Terrorist cell embedded itself within civilians around Al-Quds Hospital, fired from the hospital entrance at IDF soldiers, and was subsequently eliminated
Okay genius, how do you kill them when they are in tunnels under neighborhoods? You cannot get into them without an explosion, even if present in person and they won’t just sit there either. This is not a war crime and I’m really questioning everyone’s collective intelligence and ability to think through problems instead of reacting to stimulus.
Specific protection of medical establishments and units (including hospitals) is the general rule under IHL. Therefore, specific protection to which hospitals are entitled shall not cease unless they are used by a party to the conflict to commit, outside their humanitarian functions, an “act harmful to the enemy”. In case of doubt as to whether medical units of establishments are used to commit an “act harmful to the enemy”, they should be presumed not to be so used.
They do limit targeting. How many strikes are you seeing in the south as compared to the north? That’s a limitation and shows proportionality. You folks may not like it but this is categorically not a war crime.
Correct which is why your entire narrative is false because they never told civilians to go to a specific place. Dig into it. This is exactly what I mean when I call this stuff propaganda. It’s stretching the truth and inviting you to draw your own conclusions from warped facts.
I will put it quite simply. You cannot provide an example where the IDF told Gaza civilians to go to a specific place, only places where they should not go.
How do you take out the enemy? Answer the question. Your perspective is not useful when you have no alternative. They cannot access the tunnels without an explosive. Name a full conflict where civilian infrastructure was not hit when taking a city.
The alternative is “you don’t”, but for some reason you don’t seem to even consider that there might be a cost in civilian lives too high to kill a handful of terrorists.
You don’t have to shoot missiles indiscriminately into civilian zones. If your enemy is hiding among civilian infrastructure and/or using human shields, you need to change your tactics up to suit. Committing war crimes in order to kill your enemy isn’t how you retain the moral highground.
I’m still waiting on these tactics you are recommending. Alternatives don’t exist so your argument is absolute bullshit. The faster they can get through this, the less overall civilian suffering will occur.
Okay genius, how do you kill them when they are in tunnels under neighborhoods? You cannot get into them without an explosion, even if present in person and they won’t just sit there either. This is not a war crime and I’m really questioning everyone’s collective intelligence and ability to think through problems instead of reacting to stimulus.
You heard from it this guy. Bombing hospitals is not a war crime if there’s a bad guy near there.
This is literally true.
Emphasis mine.
Proportionality is another factor you’re ignoring.
They’re also still required to attempt to limit targeting to avoid civilian casualties and yet they don’t
They do limit targeting. How many strikes are you seeing in the south as compared to the north? That’s a limitation and shows proportionality. You folks may not like it but this is categorically not a war crime.
It has to be applied per individual attack, not per region
Correct which is why your entire narrative is false because they never told civilians to go to a specific place. Dig into it. This is exactly what I mean when I call this stuff propaganda. It’s stretching the truth and inviting you to draw your own conclusions from warped facts.
Non sequitur
I will put it quite simply. You cannot provide an example where the IDF told Gaza civilians to go to a specific place, only places where they should not go.
How do you take out the enemy? Answer the question. Your perspective is not useful when you have no alternative. They cannot access the tunnels without an explosive. Name a full conflict where civilian infrastructure was not hit when taking a city.
The alternative is “you don’t”, but for some reason you don’t seem to even consider that there might be a cost in civilian lives too high to kill a handful of terrorists.
So how many festivals are you okay with being attacked? Apparently 260 per isn’t high enough for you.
Some are more equal than others, I presume
https://www.ochaopt.org/content/hostilities-gaza-strip-and-israel-reported-impact-day-39
As if the conflict started on October 7th and hasn’t been going on since even before Hamas existed.
Israel has killed far more Palestinian civilians since October 7th than Hamas killed on October 7th. Like 10x the amount.
You don’t have to shoot missiles indiscriminately into civilian zones. If your enemy is hiding among civilian infrastructure and/or using human shields, you need to change your tactics up to suit. Committing war crimes in order to kill your enemy isn’t how you retain the moral highground.
I’m still waiting on these tactics you are recommending. Alternatives don’t exist so your argument is absolute bullshit. The faster they can get through this, the less overall civilian suffering will occur.
The civilians can’t suffer if they are dead so you’re not wrong but are advocating for war crimes.
I think I’d rather be wrong.