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.
This is the thing that pissed me off - the organization that has a humanitarian symbol so strong you can be legally held accountable for using it in a way that lessens its importance acknowledges that attacking a hospital being used as a military bases is a legal part of war. Meanwhile there are people whos education doesn’t pass high-school screaming that this isn’t legal, or its incorrect, or blaming the aggressor instead of those deliberately putting civilian lives at risk by blatantly ignoring intl rules of conflict.
If you want to throw in your argument against the red cross, spend your life and billions of dollars helping humanitarian issues world wide and then you might have some authority on the matter.
This is modern warfare. War is horrific, innocents get killed, people suffer. We put rules in place to lessen the effects on the innocent and those who circumvent those rules to try make the others look bad need to be removed in the quickest and most efficient way we can - as soon as one group gets away with ignoring the intl rules, everyone can.
I don’t think any intellectually honest person that supports Palestine thinks Hamas are the “good guys”, they are an evil created and grown directly and indirectly by Israel’s actions.
I doubt anyone thinks they are the good guys, but there are multiple trying to justify blatant war crimes and thinking they should be able to operate with immunity because they have civilians in the cross fire.
Im also doubting some “intellectually honest” people on both sides if the arguement. Well, with this CF all six sides of the arguement…
Who is doing that? Who is saying it’s justifiable for Hamas to use a hospital as a base? The only thing remotely close to that I’ve seen is people saying that a group like Hamas is an inevitable byproduct of Israeli occupation. Everyone knows putting a garrison in a hospital is shit, what’s disturbing is how many people think that justifies murdering every civilian in there
It’s the only place they could make a garrison, any other building Israel even remotely thinks is related to terrorism is summarily obliterated. If you leave people two options and one isn’t plausible you can’t be all too surprised they choose the other option.
The US spent 20 fucking years fighting in Afghanistan which also had hospital garrisons, I don’t seem to remember a pattern or practice of leveling them though. In fact the hospital that was destroyed kicked off a three party international review, the us apologized and paid the families. Israel on thee other hand said fuck it let’s go bomb hospitals.
It’s the only place they could make a garrison, any other building Israel even remotely thinks is related to terrorism is summarily obliterated. If you leave people two options and one isn’t plausible you can’t be all too surprised they choose the other option.
/u/endlessapollo one of them just replied to you justifying garrison a hospital.
It’s not a justification dude, it’s still wrong but you’re lying to yourself if your say you wouldn’t do it either.
Take a guess where all of the known presidential bunkers are in the us.
I have unfortunately seen comments trying to justify it- mostly around them not having a choice (edit: oh look, one just replied), or because otherwise they would be bombed, or its ok because Israel isn’t good either. Whats more disturbing is my comment responding asking if they just justified a war crime because they said it was ok because they would be attacked otherwise got downvoted something like 20 times. Im also aware that isn’t exactly a peer reviewed study.
I fully agree on your comment regarding how worrying it is how many people think killing them all is ok. No, it is a war crime to garrison a hospital, and it removes protection from that hospital but your response still has to be proportional and in a way that minimizes damage and civilian casualties. They could put a sniper in every window, rockets on the roof and you still can’t level the building.
That’s understanding not justification. Saying they get why it was done is not at all the same as saying it’s morally or logically correct.
It specifically does not remove protections, it makes limited military intervention legal. I agree with the rest but that phrasing makes it seem like anything is on the table when it isn’t.
Uh… well for a start one of them just replied to you.
It doesn’t give them the right to bomb the hospital point blank period, proportionality clauses kick in and it’s arguably reason to ground assault it but they cannot ignore the civilian cost of life when they’re are other ways to go about clearing the garrison.
Ed: Jesus Christ, 3 seconds on Google prior just can’t seem to do.
The principle of proportionality prohibits attacks against military objectives which are “expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated”. In other words, the principle of proportionality seeks to limit damage caused by military operations by requiring that the effects of the means and methods of warfare used must not be disproportionate to the military advantage sought.
Unfortunately as soon as they garrisoned it it became a legitimate military target and yes, they literally now have a right to bomb it. Level it, no, you are right on a proportional response and that would still be a war crime, but bombing what is now a legitimate military target prior to any invasion (like any other military target) can absolutely be justified.
Hamas knows this, and are deliberately trying to put the global blame on Israel when THEY GARRISONED A FUCKING HOSPITAL.
No the fuck they don’t!
You just ain’t right bud, do some fucking reading before you spout Israeli talking points.
The principle of proportionality prohibits attacks against military objectives which are “expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated”. In other words, the principle of proportionality seeks to limit damage caused by military operations by requiring that the effects of the means and methods of warfare used must not be disproportionate to the military advantage sought.
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 - International commitment of the Red Cross. Hamas is doing all of these.
Are you telling me you know better than the biggest humanitarian organization on the planet? I have been studying this for two years, read well over 150 peer reviewed articles on conflict and the effect it has on the civilian population, and studied multiple places where International law was not followed. I’ve done enough fucking reading on the topic and don’t need to reply with pro-anyone agenda to discuss it.
https://casebook.icrc.org/a_to_z/glossary/proportionality
The principle of proportionality prohibits attacks against military objectives which are “expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated”. In other words, the principle of proportionality seeks to limit damage caused by military operations by requiring that the effects of the means and methods of warfare used must not be disproportionate to the military advantage sought.
Same source, you know that’s theres like thousands of laws in relation to war correct?
I don’t know better boss, but I can use the search bar and read, you don’t need much more than that to know you’re objectively wrong and your source agrees.
Meanwhile there are people whos education doesn’t pass high-school screaming that this isn’t legal, or its incorrect
So…Joe Biden and UN?
Biden graduated in 65 from uni of Delaware… c average but still passed
Hi there. How about an old soldier who actually had to know this stuff and use that knowledge in a war?
First off, a single incident isn’t enough. A sniper or even a squad doing stuff can be dealt with in other ways. In order to strike a hospital (or any protected target) with explosives you need evidence it’s a target of “military or strategic value”. This is why Israel isn’t just claiming a few sporadic attacks but instead that all of the hospitals are actually command centers.
Second, the protected target can only be hit by proportional force that accomplishes a specific goal. If there’s an artillery battery in the parking lot and I level the obstetrics wing with dumb bombs then I’ve committed a war crime. Smart bombs with very low yields absolutely exist. Another example is the eponymous claim of rooftop rockets. I can hit that with an airburst explosive to prevent structural damage to most concrete buildings. In the context of protected targets these things matter. You don’t get a green light to demolish it unless it’s basically been hollowed out for military use only.
Third, whoever fires on the protected target is responsible for providing the evidence it was required. And war crimes investigators take a very dim view of “they did it once a decade ago”, as a reason. Israel and it’s allies have yet to do anything that actually proves the existence of a military or strategic target in places like the UNRWA Gaza headquarters.
Sadly I think there’s just an overwhelming tendency for bias to make people think “everything my side does is right and everything the other side does is wrong”.
Random people on the internet, many of whom are mostly (if not entirely) detached from realities of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and may only just be learning about it for the first time from social media, have now formed ranks and picked a side that feels right in the moment. I’d ask people to resist the urge to do that, and instead take some time to read into the complete history of the region and the conflict, but I think it’s much easier to go along with what other people on the net/TV/radio/etc are shouting.
People should keep in mind that there’s a 3rd side to every conflict: the side of the innocent people who have found themselves caught in the middle of an armed conflict that they never wanted or asked for. The Israeli student who was shot to death at a festival, the old Palestinian woman whose family were buried alive in a knocked-down building, the young child who was taken hostage by Hamas scared and alone, and the Gaza teenager who has lost all possibility of the normal, peaceful life and education that so many of us take for granted. Their side is the only side that anyone should be on. And it’s those very innocent civilians who Hamas are knowingly putting in danger by treating them as human shields in a way that openly invites retaliation.
When you stop to think for a minute about what’s really going on here, and when you’ve taken even the bare minimum amount of time to read up on the history of this conflict (one of the longest-running geopolitical conflicts in modern history), it’s not hard to understand that both sides really do have blood on their hands. There are no “good guys” other than the people who have managed to stay innocent, and as the conflict goes on and the desire for revenge burns in people’s hearts, eventually some of those people will become “bad guys” too.
And that’s just a very sad thing, because if nothing else it means that there is no light at the end of the tunnel.
Sadly I think there’s just an overwhelming tendency for bias to make people think “everything my side does is right and everything the other side does is wrong”.
The good old “they” mentality strikes again. You are completely correct in everything you have said, and I think this is one of the first major global issues where social media has really come to the forefront - just like the TV for Vietnam everyone can see it, but now everyone can put in their own opinions and with the 5-15 sec clips you don’t get verifications, or balanced arguments, or anything that says this person is actually well informed and not coming in with an agenda.
I think what gets me the most is how would anyone else react if their country had a neighbor whos founding document screamed for the death of you. Who ripped up their infrastructure to send rockets against you and made you develop one of the best counter-missile battery in the world to protect your civilians. Who invaded across your boarder to shoot and abduct civilians and openly brags they wanted to get more.
I would argue that people do consider the innocents caught up in it, but the unfortunate fact is that these actions can’t be allowed to continue otherwise more will be affected in the long term. I support Israeli invasion, because dragging this out, allowing Hamas immunity because they have human shields, and keeping the blockade up means help can’t get to those that need it. Attacking civilian structures should be a last resort, but if they are being used to stage attacks its not something you have the luxury of shying away from.
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.
Except it literally does justify attacking the hospital. Black on white, letter and spirit of the law.
No it doesn’t, and you’re a shitty person for thinking that.
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.
How many war criminals from US, Russia have been charged and are rotting in jail? Bush, Obama, Trump? or does this law only apply when you want to use PR for your war contractors against brown people?
“According to international humanitarian law” my ass.
Umm, sir, are you OK? You’re supposed to want them to all kill each other so we can claim their souls.
Jokes on you. I’m a ginger so I’ve just been “tactically acquiring” them.
Has it seriously not occurred to zionists that there’s a middle step between doing absolutely nothing and leveling the entire building? Send troops in there to liberate the hospital. A lot fewer innocents will die, and yea more IDF troops will die that way, but in what fucking universe is it preferable to murder civilians than to run a risky military operation? Even if Hamas kills a bunch of patients or doctors in retaliation there will surely be more survivors than if you just bomb the place. But nope, apparently Israeli lives are worth infinitely more than those of Palestinian civilians, so the best solution is to murder all Palestinians so they’re not a “threat” to Israel
When your
best solution is to murder all Palestinians
…bombing hospitals, refugee camps, schools, and endless civilians is a good thing… and explains Israel’s behaviour and rhetoric in a pretty straightforward way.
…of course, killing all those kids makes the question “why are Hamas bad” a bit awkward… I know! Saying it’s bad to murder children is anti-semitic now - that’s not an obvious, massive self-report!
I don’t personally care to judge whether Israel or Hamas are worse - they’re both monstrous, genocidal murderers, killing innocent civilians… But only one of them has the ability to actually deliver on their genocidal intentions, and they’re making headway.
No sane team lead would accept a mission like that. That’s just asking for massive friendly casualties.
Kicking in doors has an extremely high death toll, especially if it’s a known base, of course they’re going to level it instead of committing a team that’s definitely going to get blown up by ied’s and killed in ambushes.
In order to effectively suppress and seize that hospital, you’re asking that at least 100-200 friendlies die during the operation to take a building that’s a known travel route to their tunnels which house thousands of hamas and related fighters and their kit. Given the level of failure of the intel community in Isreal right now, no one operations side is going to take their word that it’s safe to send a team into that hospital.
It’s a hospital when it’s in operation, right now it’s a terrorist base of operations SPECIFICALLY because it was a hospital.
See: https://ground.news/article/hamas-has-command-center-under-al-shifa-hospital-us-official-says
In otherwords you value the lives of 100-200 IDF soldiers over the lives of many more Palestinian civilians. Considering you probably think 12,000 Palestinian deaths is a proportionate response to 1,200 Israeli deaths that’s no surprise
That was best case scenario from a POV of someone who’s done the job. Regardless of your keyboard warrior virtue signaling, no one sane is going to sacrifice their people to save a known terrorist base.
I didn’t provide my personal opinion, I provided a description of why your view on the topic is insane.
Edit for clarification: The ELECTED officials of Palestine, HAMAS, their government, has taken their own people hostage and you expect the people who were offering a permanent peace agreement LITERALLY THE DAY BEFORE THE ATTACK, that had their peace party literally interrupted by an act of war by hamas, to sacrifice their own people to save potential attackers pretending to be victims?
I think it’s very misleading how Israel and pro Israelis like to make all humane and heroic actions seem like they are not an option.
NOT destroying the hospital was an option whether you want to send soldiers in there or not.
I’m not there on the ground so I can’t say or prove anything one way or another beyond the articles presented thus far. Mass media hasn’t been reliable since AI’s were able to pass the turing test last year, hell you or I could even be bots pushing an agenda.
The reality of the situation is that the IDF is under the impression that there is access to the HAMAS tunnels under the hospital which makes the entire hospital enemy territory. They can’t enter it for fear of IED’s and they can’t leave it alone because it’s full of enemies.
Personally I’d say implement a cordon with tanks/IFV’s and try to run crowd control, but the response back from a higher up would be ‘the ied problem’. I don’t have a real solution, I’m simply pointing out (to the OG commenter) that their idea is untenable for even T1 groups.
I am hoping that through discussion perhaps a solution will be found, unlikely as it is, but I appreciate different views on the matter.
The reality is that the IDF can’t announce an area full of dying patients and doctors and journalists and refugees as that and then start shooting anyone who dares leave, and do absolutely no effort to evacuate them properly, and then offer them a tiny amount of fuel to mock their misery.
Sorry but we are past the point of normal army operation. The only explanation that for me fits is that the goal of the IDF is to ethnically cleanse and genocide Palestinians. Sadly the ethnic cleansing part isn’t exactly a secret either thanks to Israeli document leaks, so we know that was a part of the plan all along. This is why Biden and Bibi are having this weird haggle right now about forcibly displacing Palestinians or putting them under an even smaller open air prison.
I take it then that you didn’t follow the majority of our actions either in history or during our engagements in afghanistan and iraq.
Hmmm should soldiers who already signed off their lived to save civilians die or should the civilians die?
I mean, they signed off to protect Israelis. If Palestine were Israeli citizens then maybe they’d have some obligation to risk their lives to minimise damage to them but otherwise why should they? Soldiers aren’t expected to sacrifice themselves for foreign citizens. Hell some are just brutally sadistic towards them with legal impunity because the citizens of one government have next to no rights in the other aside from whats deemed diplomatically useful and even that is beyond the purview of the average soldier. Theres a reason America switched to using drone strikes on enemy infrastructure instead of sending their soldiers. That has the exact same trade off as well which is more civilian casualties and less soldier casualties. The bad thing here is israel is actively targetting civilian infrastructure and hamas is known to hide in such infrastructure, both things raising the innocent casualty rate immensely.
. If Palestine were Israeli citizens then maybe they’d have some obligation to risk their lives to minimise damage to them but otherwise why should they?
Got it, human life not worth much to Israeli soldiers if they are not Jewish and/or Israeli. By the actions of Isralis in the West Bank, I would say the Israeli government doesn’t value “Arab Israeli” lives that much either.
Soldiers aren’t expected to sacrifice themselves for foreign citizens.
No, but they are also not expected to keep an apartheid state running but here we are.
The bad thing here is israel is actively targetting civilian infrastructure and hamas is known to hide in such infrastructure, both things raising the innocent casualty rate immensely.
The bad thing here is israel is actively targetting civilian infrastructure and hamas is known to hide in such infrastructure, both things raising the innocent casualty rate immensely.
If you can’t see how it’s directly Israeli soldiers that “shoot through babies to kill a terrorist”, then I can’t help you. If you are unable to see how these people all died from Israeli missiles directly, that Israel could have not fired if it was a self-respecting humanitarian nation… then I can’t help you, sorry.
Got it, human life not worth much to Israeli soldiers if they are not Jewish and/or Israeli. By the actions of Isralis in the West Bank, I would say the Israeli government doesn’t value “Arab Israeli” lives that much either.
You’re grandstanding. I’m sure many soldiers care about the Palestinians plight in this situation because their human beings. I’m saying their not obligated to, not that they don’t. It’s not their responsibility as a consequence of their role. Even if it was do you think an individual soldiers is defining on the ground policy. Like command comes down to level a building and a band of soldiers just join together and say “no, I’ll go in myself and confirm the threat alone” like some cheesy American movie.
No, but they are also not expected to keep an apartheid state running but here we are.
