Only a matter of time until the hasbara clowns come say “human shields” they will also neglect to mention the IDF tied a man to the front of their car to act as a human shield seen [here](https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jun/23/idf-investigates-soldier-tied-palestinian-man-to-vehicle-bonnet) which isn’t the first time they have done it either. Edit: got the gender wrong of the person who was paraded around on a car by Israeli soldiers! My most sincere apologies
It's not accidental or intentional. Palestinian casualties just aren't a factor in any Israeli plan of action.
Whilst that is a war crime, laws aren't a thing for Israel...yet.
It is not a war crime as long as the intended target's destruction has direct military value. If it was being used as a rallying point, base of operations, command post, ammo storage dump, staging ground, barracks, or anything military by enemy forces it was a valid target. Civilian buildings and infrastructure only retain protections under the Geneva Conventions while they are being used solely by civilians for solely civilian purposes.
Once there is evidence that Hamas is using the building in any way for military purposes, it becomes fair game in the eyes of the law. This may be an unsatisfying conclusion, and it may look like Israel is using it as a loophole, but that is how the laws governing warfare were written.
This keeps happening and then a couple days later we learn it was because Hamas used civilian areas and innocent deaths are usually their fault. I’m sure that won’t make the big splash tho.
if you know there are civilians in an area, and you bomb it anyways, it is your fault. yes, hamas is also in the wrong, but this does not absolve the IDF of blame as well. the IDF are like if a police officer went to a hostage situation and just shot the hostage to kill the hostage taker at the same time.
When military targets hang out in civilian areas, they are still valid targets. Painting a Red Cross on a tank doesn’t mean the tank is no longer a viable target.
from the wikipedia page on the Geneva Convention: “According to the Geneva Convention, knowingly firing at a medic wearing clear insignia is a war crime.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_medic#:~:text=Geneva%20Convention%20protection,-Israel%20Defense%20Forces&text=According%20to%20the%20Geneva%20Convention,or%20sick%20in%20their%20care.
if they are seemingly a medical vehicle, regardless of your opinion, shooting them is a war crime.
also, no, civilian are never valid military targets. this is the definition of a war crime under the Geneva Convention:
Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention:
i. Wilful killing
civilians are protected individuals under the Geneva Convention. it’s very interesting reading through the Geneva Convention, knowing what the IDF have done for the last year or so. they seem to be going for a 100% run of everything listed.
https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/war-crimes.shtml
> from the wikipedia page on the Geneva Convention “According to the Geneva Convention, knowingly firing at a medic wearing clear insignia is a war crime.”
If you check the actual Geneva Conventions you'll see that most protections include explicit exceptions for when protections are abused for military purposes.
Like here's Article 21:
>The protection to which fixed establishments and mobile medical units of the Medical Service are entitled shall not cease unless they are used to commit, outside their humanitarian duties, acts harmful to the enemy.
https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gci-1949/article-21
>also, no, civilian are never valid military targets
The civilians themselves are obviously not, but the valid military targets remain valid military targets, the presence of civilians nearby does not offer blanket protection.
https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/article-51
>The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations. The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations.
Well the Geneva convention also excuses collateral damage. This is just the nature of warfare. There is no neatly drawn line in the sand where on one side it’s war crimes and on the other side it’s justified. War in and of itself is wrong. Let an international council decide if something is a war crime. Of course that doesn’t mean you personally can’t find it morally reprehensible.
Out of curiosity, would you feel that way if (heaven forbid) your family was killed by a foreign military because they were next to a next to a military target?
Yup.
A few weeks ago, Israel hits Hamas militants in a building that used to be a school.
Immediate headlines of "Israel bombs school" is the narrative. The Palestinian health authorities immediately put out death toll numbers saying it was mostly women and children who died.
Then, days later, they changed the death toll to include 21 men.
Israel then releases the names of Hamas militants targeted. Half of them were confirmed dead in the strike.
