Israel, Hamas, War Crimes and the Geneva Suggestions

[Bacle]

They are facing and enemy who does not care for laws of war and will do what evr to kill them.
Only way to win is to do the same

That Hamas wants to kill every Jew in the world doesn't matter to Abhorsen, only the theory of the Geneva Conventions and other pseudo-legalistic bullshit that allows him to preen about his own 'moral superiority'.

Like, there is a great line from Javik in ME3 that applies to wars against existential threats/vs trying to maintain 'honor' in the face of forces that want your genocide/extinction, which Hamas want for the Jews: "Stand in the ashes of trillion dead souls, and ask the ghosts if honor matters. The silence is your answer."

 

[Abhorsen]

They are facing and enemy who does not care for laws of war and will do what evr to kill them.
Only way to win is to do the same

If they don't act morally, then they become Hamas, and I'd have no reason to support them. Literally the reason we don't support Hamas and do support Israel is because Israel doesn't do these things.

Furthermore, shooting surrendering soldiers isn't necessary. The Brits had the right idea in the Falklands war: if someone in a bunker wants to surrender, you can order them to do basically anything and they have to comply, or you can shoot them as they haven't surrendered.

Simply order them to strip. If they don't, they haven't surrendered and you can shoot them.

That Hamas wants to kill every Jew in the world doesn't matter to Abhorsen, only the theory of the Geneva Conventions and other pseudo-legalistic bullshit that allows him to preen about his own 'moral superiority'.

That does matter to me, and will matter as long as the Israelis don't act like Hamas. You are the one wanting Israel to act like Hamas.

You fundamentally do not understand war, as this shows. This war is a PR war. The way Israel wins is by winning the PR battle. If they lose the PR battle (basically fuck up enough that enough of the US public opposes them or more Arab Countries join the war), then Israel loses. And currently, Israel is winning the PR battle. Shit like this is how they lose that battle.

Meanwhile, your Dunning Kruger ass decided to repeatedly get how the Geneva Conventions work wrong, and kept repeating the same bullshit over and over again. Open a book and read before opening your mouth to spout bullshit.

 

[Zachowon]

If they don't act morally, then they become Hamas, and I'd have no reason to support them. Literally the reason we don't support Hamas and do support Israel is because Israel doesn't do these things.

Furthermore, shooting surrendering soldiers isn't necessary. The Brits had the right idea in the Falklands war: if someone in a bunker wants to surrender, you can order them to do basically anything and they have to comply, or you can shoot them as they haven't surrendered.

Simply order them to strip. If they don't, they haven't surrendered and you can shoot them.

That does matter to me, and will matter as long as the Israelis don't act like Hamas. You are the one wanting Israel to act like Hamas.

You fundamentally do not understand war, as this shows. This war is a PR war. The way Israel wins is by winning the PR battle. If they lose the PR battle (basically fuck up enough that enough of the US public opposes them or more Arab Countries join the war), then Israel loses. And currently, Israel is winning the PR battle. Shit like this is how they lose that battle.

Meanwhile, your Dunning Kruger ass decided to repeatedly get how the Geneva Conventions work wrong, and kept repeating the same bullshit over and over again. Open a book and read before opening your mouth to spout bullshit.

Okay cool, when the enemy uses hostages to make sure you don't shoot them, when they will fake surrender, when they will suicide bomb you, it obviously doesn't matter that you will lose more troops trying to he civil then fighting for survival.

If Hamas didn't want the genocide the jews and Israel then you would have a point

 

[Bacle]

That does matter to me, and will matter as long as the Israelis don't act like Hamas. You are the one wanting Israel to act like Hamas.

You seem to forget Netanyahu has compared what will happen to Hamas to Almeck.

