Israel at war

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
51,663
10,083
113
Toronto
I'm sure you think terrorists go to university as well.
What the hell does that even mean?

You claimed that Hamas does not use human shields.

I asked why do CNN and NY Times report that they do?

And you reply by talking about university? D'uh? 🤪
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,785
22,219
113
I will go with the definition used in international law as understood by the Red Cross.

None of the examples listed or ever tried in military court include a force using their own people as human shields.
In order to make the argument that Hamas is doing so, you'd need to say what it is that justifies blowing up residential buildings. What are those military targets? What proof? In one of the most densely populated places on the planet, do they have any other locations or options, if they are doing so?

But even more important then that debate is to point out that Israel does not have the right to self defence against people they are occupying.



 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,785
22,219
113
What the hell does that even mean?

You claimed that Hamas does not use human shields.

I asked why do CNN and NY Times report that they do?

And you reply by talking about university? D'uh? 🤪
This is an excellent example.
Israel bombs a refugee camp and then hundreds of people go out to try to dig out the victims.
Right wingers and zionists accuse them of being 'human shields'.

 

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
32,700
60,742
113
None of the examples listed or ever tried in military court include a force using their own people as human shields.
That doesn't change the definition.

In order to make the argument that Hamas is doing so, you'd need to say what it is that justifies blowing up residential buildings.
No I don't.
I'm not arguing about whether or not Israel is justified in blowing up residential buildings.

What are those military targets? What proof? In one of the most densely populated places on the planet, do they have any other locations or options, if they are doing so?
That's the closest to an argument you have here.
Is it possible for Hamas to not use hospitals or schools as bases?

But even more important then that debate is to point out that Israel does not have the right to self defence against people they are occupying.
That has nothing to do with whether or not Hamas is using human shields.
 

Phil C. McNasty

Go Jays Go
Dec 27, 2010
26,839
4,948
113
I disagree that merely existing amongst civilians - for example, getting treated at a hospital next to civilians, is using them as human shields
You're right. Hamas would never do that.
They have standards 😆
 
  • Like
Reactions: mitchell76

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
51,663
10,083
113
Toronto

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
30,429
4,639
113
I've mostly stayed out of this because there is not a lot to be gained from talking about the subject of the war on this board.
What I have commented on was you going all in on war crimes as a solution.
Not a regrettable tragedy.
Not a mistake.
No. You said it is impossible to commit war crimes in this situation and also that Israel should absolutely do them.

This is the thing I'm commenting on, because I was both genuinely surprised you made that argument and because it is a much worse thing in my eyes than the people denying war crimes are happening.
The latter at least still implies that one thinks war crimes are bad and should be avoided - they are just saying these specific things aren't really war crimes.
Rooting for war crimes as the solution is worse, in my opinion.
If you have anything worthwhile to say, then I guess there is no need to respond to you futher here.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,785
22,219
113
That's the closest to an argument you have here.
Is it possible for Hamas to not use hospitals or schools as bases?
The real argument is would it be possible for Hamas to be able to use hospitals as bases.
Hospitals in Gaza are filled with international aid workers and volunteers, none of those would put up or not report Hamas if they were using hospitals.


That has nothing to do with whether or not Hamas is using human shields.
No, it has bigger questions about the legality of Israel's attack on Gaza in the first place.
As the occupying power they are duty bound to protect the people they occupy, and they do occupy Gaza.
The blockade was already a war crime according to the Geneva Conventions.
The occupation of Gaza is a war crime.
Apartheid is a crime against humanity.

You can't argue in court that you were using self defence to keep committing war crimes.
 

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
51,663
10,083
113
Toronto
You can keep repeating the same thing over and over. It's still a war crime.
Because the facts don't change.

Using humans as shields is a war crime. They are put in the position of being a shield (a war crime) before any Israeli action.
 

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
51,663
10,083
113
Toronto
So you have nothing to back up your claims.
I do.

This would be a horrible act and big news around the world.

Has Reuters reported on this? CNN? NY Times? MSNBC? There is no way that this is real without those news agencies reporting it.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,785
22,219
113
Because the facts don't change.

Using humans as shields is a war crime. They are put in the position of being a shield (a war crime) before any Israeli action.
But if you know there are civilians there then Israel is also committing a war crime by killing them.
Even were Hamas to be using civilians as human shields that doesn't give Israel legal basis to then kill civilians.

If mandrill were to hold klatuu at gunpoint as a human shield the cops wouldn't just kill them both and say it was mandrill's fault.
But Israel would, they'd kill the both of them and a few hundred others nearby and still blame mandrill even though they chose to fire.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts