“These attacks violate the human right to life, absent any indication that the victims posed an imminent lethal threat to anyone else at the time.”
Right on.
So… uh, what are we actually going to do about it this time?
Anybody…?
More finger wagging or asking them to investigate themselves
Someone might attempt to pass a resolution at the UN, and the US will veto it.
deleted by creator
An even stronger-worded letter than the last dozen times.
deleted by creator
Wait til they find out what’s happening in Palestine.
I’m pretty sure Israel really doesn’t care.
The world itself doesn’t care, everyone involved in this conflict has violated international law lmao
It’s international law. Which means it’s not just israel who doesn’t have to care. But also the UK, Germany, and of course the US especially the Democrat Biden administration.
So, business as usual then.
Isn’t espionage generally a violation of international law? Like extra-judicial killing violates the sovereignty of the host nation? I guess I have been thinking this whole time that sort of stuff was 1,000% illegal, but everyone operated on a “don’t get caught” understanding.
No, espionage is not a violation of international law, but most (all?) nations make it a crime within their own territory.
What can they do about it? Nuke Israel?
Taking hostages is also against international law, which both Hamas and the houthis have done
https://treaties.un.org/doc/db/terrorism/english-18-5.pdf
International Convention against the taking of hostages. Adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 17 December 1979
Considering that the taking of hostages is an offence of grave concern to the international community and that, in accordance with the provisions of this Convention, any person committing an act of hostage taking shall either be prosecuted or extradited,
Obligatory fuck the IDF and Bibi as well as Hamas and the Houthis, but you’re not saying much by stating it’s against international law. Both sides (lmao, this isn’t a literal both-sides argument) are in violation of international law. Everyone knows it doesn’t mean shit unfortunately.
Does launching rockets at Israel violate international law?
Did the kids killed by rockets in a soccer field pose an imminent lethal threat?
You say they’re terrorists if I’m not mistaken.
Why then would you judge morality against what you say is immoral? I think like every mainstream religious text ever has something about two wrongs don’t make a right.
First of all, I never said Hezbollah are terrorists.
More important, this is about legality not morality. Governments adhere to the laws of armed conflict not out morality, but because they want their enemies to adhere to them. International law is always transactional.
So if a government doesn’t adhere to the laws of armed conflict, then its enemies won’t adhere to them either. That’s pretty much the only enforcement mechanism, by the way.
Interesting.
It’s internationally illegal to booby trap by any means civilian objects in a non combat area filled with non coms.
No there’s the hague, this one Israel actually signed.
the hague
Israel (like the USA) has withdrawn from the Rome Statute and no longer accepts jurisdiction of the ICC.
Unlike you or me, states are sovereign and are allowed to withdraw from treaty jurisdiction. The ICC even specifies the process for doing so.
It’s internationally illegal
Booby traps are banned by the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. But like all treaties, failure to abide by it simply means Israel’s enemies won’t abide by it.
Treaties are like contracts. When you sign an employment contract, your employer agrees to pay you and you agree to show up to work. If you fail to show up, your employer can’t really force you to work. They just stop paying you. And if your employer unilaterally decides not to pay you any more then you can decide not to show up to work any more.
Likewise, if a country exits the EU or NATO or NAFTA or the Geneva Convention, then they stop receiving the benefits of membership. Nothing more.
Not accepting it any longer does not negate the prior agreement nor does it mean they aren’t breaking international law. It list means they’ll cry and play the downtrodden when they’re finally dragged picking and screaming to trial.
More, it means no safe zone can be held as safe. They’ve done it very specifically so no cease fire will ever be accepted.
Nope, there’s clauses that allow most of those bodies to act directly against them now without reprocussion.
does not negate the prior agreement
If you check the link, you’ll see that the treaty specifies Israel’s obligations after leaving. Namely, they are obligated to cooperate with active investigations commencing prior to withdrawal.
They left in 2002. There are no remaining investigations that were active prior to withdrawal.
it mean they aren’t breaking international law
They are “breaking international law” in the sense that I am “breaking Russian law” when I protest their invasion of Ukraine.
Russian law is meaningless to me unless I am in Russia. And the ICC is meaningless unless someone is in a state that accepts ICC jurisdiction.
There are plenty of people with ICC arrest warrants who have not been dragged to the Hague. Including Putin. They avoid going to the Hague simply by never setting foot in countries under ICC jurisdiction.
there’s clauses that allow most of those bodies to act directly against them now without reprocussion
There are no such clauses.
Keep in mind that the USA also withdrew from the ICC. China never signed at all. Nevertheless, international bodies cannot act against the USA or China “without repercussion”. The same is true of Israel.
There’s been an investigation into Israels actions for quite some time, like 95’ or so iirc. Israelis refusing acceptance doesn’t mean it isn’t happening.
Not at all the same boss, there is no accepted international ruling on hurting Russias feelings, there are however several about maiming civilians and booby trapping everyday items.
