Your version of the analogy implies equal damage on both sides. That is not the case, already Israel has killed way more than Hamas did. If you insist on making the first offense killing your family, it would be like killing my whole neighbourhood in response.
An eye for an eye retribution is all you understand? This isn’t about equality. This is about removing the ability for a terrorist group to bring harm against a sovereign nation. If your neighborhood wants to harbor terrorists, then they’re going to get blown the fuck up.
And then bombed both the routes to the “safe” place and the “safe” place itself, yes.
This is contested information. I’ve heard that Hamas was doing the bombings. Between the two sides, why would Israel warn civilians to evacuate, then bomb them and face international condemnation? Meanwhile, Hamas needs civilians as human shields so if the populace evacuates, Hamas loses their defense. Bombing their own citizens (which they’re known to do) and blaming it on Israel benefits them. So between the two, one side majorly benefits and the other side not at all.
Since you misquoted the Geneva convention, let’s fix that.
Extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly;
Israel has justification and are not wantonly destroying property. They are attacking military targets. If it was wanton, they would destroy all of Gaza instead of evacuating the north.
ICRC (Geneva IV and revisions) Rule 129
The displacement of the civilian population shall not be ordered for reasons related to the conflict unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand.
Shocking how you always leave out the part that justifies what Israel is doing.
Attacks against civilian population?
Nope, Israel is attacking military targets. The civilians need to gtfo of the way. If they don’t, that doesn’t mean Israel is committing war crimes. They’re justified to destroy military targets regardless. That’s how war works. Here’s another war crime: Utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations;
Attacking or bombarding, by whatever means, towns, villages, dwellings or buildings which are undefended and which are not military objectives;
Oops, you left that part out again.
Intentionally launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated;
And again, you leave out the part that justifies Israel. You’re intentionally lying to defame Israel. Sorry your feelings are hurt, but that doesn’t mean Israel has to roll over and die.
The transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies, or the deportation or transfer of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside this territory;
Israel isn’t occupying Gaza, nor do they intend to. They’re there to destroy Hamas and leave.
Intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions;
Not sure about this one, but since you’ve lied about all the others, I’m not inclined to take your word for it. In fact, I’m more likely to believe you’re wrong since you’ve been wrong about the others.
Since you misquoted the Geneva convention, let’s fix that.
If you think all of the examples we see on a day to day basis are justified by military necessity then that’s your view. I disagree.
I’m not going to go through each one.
Nope, Israel is attacking military targets. The civilians need to gtfo of the way. If they don’t, that doesn’t mean Israel is committing war crimes.
Where should they go? Where is safe in Gaza?
Intentionally launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated;
And again, you leave out the part that justifies Israel. You’re intentionally lying to defame Israel. Sorry your feelings are hurt, but that doesn’t mean Israel has to roll over and die.
You emphasize this “which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated” as if you cannot describe Israel’s entire offensive so far in exactly these terms. Gains minimal, civilian deaths enormous.
The transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies, or the deportation or transfer of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside this territory;
Israel isn’t occupying Gaza, nor do they intend to. They’re there to destroy Hamas and leave.
Ignoring the West Bank?
Intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions;
Not sure about this one, but since you’ve lied about all the others, I’m not inclined to take your word for it. In fact, I’m more likely to believe you’re wrong since you’ve been wrong about the others.
This is the weakest bullshit I’ve ever heard in my life. If you can’t find it in your heart to call out the intentional starvation of innocent citizens I don’t know how you can look at yourself in the mirror.
You quoted all the others and added bits, did you not check this one? Get the fuck out of here.
You emphasize this “which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated” as if you cannot describe Israel’s entire offensive so far in exactly these terms. Gains minimal, civilian deaths enormous.
That’s your opinion. I don’t think Israel agrees.
Ignoring the West Bank?
