Then we’re in agreement that they can’t compel a sovereign state to comply with treaties they aren’t party to.
Good.
And a contract that one party has no say in the terms of nor a choice as to whether to agree to it is unenforceable.
If “international law” were worth a damn it would have prevented 10/7.
Because we were all talking about compelling Israel, as opposed to whether Israel was right or wrong 
IHL isn’t a contract, so dumb analogy continues to be dumb.
I’ll remember international law is meaningless next time you cry “But Hamas are the real genociders”…“Genocide? What’s that?”
The concept of genocide exists independently of weirdos in robes pretending to be judges, and I’m capable of recognizing it when I see it.
Absent international law, the term is meaningless.
Gotta admit, though, it’s a bit rich that the guy well-known for his fetish for police uniforms thinks IHL judges are weird.
We have already seen that you can’t.
That’s not how language works.
Oh, now it’s a language argument, not a legal one? My, my, how those poles do move.
Your argument is not consistent with any principle except “Smapti has hitched his wagon to Israel in this conflict regardless of Israel’s actions and events on the ground”.
There is no enforcement arm to international law. Literally no one thinks the UN is going to step in and force Israel to do anything.
No one stopped Hamas from its attack on Oct 7, either, nor is there any international body that was in a position to do anything other than offer condemnation.
The argument is about morality, not about what some non-existent international police force or army is going to do.
I think it’s worse than that. He literally wrote, above
“The ends justify the means” is essentially dumbass Machiavelli, a simplification and distortion of an already questionable approach to morality, suitable only for thugs and sociopaths.
He suggests that if someone does you wrong and needs to be stopped (“your cause is just”), you’re freed from all moral constraints. There is no evil you can perpetrate which is beyond the pale, because your end is just. Your means–mass killings, torture, suppression of dissent, famine, genocide --are justified.
Hey, you wanna make an omelette, you gotta break some eggs.
Gift link:
According to this WaPo article, there were two trucks, which were not marked as “aid trucks”, but I’ve of the trucks resembled them.
Palestinian witnesses described some troops arriving in two undercover vehicles, one of which resembled the trucks used by Israel to bring commercial goods into Gaza. The other was a white Mercedes truck, piled high with furniture and other belongings, a common sight in a camp that’s home to thousands of displaced families.
…
Two videos verified by The Washington Post show a box truck marked with a brand of dishwashing soap traveling in the company of Israeli armored vehicles on a road about a mile west of the raid. The vehicles head west, away from Nuseirat, and it is unclear whether the videos were filmed before or after the raid.
WaPo also says the white Mercedes is visible in a video taken by a Palestinian in the camp.
It’s an interesting article. Apparently the woman was held on one building and the three men in another. The commando team was able to get to the woman without raising an alarm, and hustled her to a nearby vehicle and then drove to a helicopter. But the team going for the men failed to take their guards by surprise, and a gunfight ensued that alerted the whole community. And THAT’S when Israeli forces in the air “started shooting to give them a corridor, a wall of fire”. And it wasn’t just shooting, they dropped bombs, too. That’s the attack that killed so many of the nearby refugees.
…the live video from the slaughter made it very clear most of the deaths happened from bombing the market, not from shooting. There are broken bodies everywhere. Men, women, children. There may have been a “pitched battle” somewhere, but that wasn’t what killed most of the people.
That’s how we won World War II. We did what was necessary and didn’t wring our hands worrying about the poor innocent widdle Nazis.
I think, hypothetically in theory, if you are Vladimir Putin, Henry Kissinger, etc. then you might have a whole bunch of warrants out for your arrest and trial. Might add an extra complication to your holiday travel plans.
Yes, the Allies made absolutely no effort to avoid civilian causalities! Hell they didn’t even hesitate to bomb the death camps out of existence!
That’s the point I’ve been making for months as to why international law is meaningless and useless. Glad to see you agree.
If this is an argument about morality, then we can dispense with the arguments from authority about what the ICC or ICJ or ICRC or Geneva Convention or Rome Statute or First Reformed Treaty of Memphis (1957 Synod) have to say about what Israel is “allowed” to do as if it mattered.
…in eight months of war, one party has killed 40 children, the other party over 13,000. Are either of those numbers morally justifiable?
You don’t think that morality is at all related to widely agreed upon rules of conduct?
Smapti only has the morality he’s been told to have.
Yes, one of them is. Did the liberation of France cease to be justifiable because children were killed in the fighting?
Agreed on by who? The impetus for this entire part of the conversation was MrDibble claiming that Israel is obligated to obey treaties it hasn’t even signed.
…was it the 40, or the 13,000? Can you be specific? Because from the numbers alone, I’m guessing it’s the 40.
It depends on whether or not you think the people who killed the 13,000 children were the liberators of France or the people that killed 13,000 children in France, I suppose.
Did Israel liberate those 13,000 Palestinian children they killed? Are they now free? Is this morality?