Current WAR CRIMES Israel - * ICC issues warrants for Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu & Yoav Gallant & for Hamas's Mohammed Deif

[Kurve]

The ICC has also issued a warrant for Hamas leader Mohammed Deif, who Israel says they have killed.

According to the ICC, the chamber “found reasonable grounds to believe” that Deif was “responsible for the crimes against humanity of murder; extermination; torture; and rape and other form of sexual violence; as well as the war crimes of murder, cruel treatment, torture; taking hostages; outrages upon personal dignity; and rape and other form of sexual violence”.

It also said there were reasonable grounds to believe the crimes against humanity were “part of a widespread and systematic attack directed by Hamas and other armed groups against the civilian population of Israel”.

For Netanyahu and Gallant, who was replaced as defence minister earlier this month, the chamber “found reasonable grounds to believe” that they “each bear criminal responsibility for the following crimes as co-perpetrators for committing the acts jointly with others: the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare; and the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts”.

It also found reasonable grounds to believe that “each bear criminal responsibility as civilian superiors for the war crime of intentionally directing an attack against the civilian population”.




INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT - Elements of Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes

 

[Jazny]

https://www.timesofisrael.com/hamas-member-tells-idf-interrogators-that-gunmen-operated-in-kamal-adwan-hospital/

"Before the raid COGAT oversaw the transfer of 350 patients to other hospitals"

Civilians were evacuated with warning.

Find this interesting as there are plenty of postrs here would have you believe that Israel would simply kill all of these civilians instead.

Some post as though they think the IDF literally drop the bombs on top of the hospitals with patients in them.

 

[Jazny]

You're literally the only one saying targeting. That would be almost impossible to prove as someone completely uninvolved posting from the other side of the world.

Yes but you seem to be arguing against that and giving examples that aren't counter to it.

The IDF have knowingly and deliberately bombed civilians, in the tens of thousands.

This is a really biased way of putting it. I am not saying it's wrong, but would you say the same thing about America led strikes against ISIS which also killed up to 13000 civilians? Would you characterize that as "Coalition forces knowing and deliberately bombed civilians in the tens of thousands?". It's not really the best way to put it unless you think they were actually targetting the civilians.

We have heard disturbing reports of up to 15 civilians being allowed to be killed or endangered in any given airstrike against low ranking Hamas members. If that's true, it's really messed up and I think should be a clear war crime (unless that low ranking memeber is an imminent threat), but even then the civilians aren't the targets.

The assumption is that 12-24 militants were killed, going by IDF statements. Anywhere from 126-143 civilians were killed by this particular strike, including 69 children.

Yes if those numbers are true, and they had intelligence that the strike would likely result in those numbers when they ordered it, this would probably be a war crime. I say probably, you might scoff, but read the wording of international law, it's really vague, so it's extremely difficult to know if such a strike would actually be considered disproportionate. There are no set hard and fast rules.

I guarantee if Hamas somehow struck an Israeli refugee camp, killed 20 IDF and 130 Israeli civilians, people would be screaming genocide.

You certainly wouldn't be, that's for sure.

 

[Zidane98]

Some post as though they think the IDF literally drop the bombs on top of the hospitals with patients in them.

Yet when Hamas massacres a Gazan hospital those same posters generally play it down, accuse Israel despite obviously not being them or simply ignore it all together.

80 Beds Yet Hundreds Dead: Questions Emerge Over Gaza Hospital Attack

As the hours go by after a hospital was struck in Gaza, questions are being raised as to both the severity of the attack and the number of casualties amid grave concern over the incident.

www.iranintl.com

Sobering reading for sure. Initial Palestinian claims had nearly 1000 civilians dead - in an 80 bed hospital.


That quickly dropped once it was known that Hamas / PIJ were responsible - not Israel.

Now there is no known data coming from the Gazan ministry of health for deaths in this war crime.

Western intelligence experts estimate around 100-150 but without help from Gazan sources there will never be an answer.

 

[faible]

It is a fact that the Palestinian Authority tweeted an image of Hamas summoning a Palestinian civilian for interrogation at a hospital in Gaza.

This is irrelevant to the claim you made that you were asked to support.

Further to this it is a fact that the state of Palestine is legally responsible for any acts committed by any government entity in the state of Palestine.

State responsibility | How does law protect in war? - Online casebook

casebook.icrc.org

Well done. You managed to provide a source for a statement of fact you've made. Progress.

You of course know this.

Why would I?

You made a statement of fact with no supporting source. As distinct from an opinion.

Also faible:


Accepts claims by other posters that an airstrike on Oct 31 was targeted at civilians only without any evidence to support.

Source for the above?

Think a put up or shut up policy should apply.

Otherwise it adds nothing to the discussion.

Just asking you to apply your own standard to your posts.

 

[Jazny]

It would be more accurate if I wrote civilian impact.

I don't think Israeli leadership cares whether they're dead or displaced.

Going full 'slaughter the whole population in a month' would obviously be a level of repercussions even the US veto and support couldn't shield them from.

Instead they've opted for the plausible deniability pathway; which is what results in plenty of people arguing that maybe displacing the majority of the population and destroying pretty much every element of civilian life in Gaza isn't part of the plan, just a happy accident.

Okay, so what do you think a war that was purely intended to kill Hamas would look like if fought on the same scale in Gaza if it was fought with respect to international law by say an American force against Hamas (who don't care about international law)?

So I am asking after about 15 months of fighting between say America and Hamas in Gaza, what kind of casaulty numbers and scale of destruction would we expect to see? Like if we had a control group. Say America was really motivated dismantle Hamas.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

View attachment 2200988
Missed a few.

I thought they fabricated evidence though. Why not just throw a few more in their so apologists on line can't say "is this all lmao"?

They must have 'found' more a bit later.

I wonder if Dr Abu Safiy will leave Shin Bet detention alive, or has he been r*ped to death like Al-Bursh.

 

[faible]

Sure


If you believed what you post you would offer evidence that it was civilians the IDF was targetting.

Do you have any evidence of IDF deliberately & knowingly bombing civilians?

This claim will need a source.

In reality IDF is bombing Hamas military targets. I would agree that there is evidence to suggest guilt of disproportionate action which is a war crime.

Of course I am sure you are aware that Hamas use of civilian areas amounts to a war crime as per the Geneva convention

https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/geneva-convention-relative-protection-civilian-persons-time-war

Article 19 is of note here where enemy use of hospitals renders the protects status of hospitals void.

Israel Loosened Its Rules to Bomb Hamas Fighters, Killing Many More Civilians

Surprised by Oct. 7 and fearful of another attack, Israel weakened safeguards meant to protect noncombatants, allowing officers to endanger up to 20 people in each airstrike. One of the deadliest bombardments of the 21st century followed.

www.nytimes.com

You might have missed this one. They knew civilians would die, in massive numbers, in many cases for little-to-no military significance let alone a proportionate one.

the order granted mid-ranking Israeli officers the authority to strike thousands of militants and military sites that had never been a priority in previous wars in Gaza. Officers could now pursue not only the senior Hamas commanders, arms depots and rocket launchers that were the focus of earlier campaigns, but also the lowest-ranking fighters.

The order, which has not previously been reported, had no precedent in Israeli military history. Mid-ranking officers had never been given so much leeway to attack so many targets, many of which had lower military significance, at such a high potential civilian cost.

It meant, for example, that the military could target rank-and-file militants as they were at home surrounded by relatives and neighbors, instead of only when they were alone outside.

An investigation by The New York Times found that Israel severely weakened its system of safeguards meant to protect civilians; adopted flawed methods to find targets and assess the risk of civilian casualties; routinely failed to conduct post-strike reviews of civilian harm or punish officers for wrongdoing; and ignored warnings from within its own ranks and from senior U.S. military officials about these failings.

But the databases sometimes included outdated data, according to six officers, increasing the likelihood that officers would misidentify a civilian as a combatant.

I've not seen anyone argue they're specifically and solely targeted the civilian population, but the actions taken around the destruction of civilian infrastructure aside from bombings would suggest impact upon civilian life wasn't accidental.

 

[faible]

Okay, so what do you think a war that was purely intended to kill Hamas would look like if fought on the same scale in Gaza if it was fought with respect to international law by say an American force against Hamas (who don't care about international law)?

So I am asking after about 15 months of fighting between say America and Hamas in Gaza, what kind of casaulty numbers and scale of destruction would we expect to see? Like if we had a control group. Say America was really motivated dismantle Hamas.