I don’t know what agreements have been made about the west bank, so I can’t say. It seems you’re talking about events that have been happening before Oct 7. But, the original purpose was trying to show that Israel has been committing war crimes in Gaza. To that end, it doesn’t seem that they meet the criteria.
This is the weakest bullshit I’ve ever heard in my life. If you can’t find it in your heart to call out the intentional starvation of innocent citizens I don’t know how you can look at yourself in the mirror.
It’s not clear, but keep crying. Hamas takes food and supplies from the civilians. It’s not clear that Israel must supply Palestinians of food while their own government denies them the same. And, given how willful you were to misinterpret the previous accusations, I’m not inclined to believe that you’re correctly interpreting the convention. The latest I’ve heard is that 100 trucks of humanitarian aid are allowed in each day. How much food and supplies does an attacking country have to supply to the civilians of the country they’re attacking? Is Russia supposed to be supplying Ukrainians or can we add that to their war crimes?
An eye for an eye retribution is all you understand? This isn’t about equality. This is about removing the ability for a terrorist group to bring harm against a sovereign nation. If your neighborhood wants to harbor terrorists, then they’re going to get blown the fuck up.
This is contested information. I’ve heard that Hamas was doing the bombings. Between the two sides, why would Israel warn civilians to evacuate, then bomb them and face international condemnation? Meanwhile, Hamas needs civilians as human shields so if the populace evacuates, Hamas loses their defense. Bombing their own citizens (which they’re known to do) and blaming it on Israel benefits them. So between the two, one side majorly benefits and the other side not at all.
Since you misquoted the Geneva convention, let’s fix that.
Israel has justification and are not wantonly destroying property. They are attacking military targets. If it was wanton, they would destroy all of Gaza instead of evacuating the north.
Shocking how you always leave out the part that justifies what Israel is doing.
Nope, Israel is attacking military targets. The civilians need to gtfo of the way. If they don’t, that doesn’t mean Israel is committing war crimes. They’re justified to destroy military targets regardless. That’s how war works. Here’s another war crime: Utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations;
Oops, you left that part out again.
And again, you leave out the part that justifies Israel. You’re intentionally lying to defame Israel. Sorry your feelings are hurt, but that doesn’t mean Israel has to roll over and die.
Israel isn’t occupying Gaza, nor do they intend to. They’re there to destroy Hamas and leave.
Not sure about this one, but since you’ve lied about all the others, I’m not inclined to take your word for it. In fact, I’m more likely to believe you’re wrong since you’ve been wrong about the others.
If you think all of the examples we see on a day to day basis are justified by military necessity then that’s your view. I disagree.
I’m not going to go through each one.
Where should they go? Where is safe in Gaza?
You emphasize this “which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated” as if you cannot describe Israel’s entire offensive so far in exactly these terms. Gains minimal, civilian deaths enormous.
Ignoring the West Bank?
This is the weakest bullshit I’ve ever heard in my life. If you can’t find it in your heart to call out the intentional starvation of innocent citizens I don’t know how you can look at yourself in the mirror.
You quoted all the others and added bits, did you not check this one? Get the fuck out of here.
That’s your opinion. I don’t think Israel agrees.
I don’t know what agreements have been made about the west bank, so I can’t say. It seems you’re talking about events that have been happening before Oct 7. But, the original purpose was trying to show that Israel has been committing war crimes in Gaza. To that end, it doesn’t seem that they meet the criteria.
It’s not clear, but keep crying. Hamas takes food and supplies from the civilians. It’s not clear that Israel must supply Palestinians of food while their own government denies them the same. And, given how willful you were to misinterpret the previous accusations, I’m not inclined to believe that you’re correctly interpreting the convention. The latest I’ve heard is that 100 trucks of humanitarian aid are allowed in each day. How much food and supplies does an attacking country have to supply to the civilians of the country they’re attacking? Is Russia supposed to be supplying Ukrainians or can we add that to their war crimes?
Not supplying =/= blockading.
Anyway thanks for the chat