Did you forget what historical/biblical enemies of the Jews had happen to them on repeat occasions; they get wiped off the map by military force or natural events. Israel just needs to act more like the people that took Jericho and wiped out Almeck, for their own safety; only power and the will to use it moves the needle in the ME, not compassion. And the Jewish people don't share Christians view guilt over what happen to Jesus, or view 'turning the other cheek' shit that let's Christians be happy getting shit on or the 'pray for your enemies' crap.

Flooding the tunnels is a very clean move compared to some, and what happened looks like it is a ROE Breach and unintentional friendly fire incident.

This sort of shit was however pretty much bound to happen in the sort of urban combat Israel faces in Gaza.

You fundamentally do not understand war, as this shows. This war is a PR war. The way Israel wins is by winning the PR battle. If they lose the PR battle (basically fuck up enough that enough of the US public opposes them or more Arab Countries join the war), then Israel loses. And currently, Israel is winning the PR battle. Shit like this is how they lose that battle.

No, this isn't a PR war from the point of view of the IDF and Israel, or Israel's backers; it's existential. You have to understand, that by comparative population size, Oct 7th was like 13~ 9/11s for Israel all at once, and mostly hit young people and families who had trusted Gazans as day workers.

Israel has no real strategic depth to retreat into if the enemies breach the defensive lines and walls with massed formations. The Sampson Option exists because Israel knows it's existence is geographically hard to maintain without controlling specific areas/access points, from historical events repeatedly showing this.

If Hamas had kitbashed together even a small armored formation of Killerdozers hidden in garages for just one attempt, supported by infantry and paragliders, and tried to punch through to Jerusalem, they might have even been able to temporarily split Israel in two by reaching the West Bank, before close air support and Israel armor could respond.

In a lot of ways Israel got lucky Hamas wasn't more competent and dedicated in their attempt, and that a lot of the death and destruction was the mob that followed behind them. If Hamas had linked up with friends in the West Bank, this could have gotten a lot more ugly.

Meanwhile, your Dunning Kruger ass decided to repeatedly get how the Geneva Conventions work wrong, and kept repeating the same bullshit over and over again. Open a book and read before opening your mouth to spout bullshit.

No, I just don't think that the Geneva Conventions apply to Hamas, just like they didn't apply to AQ operatives who ended up in Gitmo or were simply killed when they fired on US/allied forces as terrorists in places like Syria or Somalia or Yemen.

And speaking of Yemen, you seem to be ignoring the whole Houthi angle to the threats to Israel now, and Hezbollah is still there. You also ignore Iran's role in all this most of the time, and I do remember you talking about how the US was bad for supporting the fight against the Houthi's back in the day. The same Houthi's who are now hijacking ships and attacking US warships directly, even if it just means skeet shooting for the AEGIS and Patriot crews.

United States introduces Operation Prosperity Guardian in response to the Iranian-backed, Hamas-aligned Houthis who continue their efforts to block the Red Sea maritime traffic. It'll be a multinational effort as well.

US To Introduce “Operation Prosperity Guardian” After Upsurge Of Attacks On Ships In Red Sea - Maritime Shipping News

U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin is expected to introduce “Operation Prosperity Guardian” during his next trip to the Middle East. ... Read mor

news.maritime-network.com

Their is increasing pressure, including from the United Arab Emirates, to redesignate the Houthi militants of Yemen, Ansarallah a Foreign Terrorist Organization. President Trump, in his final days in office, designated the Houthis a Foreign Terrorist Organization but the Biden revoked that label of them during the first weeks of their Administration.



British Petroleum is one of the latest companies to state they'll be suspending traffic through the Suez Canal and Red Sea.

UK joins new global force to combat attacks in Red Sea as shipping industry fears delays

The disruption to usual trade flows is expected to result in higher prices and delays, which will only intensify the longer the disruption lasts, as alternative routes can add thousands of miles to shipping journeys.

news.sky.com

Israeli Reportedly Bringing Back Dive Bombing to Improve Accuracy with Dumb Bombs.



Roughly 40-45% of the Bombs Used by the IDF in Gaza so far are "Dumb Bombs"

Israel Follows Russian Bombing Strategy; Reports Say IDF Blasted 13,000 'Dumb Bombs' On Gaza

In the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, nearly half of the air-to-ground munitions employed by Israel are unguided, commonly known as “dumb bombs.” The report, citing an evaluation by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), said that between 40% and 45% of...

www.eurasiantimes.com

Interesting story of an IDF Sergeant who was recently killed in Gaza. He descended from a Christian family from Germany that emigrated to Israel after WW2/The Holocaust and established a nursing home to care for Holocaust survivors. Their children all enlisted in the IDF and Urija Bayer was serving in the Maglan Commando Unit when he was mortally wounded on December 14th.



Israeli Forces Destroyed Palestinian Cultural Heritage Monument. Worse then even BLM Activists.

BP suspending shipping through the BAM is a bad sign.

 

[Abhorsen]

Okay cool, when the enemy uses hostages to make sure you don't shoot them, when they will fake surrender, when they will suicide bomb you, it obviously doesn't matter that you will lose more troops trying to he civil then fighting for survival.

If Hamas didn't want the genocide the jews and Israel then you would have a point

Literally I just demonstrated how you could easily obey the laws of war while safely doing a surrender. Read, maybe?

No, this isn't a PR war from the point of view of the IDF and Israel, or Israel's backers; it's existential. You have to understand, that by comparative population size, Oct 7th was like 13~ 9/11s for Israel all at once, and mostly hit young people and families who had trusted Gazans as day workers.

Israel has no real strategic depth to retreat into if the enemies breach the defensive lines and walls with massed formations. The Sampson Option exists because Israel knows it's existence is geographically hard to maintain without controlling specific areas/access points, from historical events repeatedly showing this.

If Hamas had kitbashed together even a small armored formation of Killerdozers hidden in garages for just one attempt, supported by infantry and paragliders, and tried to punch through to Jerusalem, they might have even been able to temporarily split Israel in two by reaching the West Bank, before close air support and Israel armor could respond.

In a lot of ways Israel got lucky Hamas wasn't more competent and dedicated in their attempt, and that a lot of the death and destruction was the mob that followed behind them. If Hamas had linked up with friends in the West Bank, this could have gotten a lot more ugly.

Literally none of that means this also isn't a PR wars. In fact, Israel knows that the PR war is also existential, because if it loses it badly enough, it loses US backing.

You again show you don't know what you are talking about.

No, I just don't think that the Geneva Conventions apply to Hamas, just like they didn't apply to AQ operatives who ended up in Gitmo or were simply killed when they fired on US/allied forces as terrorists in places like Syria or Somalia or Yemen.

They do apply though. I literally pointed out the spot in the Geneva conventions, and you started talking about the FFL, which is completely irrelevant, and also got what you said about the FFL wrong also.

It's like if I said "Five is a prime number", then you said "That's not right, because 14 is a square number". It's really hard to analogize such novel idiocy, but that's my best attempt.

 

[Bacle]

Literally none of that means this also isn't a PR wars. In fact, Israel knows that the PR war is also existential, because if it loses it badly enough, it loses US backing.

You again show you don't know what you are talking about.

Israel has options besides the US, if the US decides to abandon Israel because they are trying to resolve an issue for good, instead of letting a catspaw linger as a knife in their side.

There is a reason they have so much French gear and have for a long time. And the US cannot really fuck with France that much.

You noticed the crackdown on Islamist BS in France after Oct 7th; they know the signs, and they know what Never Again is supposed to mean.

They do apply though. I literally pointed out the spot in the Geneva conventions, and you started talking about the FFL, which is completely irrelevant, and also got what you said about the FFL wrong also.

It's like if I said "Five is a prime number", then you said "That's not right, because 14 is a square number". It's really hard to analogize such novel idiocy, but that's my best attempt.

No, I just point to how they are terrorist to be treated like AQ was and have acknowledge that this seems to be a ROE violation, but not a Geneva Convention war crime like you want.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

Minor note, the Geneva Conventions are a series of treaties, not a single document. As treaties are only binding upon signatories who have completed any domestically required ratification procedures, whether the treatment of irregular combatants, unlawful combatants clauses apply to Israel depends entirely on whether Israel signed and ratified that iteration of the underlying set of treaties.

Now, I don't know if they did or did not, but that should be something relatively simple to determine for those who are interested.

Technically yes, but during the Nuremberg trials, it was held that because international treaties such as the Hague Convention had been accepted "by all civilised nations" for a considerable period of time, they had become part of the universal and customary laws of war and thus were binding on all parties regardless of signatory status.

The same applies to the Geneva Conventions.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

They do apply though. I literally pointed out the spot in the Geneva conventions, and you started talking about the FFL, which is completely irrelevant, and also got what you said about the FFL wrong also.

Yes. Under the Conventions, the proper way to handle surrendering Hamas insurgents is to accept their surrender, then have a military court find that they are not legal combatants and have them lawfully imprisoned and/or executed. The Conventions are very specific about this -- you're required to take surrenders and you can't execute prisoners of war, but illegal combatants do not qualify for prisoner of war status and may be lawfully executed after surrendering. They just can't be summarily executed *while attempting to surrender*.

Note that the same thing would apply to American Blackwater contractors. They are mercenaries and thus illegal combatants, it is 100% legitimate to execute them as not-POWs.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

Last I checked, a rebel soldier is required to be uniformed, have a recognized command structure, and be part of an organized military that demonstrates will and capability to adhere to the conventions themselves.

Near as I can tell, the Hamas folks fail at least two points of that test. Meaning that they are not rebels, but rather unlawful combatants. That doesn't mean that they have no rights under the conventions, but it does mean that the rules of engagement and right granted are looser and lesser, respectively, than those accorded to lawful combatants. I would presume that making reasonable efforts to accept genuine* surrenders fall within those required ROE.


*false surrenders are a warcrime too. As are attacks deliberately targeting civilians. As is hiding forces at civilians/medical facilities. As is using medical facilities to stage military supplies. As is torture. As is rape. As is stealing from civilians. etc.

That is incorrect. A combatant power is required to accept surrenders from unlawful combatants; they're simply allowed to put them on trial afterwards and have them imprisoned or executed on the basis of that trial.

 

[Abhorsen]

There is a reason they have so much French gear and have for a long time. And the US cannot really fuck with France that much.

... Again, you show your complete ignorance. Yes, France was once Israel's best ally. But that hasn't been the case for around 50 years or so. They stopped sending weapons to Israel, because Israel was losing the PR war, and chose the Arab states.

And on top of that, if Israel is losing the PR so badly the US ditches them, there's 0 chance that France will take them up, not with how many muslims live in France. Instead, they'll pick the Arab states again. Look who is the only one to side with Israel at the UN, despite France's Veto.

No, I just point to how they are terrorist to be treated like AQ was and have acknowledge that this seems to be a ROE violation, but not a Geneva Convention war crime like you want.

Yes, because America's war crimes against AQ certainly stopped AQ from using those to recruit more members, leading to eventual US losses and quagmires. Oh, wait...

And again, please read the Geneva Conventions, or at least the small bit I keep pointing out to you. There's no "but they're really bad you guys" exception to the surrender rule. Instead, the surrender rule allows the person accepting the surrender to be completely confident in their safety, by demanding basically arbitrary things of those surrendering from a distance.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

And again, please read the Geneva Conventions, or at least the small bit I keep pointing out to you. There's no "but they're really bad you guys" exception to the surrender rule. Instead, the surrender rule allows the person accepting the surrender to be completely confident in their safety, by demanding basically arbitrary things of those surrendering from a distance.

Exactly. Perfidy or illegal combatant status is punished *afterwards*, not by refusing to accept surrender.