I think repeating the exact same pattern; continued occupation, continued disruption of civilian life, continued lack of self-determination is going to result in the same issues continuing to happen.

Hamas is a symptom, not the cause. Israel have demonstrated they can be more targeted when they want to. Sending bulldozers in, demolishing buildings, dropping 2,000 lbs bombs are all pretty incompatible with any attempt to minimise civilian casualties or disruption.

That said, it's not up to me to propose a solution for it, it's incumbent upon the actors involved not to commit war crimes, crimes against humanity or breach IHL or IHRL. We teach kids two wrongs don't make a right, yet we're accepting of Israel committing atrocities on a massive scale as 'self defence' against a population that has been under military occupation for decades.

Demanding a poster provide a solution in order to pretend there's no other option but 'atrocities' is an obvious logical fallacy.

 

[faible]

Yet when Hamas massacres a Gazan hospital those same posters generally play it down, accuse Israel despite obviously not being them or simply ignore it all together.

80 Beds Yet Hundreds Dead: Questions Emerge Over Gaza Hospital Attack

As the hours go by after a hospital was struck in Gaza, questions are being raised as to both the severity of the attack and the number of casualties amid grave concern over the incident.

www.iranintl.com

Sobering reading for sure. Initial Palestinian claims had nearly 1000 civilians dead - in an 80 bed hospital.


That quickly dropped once it was known that Hamas / PIJ were responsible - not Israel.

Now there is no known data coming from the Gazan ministry of health for deaths in this war crime.

Western intelligence experts estimate around 100-150 but without help from Gazan sources there will never be an answer.

Now do all the other hospitals.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

Sure


If you believed what you post you would offer evidence that it was civilians the IDF was targetting.

Do you have any evidence of IDF deliberately & knowingly bombing civilians?

This claim will need a source.

I never claimed the IDF were targeting civilians.

Here is the source Richard Hecht confirming the IDF was well aware they were killing many civilians in a refugee camp when they dropped what experts assessed were 2,000lb bunker buster JDAMs, creating a 40ft crater.

In reality IDF is bombing Hamas military targets. I would agree that there is evidence to suggest guilt of disproportionate action which is a war crime.

Thorough Airwars investigations have found that during Oct 2023 only 4% of 606 Israeli strikes on civilians in Gaza involved the death of a suspected Hamas militant. Not a great ratio for an army supposedly targeting Hamas.

Maybe their AI program picking targets was a bit shonky?

Of course I am sure you are aware that Hamas use of civilian areas amounts to a war crime as per the Geneva convention

https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/geneva-convention-relative-protection-civilian-persons-time-war

Article 19 is of note here where enemy use of hospitals renders the protects status of hospitals void.

Let's take a look, shall we?



Seems that finding weapons and ammunition, or members of the armed forces being cared for in the hospitals is not considered an act harmful to the enemy.

What acts were being carried out from Kamal Adwan that justified it's destruction?

 

[faible]

IDF: We're dropping bombs on Hamas.
Other people: Can we get independent confirmation of that?
IDF: No. Trust us.

By November, two officers said, the air force had dropped so many one-ton bombs that it was running low on the guidance kits that transform unguided weapons, or “dumb bombs,” into precision-guided munitions.

This forced pilots to rely on unguided and less accurate bombs, the officers said.

But the databases sometimes included outdated data

There were also too many calls for the officers to manually track.

To speed up the process, officers used artificial intelligence.

In other units, three officers said, an individual was considered a confirmed militant if he was simply listed in Lavender.

But the military was pursuing so many targets that officers often lacked the time or resources for such sophisticated surveillance, particularly when tracking low-ranking militants early in the war

The volume of attacks meant that there was often an hours long gap between the assessment of civilian risk and the actual strike on the target

When the air force tried to kill a money changer connected to Islamic Jihad in mid-November 2023, for example, seven hours had passed since intelligence officers last checked where he was and who he was with, according to an official familiar with the attack. The strike killed two women — but the target survived because he was no longer there

The model also suffered from fundamental flaws.

It relied, for example, on people having enough electricity to power their phones — and a working phone network.

The location of handsets also cannot be determined with complete accuracy based on phone signals

the model also ignored how, during times of war, people often cluster together in large groups

Starting in November, senior officers in the American Joint Special Operations Command repeatedly raised concerns about the model’s accuracy with their Israeli counterparts, warning that it was leading to catastrophically imprecise assessments, according to the two senior U.S. military officials familiar with the conversations.