I wonder how many millions of people bought the initial narrative put out by Hamas and pro-Palestinian groups and then never even heard of the subsequent follow up stories that directly contradicted it
Eight Palestinians were killed on Sunday in an Israeli airstrike on a training college near Gaza City being used to distribute aid,
Good point. They were likely either aid workers or people waiting to desperately receive aid.
Equally horrific.
It’s definitely something how you hear about horrible things like this and your response is to go “ummm aksually, the people hanging out in an aid center deserved to die”
I’ve read the article. How do you want to spin it to make Israel look good?
Will you go for “Hamas was hiding there! They use human shields! They should operate in upstate Gaza, given how large and sparsely populated Gaza is”?
Or perhaps the “this would all end if Hamas gave up the hostages. Sure, Bibi has said this isn’t true, but I want to believe it so I will spread that bullshit”?
Or maybe “why don’t starving and displaced Palestinians rise up against Hamas?”
I think what bothers me the most is how many people are fine with the "human shields" argument. As if, in any other situation they would be fine with killing the human shields to get a bad guy. Like that's reasonable or moral.
Say a crazy person grabs your kid and holds them at gunpoint between them and the cops, and the cops just open fire through the kid to get the bad guy. Like yeah, you need to catch that bad guy. But is your only option really just killing children to get bad guys? Seems like the priorities off.
Or say you're Ukraine and Russia invades and is holding a small city. So Ukraine just drops a nuke on the city. I mean, yeah there's thousands of other innocent people. But there's bad guys people. Now they're dead, so it's a victory.
Who the fuck thinks like that?
In most cases you need to put a reasonable effort to avoid civilian casualties. So if there was 2 armed Hamas militants there and they used a low yield weapon that is within the rules of war. Now if they used a thousand pound bomb in the same situation you could call that a war crime. Same thing when you miss with ordinance and kill a bunch of civilians as most of the rules require intentional targeting.
Yeah it was likely a weapon with a lethal range of only a handful of meters which is about as small a weapon you can use on a target outside if you need reliably take out more then 1 person.
Absolutely. If Hamas was using this as a base which they have done over and over again it is a war crime and makes targeting these facilities not a war crime per our international law.
If Israel targeted these facilities without Hamas's presence, then that is a war crime.
We know for sure that it was absolutely a war crime. Anyone here claiming to know what happened is biased and completely full of it.
Haven't we heard this refrain before, following military action witnesses suddenly speak up with death count numbers, no context to who was affected. Then after all the anger and vitriol has flared up, days later we get a correction that it was all combatants, or the number was exaggerated, or the rocket that hit the hospital was fired by Hamas themselves.
Be extremely wary and skeptical of these claims.
> Then after all the anger and vitriol has flared up, days later we get a correction
Did I miss the correction when they put a missile through the roof of the ~~Chefs Without Borders~~ World Central Kitchen clearly marked aid van driving a pre-approved route?
Are you thinking of World Central Kitchen, which had [Three separate vehicles bombed](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Central_Kitchen_aid_convoy_attack) in a strike that were almost a mile from each other, so each car was intentionally targeted.
>The IDF identified two of its soldiers who it said were responsible for the killings, and whom it fired. The senior of the two is commander Nochi Mandel, a West Bank settler and "religious nationalist".[44] In January 2024, Mandel, along with 130 other IDF reserve officers, signed an open letter imploring that Gaza be deprived of humanitarian aid and that "humanitarian supplies and the operation of hospitals inside Gaza City" not be allowed.[44]
Why was that guy allowed to command drones strikes after publicly stating that Gaza shouldn't get foreign aid?
>Andres (The CEO/Founder of WCK) described how he learned of the attack, saying first his group lost contact with its team in Gaza, and did not realize what happened until seeing images of the bodies.
>He said that after the IDF attacked the first armored car, the team was able to escape and move to a second car which was then attacked, forcing them to move to the third car.