Yeah that’s why they have open warrants, it essentially excludes them from several countries and prevents their attendance at several conferences.
Haven’t been dragged in… Yet. Yet being the keyword.
There are, most of those clauses say you are only protected by them if you sign them and if you refuse whatever you refuse to sign for can be used against you. We already went over this and notably last time it was you explaining it though you seemingly did not connect the dots.
I’m well aware, it’s why countries and adversarial parties use specific weapons against us troops. They absolutely can, we just went over sovereign discretion.
I’m gonna put you in a cage, feed you at a minimum and beat you every day.
When you gonna bite me out of despair, I will unleash all my fury on you, your family and your friends saying to everyone it’s YOUR FAULT this is happening.
Find what’s wrong in that little story and your eyes might open up.
That won’t happen because he’d have to recognize both actors as human beings. You’re missing the basic premise of Zionism. Zionism comes from the assumption that Palestinians are not human beings so they are never supposed to fight back, just take any abuse and be happy with it and die when they’re told to. Like farm animals. If a cow is being branded and kills her handler she will be caught and put down. Nobody is going to justify what she did even though she just defended herself.
This is how Zionists view Palestinians. Making arguments about humanity with them is moot because they don’t recognize Palestinians as such. Like Nazism, you can’t solve this problem until this hateful ideology is rooted out from the core.
Palestinians
Hezbollah is not Palestinian.
But its beef with Israel is because of Palestinians. Even so, I should’ve said Arabs. Israel’s problem is with Arabs in general, Palestinians just happen to be the easiest target.
When Hezbollah launched rockets at Israel on Oct 8, it wasn’t because Hezbollah was in “despair” or because Israel had put Hezbollah “in a cage” or because Hezbollah had “a minimum of food”.
Hezbollah wanted to start a fight with Israel. And it got one.
Would you agree in characterizing SOME of the settlers in the West Bank as terrorists? Would that justify bombing all Israelis there?
You just made my point.
deleted by creator
Bombing by who? Hezbollah? No, because those settlers aren’t operating in Lebanon.
Yours is the same reasoning Russia used to justify invading Ukraine. Even if SOME people in Azov can be characterized as fascists, as long as Azov remains in Ukraine there is no justification for Russia to attack them.
Your story has nothing to do with Hezbollah
Israel deserves criticism for indiscriminately bombing the general location where terrorists live, and accepting that civilian casualties are part of the deal, but then people continue to criticize a sophisticated and precision attack against the enemy combatants with an absolute minimum of civilian casualties. Seems like people think Israel has no right to defend itself at all, and makes you wonder if it’s just good old fashioned anti semitism.
Sure let’s ignore the whole in a country they aren’t at war with thing.
I don’t know what country you live in but if someone bombed my neighborhood to take out a single person people would be rightly outraged.
If I were Lebanon I’d be pretty annoyed, but they also aren’t really doing anything about the terrorists using their country as a base, so I also can’t blame Israel for taking matters into their own hands.
I can’t help but notice Israel isn’t doing anything about the illegal settlements, the settlers, or the settlers that keep murdering Palestinians while the IDF watches and on occasion helps.
Should Lebanon be cleared to kill civilians with explosives in illegal settlements?
Are the illegal settlements on land belonging to Lebanese citizens? What do they have to do with the settlements? Or are you saying that the terrorists living in Gaza are actually from Lebanon?
Yes. This is well documented.
https://unwatch.org/item-7/claim/claim-39-israel-illegally-occupies-syrian-and-lebanese-territory/
You’re either very dumb or very bad at reading, Israel has the settlements dumb dumb.
The article you linked says that Israel owns the settlements legally. Are you trolling me?
That’s in watches position, the claim is laid by Egypt and the UN is unquestionably held hostage but the UK and the US so your not going to get their agreement. You do however gain an understanding of pattern or practice of illegal occupation of Sovereign land.
If you actually cared about extremism you’d know there’s a Israeli group in Lebanon who advocate and take actions for the expansion of illegal settlements in Lebanon, they are very very not quiet about it.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_occupation_of_Southern_Lebanon
It’s not called an occupation because they’re all getting jobs.
What does that have to do with anything? Lebanon also doesn’t belong to Israel. He’s making the argument that you can’t bomb a SOVEREIGN country just because you want to take out someone you don’t like. If someone from Hezbollah went to Turkey would Israel bomb them there? I’d like to see them try. But it would never happen because Israel is a bully and only picks on the weak.
Lebanon is fully involved in this conflict. Hezbollah is entrenched there and arguably the Hezbollah military is stronger than the official Lebanese armed forces. Lebanon can’t or won’t evict the sworn enemies of Israel, and I don’t blame Israel for taking matters into their own hands. And yes they probably would feel the need to coordinate with Turkey or get their permission before trying something similar.
Yes, like I said, they go full steam ahead on their weak neighbor but would respectfully ask for permission from the strong one. We all know what a coward is. What’s your point?
