The Geneva convention was established to minimise atrocities in conflicts. Israeli settlements in Gaza are illegal and violate the Geneva convention. Legality of Israeli settlements Article 51 of the Geneva convention prohibits indiscriminate attacks on civilian population yet Israel attacked hospitals with children inside. Whether you agree or not that Hamas were present, children cannot be viewed as combatants.so when no care was taken to protect them, does this not constitute a violation? According to save the children, 1 in 50 children in Gaza had been killed or injured. This is a very high proportion and does not show care being taken to prevent such casualties and therefore constitutes a violation.

So my question is simply, do supporters of Israel no longer support our believe in the Geneva convention, did you never, or how do you reconcile Israeli breaches of the Geneva convention? For balance I should add “do you not believe such violations are occurring and if so how did you come to this position?”

Answers other than only "they have the right to go after Hamas " please. The issue is how they are going after Hamas, not whether they should or not.

EDIT: Title changed to remove ambiguity about supporting Israel vs supporting their actions

  • the_toast_is_gone@lemmy.world
    1·
    2 months ago

    If you think there is any cognitive dissonance here, you’re wrong. My position is simply that Israel has a right to exist and to defend itself from Hamas. That doesn’t mean they get to kill people willy-nilly, that would make them no different from Hamas. You don’t seem to understand that. If Hamas wants to limit civilian casualties in the war that they started, they’re more than free to either stop putting soldiers and materiel in hospitals and schools, or simply surrender. This crisis is self-manufactured.

    And again, you are misunderstanding what an execution is. If Israel actually was on a genocidal rampage (like Hamas wants to do), then Gaza would have been nothing but a bloodstain months ago. There would have been zero humanitarian aid reaching Gaza. You stated in an answer to one of my questions that it would be acceptable for Ukraine to fire at soldiers who are using civilians as human shields as long as the goal wasn’t to kill those civilians. And I would agree. Ukraine has as much a right to exist and defend itself from Russia as Israel has a right to exist and defend itself from Hamas. But when it comes to the situation in Gaza, you suddenly change your mind. The situation is the same - there’s a ratio of 3-4:1 civilians to Hamas soldiers killed - but the main difference is where it’s happening. Yes, it’s tragic every time a civilian dies. I agree with you wholeheartedly there. But that doesn’t mean throwing them up like a smokescreen makes Hamas immune to return fire in the war that they started.

    No, actually, I am not okay with governments lying about their motives for a war. That’s one reason I despise Russia. But again, if Israel’s goal was to simply wipe out the Gaza strip, everyone there would have been turned to paste months ago. Israel is suspected to have nukes, after all. Instead, they have been warning people ahead of their strikes, and those people died because Hamas refused to evacuate them so they could use them as propaganda pawns in the war that they started.

    But why can’t you put a precise number? For one, you can’t value every soldier’s life the exact same way. A guy with an RPG and a stash of a hundred rockets blowing up everything he sees needs to be removed much more swiftly than some dude in the rear lines who mostly just stands around. As another example, taking down a military commander who is ordering the civilians to endure the bombing that Hamas brought upon them would bring the war closer to an end than devoting the same resources to killing said dude standing around doing guard duty. If a hundred civilians have to die in an operation (because Hamas is using them as pawns in the war that they started), then it makes far more sense for the operation to kill Rocket Man or Major Major Major Major than Mr. Guard Duty. Your question is comparing apples to oranges. Additionally, I don’t question the raw casualty counts that the Gaza Health Ministry puts out, I question the accuracy of their estimates of civilians vs. soldiers killed. As they are under the jurisdiction of Hamas, they have every incentive to manipulate those numbers in particular.

    We’ll cross that bridge when we get there. Again, this goes back to one of the questions I asked you. You stated that it would be acceptable to kill the gunmen before they started shooting innocent people, and then bent over backwards to paint the situation in as much of an anti-Israel light as possible like you don’t actually believe what you just said. If given the opportunity, Hamas will repeat October 7th. Israel should absolutely fortify the border and load up the Iron Dome to prevent this - and confront the military that’s on their doorstep.

    Ultimately, this is an exploitable crisis for (what went ignored in your post) Bibi to escape active criminal charges as he maintains immunity in his position of power. Sure, arrest Bibi for his part in radicalizing Palestine and whatever needless casualties are happening. Netanyahu too. But they aren’t the only ones exploiting this crisis.

    At this point, a nuke is uncalled for. I mean why not? Because the simple fact is the situation isn’t that severe yet. Nobody opposing Israel at the moment - Gaza, Hamas, whoever you want to call out - has a nuke. That would be an imminent and existential threat to Israel which would need to be addressed immediately. As far as I’m concerned, that’s the only situation in which nukes are permissible with the risk of MAD. But right now, Hamas has an opportunity to surrender every single day. This crisis could end at any moment, if Hamas simply gave up the war that they started. Your statements imply that it’s okay for Israel to get attacked indiscriminately as long as seemingly fewer civilians are killed in the process.