Israel Loosened Its Rules to Bomb Hamas Fighters, Killing Many More Civilians

Surprised by Oct. 7 and fearful of another attack, Israel weakened safeguards meant to protect noncombatants, allowing officers to endanger up to 20 people in each airstrike. One of the deadliest bombardments of the 21st century followed.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Jazny]

I think repeating the exact same pattern; continued occupation, continued disruption of civilian life, continued lack of self-determination is going to result in the same issues continuing to happen.

Hamas is a symptom, not the cause. Israel have demonstrated they can be more targeted when they want to. Sending bulldozers in, demolishing buildings, dropping 2,000 lbs bombs are all pretty incompatible with any attempt to minimise civilian casualties or disruption.

That said, it's not up to me to propose a solution for it, it's incumbent upon the actors involved not to commit war crimes, crimes against humanity or breach IHL or IHRL. We teach kids two wrongs don't make a right, yet we're accepting of Israel committing atrocities on a massive scale as 'self defence' against a population that has been under military occupation for decades.

Demanding a poster provide a solution in order to pretend there's no other option but 'atrocities' is an obvious logical fallacy.

I am not asking for a solution. I am just asking in a hypothetical scenario where a war is fought in Gaza by a technologically superior military within the rules of international law to eliminate Hamas, what kind of civilian casaulties and destruction would we expect to see?

I am asking because a genuine answer might look at the conflict and the various factors that make this conflict so deadly for civilians, look at past airstrike campaigns, and might conclude that it might be somewhat less destructive to civilian life and infrastructure, but wouldn't be outrageously dissimilar to what we are seeing.

Like if America were fighting Hamas instead, would we really expect there would be less than 20k civilian casaulties by this stage of the war? I think that would be surprising. I think there would be clear differences in the way they fight and the strategies they would use though, but I think we would be seeing close to similar consequences. I believe America would probably be more mindful of proportionality than the IDF seemed to be at the start of the war, for example. But I find it hard to believe they would have killed less Hamas combatants and I doubt there would be a 1:1 civilian casaulty ratio in that hypothetical war, it doesn't seem to happen in urban areas, especially against an enemy like Hamas who embed within the civilian population.

So if the war in Gaza doesn't look anything like previous genocides that are officially recognised under the 1948 definition, and looks a lot closer to what we think the tragic consequences of any military power might inflict on Gaza if they were fighting the war instead, it kind of makes it hard for me to believe the genocide claim. Obviously I can't know for sure, but it would be a very strange case of genocide.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

I am not asking for a solution. I am just asking in a hypothetical scenario where a war is fought in Gaza by a technologically superior military within the rules of international law to eliminate Hamas, what kind of civilian casaulties and destruction would we expect to see?

I am asking because a genuine answer might look at the conflict and the various factors that make this conflict so deadly for civilians, look at past airstrike campaigns, and might conclude that it might be somewhat less destructive to civilian life and infrastructure, but wouldn't be outrageously dissimilar to what we are seeing.

Like if America were fighting Hamas instead, would we really expect there would be less than 20k civilian casaulties by this stage of the war? I think that would be surprising. I think there would be clear differences in the way they fight and the strategies they would use though, but I think we would be seeing close to similar consequences. I believe America would probably be more mindful of proportionality than the IDF seemed to be at the start of the war, for example. But I find it hard to believe they would have killed less Hamas combatants and I doubt there would be a 1:1 civilian casaulty ratio in that hypothetical war, it doesn't seem to happen in urban areas, especially against an enemy like Hamas who embed within the civilian population.

So if the war in Gaza doesn't look anything like previous genocides that are officially recognised under the 1948 definition, and looks a lot closer to what we think the tragic consequences of any military power might inflict on Gaza if they were fighting the war instead, it kind of makes it hard for me to believe the genocide claim. Obviously I can't know for sure, but it would be a very strange case of genocide.

Who do you think is supplying Israel with most of the weapons, and which country has the most dual citizens serving in the IDF?

America is very much involved in this conflict.

 

[Jazny]

Who do you think is supplying Israel with most of the weapons, and which country has the most dual citizens serving in the IDF?