What exactly do you think is a soldiers job? because they don’t determine diplomatic policy. That’s on politicians. One of their responsibilities is helping enforce that policy but they don’t exactly have a choice here if they want to protect Israelis. Just quitting and getting discharged ain’t exactly gonna stop hamas pulling shit like the October attack.
If you can’t see how it’s directly Israeli soldiers that “shoot through babies to kill a terrorist”, then I can’t help you. If you are unable to see how these people all died from Israeli missiles directly, that Israel could have not fired if it was a self-respecting humanitarian nation… then I can’t help you, sorry.
Everyone could just not do things. Hamas could’ve just not attacked in October and killed a bunch of innocent civilians. Hamas could just not keep the hostages they’ve taken and return them so Israel isn’t incentivised to level Palestine to the ground to find them. This isn’t a rational line of reasoning. If you’re outraged and upset that’s fine, frankly it would be weirder if anyone wasn’t given this clusterf*ck of a situation. But that doesn’t mean you can just make large generic points and obvious lapses in reasoning and not get called out on it.
It’s not the IDF’s responsibility to protect Palestinians, it’s HAMAS’, the legally elected government of Palestine… You know, the country which just launched an attack against Israel to which Israel responded with violence and then hamas hid behind civilians in a hospital.
Can’t have missed it, it’s been all over the news.
I thought it was the IDF’s responsibility not to kill civilians directly? Does it matter which kind of civilians they are? Or does Israel like to play favorites where one Palestinian is not worth a tenth of an Israeli?
(and meh to your snarky comment)
Ground News is missing the most important part. Nobody has seen the evidence to corroborate the statement. This is as credible as mobile chemical labs until that happens.
Second, this is what the Infantry exists for. No professional military is going bomb a functioning hospital without serious evidence of a large troop concentration there. Just saying you don’t want to take casualties is not an excuse in international law or military culture.
Infantry are tasked to take the hill when it is strategically and operationally required, not when the enemy presents ‘hostages’ to which we cannot verify the identities of, nor confirm are not enemy combatants as the legal government, hamas, committed an act of war, Israel responded in kind, and in most full-war scenarios, the civilians are also considered hostile if they can be listed as ‘military age’.
The age of throwing soldiers into the hill with abandon is way over, you require intelligence and operational equipment and engagement now. (drones, munitions, local assets to guide the engagement/translate, vehicles, etc). Israel had a complete intelligence failure and to prevent mass casualties going in with infantry, they used the next best thing, artillery.
One of the leading causes of death in the Canadian and American militaries during the last two decades of engagements was due to IED or VBIED’s (vehicle born improvised explosive device), and every green military learned from this to do vastly more reconnaissance before wasting the LITERAL MILLIONS OF DOLLARS PER TROOP IN TRAINING throwing them uselessly at an enemy.
A fully qualified regular force of 11A(USA)/0010(CDN) is given around ~375k USD in training and development costs (per person) just to do their base job of firing a rifle, this does not include specialist training or anything beyond maybe how to effectively conduct a vehicle check point. All other skills require a vast amount of training as well as leadership courses, CQB courses, vehicle courses, medical check up, engineering courses, oreinteering courses, wilderness survival courses, etc.
Actions have consequences and where I would like the aggression to stop today, hamas still exists and their MANDATE of existence, their literal raison d’etre, if you will, is to eliminate all jewish people.
No one wants the killing of civilians, however the reality on the ground is the IDF using our weapons, uniforms, vehicles, and ammunition to gun down innocents and guilty alike, just like how we sell saudis weapons and how we sell weapons all over the world for abuse by various dictators.
This isn’t a situation where ‘stop, please stop’ is going to work for either hamas or the IDF and the US leadership is basically nonexistent with the current administration and if 45 wins again, the USA will probably crumble worse than Rome.
Everything will simply escalate from here, and with the continuing fall of governments across the African continent and economies failing in the EU, it’s not long before lines are drawn and an ‘axis’ is presented in the propaganda.
A lot fewer innocents will die, and yea more IDF troops will die that way, but in what fucking universe is it preferable to murder civilians than to run a risky military operation?
A lot fewer innocent palestinians. Why do you expect the Israeli government to prioritise the lives of Palestinian over their own citizens when trying to smack out a terrorist threat? I agree wholeheartedly that the attacks must stop and a ceasefire should be declared but comments like this which just present a simple solution and outright ignore the obvious reason that is not happening just distract from conversations we should be having.
Why do you expect the Israeli government to prioritise the lives of Palestinian over their own citizens when trying to smack out a terrorist threat?
Because they were instrumental in creating that terrorist threat in the first place, not only by perpetrating ethnic cleansing but by directly funding Hamas in the 70s and 80s as a counterbalance against the secular PLO.
I mean America funded and trained what became al qaeda as well. If your only justification here is Israel was aligned with another government 40 years ago and that means their personally responsible for all the people under that government jurisdiction while in hostilities with it then you’re talking crazy. The Palestinians are hamass responsibility as their representative. It sucks hamas doesn’t care about them and most Palestinians would reject them if able but i don’t get why that then means Israel is meant to care instead. Theirs a case for moral compassion from Israel but that flies out the window when hamas is actively attacking them from Palestinian territories. I’d be more inclined to support your viewpoint if hamas was only attacking Palestinians and Israel let them do it because they supported their rise to power in the past.
Has it seriously not occurred to zionists that there’s a middle step between doing absolutely nothing and leveling the entire building?
But where’s the genocide in that?
do you have any footage of hospitals-in-service being bombed?
