479
submitted 11 months ago by Nobody@lemmy.world to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml

JERUSALEM (AP) — The head of surgery at Gaza’s largest and most advanced hospital held up his phone Saturday to the hammering of gunfire and artillery shelling. “Listen,” said Dr. Marwan Abu Sada as fighting raged around Shifa Hospital.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Enkers@sh.itjust.works 154 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Kinda similar to the "human shields" argument. When I read comics growing up, when a villain takes a hostage the answer was never "kill the hostage" except for the edgiest of antiheroes, yet here we are with "human shields" being used as a justification to kill civilians. It's fucking wild.

[-] ninjan@lemmy.mildgrim.com 59 points 11 months ago

This exactly is my main gripe with how Israel is conducting this war. They're completely unwilling to take any additional risk to preserve civilian life.

[-] constate368@lemmy.world 53 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Even the US sent troops in to kill a scumbag like Uday Hussein instead of bombing with an airstrike.

This is just the Zionist creed of "unlimited Palestinian deaths don't make up for 1 Israeli."

[-] Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de 27 points 11 months ago

It's not just in "this war", they weren't giving a shit about Palestinian civilians for decades.

[-] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 10 points 11 months ago

Not like they care about any non Israelis in the area. Especially if they are press

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[-] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 28 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I wonder if a lot of people's idea of war has been shaped by the recent American occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, which were wars of choice where at least in theory American soldiers were fighting largely for the benefit of the natives. Countries that believe they actually need to win and don't have the option of just giving up and going home fight wars in a very different way. Consider for example World War II, the proverbial "good versus evil" war fought by the generation that originally came up with the comic book characters you read about. The Allies certainly didn't hesitate to kill enormous numbers of Axis civilians in the course of destroying military targets. (IMO the Allies actually went way too far and a lot of the strategic bombing of Germany and Japan served no military purpose, but I suppose they were more worried about bombing too little than they were about bombing too much.)

[-] Nobody@lemmy.world 22 points 11 months ago

The total war tactics of WW2 are unthinkable by modern standards, but it’s hard not to sympathize with an outgunned army fighting for their home. They fight because they’d rather die than lose.

Maybe instead of fighting people in that position, you talk to them and work out a peace deal. If they’re willing to be reasonable, end the violence.

load more comments (20 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Cheers@sh.itjust.works 20 points 11 months ago

If you kill hospitals, you kill a generation.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Throbbing_Banjo@midwest.social 68 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Because that's where the Palestinians are, and this is a genocide.

[-] HowMany@lemmy.ml 54 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Because Israel is committing war crimes. Because Israel has stated, unequivocally, that Palestinians are animals and must be scourged off the face of the earth.

load more comments (30 replies)
[-] orcrist@lemm.ee 29 points 11 months ago

What a terrible headline. If APNews thinks it's a war crime, it has a duty to say so. You can't just write a headline like this without drawing the obvious inference.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] kromem@lemmy.world 24 points 11 months ago

Given most people aren't reading the article, the particularly relevant points:

International humanitarian law lends hospitals special protections during war. But hospitals can lose their protections if combatants use them to hide fighters or store weapons, the International Committee of the Red Cross said. [...]

In an editorial published Friday in Britain’s The Guardian newspaper, International Criminal Court prosecutor Karim Khan issued a warning to combatants that the burden of proof is on them if they claim hospitals, schools or houses of worship have lost their protected status because they are being used for military purposes. And the bar for evidence is very high.

“If there is a doubt that a civilian object has lost its protective status, the attacker must assume that it is protected,” Khan wrote. “The burden of demonstrating that this protective status is lost rests with those who fire the gun, the missile, or the rocket in question.”

TL;DR: If Hamas is conducting military operations from hospitals, they can be legitimate targets in the eyes of international law, but precautions still need to be taken to avoid civilian casualties and the case for their military use should be overwhelming, not amorphous or tenuous.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 21 points 11 months ago

Because Israel is trying to genocide.

They don't care about Hamas, they just want Palestine gone.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Arthur_Leywin@lemmy.ml 17 points 11 months ago

Netanyahu doesn't give a duck.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2023
479 points (94.3% liked)

World News

32285 readers
896 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS