CNN Host Left Stunned As IDF Confirms Israel Hit Refugee Camp With Airstrike
newrepublic.com
CNN’s Wolf Blitzer seemed at a lost of words at the justification being used to bomb a refugee camp in Gaza.
You are viewing a single comment
CNN’s Wolf Blitzer seemed at a lost of words at the justification being used to bomb a refugee camp in Gaza.
That's not how it works. The failure of an enemy to abide by the laws of war does not absolve your side of the necessity of following the laws of war.
Jesus, fuck, it's the Bush administration all over again. I'm having fucking flashbacks to "Why it's actually totally legal to torture 'unprivileged combatants'"
They shouldn't have gotten away with it.... but they largely did, didn't they? Plenty of tales of US forces executing men of fighting age, based on very spurious allegations. The US killed two Reuters journalists and convicted... Chelsea Manning for leaking the footage to wikileaks. Not as if this was new. Colin Powell started his career by arguably whitewashing the My Lai massacre and ended it by fraudulently justifying the war in Iraq. Certainly didn't hurt his career. So apparently, it often does work that way. You hire some lawyers, you find a technicality, and you can get away with pretending it was legal. I look forward to seeing George Bush Jr. on dancing with the Stars.
You might suspect that might makes right, and the US, China and Russia get away with war crimes and/or a bit of genocide because they're nuclear powers.
But that can't be it, can it? Because Assad gets away with war crimes constantly. IRC there was a story a few years ago, about how doctors in Syria no longer told the UN where their hospital were located. The Syrians were deliberately targetting hospitals, based on UN information. You know, the UN says: 'don't bomb this, it's a hospital, that would be a war crime'. So Assad bombs them all anyway. I think at one point they bombed 4 in one day. Anyway, Assad's still in power.
That is actually how it works. It is not against international law to strike civilian areas if it cannot be avoided in order to attack military targets. It needs to be done in a manner appropriate to the situation, for which there is obviously no hard line defined. Assuming that Israel is not lying regarding the military target around/under the location of this strike (which they probably aren't, because murdering civilians without reason hurts their interests), it is explicitly legal without any loopholes or weird interpretations.
That is categorically not how it works. We had trials over this after WWII. The international law was delineated quite clearly. Intentionally targeting civilians to hit military targets is still a war crime. Even if enemy combatants are hiding among civilians to use them as human shields, even if you can prove that it is a standard practice of your enemy. It's still a war crime. Israel is just so confident that the US will back them up all the way down to total genocide that they don't even pretend they are trying to follow IHL anymore.
Civilians should never be the target. The Israei government will be questioned for their actions, but I'll be surprised if they are held responsible for them.
It is if the collateral damage is considered 'excessive' in comparison to the military benefits that would be gained if the strike was successful and in relation to the level of precision available.
You know, like murdering 50 civilians in a refugee camp with a guided munition to kill an enemy officer.
Like murdering 8000 civilians in a coordinated 'surgical' strike in an operation the media would glowingly call Shock and Awe, and getting re-elected on the back of it.
Or demolishing thousands of mosques, then signing trade deals with Muslim countries, as part of the Belt and Road initiative.
Or forcibly conscripting Muslim men for the meatgrinder in Ukraine, previously leveling Chechnya, then inviting over Hamas for a visit where they praise your leadership.
I wouldn't get your hopes up too high. Once everyone's bored of this war and distracted, and the man on the street in the Arab world is once again existentially preoccupied, it's not unlikely Arab leaders will end their performative outrage and return to real politik, making money and throwing Palestinians under the bus.
Oh, don't worry, my hopes weren't that Arab leaders would hold Israel accountable. Only that some of us will remember this outrage.
Actually, it does if justified. I don't agree at all with it, but that's war. The IDF will justify it and no one will do anything but look the other way.
what
Where's the proof they killed this general? It just sounds way too convenient to try to justify your fuck up with a lie, but until proven that this target was indeed hiding there with other combatants I have my doubts.
So Hamas was not committing war crimes when they shot up that music festival because surely there were some IDF soldiers in there?
The moment unarmed people that have nothing to do with the war are knowingly targeted is the moment any party crosses the line
knowingly targeted != collateral damage
It's a terrorist act and is a crime. It's not a war crime as war was not declared. Hamas is not a uniformed military and they don't fall under traditional laws of war. They are terrorists and international law gives great latitude on ways to eliminate them.
If you really need it spelled out here's a literal human rights lawyer explaining the war crimes israel is committing and which international laws exactly they are breaking. https://youtu.be/wiGp2mvFLY0?si=WYD-YCE0R1dlhL8V
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/wiGp2mvFLY0?si=WYD-YCE0R1dlhL8V
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.