• AlmightySnoo 🐢🇮🇱🇺🇦@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Patients in hospitals, either ill or injured, are a protected class under the Geneva Conventions.

    Again, not a clear-cut issue. You cannot extrapolate a few lines from the Geneva Convention with your own definitions of what constitutes a “patient”. So again, since this misinformation is being repeated, I find it only fair to quote a few passages on why that is, at least, debatable and why it is still indeed very important to add that the 3 killed were terrorists, were carrying guns and were planning a terrorist attack.

    The Geneva Convention provides guidelines for the medical treatment of enemy wounded and sick, as well as prisoners of war. However, there are no comparable provisions for the treatment of terrorists, who can be termed unlawful combatants or unprivileged belligerents.

    (there wouldn’t be an article about it if it was an obvious question: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19998085/ , you should contact that journal and ask them to retract that article since you seem to say that they’re wrong)

    Qualifying as wounded or sick in the context of international humanitarian law requires the fulfilment of two cumulative criteria: a person must require medical care and must refrain from any act of hostility. In other words the legal status of being wounded or sick is based on a person’s medical condition and conduct.

    (https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gci-1949/article-12/commentary/2016 )

    Being an active terrorist member of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, carrying at least one gun, planning a terrorist attack, and very likely committing perfidy by hiding as civilian patients in a hospital, all of that is certainly NOT “refraining from any act of hostility”. You’re free to consider the more general moral debate on whether it’s okay to assassinate terrorists hiding in a hospital, but it’s wrong and misleading to make the Geneva Convention say what it clearly doesn’t say at all.

    What would have clearly defended the terrorists’ right to care would have been if they surrendered and left Hamas. But in the absence of that, it’s, at best, still debatable whether the First Geneva Convention defends those terrorists’ right to hide as civilians in a hospital to “receive care” or not.

    With all this said, yes, it is very much indeed misinformation to maliciously leave out the fact that the 3 killed were Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists.

    • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      “shall be respected and protected in ALL CIRCUMSTANCES”. This absolutely is a clear cut issue.

      • AlmightySnoo 🐢🇮🇱🇺🇦@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        It’s not when they themselves require “the fulfilment of two cumulative criteria: a person must require medical care and must refrain from any act of hostility.

        Again, since you’re fully confident in this, go ask the journal to retract the article I linked to. Show them how they should read the Geneva Convention, that it “shouldn’t be a debate” and that it shouldn’t even require an article.

    • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      Oh look - links to the act, information provided in a clear and balanced way, and discussed without insults and posturing is downvoted to shit yet buh, warcrime is pushed to the top. Me thinks there is a bias.

      • AlmightySnoo 🐢🇮🇱🇺🇦@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        is downvoted to shit

        You should take those counts with a grain of salt, and they shouldn’t mean anything in principle since we have no Karma here. I caught someone making two accounts just yesterday to downvote everything on my profile. Lemmy has a clear vote manipulation problem and some are clearly weaponizing it to try to hide some stories from those who filter by “Hot”, like for instance this story which literally got censored by the bot downvotes: https://lemmy.world/post/10789603