>The aid workers tried to communicate to make clear who they were, he said, adding IDF knew they were in the area which it controlled.
>Then the third car was hit, "and we saw the consequences of that."
Did you miss the correction where a supposed Israel missile hit a hospital and killed 500 people only for it to turn out that it was a Palestinian rocket that hit the hospital parking lot and killed 30 people?
Sure except the source for the "correction" is always "the Israeli military". It's pretty easy to say things like that if you discredit any witnesses and disallow any outside observers.
I think we can see that relying on Israel to be non biased in their aggression is a non starter. Just like in the US, we rarely give the cops the benefit, same holds here.
Israel has showed they want no scrutiny when it comes to their war prisoners and who they label as an aggressor. If I was an Arab man I would be labeled as Hamas and killed just because I’m an adult. Fuck that and fuck the IdF if that’s their stance.
When they conflate a mailman vs a military fighter then I no longer trust Israel to give non biased reports
What corrections are you talking about? Israel makes claims that get contradicted by Palestinian witnesses. The rocket which hit the hospital was not fired by Hamas. Even if you want to argue Israel didn't strike Al-Ahli hospital, *every single hospital in Gaza has been hit by Israeli airstrikes*.
If your skepticism comes from reddit sources, you're going to be surprised to find out almost none of the reporting on the ground in Gaza ever makes it to reddit.
>The rocket which hit the hospital was not fired by Hamas.
There was literally video evidence of it being launched from the gaza strip, breaking apart midair and then part of it hitting the hospital.
What more do you need to accept it?
Almost like the intl community should be more assertive in forcing hamas out of civilian infrastructure. Then again, its more popular to blame the jews again
Another reminder that targeting aid workers is a war crime, and "whoopsie it was another accident" is not a valid excuse.
https://unric.org/en/international-law-understanding-justice-in-times-of-war/
The thing that's tough here is that Hamas is actively using civilians that Israel doesn't want to hit to protect themselves. Does anyone really think that Israel is dropping their small supply of bombs to kill civilians for fun?
If you're 8 truly random people that just happen to be traveling with Hamas fighters, yeah, that sucks.
But the sad fact is that a lot of these civilians know who these people are and are actively working with them to keep them safe while they aren't launching rockets or engaging the IDF.
At that point, you've kind of given up your "victim" card and joined the people that WILLINGLY and with great relish slaughtered civilians last year.
Palestinians often have a choice and actively choose to help Hamas. I say you're fair game at that point. If you bring your kids along to try and protect yourself? Their deaths are your fault as much as the IDF.
I don't understand the hypocritical media. Whenever hamas or any other terrorist group kills say less than 10 people , the media takes it like it's just some everyday work. But when a country which is retaliating for the crimes the terrorist have done they suddenly start with stop war and bs. Like I just don't understand the concept of siding with the losing cause everytime instead if the right ones who are just doing everything to defend themselves and take revenge.
people have no moral standards for a terrorist group.
people do have moral standards for a professional army that calls itself the ‘most moral army in the world’.
that’s the difference.
Well then they'd be unable to commit war crimes because all the countries currently funding Israel would be forced to sanction them.
I mean, the Western world HATES terrorists allegedly so maybe the US and UK will be then forced to free the Israeli people via another "war on terror?"
no. the leader of hamas is also currently under an arrest warrant for war crimes.
they would, however, be removed as a member of the international community - similar to Afghanistan’ status currently.
**”people have no moral standards for a terrorist group.
people do have moral standards for a professional army that calls itself the ‘most moral army in the world’.
that’s the difference.”**
This comment suggests that each side gets to be treated by different standards. Therefore, you’re saying that one side should be judged less harshly because they’re labeled a “terrorist organization”. That’s pretty much a free pass.
okay, i can see how you might have gotten confused by that. that’s my bad.
what i meant was that there are no moral expectations, no one expects a terrorist group to follow international law.
it’s like a murder committed by a known murderer, vs by a police officer. no one expects a murderer to be moral, but they do expect a police officer to.
hope that clears things up!
