Just now, Bkk Brian said:

That's not how it works, you need to provide evidence of you claims, regards war crimes that another subject that needs evidence, trial and convictions

 

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/2/un-rights-office-says-israeli-attacks-on-jabalia-could-be-war-crime

 

Of course, Netanyahu will never do the right thing and protest his innocence at the ICC. Here's a man that will never travel outside his country again.

 

 

Just now, Bkk Brian said:

a meme..........your on a roll down the tunnels

 

Was the bombing of Jabalaya even possibly not a war crime?

Just now, ozimoron said:

 

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/2/un-rights-office-says-israeli-attacks-on-jabalia-could-be-war-crime

 

Of course, Netanyahu will never do the right thing and protest his innocence at the ICC. Here's a man that will never travel outside his country again.

 

 

You are not getting away with your unsubstantiated claims. Links to those needed

6 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

But I like your avatar.

I have changed it just for you..nice?

 

3 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

You are not getting away with your unsubstantiated claims. Links to those needed

 

Is there even the remotest possibility of Jabalaya not being a war crime?

5 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Was the bombing of Jabalaya a war crime or not. If not, why not?

 

Maybe.

You decide it was based on what you read in the media. This is not proof enough to make it so.

Most of Israel's actions could be proven to be legal. Not good, not moral - legal. Deciding whether they are or aren't requires more information. 

Most of Hamas's actions are more straightforward violations.

24 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Possibly but doubtful, Hamas figures:

 

Have you factored in:

 

- Now over 600 Hamas rockets verified as having misfired and landed back in Gaza and landing in civilian areas

- The hundred if not thousands of Hamas terrorists already killed by IDF as they claim, those figure are not separated from the figures Hamas run health authority issues.

- Hamas claimed at first 800 killed by IDF hospital car park strike. That figure was then reduced to 500 or so and it turned out to be a Hamas rocket not IDF

 

Since the 2006 election, under international law, Hamas is a political organisation with an armed wing, not a terrorist organisation.

Just now, Morch said:

 

Maybe.

You decide it was based on what you read in the media. This is not proof enough to make it so.

Most of Israel's actions could be proven to be legal. Not good, not moral - legal. Deciding whether they are or aren't requires more information. 

Most of Hamas's actions are more straightforward violations.

 

Everybody, bar none, gets their info from the media. The facts are that hundreds of civilians died. Do you dispute that fact?

14 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

I cited 2 world leaders. The apologists for Israel will clutch at any pearl rather than comment on the allegations.

 

Here's a few more.

 

https://www.ajc.org/news/world-leaders-condemn-hamas-terror-attacks-on-israeli-civilians

 

No, you don't get to upgrade junior politicians to count as world leaders.

As for you link - please point out to 'war crimes' accusations.

Why are you even replying to this ozimoron i rumbled hi in his first post. As for Bud Abbot he is just reposting comical posts from AJ he posted a while back.Nothing new move on.

8 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Yes, a clear war crime.

 

In your opinion.

8 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/2/un-rights-office-says-israeli-attacks-on-jabalia-could-be-war-crime

 

Of course, Netanyahu will never do the right thing and protest his innocence at the ICC. Here's a man that will never travel outside his country again.

 

 

 

Key words: Could be.

Not 'is'.

6 minutes ago, couchpotato said:

I have changed it just for you..nice?

 

 

Alrighish, but liked the previous one better.

More of a natural look.

Just now, Morch said:

 

In your opinion.

 

Hundreds of people died. That is indisputable. Here's a nother little factoid. Israel has dropped more bombs on Gaza than the US dropped on ISIS in a month.

 

https://www.tbsnews.net/hamas-israel-war/israel-dropped-more-bombs-gaza-6-days-us-led-coalition-dropped-any-month-fighting

1 minute ago, Morch said:

 

Key words: Could be.

Not 'is'.

 

What circumstances can you conceeve of where it may not be?

3 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

 

Since the 2006 election, under international law, Hamas is a political organisation with an armed wing, not a terrorist organisation.

 

Says who?

 

11 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/2/un-rights-office-says-israeli-attacks-on-jabalia-could-be-war-crime

 

Of course, Netanyahu will never do the right thing and protest his innocence at the ICC. Here's a man that will never travel outside his country again.

 

 

Your claim:

 

"Huge lie. Dropping bombs on a refugee camp is knowingly, wilingly and deliberately killing civilians. The fact that hundreds of civilians were killed and that the outcome was entirely predictable makes it deliberate."

Just now, Bkk Brian said:

Your claim:

 

"Huge lie. Dropping bombs on a refugee camp is knowingly, wilingly and deliberately killing civilians. The fact that hundreds of civilians were killed and that the outcome was entirely predictable makes it deliberate."