    That’s quite not happening when they’re bombing these densely-populated buildings, though. You’re right, they’re using rockets instead. And they’re in positions that can’t be attacked directly, as I already said. And if some malfunction or sabotage happens to the Iron Dome, as unlikely as that might be, all those missile bases will suddenly become a much more serious threat. In that case, how will the people who cried that these installations should never have been targeted react as rockets fall into Israeli territory en masse for the first time in years? And even if that doesn’t happen, Israel still only reports a success rate of 90% for the Iron Dome while they’ve been sitting patiently as Hamas has launched tens of thousands of missiles at them over not just this war, but longer than a decade. Resting on your laurels is a sure way to fail eventually.

    That does nothing in terms of permitting Hamas to regroup. It just ensures that civilians are radicalized in greater numbers. Allowing their attacks to continue unimpeded will only embolden Hamas. If lying down and taking it was a feasible strategy, intelligence failures aside, then October 7th wouldn’t have happened because Hamas wouldn’t have wanted to attack.

    Nobody said anything about, “Let jews die.” Only one component of your answer actually deals with the imminent problem of rockets raining down on Israel, and it’s just to sit there and take it. No other nation on Earth would be expected to sit around and let their genocidal neighbors indiscriminately launch explosives at their cities, regardless of the defenses in place.

    Hamas didn’t attack by tunnels. There are also incredibly easy methods of detecting underground tunnel networks via sonar systems that are already employed around the world. Are you talking about ground-penetrating radar? Because this source says that its maximum depth is around 30 meters and could be as low as 4 feet, while [Hamas routinely digs their tunnels at depths of 50 meters.(https://www.reuters.com/graphics/ISRAEL-PALESTINIANS/GAZA-TUNNELS/gkvldmzorvb/) Maybe it would be feasible if they buried the detector element deep within the soil (which isn’t something I’m sure is possible), but based on this info, it isn’t the guaranteed solution you imply it is.

    Israel hasn’t even been able to support a 2 state solution, after all. If this were true, Gaza and the West Bank would not exist. They would have been wiped out. Israel has been extremely effective in war ever since the 1950s.

    • lennybird@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      2 months ago

      (Comment 1 of 2)

      A couple logistical things: I think we’ve generally exhausted our points and are increasingly going in circles; so given the diminished bystander audience by this point I’m going to make this my last comment and oblige you with the final response if you so wish. Upvoted and thank you for the discussion.

      Moreover if you don’t mind I’m changing my response style slightly to (slightly) tamp down on the increasing length of these while also trying to remain on-point without too much meander.

      • A criminal cannot justify their crimes by saying, I could’ve killed more if I wanted to or even tortured them in greater numbers. Yes, Hitler could’ve used scalding hot water instead of Zyklon B and conducted MORE torture. Hitler could’ve killed double the amount of people he killed but he didn’t. Such restraint! Naturally we wouldn’t praise Hitler for committing less war crimes and instead merely focus on the fact that war crimes and murder was committed at all.

      • Israel has a right to defend itself, but that does not give carte blanche to kill as many civilians as they unilaterally deem appropriate in their calculus.

      • Thus executing 4 civilians for every 1 Hamas target is exactly the same as releasing a bomb knowing those same number of civilians will die for the target you seek.

      • Yes, the main difference IS where it is happening. Ukraine isn’t actively targeting civilian centers inside Russia; they’re playing defense on their own territory. Location matters because the Hamas soldier inside his own building isn’t an imminent threat to the civilians of Israel relative to the threat Israel poses to the innocent civilians of Gaza. Again, their bullets cannot reach Israel and ultimately neither can their rockets in any meaningfully significant quantity that wasn’t par for the course preceding October 7th for that matter. The world would not stand for Israel doing to Gaza if this was simply the same par for the course rocket attacks that have happened for decades. This proves the rockets aren’t the primary motivating factor for killing this many innocent civilians.

      • If Ukraine began to kill more civilians in Russia than Russia killed in Ukraine by an order of magnitude no less, then the waters would then be muddied and my support for them would, too, wane. Does Putin share responsibility for the murder of those civilians? Absolutely. Would Ukraine as well? Definitely. In the end, they should all be prosecuted for war crimes, just as the ICC is actively doing. If you think it’s worth it, then you better be willing to pay the piper at the end and be held accountable for the “justified murders.” After all, something tells me that Bibi wouldn’t be such a proud martyr then if he was actually held accountable for the demonstrated war crimes he has committed. Something tells me if it was he who had to be on the front line in Gaza that he wouldn’t have ordered this invasion.

      • The Gaza Health Ministry of elected officials actually answers primarily to the PA and Fatah first. There is no indication past or present that the distinction between civilians and Hamas targets is erroneous. Even if we take US Intelligence of Hamas strength versus the number of Hamas killed by said US intelligence, the numbers line up quite closely. In fact, most independent watchdogs suggest the civilian death toll is far higher when factoring in the number of bodies remaining under rubble, those still missing, and the disease and famine situation.