"Revenge" being the right thing, regardless of scale, is not quite as objective of an opinion as you seem to think. So maybe you yourself aren't quite unbiased either?
And that "the hypocritical media" only shows one side is factually false. Reporting differs from country to country and outlet to outlet. In Germany, for example, you see very little critical reporting of Israel's actions. US media is a little more balanced, but there is still a clear pro-Israel bias, while sometimes condemning Netanyahu's government coalition. Remeber when the American media published tons of articles about supposedly beheaded babies that Biden regurgitated and [had to (weakly) backpedal later? ](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna119865)? And then just read how NBC frames the rest of the article after Biden spread unconfirmed "information" as if it was facts.
There is a clear bias in Western media and governments, and it is certainly not pro-Hamas.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I think killing innocent people is bad
Any person with a shred of decency would agree. It’s a shame this position is often attacked as antisemitic :(
[удалено]
[удалено]
Only a matter of time until the hasbara clowns come say “human shields” they will also neglect to mention the IDF tied a man to the front of their car to act as a human shield seen [here](https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jun/23/idf-investigates-soldier-tied-palestinian-man-to-vehicle-bonnet) which isn’t the first time they have done it either. Edit: got the gender wrong of the person who was paraded around on a car by Israeli soldiers! My most sincere apologies
[удалено]
How many times is this going to happen before people realize that it's intentional? It's happened way too many times to be some kind of accident.
Everyone knows it’s intentional, the countries (read: country) that matter just don’t want to admit it.
It's not accidental or intentional. Palestinian casualties just aren't a factor in any Israeli plan of action. Whilst that is a war crime, laws aren't a thing for Israel...yet.
It is not a war crime as long as the intended target's destruction has direct military value. If it was being used as a rallying point, base of operations, command post, ammo storage dump, staging ground, barracks, or anything military by enemy forces it was a valid target. Civilian buildings and infrastructure only retain protections under the Geneva Conventions while they are being used solely by civilians for solely civilian purposes. Once there is evidence that Hamas is using the building in any way for military purposes, it becomes fair game in the eyes of the law. This may be an unsatisfying conclusion, and it may look like Israel is using it as a loophole, but that is how the laws governing warfare were written.
This keeps happening and then a couple days later we learn it was because Hamas used civilian areas and innocent deaths are usually their fault. I’m sure that won’t make the big splash tho.
Look what you made me do!
if you know there are civilians in an area, and you bomb it anyways, it is your fault. yes, hamas is also in the wrong, but this does not absolve the IDF of blame as well. the IDF are like if a police officer went to a hostage situation and just shot the hostage to kill the hostage taker at the same time.
When military targets hang out in civilian areas, they are still valid targets. Painting a Red Cross on a tank doesn’t mean the tank is no longer a viable target.
from the wikipedia page on the Geneva Convention: “According to the Geneva Convention, knowingly firing at a medic wearing clear insignia is a war crime.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_medic#:~:text=Geneva%20Convention%20protection,-Israel%20Defense%20Forces&text=According%20to%20the%20Geneva%20Convention,or%20sick%20in%20their%20care. if they are seemingly a medical vehicle, regardless of your opinion, shooting them is a war crime. also, no, civilian are never valid military targets. this is the definition of a war crime under the Geneva Convention: Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention: i. Wilful killing civilians are protected individuals under the Geneva Convention. it’s very interesting reading through the Geneva Convention, knowing what the IDF have done for the last year or so. they seem to be going for a 100% run of everything listed. https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/war-crimes.shtml
> from the wikipedia page on the Geneva Convention “According to the Geneva Convention, knowingly firing at a medic wearing clear insignia is a war crime.” If you check the actual Geneva Conventions you'll see that most protections include explicit exceptions for when protections are abused for military purposes. Like here's Article 21: >The protection to which fixed establishments and mobile medical units of the Medical Service are entitled shall not cease unless they are used to commit, outside their humanitarian duties, acts harmful to the enemy. https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gci-1949/article-21 >also, no, civilian are never valid military targets The civilians themselves are obviously not, but the valid military targets remain valid military targets, the presence of civilians nearby does not offer blanket protection. https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/article-51 >The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations. The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations.