Since when did video evidence matter to zionists? Since you asked for it though, here’s a recent hospital bombing, plus a strike on a refugee camp bc why not? Idk how much live footage there is of those, but they definitely happened https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2023/10/gaza-un-experts-decry-bombing-hospitals-and-schools-crimes-against-humanity https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2023/11/13/israel-hamas-war-live-gazas-two-largest-hospitals-shut-amid-nonstop-raids Of course I’m sure these won’t count because reasons, but there you go
The only people who have bombed hospitals so far are hamas.
Source: it came to an IDF soldier in a dream
funny how when Palestine makes a claim, Lemmy just eats it all up.
but when Israel releases footage and coordinates to support their claims, everyone is suddenly questioning.
I guess it has to do with the enormous social media machine Israel has. I take both sides with a grain of salt tho
enormous compared to what? because I’m seeing so many hamas defenders in lemmy and they never concede basic facts. it looks like it’s tiny and ineffectual compared with the hamas propagandists.
Man, what? Where do you hang out? My comments have a pro Israel slant to them and I get consistently downvoted.
I don’t think any instance should have downvotes anyhow. A bit too much like Reddit.
I liked Reddit before spez fucked it up and I actually like having the downvote function.
Back when I was on Facebook I wished that site had it.
Oh, social media machine? You mean the same that Qatar and Iran operate? The same that Elon Musk, you know, CEO of Twitter, met with Qatari media mongrels months before the attack. The same Qatar that houses Hamas leadership.
It’s so powerful that I even need to include that, yes, Israel also has one. But it’s doing a pretty shit job evidently.
People have hard time trusting a genocidal country with an incentive for its citizen to propagate its propaganda.
And you have easy time believing Hamas, the other side of this conflict? Seems a little naive if that’s the case
Lemmy is a hive-mind as much as Reddit is/was. Anyone who claims its somehow better here is either lurking or part of the hivemind (just find the downvoted comments in this thread and think about how you would vote)
Meh, I take all the news and developments with large lumps of salt for this topic especially.
I believe both that Hamas is operating behind human shields to curry favour against humanitarian law, and that the IDF is more or less indiscriminately harming civilians, refugees and militants of Palestine all in the same brushstroke to excuse extermination as merely retaliation (also against humanitarian law in case that’s not clear to anyone)
but the forces bombing hospitals, escape routes, and journalists, they aren’t terrorists??
Can’t both be wrong?
Palestinians and isreali civilians are caught between two asshole organizations and as they say, when elephants fight, the ants suffer.
It’s tiring to see everyone taking sides. Just admit that both sides are wrong: Hamas are using civilians as cover, Israel is just killing everyone to get at Hamas. The people suffer. :-(
I don’t understand why this is such a difficult concept for so many people. Two sides can absolutely be in the wrong, especially over the span of generations. At such a point it really hardly matters anymore at all who started what, it’s just two sides showing humanity’s ugliest side non-stop.
One group seems to be following the Geneva convention.
But yeah. Same.
of course that’s possible, I’m pointing out that the language used in the title of this post doesn’t want you to see it that way
No, didn’t you get the memo?
Everything is a team sport these days, and just like you can either be team Jacob or team Edward but can’t be undecided, online etiquette rules dictate that you can either be team Hamas or team IDF.
And no, team ‘civilians’ doesn’t count. Too much grey area for people to know whether you are on their team or not. They’ll need to read your entire comments to know if they should downvote you or upvote you.
Could you imagine?
That’s probably a war crime in and of itself.
So hurry up and pick a side and stop making discussing international conflicts online so complicated with your ‘nuance’ BS.
It is possible for everyone to be wrong.
Uh oh, guess that means there’s no choice but to level the entire place and kill every civilian in there :(
So weird seeing people carry water for Hamas. It blows my mind.
After learning that there were indeed fighters, weapons, and tunnels just like Israel said, contrary to what a certain popular news outlet said.
If Israel rolled up without any opposition, no one would have died.
Now imagine what would happen to civilians if Hamas were allowed to roll up on an Israeli hospital unobstructed (refer to the attack on Oct. 7 for more info).
The people in the hospital can’t do anything about what Hamas does and doesn’t do, as unfortunately within Gaza they can do whatever they want because they have the guns. Hamas committing war crimes doesn’t justify committing your own war crimes.
You had me in the first half, not gonna lie.
Of course many of those people can’t help that Hamas is set up there.
However, that doesn’t change the fact that places like hospitals can go from protected to valid targets when militaries start fighting out of it.
That’s exactly what Israel said was happening which was doubted by many in the fediverse and other lefty spaces (I count myself as a lefty for whatever that’s worth). Now we have receipts.
Hamas is fully responsible for the endangering those people.
If there’s ever another election there hopefully people remember this and don’t elect them again.
A hospital (in operation) is never a valid target. Even if Hamas fighters are in there. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
You’re wrong.
Legitimate military targets include: armed forces and persons who take part in the fighting; positions or installations occupied by armed forces as well as objectives that are directly contested in battle; military installations such as barracks, war ministries, munitions or fuel dumps, storage yards for vehicles, airfields, rocket launch ramps, and naval bases.
Hamas put those people and babies in danger when they set up barracks and munitions there.
You don’t get to just shoot shit out of a hospital and expect the opposing force to sit there with their thumb up their ass.
I’ll remember this next time you’re in any kind of hostage situation. I’ll tell the cops to fire away, you’re obviously cool with it.
This is not a hostage situation. It’s a war.
You’re right, the Palestine people should just let themselves be oppressed by the state of Israel. Now that the country has been bombed for over a month, they should welcome IDF soldiers with open arms. /s
They oppressed by Hamas
They couldn’t do that or leave due to Hamas.
