You are relying on statements made by Hamas, who are far better at propaganda than warfare. They still haven't discriminated civilian casualties from military, which is a tell. And no one employing expensive weapons does so indiscriminately: the question is whether their deliberate choices do or do not violate the law of war. If the IDF were bent on genocide, they all would be dead already.
You are relying on statements made by Hamas, who are far better at propaganda than warfare. They still haven't discriminated civilian casualties from military, which is a tell. And no one employing expensive weapons does so indiscriminately: the question is whether their deliberate choices do or do not violate the law of war. If the IDF were bent on genocide, they all would be dead already.
I hear, and generally agree, with you and Seth. That said, I do think there needs to be a term for not taking proper care about civilians / collateral damage. 'Genocide' is too strong, and in my mind cheapens the term when we consider things like what the Nazis, Turks, and Hutus did.
That said, it can certainly be that Israel isn't taking proper care in its efforts. And sure, nations don't throw around million dollar missiles indiscriminately, but they can certainly use them with more or less care as to what else they take out and or how likely the target is to be 'legit'. And, I would presume, their calculus might be different depending on if the munitions are being given to them or if they are paying for them more directly.
There is. You said it. It’s “collateral damage.” The Geneva Convention says you have to fire at military targets and even if civilians are killed it’s not a war crime.
The term for not taking proper (reasonable) care to protect civilians is "war crime." Combatants are not obliged to sit on their hands and not pursue military objectives, however. International law is that harm to civilians must be minimized and be proprotional to military necessity. The situation at Al-Shifa Hospital is a good example. The IDF urged everyone to evacuate for about a month. Medical staff claimed patients could not be evacuated--which is BS; and the IDF finally advanced on the hospital, moving remaining patients and staff around the complex for their safety. The battle to secure the hospital went on for two weeks, the IDF vs. *non-existent* Hamas terrorists. There were civilian casualties, but few in light of the scale of fighting. And, of course, Gaza (Hamas) health authorities inflated the number of causulaties wildly.
If the Russians had killed 30,000 Ukrainians in bombing campaigns and leveled Kiev, because they claimed to be aiming for Ukrainian troops hidden underground tunnels, everyone would be calling it genocide.
Other estimates appear lower, but seem to be sticking with confirmed numbers. Confirming numbers out of a place like Mariupol would presumably be pretty hard.
Also, don't forget about the thousands of children that were kidnapped by the Russians and are currently being raised in Russia. But thanks for making our point. It is funny how much atrocity will be overlooked by the left--Uyghurs, Bangladesh, Yemen, Sudan, etc.--when the Jews cannot be blamed.
Yes. Iran gives money to Hamas to commit terror attacks, and we know they are guilty of these war crimes already: waging offensive war, deliberately murdering civilians, taking hostages, using civilains as human shields, using civilian infrastructure of military purposes, and failing to distinguish themselves from civilians-- and maybe sexual assault.
Focusing on Gaza, I don't know. None have been proven. There has been one actual charge, that early on the IDF cut off essentials like electricity, water, etc. as a tactic against Hamas, but that it improperly affected the entire population. The weight of bombs does not establish a war crime; the existence of civilian casualties does not establish a war crime, though it does and should call that into question. Neither do numbers of casualties cited by Hamas establish that a war crime has occurred. By the way, a statistics professor at the Wharton School did an analysis of Hamas casualty figures which concluded that daily reports do not reflect naturally occurring--i.e., real--events. Rather they appear to be numbers increased randomly. (I had his name jotted down but I can't at the moment lay hands on it.)
A UN inquiry says Israel and Hamas have both committed war crimes since October 7. Amnesty International agrees. three IDF soldiers were convicted in May of 2023. Since then more IDF soldiers have been indicted even as recently as two weeks ago. Israel's military has also accepted in briefings that the overall Gaza casualty numbers are broadly reliable. Many experts believe that Hamas is actually under counting casualties, while other experts claim Hamas is padding causality figures. Whatever. It is still far too many either way.
Whatever the number of civilian casualties, war crime or not depends on reasonable efforts to avoid them or not, and proportionality to military necessity, which Hamas makes difficult by their tactic of placing military assets in and among civilians. If the UN report is the one I'm thinking of it's a report of an Italian lawyer who is asssigned to advocate for Palestinians--thus her report is *to* the UN, but it is not endorsed by the UN itself. Allegations regarding individuals do not amount to war crimes as policy--again, we will have to see. I would have to see what Amnesty International has said.
You are relying on statements made by Hamas, who are far better at propaganda than warfare. They still haven't discriminated civilian casualties from military, which is a tell. And no one employing expensive weapons does so indiscriminately: the question is whether their deliberate choices do or do not violate the law of war. If the IDF were bent on genocide, they all would be dead already.
