The long-practiced Hamas strategy of using Palestinian children and other civilians as human shields raises the important and old moral issue of weighing the lives of enemy civilians against the lives of one's own civilians and soldiers.
I agree in principle, but their goal -- to wipe out Hamas -- will not be achieved through a ground invasion.
Each time Israel blows up a palestinian house, or kills a palestinean child it creates more enemies. The brothers, the sisters, the uncles and aunts, all of whom may have once sympathized with the two state solution will now take up arms against Israel. Their children, their grandchildren, will do the same.
You can eradicate every member of Hamas, but you cannot eradicate an idea. It will survive. New tunnels will be built. New rockets will be purchased.
The terror will continue, and this time the number of bad guys will increase.
A ground invasion, and a blockade, is precisely what Hamas wants. And they want to drag the U.S. and other western nations, already bankrupt, into another costly war.
Hamas is playing the long game, not the short game. And they are winning the long game.
I agree. And the best way to deal with this problem is to stop sending "financial aid"
1. A destitute, bankrupt America, is not a safe America.
2. Financial aid only makes Hamas tolerable.
Without the aid, their economy will collapse. And when it does they will finally vote differently.
The same is true of latin america. Stop sending aid that props up corrupt, drug lord politicians.
But this establishment/globalist party in Washington, and much of the western hemisphere, loves financial aid because it enriches them. It ensures their releection. It's all for personal gain.
This is all white noise. International law is pure mythology. The only law applicable is the law of the jungle. Israel, hopefully with US help, must destroy Hamas, with every weapon in its arsenal. Israel is dealing with pure evil and the only thing is Hamas understands is fear
There are international laws dealing with the current events taking place in Gaza and Israel. Laws on proportionality, different categories of civilians, requirements of countries regarding refugees, terrorists and genocide. Most countries, news articles, and people accusing Israel seem to be misinformed and spreading incorrect information, often purposely. Besides Hamas, some countries in violation of some of these various laws vis-a-vis this conflict are Qatar, Egypt, and the U.S.
Perhaps you could explain proportionately law, since the response cannot be proportionate to the crime itself. That would leave the perpetrators with no just punishment. Likewise, proportionality cannot be measured numerically. I’m hearing this touted frequently but a without definition.
All I'm really finding are expressions like this which sound very subjective to me.
"This principle plays a key role in regulating the conduct of hostilities, requiring that the expected incidental harm is not excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage. It appears in many provisions of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and the 1977 Additional Protocols".
Perhaps this video would be more helpful but I can't remember what was said about proportionality.
A;ll such casualties are the responsibility of Hamas which values death as a martry more than life
The decision should be theirs. The US should not interfere.
I agree in principle, but their goal -- to wipe out Hamas -- will not be achieved through a ground invasion.
Each time Israel blows up a palestinian house, or kills a palestinean child it creates more enemies. The brothers, the sisters, the uncles and aunts, all of whom may have once sympathized with the two state solution will now take up arms against Israel. Their children, their grandchildren, will do the same.
You can eradicate every member of Hamas, but you cannot eradicate an idea. It will survive. New tunnels will be built. New rockets will be purchased.
The terror will continue, and this time the number of bad guys will increase.
A ground invasion, and a blockade, is precisely what Hamas wants. And they want to drag the U.S. and other western nations, already bankrupt, into another costly war.
Hamas is playing the long game, not the short game. And they are winning the long game.
I agree. And the best way to deal with this problem is to stop sending "financial aid"
1. A destitute, bankrupt America, is not a safe America.
2. Financial aid only makes Hamas tolerable.
Without the aid, their economy will collapse. And when it does they will finally vote differently.
The same is true of latin america. Stop sending aid that props up corrupt, drug lord politicians.
But this establishment/globalist party in Washington, and much of the western hemisphere, loves financial aid because it enriches them. It ensures their releection. It's all for personal gain.
This is all white noise. International law is pure mythology. The only law applicable is the law of the jungle. Israel, hopefully with US help, must destroy Hamas, with every weapon in its arsenal. Israel is dealing with pure evil and the only thing is Hamas understands is fear
There are international laws dealing with the current events taking place in Gaza and Israel. Laws on proportionality, different categories of civilians, requirements of countries regarding refugees, terrorists and genocide. Most countries, news articles, and people accusing Israel seem to be misinformed and spreading incorrect information, often purposely. Besides Hamas, some countries in violation of some of these various laws vis-a-vis this conflict are Qatar, Egypt, and the U.S.
Perhaps you could explain proportionately law, since the response cannot be proportionate to the crime itself. That would leave the perpetrators with no just punishment. Likewise, proportionality cannot be measured numerically. I’m hearing this touted frequently but a without definition.
All I'm really finding are expressions like this which sound very subjective to me.
"This principle plays a key role in regulating the conduct of hostilities, requiring that the expected incidental harm is not excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage. It appears in many provisions of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and the 1977 Additional Protocols".
Perhaps this video would be more helpful but I can't remember what was said about proportionality.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEHdrt6NdvY&ab_channel=TheCarolineGlickShow