No, if the IDF were allowed to roll up with no opposition, people would still have died. They want to ethnically cleanse Gaza, Hamas just gives them a “good” excuse to do so. If it weren’t for the 10/7 attack they would just maintain the status quo of shooting children for throwing rocks and making it hard to get aid into Gaza
That’s some qanon-level bullshit
No, it’s just observation based on the last few decades of Israeli terrorism and genocide and imperialism. How else do you explain the horrific numbers of civilians killed by the IDF, during both peace time and war?
First explanation: Hamas is lying. Just as as they did before. Second explanation: There’re two fucking million people there, and Hamas is actively trying to kill them, which is way easier than killing IDF soldiers.
I see, IDF hasn’t been murdering civilians en masse, it’s just a big conspiracy to make them look bad! Thank you for the explanation :3
Now imagine what would happen to civilians if Hamas were allowed to roll up on an Israeli hospital unobstructed (refer to the attack on Oct. 7 for more info).
Simple. They shell their own people alongside the terrorist.
While there’s definitely Hamas supporter and anti-jew around, when people call for humanitarian ceasefire and stop attacking hospital, they aren’t supporting Hamas, but somehow it got included into one because that doesn’t fulfill some people’s agenda and believe, and the same people will instead carry water for IDF and Netanyahu, the force and people who disproportionately attack Gaza as a retaliation for 7th October attack, collective punish the people of Gaza and displaced millions, attacking media because they didn’t show the same perspective as them, literally murder journalist that tend to publish unfavourable news against Israel, establish illegal settlement in West Bank using far right terrorist, using disproportionate force to disperse Palestinian protestor, arrest Israeli politician that criticise them, shoot a child with live bullet to disperse protest, arrest Palestinian without reason, treat Palestinian in a way that basically fit ACAB, deliver luggage-full of cash to Hamas leader, so on and so forth. Aren’t your mind blown? Or is that not an issue because one side is clearly evil so the other side should be okay to conduct evil?
In the full-length interview, Porat states that the Palestinian fighters – who she says treated her and the other Israeli civilians “humanely” – intended to “kidnap us to Gaza. Not to murder us.”
Ohhh Hamas was only there to do a little light kidnapping. Please ignore the beheddings and people burned alive. It’s damaging to our current propaganda efforts.
Also ignore this call from a terrorist to his family bragging about all the Jews he killed and attempting to get his father to open WhatsApp to see the awesome photos.
Ohhh so that’s how IDF sympathiser works, denying survivor account because it doesn’t align with their view, and ignore the main point.
Maybe here’s another one with viewpoint align to the IDF sympathiser will do?
Now i wonder how Be’eri are so wrecked, hmmm 🤔
Not a good way to avoid having your hospitals bombed…
hamas has no hospitals.
In the Gaza Strip the government was the Hamas government of 2012. Following two Fatah–Hamas Agreements in 2014, on 25 September 2014 Hamas agreed to let the PA Government resume control over the Gaza Strip and its border crossings with Egypt and Israel, but that agreement had broken down by June 2015, after President Abbas said the PA government was unable to operate in the Gaza Strip.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_government
Let’s not pretend like they’re just some random group that just rolled in.
If terrorists do terrorism around a hospital, you shoot the hospital. It’s the only logical answer.
Yeah I mean that’s why we declared war on airplanes after 9/11
If cancer does cancer stuff around my stomach, you shoot my stomach. It’s the only logical answer. /s
lol let’s ignore what chemo does to you.
They wouldn’t have anything to fire at if IDF troops weren’t there already murdering people.
Huh, wonder why the IDF is there. Oh yeah, it’s because Hamas stormed out of Gaza and specifically targeted civilians as nice soft targets.
Not to defend Hamas or anything. But Israel does the same thing all the time. Proper escalation to kids throwing rocks at armed soldiers is not a lethal hail of semi-automatic military eeaponry fire. Happens all the time though.
And I will stand aside and let you criticize them all you want.
And we all know that October saw the first civilians killed in this conflict.
Israel has killed more children than Hamas did people in that attack.
As in innocent children.
That’s not what I’m saying. I hold the Israeli government and Hamas to both be responsible in this conflict. I don’t see judging who is more responsible as that productive of an exercise. More Palestinian civilians have died, but that’s because Hamas actively put them in harm’s way. What would you ask Israel to do, given that 1,400 of their citizens died on 10/7 and hundreds more remain hostages?
Israel’s position previous to 10/7 was that they would just leave Gaza as an open air prison with Hamas in charge, though they would never like it framed that way. After 10/7, that changed. Hamas is clearly more of a threat than they envisioned and has to be exterminated.
Given that this is the general air inside of Israel, what should happen? I’m not sure they can really even back off at this point, given how far Hamas went. Unfortunately, smarter people than me don’t have good answers. Part of the problem is a failure of leadership on both sides. Bibi apparently did his best back in the day to essentially legitimize Hamas while cutting the PLA out of the peace process, purposefully splitting the Palestinians. Meanwhile, Palestinian leadership is a mix of corrupt, weak, and uninspiring. Both Israelis and Palestinians deserve a new generation of better leaders, but I haven’t heard of any.
Why is the IDF in the West bank, and actively trying to stir up conflict? And if a radical group/government took control of the West bank because of it, would you blame both sides?
they managed to find something at the start of the conflict.
Well, that’s misleading. The article acts as if they’re doing it from the hospital. They’re firing from the road. There’s nothing given in the article indicating they had anything to do with the hospital.
In the footage the terrorist runs into the hospital’s underground carpark
Removed by mod
We should nuke it, then. there might be underground tunnels and bunker that run very deep. that’s only way to be sure that guy is dead. fuck everyone else, lmao.
No one here said that. Stop reading what you want to from what people say just so you can rant about it.
Terrorists kidnapping people, haven’t had any leads on where they are, but israel is taking its sweet time to plummet most of gaza infrastructures to the ground. Very very convenient excuse to drive out innocent palestinians off their land. hmm… it’s not like Israel helped create Hamas, and planned it.
