Israel at war

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
51,424
9,979
113
Toronto
I support BDS, a Palestinian movement to end apartheid through non-violent sanctions.
And we've already agreed that a boycott would take years probably cost tens of thousands of Gazan lives than if Hamas surrendered and returned the hostages and the bombings and siege would end immediately.

Why are you in favour of more Gazans being killed?
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
30,404
4,614
113
Under international law it's not that cut and dry. The rules of war still require a proportional proportionality analysis unless it's self-defense, but for it to be self-defense attacks have to be originating from the hospital or anticipated to originate from the hospital at the time the strike is initiated.

Your enemy is allowed to be at hospitals. They can be there tending to wounded, the can be there being tended to as wounded, they can be there visiting family, they can be there just hanging out. Even if it was a Hamas-only military field hospital, there are still parts of Geneva, Hague and Rome that apply protecting it. All hospitals are protected targets. Bring a protected target doesn't mean you can't attack them ever, but it means there are very strict conditions on when you can and "there are enemy there" is not sufficient. Certainly "there are probably some enemy there" isn't sufficient.
Here is the post again.

Direct fire from windows qualify?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phil C. McNasty

DinkleMouse

Well-known member
Jan 15, 2022
1,435
1,760
113
Here is the post again.

Direct fire from windows qualify?
Yes.

Attacking the Sheikh Hamad hospital is not the only war crime Israel is accused of though. So I don't see how this ends the call for an ICC investigation. But also the video that's been released doesn't show that. Fox, NY Post, and others are quoting the Times of Israel saying the IDF had released a video showing that they were fired at from the windows, but I can't find it and I don't see that in the video they did post. If I missed it, please tell me the timestamp and I'll look again. The ICC will likely want to see it before they rule this strike out.

I wouldn't expect action soon though. The US cannot be investigated for war crimes in Iraq because nether the US nor Iraq have ratified the Rome Statute and the ICC only has jurisdiction over war crimes committed by a signatory state or conducted within the territory of a signatory state. Afghanistan has though, and an investigation into whether America committed war crimes in Afghanistan began in 2016 and is still ongoing. Yes, it's that slow. The only reason Putin was indicted so quickly is because both Russia and Ukraine were signatories at the time of the indictment and both states cooperated which sped the process up (until the indictment came down and Russia withdrew).

Israel hasn't ratified the Rome Statute either, but the State of Palestine has, and as the alleged war crimes (or the lesser "crimes against humanity") occurred in the territory of the State of Palestine, the ICC does have jurisdiction but investigators aren't going to enter an active war zone and Israel is unlikely to coordinate and assist with investigations remotely given that they aren't signatories and have an equally hostile stance towards the ICC as the US does. Especially since the ICC has had an open case against them since last year.

And before anyone asks, the ICC does have open cases for Hamas and "other Palestinian groups".
 

Not getting younger

Well-known member
Jun 29, 2022
4,555
2,458
113
50 more pages to catch up on, and it’s obvious some still don’t seem to understand there’s squat anyone can do about it ( war crimes). Have to wonder what the point is. Other than proving “who” is right.

Nor have they presented anything anyone infinitely more qualified hasn’t tried over the past 50 years.

And not much has changed, except Israel would appear to be putting Hamas out of commission.
 
Toronto Escorts