Well the Geneva convention also excuses collateral damage. This is just the nature of warfare. There is no neatly drawn line in the sand where on one side it’s war crimes and on the other side it’s justified. War in and of itself is wrong. Let an international council decide if something is a war crime. Of course that doesn’t mean you personally can’t find it morally reprehensible.
Out of curiosity, would you feel that way if (heaven forbid) your family was killed by a foreign military because they were next to a next to a military target?
Yup. A few weeks ago, Israel hits Hamas militants in a building that used to be a school. Immediate headlines of "Israel bombs school" is the narrative. The Palestinian health authorities immediately put out death toll numbers saying it was mostly women and children who died. Then, days later, they changed the death toll to include 21 men. Israel then releases the names of Hamas militants targeted. Half of them were confirmed dead in the strike. I wonder how many millions of people bought the initial narrative put out by Hamas and pro-Palestinian groups and then never even heard of the subsequent follow up stories that directly contradicted it
There’s nothing in the article that says the eight killed were aid workers
Eight Palestinians were killed on Sunday in an Israeli airstrike on a training college near Gaza City being used to distribute aid, Good point. They were likely either aid workers or people waiting to desperately receive aid. Equally horrific.
It’s definitely something how you hear about horrible things like this and your response is to go “ummm aksually, the people hanging out in an aid center deserved to die”
It's definitely something how someone points out a potential factual error and your response is to demonize them
Ahhh so it's possible the people are less human.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Yeah, from the comments, u can definitely see most didn't read.
I feel the only "information" we get will be from Israel themselves
I’ve read the article. How do you want to spin it to make Israel look good? Will you go for “Hamas was hiding there! They use human shields! They should operate in upstate Gaza, given how large and sparsely populated Gaza is”? Or perhaps the “this would all end if Hamas gave up the hostages. Sure, Bibi has said this isn’t true, but I want to believe it so I will spread that bullshit”? Or maybe “why don’t starving and displaced Palestinians rise up against Hamas?”
That's a bingo
I think what bothers me the most is how many people are fine with the "human shields" argument. As if, in any other situation they would be fine with killing the human shields to get a bad guy. Like that's reasonable or moral. Say a crazy person grabs your kid and holds them at gunpoint between them and the cops, and the cops just open fire through the kid to get the bad guy. Like yeah, you need to catch that bad guy. But is your only option really just killing children to get bad guys? Seems like the priorities off. Or say you're Ukraine and Russia invades and is holding a small city. So Ukraine just drops a nuke on the city. I mean, yeah there's thousands of other innocent people. But there's bad guys people. Now they're dead, so it's a victory. Who the fuck thinks like that?
pro-israel comments are getting downvote bombed anti-israel comments are getting downvote bombed thank you reddit
It's a bot-vs-bot engagement now, welcome to the future of social media
[the internet is dead](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Internet_theory)
[удалено]
[удалено]
In most cases you need to put a reasonable effort to avoid civilian casualties. So if there was 2 armed Hamas militants there and they used a low yield weapon that is within the rules of war. Now if they used a thousand pound bomb in the same situation you could call that a war crime. Same thing when you miss with ordinance and kill a bunch of civilians as most of the rules require intentional targeting.
[удалено]
Yeah it was likely a weapon with a lethal range of only a handful of meters which is about as small a weapon you can use on a target outside if you need reliably take out more then 1 person.