Helped create hamas over a decade ago, yes. Planned what tho? If you say the Israeli government planned the October attack then you’re bordering on a qanon conspiracies level of uncoroborated BS.
Who’s betting they’ll find the hostages safe and sound, well taken care of, just after most of gaza becomes a wasteland and israel claims it for themselves. And they get a hero’s welcome while US, UN and EU gives a pat on the back.
No one. Some hostages have already died after excursion to Palestine so assuming hamas is treating them “safe and well” is very optimistic. Even if they wanted to their aren’t enough resources to care for actual Palestinians atm and Israel attacks don’t exactly leave leeway for safeguarding hostages. There’s a reason most hostages families are rejecting israels policy on this, its cause no one seems to be considering what would happen to the hostages and the government/bibi seem dead set on just retaliating for something they clearly should’ve been prepped to prevent.
Don’t tell me politicians haven’t sacrificed their own citizens to further their agenda. You’d be dumb ass propaganda guzler who needs to read a history book.
You’re reading a lot into a comment which basically amounted to someone saying this has nothing to do with the hospital and then someone pointing out the terrorist ran to hide in it at the end. Try not to conflate multiple pov and people together just so you can rant about everyone not being as flagrantly outraged as you. What israel is doing here is awful, no one is justifying that.
if anyone’s interested in some further reading / contextual information on this article / conflict specifically (or conflict generally):
At this point I need to ask: Are these all different hospitals being attacked or is everyone still reporting about 1 specific hospital that was attacked?
why is there a tank anywhere near a hospital
Because that’s where hamas is headquartered
Removed by mod
Wait. Wait wait. You think they need “plants” to paint Hamas doing horrible, reckless, teorrist shit?
Ok, bud.
I am no fan of the IDF, but you sound like those q anon people who call victims of school shootings “crisis actors.”
They don’t need “plants.”
And yeah, they definitely shouldn’t nuke the hospital. Agreed.
Removed by mod
Bro I’m Palestinian and even I know calling Hamas agents who do awful shit plants is braindead.
They literally rule over a state where half the population wasn’t even born yet last time there was a vote, nuffa that lionizing shit.
ooh, so we’re at that stage where we’re making conspiracy theories? :o
The video literally shows a tank out the front of the hospital so of course you’re gonna have guys with rpgs defending it?
Cart before the horse
Seriously. There’s an easy way to not get your tanks targeted by fighters who can retreat into a hospital: don’t drive your tanks up to a hospital.
No kidding. IDF is bombing hospitals already… so yeah if you see a tank roll up what are you gonna do?
Pull that RPG out of nowhere because they didn’t already weapons and explosives stored in a hospital as that would be a war crime and the exact reason a military force would attack a hospital in the first place?
I don’t see how ANYTHING would justify bombing a hospital full of innocent people.
I disagree, but also hate you were downvoted without anyone having the balls to reply.
Ignoring who is who, let’s throw in a scenario where a hospital is being used to stage attacks against you - your family, your city, your country, doesn’t matter. You have two options - do something or do nothing.
1, do something. You could blockade the hospital, but then you are blamed for the patients suffering. You could send in aid for the patients, but this gets stolen and never reaches them anyway. Innocents will die. For some reason the people holding the hospital aren’t blamed for this.
You could bomb it, to try and force a surrender when hostile realise they aren’t safe. Innocents will die.
You could swap supplies for patients and send them somewhere else. Supplies are used against you, conflict is prolonged and those remaining suffer. Innocents will die.
You could put armored vehicles outside as a show of force. Weapons being stored on site illegally are fired against you. They are operating in defense. Nothing changes, innocents will die.
You could invade the hospital to arrest or kill those holding the hospital - an enclosed building with multiple chokepoints, ambush locations, CQB. Civilians will be caught in the crossfire, you and those with you are likely to die, the intl community will be outraged at you and anyone can just drop their weapons and pretend to be a civilian. Innocents will die, no guarantee of success, you may die.
2, do nothing. These attacks continue. They know you won’t come get them so they operate with immunity. Supplies destined for civilians are used against you innocents suffer. They know they can take another, possibly one of yours and you won’t do anything. Doesn’t matter if its a war crime to take civilian hostages, so what will others matter if I have shields to protect me. Innocents will die, nothing changes.
What realistic options would you have?
I don’t see how you can justify Hamas intentionally fighting from hospitals, specifically so they get bombed and you can use it as PR against the IDF.
It’s not PR. Do you think they want to get themselves and others killed? IDF is responsible for their own actions in the country they have occupied and oppressed for 55 years.
Do you think they want to get themselves and others killed?
Dude, they’re radical Islamic soldiers who routinely kill themselves in jihad, fighting along civilians they have actively put in harms way.
YES I believe they want to get themselves and as many Palestinians killed as possible. They just want to kill a few thousand Israelis in the process.
It’s comical how many Hamas-apologists there are on this site.
It remains a mystery why Israel shoots at
Hamas baseshospitals.It remains unjustified.
Sadly, that’s wrong. According to established international humanitarian law, it is justified to counter-attack hospitals in the event that they are used to gather recon or stage attacks. https://www.icrc.org/en/document/protection-hospitals-during-armed-conflicts-what-law-says
That’s why staging attacks or garrisoning troops at hospitals, thus turning the sick and injured into human shields, is not only a horrible and inhumane thing to do, but also a war crime.
At some level Hamas knows this, and so the question is why they would do even do it? Is it because they think that using human shields is an effective deterrence? Or is it because they want to provoke an IDF counter-attack against a hospital so they can use it in their propaganda? Either way, it’s a war crime on Hamas’ part and generally terrible for the innocent people in Gaza.
