. Nobody is condemning them for not sharing it with their own people

Israel claims that. Meanwhile UNRWA said they got some fuel from reserves, but those reserves to run out soon despite rationing. https://edition.cnn.com/2023/10/30/middleeast/fuel-gaza-crisis-map-dg/index.html

Can you source that?

You are not aware of Israels announcement and subsequent total blockade of Gaza with food, water, medical supplies and fuel?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Israeli_blockade_of_the_Gaza_Strip

DoomBot5

•

They stopped providing Gaza with free resources. They did not target existing infrastructure in Gaza.

tryptaminev

•

That is a gross misrepresentation.

As the occupying force it is their obligation to provide the people with all necessities for survival, or enable the people to get these. As Israel has been blocking most transfer of goods it is extremely difficult for Gaza to build up an economy to buy all these things. But even if they could pay for them, Israel has been blocking the transfer of everything, including bombing the Rafah crossing to deny the entry of humanitarian aid from Egypt. By denying the entry of fuel, which is needed to operate the power plant, generators, desalination and wells, they have also targeted these infrastructures, because the, also explicitly stated goal, is to deny people electricity and water. Finally there have been attacks on solar panels, generator houses and water tanks at hospitals and residential buildings. Israel claims all of these to have been military targets. But if the solar panels are the only lifeline of people who need dyalisis and incubators for early born children, i struggle to see the justification in turning the lights out in some claimed Hamas tunnel nearby.

DoomBot5

•

By nearby you mean under the hospitals themselves. That's also where the power goes to. Any leftovers might reach the hospital above. It's the same with all the other supplies. Hamas has plenty they have stolen for themselves abs refuse to share with their citizens.

WorkIsSlow

•

The Geneva Convention's definition of genocide. "... any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group, such as: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."

You seem to defend a and b as necessary costs of doing business. Isreal's frequent attacks on civilians, journalists, medical personnel, and humanitarian groups seem to conflict this. Look into the killings of clearly marked journalists.

I'd argue that c is met by Isreal's control of Gaza's water and power along with the targeting of hospitals.

The Geneva Convention on collective penalties. "No protected person may be punished for any offense he or she gas not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited."

it'sjustamemepleasedon'thurtme

memes