EPTThings Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine - Page 99
| Forum Index > General Forum |
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
CuddlyCuteKitten
Sweden2631 Posts
On November 15 2023 23:54 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Notice the word "voluntarily" otherwise it would be considered a war crime. They can fuck right off with that. No doubt they would also immediately condemn the host countries for not doing enough to curb terrorism or rising antisemitism. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4224 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
NSFW + Show Spoiler + Hopefully they are following up with water, and meds. Alongside Medics etc. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
pmp10
3337 Posts
Iran supposedly washes their hands of Hamas. You gave us no warning of your Oct. 7 attack on Israel and we will not enter the war on your behalf. Debatable how true it is, but suggests that Iran is not interested in full-scale war at this point. Isreal is planning to move on southern Gaza soon. We do understand from a briefing that U.N. partners received here in Egypt today that the offensive will soon start in the south. It won't be at the same scale, but it will be starting. And so there will be more population displacement in the south. People are being encouraged, you know, perhaps forced into a safe zone; what we understand, it’s being reserved for around 48 square kilometers. If true, it could mean we end-up with biggest open-air concentration camp in the world. | ||
|
Cerebrate1
265 Posts
On November 16 2023 05:19 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: IDF Colonel giving a tour of the Hospital. No idea why the laptop would be blurred. Where are the Doctors without borders staff in all this, were they removed? https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/1724882245578539260 Huh, yet more clearly documented war crimes by Hamas. I wonder if all those people who are so concerned about upholding international law will protest against Hamas, demand for them to surrender, or at least stop using protected sites for military purposes? There are a lot of countries who buy oil and gas from Qatar who could very easily apply pressure if they really wanted to. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21725 Posts
On November 16 2023 06:02 Cerebrate1 wrote: Right? Its shocking how some people don't agree that Hamas committing war crimes makes it ok for Israel to deprive the largest hospital in Gaza the ability to care for its patients.... oh wait, no that actually makes a lot of sense.Huh, yet more clearly documented war crimes by Hamas. I wonder if all those people who are so concerned about upholding international law will protest against Hamas, demand for them to surrender, or at least stop using protected sites for military purposes? There are a lot of countries who buy oil and gas from Qatar who could very easily apply pressure if they really wanted to. | ||
KwarK
United States42842 Posts
On November 16 2023 06:02 Cerebrate1 wrote: Huh, yet more clearly documented war crimes by Hamas. I wonder if all those people who are so concerned about upholding international law will protest against Hamas, demand for them to surrender, or at least stop using protected sites for military purposes? There are a lot of countries who buy oil and gas from Qatar who could very easily apply pressure if they really wanted to. Yeah, it’s like how people protest police brutality but they don’t protest criminal brutality. It’s a literal double standard. The IDF is literally being held to a higher standard than actual terrorists. I for one am outraged. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4224 Posts
Hmm... Oh... | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15690 Posts
On November 16 2023 06:10 Gorsameth wrote: Right? Its shocking how some people don't agree that Hamas committing war crimes makes it ok for Israel to deprive the largest hospital in Gaza the ability to care for its patients.... oh wait, no that actually makes a lot of sense. This line of thinking concludes a terrorist organization will be granted freedom to conduct anything they wish from within a hospital. As long as they have tunnels leading from hospitals, they can always retreat back to a hospital to be granted complete immunity from pursuit. If you are saying Israel is not within their right to pursue Hamas within a hospital, I am not understanding what you ought to do about terrorists in a hospital. Its not like the terrorists can just be left to continue operating out of a hospital. Removing terrorists from a hospital is the bare minimum. It is not the fault of Israel that Hamas chose to occupy hospitals and its ridiculous to blame them for clearing out a hospital. I am assuming I am just misunderstanding you guys, because it feels like this is not a good faith comment to make. If a terrorist organization is occupying a hospital, are you saying they should be left alone? To what extent is this true? When does it make sense to use force to remove a terrorist organization from a hospital? | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Falling
Canada11360 Posts
"Rule 28. Medical units exclusively assigned to medical purposes must be respected and protected in all circumstances. They lose their protection if they are being used, outside their humanitarian function, to commit acts harmful to the enemy." Hospitals are immune. Hospitals lose their immunity if they are used to commit harmful acts to the enemy, like for instance if they are used as combatant headquarters (or, I imagine, holding of hostages). It doesn't mean Israel should as a result just flatten the hospital with a bomb (which they did not do.) But it does mean they are operating within the bounds of international law to seize and control the hospital. My guess is the IDF will want the hospital to keep running as a hospital, but we'll see. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4224 Posts