Not unconditionally though. From your own linked source:
Before carrying out an attack on a medical establishment or unit that has lost its protected status, a warning must be given. Where appropriate, this should include a time limit, which must go unheeded before an attack is permitted. The purpose of issuing a warning is to allow those committing an “act harmful to the enemy” to terminate such act, or – if they persist – to ultimately allow for safe evacuation of the wounded and sick who are not responsible for such conduct and who should not become the victims of it.
Where such a warning has remained unheeded, the enemy is no longer obliged to refrain from interfering with the work of a medical establishment or unit, or to take positive measures to assist it in its work. Even then, humanitarian considerations relating to the welfare of the wounded and sick being cared for in the facility may not be disregarded. They must be spared and, as far as possible, active measures for their safety taken.
This derives from the obligation to respect and protect the wounded and sick as well as the general rules on the conduct of hostilities that apply to attacks on any military objective. Notably, an attacking party remains bound by the principle of proportionality. The military advantage likely to be gained from attacking medical establishments or units that have lost their protected status should be carefully weighed against the humanitarian consequences likely to result from the damage or destruction caused to those facilities: such an attack may have significant incidental second- and third-order effects on the delivery of health care in the short, middle and long-term.
An attacking party remains also bound by the obligation to take precautions in attack, in particular to do everything feasible to avoid or at least minimize harm to patients and medical personnel who may have nothing to do with those acts and for whom the humanitarian consequences will be especially dire.
So leveling an entire hospital because a single rocket is fired from one by terrorists isn’t exactly justified by the law, even if firing rockets from a hospital is a war crime and justifies some degree of proportional reaction assuming humanitarian concerns can be justified.
As for why Hamas does this, it’s because it’s a win win for them. Either they reduce the capabilities of retaliation when humanitarian concerns are factored in, or they harm Israel’s image when engaging in disproportionate retaliation that isn’t adequately factoring in humanitarian concerns.
But the whole point of the Geneva convention and regulation regarding conduct in war is that even if your enemy is the literal worst, that stooping to their level is not what modern nations should do, and concern for the civilians even in enemy territory is a worthwhile endeavor regardless of the disregard for those laws by your own enemies.
I can’t regard Hamas as anything but disgusting terrorists and it’s troubling how much I see apologist rationalization for their terrorist acts on here.
But that doesn’t justify the IDF throwing the Geneva convention out the window and bombing civilian infrastructure to rubble any more than ISIL’s activities in Syria justified Assad’s bombing civilian areas where they were present to rubble.
They’ve been known to do all those things. I don’t know that they did all of it this time (time will tell) but why would they fuck their image in the eyes of world superpowers now? They need support.
And they leveled the hospital? I thought they sent people away after they cleared Hamas out?
I’m not talking about the law. Laws change over time. Not all laws are just. Not everything just is a law.
So in your own personal sense of justice, is it just to wage militant attacks from hospitals and other civilian resources?
Personally I think it’s wrong to use sick and injured people as human shields.
Neither side is justified.
Hamas hiding behind civilians isn’t justification to kill the civilians.
Edit: he downvoted me in less than a minute, lol. I guess we know where he stands on the bias spectrum.
He thinks Israel is justified in killing these civilians. Wow.
I’m not talking about the law. Laws change over time.
I downvoted you because frankly I think that is a dumb and irrelevant thing to say. The world doesn’t work based on your, or mine, or anyone else’s personal sense of justice, nor should it. That’s why international law exists.
Under international humanitarian law, Hamas using sick people as a human shield is giving the IDF every excuse and legal justification they need to counter-attack the hospitals that they are using to state those attacks. Period.
I would vastly prefer if Hamas didn’t do that. I would vastly prefer that the IDF didn’t have legal justification for attacking hospitals. But what I prefer doesn’t mean shit.
But I guess when you can’t argue against the substance of what I’m saying you can only make embarrassing claims about the timing of meaningless internet points.
Oh well, whatever. Have a good one.
That’s why international law exists.
Lol, and you completely ignore me saying “Not all laws are just. Not everything just is a law.”
If you want to focus on the law, go right on ahead. I don’t even know why you’d bother replying to someone who clearly states they are not focusing on the law telling them what the law says.
Let’s be real. You’re biased towards Israel so you argue against anything that criticizes it. You don’t want me to say killing civilians is unjust because it’s critical of Israel’s behavior, which you cannot allow.
Just admit it. You’d come across as more genuine than whatever you’re doing now.
Hamas knows they can and will retaliate so they form their strategy to leverage this. And Israel thinks they can get away with bombing hospitals by dumping shit tons of money on pr. What should be done is it should be made illegal according to international humanitarian laws, god knows why it isn’t.
The law says its OK so it must be OK!
deleted by creator
I don’t know how you managed to say something so ignorant, wrong, disproportionate and illegal in 3 words. That’s impressive.
Without going into that person’s history, my guess is they’re criticizing the response to Hamas turning the hospital into a war zone and weapons cache as heavy handed.
You’re a better person that me - I’m envisioning a gruff old racist nam vet who is proud of a few napalm stories, saying to just kill them all and move on.
Yeah, considering how little regard zionists have for Palestinian life this really just sounds like something they’d say unironically
I wouldn’t even say this is isolated to zionism and Palestine - the number to people ive seen say just nuke the whole middle east… or China… or north Korea… or Russia… in the last 20 years tells me this goes much deeper.
I wish that weren’t true :c this is definitely an attitude I’ve seen in regards to North Korea, no surprise that people would want to see that happen other places too. The way people conflate oppressive governments with their citizens and want those citizens punished is genuinely horrifying.