      • Please don’t add words to my mouth. I said that it’s okay if there was an imminent threat, but when there is an alternative strategy that ensures civilians are protected and you can wait for, say, the “snipers” to come in to pick these targets off, then change the entire paradigm. Like I said, the scenario laid out before us is factually much closer to that of a hostage standoff and siege in a children’s school. Nobody would abide by having the police set the building on fire.

      • There is no lying down and taking it; there are viable more reasonable paths out of this that everyone on the sidelines is telling Israel: Double-down on defensive, border, intelligence. Get a new leader in. Stop blocking Palestinian statehood, start wining Hearts & minds, and giving them self agency. Start working with the PA and Fatah with better faith, and stop creating more terrorists than you’re eliminating when you tear apart families with wanton collateral damage. Stop assassinating your own Prime Ministers who in good faith sought out a 2 state solution. Ultimately the rate of innocent civilian lives being murdered is higher now than ever before. I don’t take that as a win in any capacity. I also don’t think it would be acceptable anywhere else to continuously annex chunks of Palestine for Israel. After all, we don’t accept that when Russia did that in Crimea and the Donbas… Why is it acceptable for Israel to do that with Palestine? Have you ever seen a map of Israel vs. Palestine over the decades? At this point I’m almost beginning to wonder if Hamas is a convenient excuse propped up to justify territorial conquest. I wouldn’t put it past Netanyahu. Several times your excuse to justify Israeli actions is, “I mean they could’ve killed more; they could’ve annexed more more rapidly!” Of course, but it’s all a matter of how much they can get away with no different than a toddler probing the limits of their parents.

      To me the following remain immutable facts:

      • Quantitatively, Israel has invoked, by many factors, more suffering upon Innocent Civilians than Hamas has since both before or after October 7th. The response is thus more heinous than the attack which prompted it. This is frankly undeniable. Even if you disagree with the official numbers, surely you agree that the civilian death toll is well beyond the ~1200 of October 7th. The debt in blood has been repaid many times in all actuality.

      • There is only one way you can justify these mass, willful murders (which, it is murder): That they will prevent an even greater number of civilian casualties from happening in the future both in Gaza and Israel… And ultimately, the evidence for that is extremely shaky and to me does not meet the standard for justifying murder. Like I said: There are several viable strategies Israel can protect itself that would make it all but impossible for Hamas to commit another October 7th attack let alone the dozens of the equivalent Israel has now committed in Gaza.

      • Reaction to an alleged first-strike does not give Carte Blanche to commit as many war crimes as one desires.

      • Restraint of a murderer for not killing 10 innocent people does not excuse their killing of 5.

      • Restraint of stealing only half of the land instead of all the land is no excuse.

      • Israel both had and continues to have better options that ensures the protection of Israeli civilians while not requiring to kill 30,000 civilians and counting. The USA, speaking from experience, agrees.

      • The instability wrought by Israel in destroying civilian infrastructure from schools to mosques to residential housing, food & water, all the while killing women and children is exactly what one does to plant the seeds of radicalization for decades to come – NOT eliminate it. Especially when the likes of Lebanon and Iran tend to be the sources of all their needs. After all, moles will simply begin digging tunnels anew.

      • The greater you try to play whack-a-mole with Tunnels “50 meters” down, the less it makes sense to target the civilians who largely reside above. After all, Israel isn’t simply using bunker busters to reach these tunnels; and these manholes and entrances are everywhere that it’s quite literally impossible to target them all without actually dropping a nuke on Gaza. Moreover, if it was that easy for Hamas to do (a) they would’ve done it for their October 7th attack, and (b) if it’s that easy to do, then it’s equally that easy for the much wealthier and capable nation of Israel to dig equally-deep tunnels to stand guard and listen. A small price to pay for the safety of Israeli civilians, after all.

      I just want to note that under the ghetto conditions Israel has boxed Palestine in, that too, is no way to live. This creeping territorial annexation as the innocent civilians get pummeled by the “good guys” in far greater numbers than what Hamas is capable of doing to Israel speaks to the dire conditions they too live in. Make no mistake that, “Let the Palestinians die” applies just as much if we let things be par for the course… Hence why radicalization is so prominent in the first place. After all, as I said: Radicalization and terrorism simply does not manifest out of thin air. Wealthy countries with good education and solid civilian infrastructure and room to breathe and self agency do not have radicalization problems. Including Muslim nations.

      Your justification for the deaths that have occurred could just as easily be used as justification to drop a nuke. So for whatever reason, there is a red line for you here — and perhaps it’s because it evokes an imagery that is incompatible with your conscience. But perhaps like journalists were shown footage of October 7th that you should start viewing footage of the aftermath of IDF strikes and lifeless bodies in Gaza. I’ve also seen enough testimony from countless independent humanitarian aid workers and especially physicians engaged in the Hippocratic Oath who speak to the horrors they’ve seen. I wonder, have you? Would you be able to pull the trigger?