On November 16 2023 07:39 Mohdoo wrote: This line of thinking concludes a terrorist organization will be granted freedom to conduct anything they wish from within a hospital. As long as they have tunnels leading from hospitals, they can always retreat back to a hospital to be granted complete immunity from pursuit. If you are saying Israel is not within their right to pursue Hamas within a hospital, I am not understanding what you ought to do about terrorists in a hospital. Its not like the terrorists can just be left to continue operating out of a hospital. Removing terrorists from a hospital is the bare minimum. It is not the fault of Israel that Hamas chose to occupy hospitals and its ridiculous to blame them for clearing out a hospital. I am assuming I am just misunderstanding you guys, because it feels like this is not a good faith comment to make. If a terrorist organization is occupying a hospital, are you saying they should be left alone? To what extent is this true? When does it make sense to use force to remove a terrorist organization from a hospital? When terrorists hide behind/among civilians, we try to negotiate. We don't prioritize the death of terrorists, we prioritize the safety of the hostages. There's no greater cause. We kill terrorists only if it's the best bet we have to save civilians. The IDF isn't putting the safety of civilians above their goal to destroy Hamas. Their priorities are backwards. Whether it's Hamas or civilians refusing to cooperate, either way the IDF has orders to engage anyway and accept whichever civilian casualties this leads to. This is true even in cases where doctors have no trust in the IDF and refuse to come out the hospital, and instead choose to stay with the patients. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4224 Posts
On November 16 2023 08:17 Falling wrote: Well, fortunately this eventuality has already been covered in International Humanitarian Law. Hospitals are immune. Hospitals lose their immunity if they are used to commit harmful acts to the enemy, like for instance if they are used as combatant headquarters (or, I imagine, holding of hostages). It doesn't mean Israel should as a result just flatten the hospital with a bomb (which they did not do.) But it does mean they are operating within the bounds of international law to seize and control the hospital. My guess is the IDF will want the hospital to keep running as a hospital, but we'll see. This sounds so great until you realize that Israel is no longer threatened. Their existence is secured and their citizens are overwhelmingly safe. And that requires little to no bombardment of Gaza. So the phrase "commit acts harmful to the enemy" no longer applies. It hasn't applied for several weeks. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15690 Posts
On November 16 2023 08:26 Magic Powers wrote: This sounds so great until you realize that Israel is no longer threatened. Their existence is secured and their citizens are overwhelmingly safe. And that requires little to no bombardment of Gaza. So the phrase "commit acts harmful to the enemy" no longer applies. It hasn't applied for several weeks. No one is accepting this argument that Israel is no longer threatened. Rockets are still being fired at Israel. Hamas not conducting daily raids does not mean Hamas is no longer a threat. Hamas still controls land. It is not reasonable to try to get people to view Hamas as no longer a threat when it still controls land. Can you provide more detail as to why you view Hamas as no longer a threat? And do you mean for now, or ever? The issue is that if Israel just picked up and left right now, Hamas would have an easy time moving back in and utilizing their existing network and whatnot. Until Hamas’s land is all taken, I think it is reasonable to view them as a threat. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15690 Posts
On November 16 2023 08:17 Falling wrote: Well, fortunately this eventuality has already been covered in International Humanitarian Law. Hospitals are immune. Hospitals lose their immunity if they are used to commit harmful acts to the enemy, like for instance if they are used as combatant headquarters (or, I imagine, holding of hostages). It doesn't mean Israel should as a result just flatten the hospital with a bomb (which they did not do.) But it does mean they are operating within the bounds of international law to seize and control the hospital. My guess is the IDF will want the hospital to keep running as a hospital, but we'll see. lol jesus christ. I did not realize this is already well-established within the whole war law system. Am I to then assume the people screeching about war crimes are also saying Hamas is not operating out of hospitals? Good grief, its worse than I thought. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4224 Posts
On November 16 2023 08:39 Mohdoo wrote: No one is accepting this argument that Israel is no longer threatened. Rockets are still being fired at Israel. Hamas not conducting daily raids does not mean Hamas is no longer a threat. Hamas still controls land. It is not reasonable to try to get people to view Hamas as no longer a threat when it still controls land. Can you provide more detail as to why you view Hamas as no longer a threat? And do you mean for now, or ever? The issue is that if Israel just picked up and left right now, Hamas would have an easy time moving back in and utilizing their existing network and whatnot. Until Hamas’s land is all taken, I think it is reasonable to view them as a threat. How many Israeli lives have been lost over the past few weeks? | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4224 Posts
I don't care about "rules of war". War sucks. Suffering should be minimized, and Israel is not minimizing the suffering or even trying to. That's what I care about. | ||
| ||