America is very much involved in this conflict.

Do you have something more relevant to add to my post?

 

[Kurve]

And here it is.

• The US House has passed a bill to sanction International Criminal Court officials over Israel.

US House votes to sanction International Criminal Court over Israel arrest warrants

The US House of Representatives has voted to sanction the International Criminal Court over arrest warrants it issued for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former defence minister.

www.sbs.com.au

 

[Zidane98]

Who do you think is supplying Israel with most of the weapons, and which country has the most dual citizens serving in the IDF?

America is very much involved in this conflict.

Who do you think is openly declaring their intent to destroy the state of Israel along with proxies Hamas, Hezbollah & Houthis?

Also the majority of US military aid is Iron dome. Solelu 9a defensive system designed for prevention of genocidal attacks against Israeli civilians. Guess that's a bad thing for some.

 

[Zidane98]

And here it is.

• The US House has passed a bill to sanction International Criminal Court officials over Israel.

US House votes to sanction International Criminal Court over Israel arrest warrants

The US House of Representatives has voted to sanction the International Criminal Court over arrest warrants it issued for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former defence minister.

www.sbs.com.au

Has it passed senate too?

Hopefully it is put to bed in the senate.

 

[Kurve]

Has it passed senate too?

Hopefully it is put to bed in the senate.

It's to go before the Senate under Trump so I expect it to go ahead.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

It's to go before the Senate under Trump so I expect it to go ahead.

They have voted to sanction a holocaust survivor, Theodor Meron, one of the experts Karim Khan consulted. On a standard of clear and convincing evidence, Theodor called for Khan to seek warrants for Netanyahu's and Gallant's arrest for the use of starvation as a weapon of war and murder.

 

[faible]

Who do you think is openly declaring their intent to destroy the state of Israel along with proxies Hamas, Hezbollah & Houthis?

You can start a thread about Iran any time you like. Although no one is defending them. They also aren’t voting to sanction the ICC though so not sure the US looks much better.

 

[faible]

I am not asking for a solution. I am just asking in a hypothetical scenario where a war is fought in Gaza by a technologically superior military within the rules of international law to eliminate Hamas, what kind of civilian casaulties and destruction would we expect to see?

I am asking because a genuine answer might look at the conflict and the various factors that make this conflict so deadly for civilians, look at past airstrike campaigns, and might conclude that it might be somewhat less destructive to civilian life and infrastructure, but wouldn't be outrageously dissimilar to what we are seeing.

Like if America were fighting Hamas instead, would we really expect there would be less than 20k civilian casaulties by this stage of the war? I think that would be surprising. I think there would be clear differences in the way they fight and the strategies they would use though, but I think we would be seeing close to similar consequences. I believe America would probably be more mindful of proportionality than the IDF seemed to be at the start of the war, for example. But I find it hard to believe they would have killed less Hamas combatants and I doubt there would be a 1:1 civilian casaulty ratio in that hypothetical war, it doesn't seem to happen in urban areas, especially against an enemy like Hamas who embed within the civilian population.

So if the war in Gaza doesn't look anything like previous genocides that are officially recognised under the 1948 definition, and looks a lot closer to what we think the tragic consequences of any military power might inflict on Gaza if they were fighting the war instead, it kind of makes it hard for me to believe the genocide claim. Obviously I can't know for sure, but it would be a very strange case of genocide.

We know you don’t think it’s a genocide. That’s not the only war crime or crime against humanity alleged.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Who do you think is openly declaring their intent to destroy the state of Israel along with proxies Hamas, Hezbollah & Houthis?

Not sure mate. Is it South Africa and/or Ireland?

 

[Zidane98]

You can start a thread about Iran any time you like. Although no one is defending them. They also aren’t voting to sanction the ICC though so not sure the US looks much better.

Iran worked with Hamas on the Oct 7 terror attack that started this war and have formed a coalition of proxies who openly declare tgeyr intent to destroy a state. So it is absolutely relevant to this thread. Once again the usual suspects are quite happy to ignore this.


How should a state respond to a coalition of 4 proxies threatening to destroy them in your opinion?

 

[Zidane98]

Now do all the other hospitals.

Didn't realise it was ok for Hamad to murder a few hundred Gazans in a war crime because Israel also attacked hospitals.

Interesting logic by you.