When did I say anything like that? What I’ve been pointing out is why Israel is a bad actor. Not inventing authority we all agree the ICJ and UN don’t have.
I haven’t said Israel has to do anything. Just saying that it is a fascist racist genocidal terror regime when it doesn’t.
Not really. If anything, Israel holding itself back has caused the conflict to stretch out for far longer than it needed to. If they hadn’t held back this war would have been over within a week.
Right here;
And here;
If we agree they have no authority, then let’s stop pretending like the things they say are worth any more than the opinion of Joe Schmoe.
So, not at all, then.
Customary IHL isn’t a treaty, dumb motherfucker. It’s merely what the civilized world has agreed is right. A moral judgement.
One Israel* has absolutely failed.
* “…and Hamas!” “Yes, them too.” There, said it for you so you don’t have to.
If it’s just a moral judgement with no force of law, then they can’t possibly have committed “crimes” by not adhering to it.
They committed crimes. The ICRC is not the ICJ. That’s related to the moral judgment but neither is dependent on the other.
Israel is a fascist, racist, colonialist oppressor state.
Netanyahu and Gallant are also wanted war criminals.
Both of these are true, but the former doesn’t depend on the latter and was true even before October last year.
Just like the police were the just party when BLM was happening, right, bootlicker?
According to a treaty they haven’t signed and a kangaroo court run by a man who has been campaigning against Israel for half a century.
Israel is a liberal democracy that respects freedom of speech and religion, whose current government is shit and is on the way out.
Wrong.
No, according to the customs of civilized nations.
Yeah, kangaroo courts are usually set up by international bodies 
Was it a kangaroo court when Ben Ferencz was advocating for it?
Sorry, not sure who you’re talking about here. ICC Judge President Akane isn’t a man, Chief Prosecutor Khan has only been that since 2021 (and is only 54, so good on him for rightfully realising Israel is terrible at age 4), not sure who else you could be talking about.
Ha ha ha ha. Smapti’s a comedian.
Hey, Mr. Comedian, go to Tel Aviv and wave a Palestinian flag around, then come and tell us how Israel respects freedom of speech.
Sure. That wasn’t you licking boots in the various Ferguson and BLM threads…
Yeah. That was me. Ten years ago. I was wrong then and I’ve said so many times.
I imagine I’d get about the same response as if I marched down Pennsylvania Avenue with a Nazi flag in 1943. Your point?
The Jews are barbarians now. So sayeth MrDibble.
It was a good idea once. Unfortunately the UN recognized Israel’s right to exist once and has spent their time since trying to claw it back.
What the fuck?
If Ukraine got access to a bigass bomb and had reason to believe that using it on the Russian capital would make Russia surrender (as opposed to glassing Ukraine, which would be the more likely outcome and the actual reason for Ukraine not to launch a massive strike on Moscow), they’d definitely be justified in launching it.
…nearly 300 dead, over 600 wounded. Just because it wasn’t under their jurisdiction doesn’t give them licence drop bombs on a market.
No you did not.
Nobody was coerced into protecting anyone or anything here. Nor did anyone volunteer. They were just going about their day.
The location was secret. They were hiding. Part of the point of a human shield is that the target is out in the open, using human shields to stop them from being targeted. This wasn’t the case here.
If we extend the definition of human shields to include someone buying something from the market, then that extends to everyone living next to a military base anywhere in the world.
These are human shields.
More.
https://www.btselem.org/topic/human_shields
Video
Nobody understood what the fuck you were talking about. You had to post two length boring paragraphs in an attempt to clarify. You didn’t describe “real consequences.” It was nonsense gibberish about Japanese dukes and mansions and kitchen slaves and the French.
So, who is just isn’t an inflexible thing? Our perspectives on historic actions can evolve? The very idea…
Sure, when America was actually at war with them. In 1939, not so much.
Did you note the date of that article on displaying the flag? Was Israel at war with Palestine a year ago?
Israel = The Jews. So sayeth Smapti.
Pedal, pedal, pedal…
Even more confirmation that Netanyahu and his allies (i.e. the present government of Israel) are, functionally speaking, allies of Hamas; and so is the IDF as long as they’re in charge:
This is far more than a military conflict, and in every facet aside from the battlefield Israel is losing, and losing big… and even on the battlefield they’re not doing all that well.
While you are correct, so was I.
Respectfully, I disagree. It implies intentional colocation of civilians with military for the purpose of deterrence. This goes towards the principle of distinction. There is no requirement that the military component be “out in the open”. (cite otherwise? some lines in the wiki support my position too) Forcibly embedding your military in a residential area is a form of deterrence, isn’t it? “You can’t attack me because all these innocent people.”
Military bases established in peacetime are potentially different if the people are aware of their proximity and continue living there of their own free will. Like if you are a civilian living right next to a base, you ought to know that in case of war your house could get bombed.
~Max
…it requires the shields to either be voluntary or coerced. Neither is the case here.
It doesn’t imply that at all.
Its not about a “requirement” to be out in the open. It’s more the fact that the purpose of having human shields is for deterrence. But if the intention is to be hidden, and you don’t want the enemy to know where you are, then the people around you aren’t being used as a deterrence.
There isn’t a single person in Gaza who believes that there is anywhere in Gaza that is safe, or that Israel wouldn’t hesitate to attack anyone or anywhere, regardless of those “innocent people.” We’ve seen that play out over and over again.
It’s like the ridiculous notion that Hamas were hiding in hospitals because “You can’t attack me because all these innocent people" when the IDF have been systematically attacking and raiding hospitals from the start of the war.
There are people who just a few days ago were defending the systematic destruction of Mosques and schools and universities and apartment complexes. They are literally bombing tents. The IDF waited for suspects to get home before bombing them. Everyone on the ground knows this. Nobody thinks that “colocating” in civilian areas will prevent the IDF targeting them.
If they weren’t forced to be there and they didn’t go there on their own, how did they get there? Teleportation? Dimensional gateways? Divine intervention?
…what the fuck are you talking about?
They are apartment blocks. People are living there.
The IDF bombed a market. They were buying and selling food and clothes. They didn’t voluntarily stand in the way of the hostage-takers and the IDF. Nor were they forced.
Then you acknowledge that Hamas uses places where people live as bases.
…just like how the IDF uses places where people live as bases? Sure. And I’m not sure if I would be calling an apartment used to hold hostages a “base.”
The discussion was about the use of the term “human shields.” The other people in the apartment block, nor the people in the market or the surrounds, didn’t voluntarily put themselves in between the terrorists and the IDF. Nor were they coerced.
Right. Hamas was just using them as human shields without their knowledge, which is somehow better according to Banquet_Bear’s Big Book of Rules.