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.
Now you are moving the goal posts from the original of whether IDF has committed war crimes (they have), to whether war crimes are policy. I notice you also dismiss actual convictions as "allegations." Maybe put your confirmation bias aside here.
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.
Now you are moving the goal posts from the original of whether IDF has committed war crimes (they have), to whether war crimes are policy. I notice you also dismiss actual convictions as "allegations." Maybe put your confirmation bias aside here.