To slightly draw back to the previous bit of the debate, what makes a situation such as this a ROE violation and *not* a war crime is that the various Conventions on war do specifically mention that surrender must be "seen and recognized", and the Hague Convention in fact explicitly notes that a soldier who surrenders at the last moment does so at his own risk of the other side not recognizing an attempt to surrender in time to cease fire.

(In practice, it has been *quite widely practiced* throughout history that last-second surrenders are not accepted, even though this is, by technical reading of Hague and Geneva, a war crime.)

 

[Abhorsen]

To slightly draw back to the previous bit of the debate, what makes a situation such as this a ROE violation and *not* a war crime is that the various Conventions on war do specifically mention that surrender must be "seen and recognized", and the Hague Convention in fact explicitly notes that a soldier who surrenders at the last moment does so at his own risk of the other side not recognizing an attempt to surrender in time to cease fire.

Yes, only we don't even know if that was the case here. It could have been seen and acknowledged, and shot anyway. It's quite likely, honestly. Any normal human would want to just kill Hamas extrajudicially. The thing is, impulses aren't always moral.

 

[willdelve4beer]

That is incorrect. A combatant power is required to accept surrenders from unlawful combatants; they're simply allowed to put them on trial afterwards and have them imprisoned or executed on the basis of that trial.

Cool. Did not know that. thanks.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

The white flag rules go all the way back to the Hague Conventions, which are quite a bit earlier than the Geneva Conventions:

An individual is considered a parlementaire who is authorized by one of the belligerents to enter into communication with the other, and who carries a white flag. He has a right to inviolability, as well as the trumpeter, bugler, or drummer, the flag-bearer, and the interpreter who may accompany him.

— Hague Convention of 1899, Laws of War : Laws and Customs of War on Land

So technically a white flag is an offer of parley rather than surrender per se, but that is a very narrow distinction. That said, it is an established rule that a belligerent does not have to accept an offer of ceasefire or of conditional surrender; the only surrender that is absolute is an unconditional cessation of hostilities, and the belligerent *is* allowed to say, "I will only accept an unconditional surrender."

This was notably done during World War I; the Central Powers wanted a cease-fire while negotiating terms, but the Entente Powers refused to cease fire and ultimately decided to play every possible technicality about when the armistice agreement went into effect, initiating a major offensive *after the armistice had been signed* and only ceasing hostilities at the *exact moment* specified in the treaty (11 AM Central European Time, 11 November 1918).

That happened because some of the military high command did not want to honor the armistice at all and were effectively *trying* to "prove" that a major offensive would finally achieve the decisive break through. They literally threw away almost three thousand lives just for one more go at the the same sociopathic logic where every butchered attempt to go "over the top" just made high command want to do it more to prove they weren't wrong.

 

[IndyFront]

That does matter to me, and will matter as long as the Israelis don't act like Hamas. You are the one wanting Israel to act like Hamas.

The ones who are thinking and acting emotionally and ideologically are the ones that are going to harm Israel more than Hamas ever could, especially if the confrontations between the secularists and extremists boil over. It may seem counterintuitive but the Islamist extremists are absolutely frothing at the thought of the Anti-Arab far-right extremists seizing power and beginning a mass crackdown on dissent, of which there is quite a bit of in Israel against Netanyahu and the extremists atm (and there's also the threat of Bibi getting overthrown and someone like Smotrich or the "Nuke Gaza" guy taking over)

 

[Sergeant Foley]

That's tragic about the hostages. But, it makes you wonder if this is another "surrendering WW2 Japanese soldier" problem that caused them to adopt this rule of engagement.

Hoping the Israeli Defense Forces wipe out these Palestinians off the entire map.

 

[Jormungandr]

Hoping the Israeli Defense Forces wipe out these Palestinians off the entire map.

I have as much sympathy for them as I would a drunk Russian who decides to piss on an electric fence (side note: Yes, those YouTube videos are hilarious).