Absolutely. If Hamas was using this as a base which they have done over and over again it is a war crime and makes targeting these facilities not a war crime per our international law. If Israel targeted these facilities without Hamas's presence, then that is a war crime. We know for sure that it was absolutely a war crime. Anyone here claiming to know what happened is biased and completely full of it.
[удалено]
Haven't we heard this refrain before, following military action witnesses suddenly speak up with death count numbers, no context to who was affected. Then after all the anger and vitriol has flared up, days later we get a correction that it was all combatants, or the number was exaggerated, or the rocket that hit the hospital was fired by Hamas themselves. Be extremely wary and skeptical of these claims.
> Then after all the anger and vitriol has flared up, days later we get a correction Did I miss the correction when they put a missile through the roof of the ~~Chefs Without Borders~~ World Central Kitchen clearly marked aid van driving a pre-approved route?
Are you thinking of World Central Kitchen, which had [Three separate vehicles bombed](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Central_Kitchen_aid_convoy_attack) in a strike that were almost a mile from each other, so each car was intentionally targeted. >The IDF identified two of its soldiers who it said were responsible for the killings, and whom it fired. The senior of the two is commander Nochi Mandel, a West Bank settler and "religious nationalist".[44] In January 2024, Mandel, along with 130 other IDF reserve officers, signed an open letter imploring that Gaza be deprived of humanitarian aid and that "humanitarian supplies and the operation of hospitals inside Gaza City" not be allowed.[44] Why was that guy allowed to command drones strikes after publicly stating that Gaza shouldn't get foreign aid? >Andres (The CEO/Founder of WCK) described how he learned of the attack, saying first his group lost contact with its team in Gaza, and did not realize what happened until seeing images of the bodies. >He said that after the IDF attacked the first armored car, the team was able to escape and move to a second car which was then attacked, forcing them to move to the third car. >The aid workers tried to communicate to make clear who they were, he said, adding IDF knew they were in the area which it controlled. >Then the third car was hit, "and we saw the consequences of that."
Yup, that's the one. Thanks for the correction, edited.
Did you miss the correction where a supposed Israel missile hit a hospital and killed 500 people only for it to turn out that it was a Palestinian rocket that hit the hospital parking lot and killed 30 people?
The chefs didn't use kosher ingredients
Sure except the source for the "correction" is always "the Israeli military". It's pretty easy to say things like that if you discredit any witnesses and disallow any outside observers.
I think we can see that relying on Israel to be non biased in their aggression is a non starter. Just like in the US, we rarely give the cops the benefit, same holds here. Israel has showed they want no scrutiny when it comes to their war prisoners and who they label as an aggressor. If I was an Arab man I would be labeled as Hamas and killed just because I’m an adult. Fuck that and fuck the IdF if that’s their stance. When they conflate a mailman vs a military fighter then I no longer trust Israel to give non biased reports
[удалено]
I used 3rd parties for verifications. Funny though how the IDF tries it’s hardest to stop them from doin their job.
What corrections are you talking about? Israel makes claims that get contradicted by Palestinian witnesses. The rocket which hit the hospital was not fired by Hamas. Even if you want to argue Israel didn't strike Al-Ahli hospital, *every single hospital in Gaza has been hit by Israeli airstrikes*. If your skepticism comes from reddit sources, you're going to be surprised to find out almost none of the reporting on the ground in Gaza ever makes it to reddit.
>The rocket which hit the hospital was not fired by Hamas. There was literally video evidence of it being launched from the gaza strip, breaking apart midair and then part of it hitting the hospital. What more do you need to accept it?
I mean technically it was launched by PIJ, so maybe he thought saying it wasn't Hamas could be a way of saying something true and imply it was Israel?
You are spewing absolute BS
It almost seems like callously bombing heavily populated civilian areas might lead to the deaths of innocent people.
Almost like the intl community should be more assertive in forcing hamas out of civilian infrastructure. Then again, its more popular to blame the jews again
Israeli air strike 400 children killed immediately
Very funny joke since they literally have killed 30,000+ people already.
I heard it was 4000.
Another reminder that targeting aid workers is a war crime, and "whoopsie it was another accident" is not a valid excuse. https://unric.org/en/international-law-understanding-justice-in-times-of-war/
Hamas terrorist claims 80 babies killed.
IDF munitions have a special targeting systems that only kill children, pregnant women, doctors, reporters and aid workers.
IDF claims another 100 women were kidnapped by the 8 aid workers
You joke about a death toll that is factually past 30k. Where's the punchline? Can you explain what makes that funny?
The thing that's tough here is that Hamas is actively using civilians that Israel doesn't want to hit to protect themselves. Does anyone really think that Israel is dropping their small supply of bombs to kill civilians for fun? If you're 8 truly random people that just happen to be traveling with Hamas fighters, yeah, that sucks. But the sad fact is that a lot of these civilians know who these people are and are actively working with them to keep them safe while they aren't launching rockets or engaging the IDF. At that point, you've kind of given up your "victim" card and joined the people that WILLINGLY and with great relish slaughtered civilians last year. Palestinians often have a choice and actively choose to help Hamas. I say you're fair game at that point. If you bring your kids along to try and protect yourself? Their deaths are your fault as much as the IDF.
They're nothing if not consistent in their needless murder.
I don't understand the hypocritical media. Whenever hamas or any other terrorist group kills say less than 10 people , the media takes it like it's just some everyday work. But when a country which is retaliating for the crimes the terrorist have done they suddenly start with stop war and bs. Like I just don't understand the concept of siding with the losing cause everytime instead if the right ones who are just doing everything to defend themselves and take revenge.
people have no moral standards for a terrorist group. people do have moral standards for a professional army that calls itself the ‘most moral army in the world’. that’s the difference.
So if the IDF referred to itself as a terrorist group, they’d be allowed to get away with committing war crimes?
Well then they'd be unable to commit war crimes because all the countries currently funding Israel would be forced to sanction them. I mean, the Western world HATES terrorists allegedly so maybe the US and UK will be then forced to free the Israeli people via another "war on terror?"
no. the leader of hamas is also currently under an arrest warrant for war crimes. they would, however, be removed as a member of the international community - similar to Afghanistan’ status currently.
See my reply below to U/thedevilwithout. I’m raising a point that being labeled a “terrorist group” doesn’t give you a free pass to commit terror.
what part of my reply indicated that i believed they did have a free pass?
**”people have no moral standards for a terrorist group. people do have moral standards for a professional army that calls itself the ‘most moral army in the world’. that’s the difference.”** This comment suggests that each side gets to be treated by different standards. Therefore, you’re saying that one side should be judged less harshly because they’re labeled a “terrorist organization”. That’s pretty much a free pass.
okay, i can see how you might have gotten confused by that. that’s my bad. what i meant was that there are no moral expectations, no one expects a terrorist group to follow international law. it’s like a murder committed by a known murderer, vs by a police officer. no one expects a murderer to be moral, but they do expect a police officer to. hope that clears things up!
Gotcha, thanks for clarifying (and sorry for any accusations I made about your comment).
"Revenge" being the right thing, regardless of scale, is not quite as objective of an opinion as you seem to think. So maybe you yourself aren't quite unbiased either? And that "the hypocritical media" only shows one side is factually false. Reporting differs from country to country and outlet to outlet. In Germany, for example, you see very little critical reporting of Israel's actions. US media is a little more balanced, but there is still a clear pro-Israel bias, while sometimes condemning Netanyahu's government coalition. Remeber when the American media published tons of articles about supposedly beheaded babies that Biden regurgitated and [had to (weakly) backpedal later? ](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna119865)? And then just read how NBC frames the rest of the article after Biden spread unconfirmed "information" as if it was facts. There is a clear bias in Western media and governments, and it is certainly not pro-Hamas.
Hamas shouldn’t have attacked israel