10-year-old Fatima Jaafar Abdullah was killed in pager explosions in Lebanon.

Israel murders another kid again.

  • xenomor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    On the prohibition of indiscriminate attacks:

    “© those which employ a method or means of combat the effects of which cannot be limited as required by this Protocol; and consequently, in each such case, are of a nature to strike military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction.”

    https://www.justsecurity.org/81351/the-prohibition-on-indiscriminate-attacks-the-us-position-vs-the-dod-law-of-war-manual/

    It’s important to note that this is the consensus of much of the international community and the US (and I presume its surrogate Israel) have not signed on to the above provision despite speaking to support it. The weasely approach we (the US) have taken to these standards really demonstrates how hollow our sentiments are when we feign moral authority in international affairs.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      “© those which employ a method or means of combat the effects of which cannot be limited as required by this Protocol; and consequently, in each such case, are of a nature to strike military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction.”

      Would you like to explain how setting up bombs within the personal devices of enemy combatants is striking civilians or civilian objects without distinction? Or do you think all collateral damage is a war crime?

      Like, fuck’s sake, not every dogshit act by a criminal state like Israel is a war crime. Jesus H. Christ.

      It’s important to note that this is the consensus of much of the international community and the US (and I presume its surrogate Israel) have not signed on to the above provision despite speaking to support it. The weasely approach we (the US) have taken to these standards really demonstrates how hollow our sentiments are when we feign moral authority in international affairs.

      Was this really all just to say “US BAD” and “US PUPPET ISRAEL”? Holy shit.

      • xenomor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        First of all, there was no way for Israel to know whether the people they claim to be targeting were combatants when the attack occurred since Israel had no information about the status of these bombs when they chose to detonate them.

        Secondly, placing a bomb in a common device that you have every reason to believe will spend much of its time in the proximity of civilians, in homes, markets and other public spaces, and choosing to detonate it without knowledge of the location of the bomb, or it’s proximity to your supposed target, is actively avoiding distinguishing between ‘combatants’ and civilians. I can’t believe that western brain rot requires this to be spelled out for it.

        • CoCo_Goldstein@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          Israel learned that Hezbollah was ordering new pagers to be given to members of Hezbollah and no one else. Every member of Hezbollah is a sworn enemy of Israel. These pagers were to be used for secure communications between members of Hezbollah. It was highly likely that nearly every one of these pagers would be carried by members of Hezbollah at the time they went off (IIRC 3pm local time).

        • PugJesus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          First of all, there was no way for Israel to know whether the people they claim to be targeting were combatants when the attack occurred since Israel had no information about the status of these bombs when they chose to detonate them.

          So it’s your view that any explosive that isn’t tracked at all times with 100% accuracy is a war crime.

          Uh. ‘Interesting’.

          Secondly, placing a bomb in a common device that you have every reason to believe will spend much of its time in the proximity of civilians, in homes, markets and other public spaces, and choosing to detonate it without knowledge of the location of the bomb, or it’s proximity to your supposed target, is actively avoiding distinguishing between ‘combatants’ and civilians. I can’t believe that western brain rot requires this to be spelled out for it.

          ‘Western brain rot’, apparently, is when someone else disproves your utterly and blatantly incorrect claim about the definition of a war crime and then you flail around desperately seeking another justification for your claim once disproven. Okay.

          • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            21 hours ago

            This is terrorism and a violation of International humanitarian law. It’s not a war crime because Lebanon and Israel are not formally at war; yet Israel just attacked civilians in public, including health workers, and even officials in Parliament.

            As an attack on Hezbollah militant fighters, sure, fair game. But this didn’t just attack them.

            Photographs and videos filmed by victims and witnesses to the incident and reviewed by Human Rights Watch showed pagers exploding in various locales, such as grocery stores. Other videos that appear to be linked to the incident show adults and children in emergency rooms with severe penetrating traumatic injuries to their heads, torsos. and limbs, and other injuries consistent with the detonation of high explosives.

            Hezbollah, in a statement, said that the pagers belonged “to employees of various Hezbollah units and institutions” and blamed the Israeli government. US and former Israeli officials speaking to the media said that Israel was responsible for the attack. The Israeli military has not commented.

            “Customary international humanitarian law prohibits the use of booby traps – objects that civilians are likely to be attracted to or are associated with normal civilian daily use – precisely to avoid putting civilians at grave risk and produce the devastating scenes that continue to unfold across Lebanon today. The use of an explosive device whose exact location could not be reliably known would be unlawfully indiscriminate, using a means of attack that could not be directed at a specific military target and as a result would strike military targets and civilians without distinction. A prompt and impartial investigation into the attacks should be urgently conducted.”

            • Lama Fakih, Middle East and North Africa Director at Human Rights Watch
            • PugJesus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              20 hours ago

              This is terrorism and a violation of International humanitarian law. It’s not a war crime because Lebanon and Israel are not formally at war

              War crimes are not restricted to polities formally at war.

              As an attack on Hezbollah militant fighters, sure, fair game. But this didn’t just attack them.

              Photographs and videos filmed by victims and witnesses to the incident and reviewed by Human Rights Watch showed pagers exploding in various locales, such as grocery stores. Other videos that appear to be linked to the incident show adults and children in emergency rooms with severe penetrating traumatic injuries to their heads, torsos. and limbs, and other injuries consistent with the detonation of high explosives.

              Unless there’s some proof that Israel targeted civilians or was exceptionally lax in targeting combatants, this has no relevance as to whether what they did was a war crime.

