this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2023
211 points (77.1% liked)

World News

38530 readers
1536 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] donuts@kbin.social 125 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (4 children)

To be clear, staging militant attacks from a hospital is a war crime.
To make matters worse, it opens up the likelihood and justification of counter-attacks against that hospital and the people in it.

According to international humanitarian law (IHL), health establishments and units, including hospitals, should not be attacked. This protection extends to the wounded and sick as well as to medical staff and means of transport. The rule has few exceptions.

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".

Medical establishments and units enjoy protection because of their function of providing care for the wounded and sick. When they are used to interfere directly or indirectly in military operations, and thereby cause harm to the enemy, the rationale for their specific protection is removed. This would be the case for example if a hospital is used as a base from which to launch an attack; as an observation post to transmit information of military value; as a weapons depot; as a center for liaison with fighting troops; or as a shelter for able-bodied combatants.

Source: The International Committee of the Red Cross

Nobody should beat around the bush here. Hamas are using injured civilians as a human shield to stage attacks, and in doing so they are inviting retaliation and suffering under well-establish terms of international law. There's not really any particular gray area here. It's horrible, it's unethical, it's criminal, and it's just plain wrong.

[–] dangblingus@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

To be clear, no one here is defending Hamas or saying that it isn't a war crime.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 0 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Ok, let's send them to the Hague I guess? Why do you think this is an important point? Hamas isn't actually a legitimate organization that signed on to international law and would ever care what "legitimate warfare" is. They just went into Israel and murdered a bunch of civilians. If these fighters are caught whether the UN thinks they were wrong is the least of their problems.

And none of that makes Israel attacking a hospital (or just the blatant collective punishment) justified.

[–] trackcharlie@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Hamas are the legal representative government of palestine mate

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

50% of the people alive in Palestine today weren't born when the last election was held and then elections were shut down.

[–] trackcharlie@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 10 months ago

This is one of the most well known facts about palestine known the world over.

[–] VentraSqwal@links.dartboard.social 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Nah the PLO is the official government of Palestine and is recognized as so by basically everyone, but they are stationed in the West Bank and Israel tries to keep them separated. Hamas has some control over Gaza and held an election decades ago before most of the people there could vote and hasn't held another one since.

[–] trackcharlie@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 10 months ago

The palestinian authority answers to hamas and the muslim brotherhood. So, yea, hamas, the people that actually got voted in, do run the show.

[–] steventhedev@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Except it literally does justify attacking the hospital. Black on white, letter and spirit of the law.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz -4 points 10 months ago (2 children)

No it doesn't, and you're a shitty person for thinking that.

[–] khalic@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Just because you don’t like something doesn’t make it wrong. They’re right about legitimate targets regarding conflict rules

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

"Whether it's ok to bomb a hospital" isn't a legal question.

[–] khalic@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

We aren’t discussing if “it’s ok”, we are discussing the Rules of Conflict. War is never ok, but war without rules is even worse

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 1 points 10 months ago

Except it literally does justify attacking the hospital.

"Justified" and "legal" are two separate judgements. OP wants to conflate them to excuse an unjust act.

[–] WhiteHawk@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago

This is not a matter of personal opinion

[–] snek@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago

Proximity shielfing isn't really the classic human shield idea. It's like "human shields*" with an asterisk and six paragraphs of footnotes showing how countries like Israel use the idea of proximity shielding to commit human rights violations untouched.