I hear, and generally agree, with you and Seth. That said, I do think there needs to be a term for not taking proper care about civilians / collateral damage. 'Genocide' is too strong, and in my mind cheapens the term when we consider things like what the Nazis, Turks, and Hutus did.
That said, it can certainly be that Israel isn't taking proper care in its efforts. And sure, nations don't throw around million dollar missiles indiscriminately, but they can certainly use them with more or less care as to what else they take out and or how likely the target is to be 'legit'. And, I would presume, their calculus might be different depending on if the munitions are being given to them or if they are paying for them more directly.
There is. You said it. It’s “collateral damage.” The Geneva Convention says you have to fire at military targets and even if civilians are killed it’s not a war crime.
That said, Netanyahu is slime mold.
The term for not taking proper (reasonable) care to protect civilians is "war crime." Combatants are not obliged to sit on their hands and not pursue military objectives, however. International law is that harm to civilians must be minimized and be proprotional to military necessity. The situation at Al-Shifa Hospital is a good example. The IDF urged everyone to evacuate for about a month. Medical staff claimed patients could not be evacuated--which is BS; and the IDF finally advanced on the hospital, moving remaining patients and staff around the complex for their safety. The battle to secure the hospital went on for two weeks, the IDF vs. *non-existent* Hamas terrorists. There were civilian casualties, but few in light of the scale of fighting. And, of course, Gaza (Hamas) health authorities inflated the number of causulaties wildly.
Well said…:)
If the Russians had killed 30,000 Ukrainians in bombing campaigns and leveled Kiev, because they claimed to be aiming for Ukrainian troops hidden underground tunnels, everyone would be calling it genocide.
I wouldn’t, because I know what genocide is.
And they’ve killed more than that.
"an investigation by AP from the end of 2022 gives a number of up to 75,000 killed civilians in Mariupol area alone"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine#Casualties
That's the first and only time I've heard that and I follow the news from Ukraine very closely.
Other estimates appear lower, but seem to be sticking with confirmed numbers. Confirming numbers out of a place like Mariupol would presumably be pretty hard.
Also, don't forget about the thousands of children that were kidnapped by the Russians and are currently being raised in Russia. But thanks for making our point. It is funny how much atrocity will be overlooked by the left--Uyghurs, Bangladesh, Yemen, Sudan, etc.--when the Jews cannot be blamed.
For everyone claiming reliance on Hamas figures is believing propaganda, there is someone claiming reliance on IDF figures is believing propaganda.
Everyone lies in war.
So then why does anyone rely on statements made by IDF? Simply because the US broadly supports Israel?
No one should believe them without qualification, but it's in their interest to play by the rules of war. Itis far less so in Hamas' case.
Why? Because we consider Hamas to be terrorists?
Yes. Iran gives money to Hamas to commit terror attacks, and we know they are guilty of these war crimes already: waging offensive war, deliberately murdering civilians, taking hostages, using civilains as human shields, using civilian infrastructure of military purposes, and failing to distinguish themselves from civilians-- and maybe sexual assault.
What about the war crimes committed by IDF? Are you arguing they do not commit war crimes?
Focusing on Gaza, I don't know. None have been proven. There has been one actual charge, that early on the IDF cut off essentials like electricity, water, etc. as a tactic against Hamas, but that it improperly affected the entire population. The weight of bombs does not establish a war crime; the existence of civilian casualties does not establish a war crime, though it does and should call that into question. Neither do numbers of casualties cited by Hamas establish that a war crime has occurred. By the way, a statistics professor at the Wharton School did an analysis of Hamas casualty figures which concluded that daily reports do not reflect naturally occurring--i.e., real--events. Rather they appear to be numbers increased randomly. (I had his name jotted down but I can't at the moment lay hands on it.)
A UN inquiry says Israel and Hamas have both committed war crimes since October 7. Amnesty International agrees. three IDF soldiers were convicted in May of 2023. Since then more IDF soldiers have been indicted even as recently as two weeks ago. Israel's military has also accepted in briefings that the overall Gaza casualty numbers are broadly reliable. Many experts believe that Hamas is actually under counting casualties, while other experts claim Hamas is padding causality figures. Whatever. It is still far too many either way.
Whatever the number of civilian casualties, war crime or not depends on reasonable efforts to avoid them or not, and proportionality to military necessity, which Hamas makes difficult by their tactic of placing military assets in and among civilians. If the UN report is the one I'm thinking of it's a report of an Italian lawyer who is asssigned to advocate for Palestinians--thus her report is *to* the UN, but it is not endorsed by the UN itself. Allegations regarding individuals do not amount to war crimes as policy--again, we will have to see. I would have to see what Amnesty International has said.