Jump to content

Israel - Hamas War 2


Kalbear
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Ran said:

If Israel is not targeting Hamas and is instead deliberately and purposefully interfering with supply from the Egyptian side, then, as I said, I'd consider that a war crime.

Does this count? https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/israel-threatens-egypt-on-gaza-aid-delivery/3014394

Or is it only a war crime if they make good on their threats?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

If it were Russia or China or Iran doing this, there would be no debate that it was a war crime.

Hypocrites believe everyone else is a hypocrite.

I carry no water for either side but when you see a lot of experts hedging on something "possibly" being a war crime, it leaves one thinking that in fact the situation is very complicated. And it is, in fact, complicated.

@dbergkvist 

A news site I've never heard of citing a channel I've never heard of citing information with no provenance attached... I don't know, seems iffy to depend on it, don't you think?

Edited by Ran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, KingAerys_II said:

They already did war crimes, the illegal settlements are war crimes as well. 

I think they are going to "conquer" Gaza

The plan is to kill as many Palestinians as possible, I fear. At least as many as they can get away with. Like they've been doing before with the settler attacks and such.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ran said:

a lot of experts hedging on something "possibly" being a war crime

UN says it is a war crime.

https://www.reuters.com/world/un-experts-say-israels-strikes-gaza-amount-collective-punishment-2023-10-12/#:~:text=There is no justification for,amounts to a war crime."&text=The group said that taking,also constituted a war crime.

Quote

"This amounts to collective punishment. There is no justification for violence that indiscriminately targets innocent civilians, whether by Hamas or Israeli forces. This is absolutely prohibited under international law and amounts to a war crime."

Where are these 'experts'? It is clear to everyone else that it is, in fact, a war crime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a good piece by The Guardian. 

"A central tenet of international humanitarian law, which is applicable to all participants, not only state actors, is that civilians should not be targeted. Additionally, it dictates that an attack must not be carried out if it is “expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof” that would be excessive in relation to the anticipated military gains.

There are many other provisions, which also prohibit hostage taking, excessive destruction and appropriation of property and attacks on hospitals. Another provision states that access to humanitarian relief for civilians in need must be allowed."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2 minutes ago, Ran said:

Hypocrites believe everyone else is a hypocrite.

I carry no water for either side but when you see a lot of experts hedging on something "possibly" being a war crime, it leaves one thinking that in fact the situation is very complicated. And it in fact is complicated.

But again, whether experts agree that this is technically, legally a war crime or not, we surely agree that it is intended to punish the entire Gaza population for the crimes of Hamas: Israel has said so. And so surely you agree that it is morally wrong? That at least isn’t complicated, not to me. It’s not compatible with any concept of justice or ethical behaviour. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, mormont said:

we surely agree that it is intended to punish the entire Gaza population for the crimes of Hamas: Israel has said so.

Is this referring to some statement from the energy minister that he posted on Twitter? The random tweetings of political officials, whose role in military or strategic decision making are unknown, don't strike me as a basis for understanding the actual government policy. It's not unlike the Knesset Likudnik asshole wanting a second Nakba.

What I know is that Egypt, the US, and others are consulting with Israel on this matter.

 

Edited by Ran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ran said:

The random tweetings of political officials, whose role in military or strategic decision making are unknown, don't strike me as a basis for understanding the actual government policy.

Israeli defense minister orders ‘complete siege’ on Gaza after Hamas surprise attack | PBS NewsHour

Quote

Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant ordered a “complete siege” on Gaza, saying authorities would cut electricity and block the entry of food and fuel.

Gallant said Israel was at war with “human animals,” using the kind of dehumanizing language often employed by both sides at times of soaring tensions.

This is literally attempted genocide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Ran said:

A news site I've never heard of citing a channel I've never heard of citing information with no provenance attached... I don't know, seems iffy to depend on it, don't you think?

Well, I could argue the that NYT is  opeenly pro-Israel. They don't even seem to be engaging in their forte of bothsiding everything. 

Nevertheless, there are other pieces from better known sources as well, all making some good and valid points.

https://newrepublic.com/article/171286/new-york-times-israel-coverage-history-netanyahu

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Many-Faced Votary said:

If you've read the rest of the thread, it is unclear if they mean a "complete siege" from the Israeli side or if they mean to prevent aid via Egypt. As noted by the NYT two days ago, humanitarian supplies were indeed crossing into Palestine, but then bombing by Israel on the Palestinian side has led Egypt to temporarily close the border. And as I noted, we don't seem to have a clear statement from Israel on the purpose of those bombings, but near as I can tell there have been no bombings today, which suggests talks are ongoing.

I suspect Israel is concerned about Hamas using the opening to get people out or weapons in, but it may be possible that they are serious about it to the point of blocking the Egyptian route for humanitarian supplies to enter Gaza. Which, as I said, would make it seem like a war crime to me. But as I think I've shown, Israel seems to have no duty to supply electricity or fuel to Gaza, and it can prevent food and other necessities to pass through its borders if it fears it will be redirected (and I think it's obvious that that fear is correct -- Hamas will certainly prioritize supplying itself over civilians). OTOH, I don't think that can justify it blocking aid from the Egyptian side, if that's what it intends to do.

Edited by Ran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...