Israeli Crimes

166 readers

51 users here now

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

PanArab@lemmy.world

[Video] NSFL - Israel bombs two unarmed civilians in Gaza. Then proudly posts the footage. (i.imgur.com)

submitted 2 weeks ago by RadioFreeArabia@lemmy.cafe to c/israelicrimes@lemmy.world

14 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] shoo@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I've got no stake in defending Israel but not holding a gun doesn't make you a civilian. Your argument falls just as flat with no context (could have been sugar or an IED, neither of us knows) but you're the one who originally labeled them. Supplying flammable materials to an insurgency could very well make you a fair target, modern irregular warfare is messy.

The right reaction to a no-context 5s clip of two people getting blown up is "what a senseless waste of human life".

And that last case is pretty clear. If armed US citizens refused to disarm for an occupying force or engaged in hostilities they become unlawful combatants and lose their protections.

[–] RadioFreeArabia@lemmy.cafe 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I just learned that flour is highly flammable, so that’s what they were most likely carrying with them.

https://recipes.howstuffworks.com/tools-and-techniques/question150.htm

https://www.iflscience.com/flour-can-explode-and-its-important-that-you-know-that-74064

Israeli politicians have talked openly about starving Palestinians. So it’s no surprise that they will target aid which they also talked openly about.

[–] RadioFreeArabia@lemmy.cafe 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

You used "unlawful" certainly you have a law you can cite that says so. Because this is not what international law says. Resistance to an occupying force, including armed resistance, is legal per international law. What law are you citing?

Resolution No. (3103) of 1973 regarding the principles relating to the legal status of fighters who struggle against colonial control, foreign occupation, and racist regimes, not only by granting legitimacy to their work but also by including these fighters by the rules of international law applicable in armed conflicts, such as the 1949 Geneva Conventions on war-wounded and their prisoners, and the protection of civilians. This resolution stated that the struggle of people for their right to self-determination and independence is a legitimate struggle that is fully consistent with the principles of international law and that any attempt to suppress the armed struggle is a violation of the Charter of the United Nations, the Declaration of the Principles of International Law and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and that combatants who commit In captivity they must be treated as prisoners of war by the provisions of the Geneva Convention relating to Prisoners of War.

https://dahershield.com/en/2024/02/07/the-right-to-resist-occupation-in-international-law/

https://www.972mag.com/on-the-palestinians-legal-right-to-fight-the-occupation/

https://crescent.icit-digital.org/articles/people-under-occupation-have-the-right-to-resist-their-occupiers-by-any-means-necessary

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/north-africa-west-asia/right-to-resist-in-occupied-palestine-denial-and-suppression/

[–] shoo@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Unlawful combatant is defined in probably as many ways as there are countries, there's no international standard. Generally, as I used it here, a combatant without official ties to an organized belligerent group. For example, I couldn't unilaterally go blow up my local post office tomorrow and be a lawful combatant by any stretch.

If you're really caught up on semantics, then we can call armed US citizens combatants in an occupation by Chinese forces. If you don't surrender your weapons as a combatant you're liable to get blown up.

[–] RadioFreeArabia@lemmy.cafe 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

You are not stateless living under an illegal military occupation though. The law is specific and clear. Palestinians are denied statehood and are living under a military occupation.

You still didn't cite any law, you are just making stuff up. Maybe you are willing to submit to a foreign occupation, but there will be those will fight and international law protects that right.

[–] shoo@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Sure, I don't know what you're arguing? Nowhere did I say Palestines were wrong or deserve any violence. Part of resisting occupation is dying. There's no legal spell that transports an occupying force out of your county. If you could politely ask them to leave they wouldn't be occupying.

[–] RadioFreeArabia@lemmy.cafe 2 points 2 weeks ago

I do agree that international law and conventions have proven to be just for show with no real power. But in an ideal world no one would be above the law or have impunity to do as they wish regardless of the laws. We still document Israeli crimes even if they won't be held accountable any time soon.