              Hezbollah, in a statement, said that the pagers belonged “to employees of various Hezbollah units and institutions” and blamed the Israeli government. US and former Israeli officials speaking to the media said that Israel was responsible for the attack. The Israeli military has not commented.

              Hezbollah is a paramilitary group. It’s going to be a hard sell to any lawyer or judge that targeting their members is targeting noncombatants.

              “Customary international humanitarian law prohibits the use of booby traps – objects that civilians are likely to be attracted to or are associated with normal civilian daily use – precisely to avoid putting civilians at grave risk and produce the devastating scenes that continue to unfold across Lebanon today."

              That’s a very curious claim regarding international law on booby traps.

              • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                2 hours ago

                Sure, my point is that this is still terrorism and a violation of international humanitarian law. It’s worth noting that Hezbollah members aren’t just militant fighters. There are also social services and Parliamentary members, which are not combatants.

                Hezbollah organizes and maintains an extensive social development program and runs hospitals, news services, educational facilities, and encouragement of Nikah mut’ah. One of its established institutions, Jihad Al Binna’s Reconstruction Campaign, is responsible for numerous economic and infrastructure development projects in Lebanon. Hezbollah controls the Martyr’s Institute (Al-Shahid Social Association), which guarantees to provide living and education expenses for the families of fighters who die in battle.

                “Hezbollah not only has armed and political wings - it also boasts an extensive social development program. Hezbollah currently operates at least four hospitals, twelve clinics, twelve schools and two agricultural centres that provide farmers with technical assistance and training. It also has an environmental department and an extensive social assistance program. Medical care is also cheaper than in most of the country’s private hospitals and free for Hezbollah members”.

                Hezbollah holds 14 of the 128 seats in the Parliament of Lebanon and is a member of the Resistance and Development Bloc. According to Daniel L. Byman, it is “the most powerful single political movement in Lebanon.” Hezbollah, along with the Amal Movement, represents most of Lebanese Shi’a. Unlike Amal, Hezbollah has not disarmed. Hezbollah participates in the Parliament of Lebanon.

                Edit: your linked Westpoint article is proving my point

                See Quotes

                International humanitarian law does not outlaw booby-traps altogether. However, given the grave risks booby-traps pose to the civilian population, IHL places stringent restrictions on their use. The ICRC, for instance, has concluded, correctly so, that the “use of booby-traps which are in any way attached to or associated with objects or persons entitled to special protection under international humanitarian law or with objects that are likely to attract civilians” is a violation of customary IHL (Customary IHL Study, rule 80).

                Second, booby-traps may not take the “form of an apparently harmless portable object which is specifically designed and constructed to contain explosive material and to detonate when it is disturbed or approached” (art. 7(2)). The U.S. Department of Defense’s Law of War Manual provides the example of “booby-traps manufactured to resemble items, such as watches, personal audio players, cameras, toys, and the like.” It observes that the “prohibition is intended to prevent the production of large quantities of dangerous objects that can be scattered around and are likely to be attractive to civilians, especially children” (§ 6.12.4.8).

                Third, booby-traps may not be attached or associated with the following specified objects (art. 7(1)). Including medical facilities, medical equipment, medical supplies or medical transportation;

                  • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 hours ago

                    Article 7(2) of Amended Protocol II, of which details are discussed here of which pagers, that include the use by health care workers, certainly apply, especially when detonated in civilian spaces.

                    See Quotes

                    International humanitarian law does not outlaw booby-traps altogether. However, given the grave risks booby-traps pose to the civilian population, IHL places stringent restrictions on their use. The ICRC, for instance, has concluded, correctly so, that the “use of booby-traps which are in any way attached to or associated with objects or persons entitled to special protection under international humanitarian law or with objects that are likely to attract civilians” is a violation of customary IHL (Customary IHL Study, rule 80).

                    Second, booby-traps may not take the “form of an apparently harmless portable object which is specifically designed and constructed to contain explosive material and to detonate when it is disturbed or approached” (art. 7(2)). The U.S. Department of Defense’s Law of War Manual provides the example of “booby-traps manufactured to resemble items, such as watches, personal audio players, cameras, toys, and the like.” It observes that the “prohibition is intended to prevent the production of large quantities of dangerous objects that can be scattered around and are likely to be attractive to civilians, especially children” (§ 6.12.4.8).

                    Third, booby-traps may not be attached or associated with the following specified objects (art. 7(1)). Including medical facilities, medical equipment, medical supplies or medical transportation;

                • PugJesus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  20 hours ago

                  It’s worth noting that Hezbollah members aren’t just militant fighters.

                  The SS also included members that weren’t ‘militant fighters’, running a vast economic, political, and charitable apparatus, but few would dispute that attacking members of the SS would be attacking members of a paramilitary organization and legitimate targets.

                  • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    20 hours ago

                    Every part of the SS was engaged in ethnic cleansing and genocide, even the medical corp. How are you comparing them to Hezbollah, which only exists out of resistance to Israel’s ethnic cleansing of Lebanon?

                    You haven’t made an argument for why they should not be considered non-conbatants

                    Non-combatant is a term of art in the law of war and international humanitarian law to refer to civilians who are not taking a direct part in hostilities; persons, such as combat medics and military chaplains, who are members of the belligerent armed forces but are protected because of their specific duties (as currently described in Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions, adopted in June 1977); combatants who are placed hors de combat; and neutral persons, such as peacekeepers, who are not involved in fighting for one of the belligerents involved in a war. This particular status was first recognized under the Geneva Conventions with the First Geneva Convention of 1864.