 

 

Is it possible it wasn't deliberate or that Israel did not know they would kill hundreds of civilians? This is what happens when far right religious governments get power.

2 hours ago, ozimoron said:

 

Everybody, bar none, gets their info from the media. The facts are that hundreds of civilians died. Do you dispute that fact?

 

 

Casualty figures from Israel are verified.

Casualty figures from the Gaza Strip are not.

Just one example.

So no, not all information is 'from the media' in the sense that 'we don't know for sure'.

 

Hundreds of civilians may have died.

This by itself does not necessarily mean a war crime was committed.

 

I get it that for you that's enough to make a ruling, but luckily you're in no position to do so.

 

 

4 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Hundreds of people died. That is indisputable. Here's a nother little factoid. Israel has dropped more bombs on Gaza than the US dropped on ISIS in a month.

 

https://www.tbsnews.net/hamas-israel-war/israel-dropped-more-bombs-gaza-6-days-us-led-coalition-dropped-any-month-fighting

 

Hundreds and thousands of people die or get killed in wars all over the world.

It doesn't follow that each incident is a war crime.

 

As for the number of bombs - here's another factoid for you - bomb to casualty ratio. Not a very economic way to go about wiping out civilians.

1 minute ago, Morch said:

 

Hundreds and thousands of people die or get killed in wars all over the world.

It doesn't follow that each incident is a war crime.

 

As for the number of bombs - here's another factoid for you - bomb to casualty ratio. Not a very economic way to go about wiping out civilians.

 

It does actually mean that. There are war crimes behind every mass civilian killing in war. Always has been, always will be.

6 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

What circumstances can you conceeve of where it may not be?

 

Here are just some of the considerations applied to such decisions/rulings

 

- actual and accurate knowledge about civilians on site.

- value of military target vs. expected civilian casualties.

- means used to attack vs. other options.

- civilian facilities taken over by terrorist/military force.

 

There are more (a whole lot of that linked much earlier in topic).

 

8 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

 

Is it possible it wasn't deliberate or that Israel did not know they would kill hundreds of civilians? This is what happens when far right religious governments get power.

 

Do you think them politicians in government sit in IAF command center and call the shots?

Just now, Morch said:

 

Here are just some of the considerations applied to such decisions/rulings

 

- actual and accurate knowledge about civilians on site.

- value of military target vs. expected civilian casualties.

- means used to attack vs. other options.

- civilian facilities taken over by terrorist/military force.

 

There are more (a whole lot of that linked much earlier in topic).

 

 

All I see are opinions and excuses that absolve mass killings of civilians, not evidence of non commission of war crimes. The Human shields claim is a classic example of this non defence.

3 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

It does actually mean that. There are war crimes behind every mass civilian killing in war. Always has been, always will be.

 

Again, you toss about wide brush statements like that, not backing them up with anything substantial.

That's not a debate, that's you on a soap box.

Just now, Morch said:

 

Do you think them politicians in government sit in IAF command center and call the shots?

 

I know they do. It's inconceivable that they don't. No government has ever not controlled its military.

40 minutes ago, couchpotato said:

Now 321 pages of absolutely useless bickering, mostly between a few individuals. All these posts will have no bearing on the future outcome of the region (whichever side you back), so once again just a bunch of bickering egos. Bit sad really.

Yet here you are...

1 hour ago, ozimoron said:

 

All I see are opinions and excuses that absolve mass killings of civilians, not evidence of non commission of war crimes. The Human shields claim is a classic example of this non defence.

 

 

I said that determining whether Israel's actions amount to war crimes is not as easily decided as you claim or wish them to be. You asked for conditions which may effect this and I posted some. This is not an 'opinion' but stuff that was discussed and linked numerous times up topic. There is no obligation to rehash it for you, dig up links and so on. You joining the topic doesn't mean we start from scratch. Not how it goes.

 

I did not make a wholesale claim no war crimes were committed by Israel. I fully expect some actions would qualify, though not to the extent you seem to hope for.

 

I've no idea what your issue is with the Human Shield thing, sorry.

6 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

I know they do. It's inconceivable that they don't. No government has ever not controlled its military.

 

Then you don't know as much as you think.

Politicians do not seat on IAF planning teams, and do not oversee attacks in the manner you allege.

If you wish to make the claim - provide support.

 

Controlling the military does not imply involvement on the level you suggest.

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

 

No, I asked you to suggest a circumstance in which it may not be a war crime. You demurred.

 

I have answered your question. That it is not the answer you expect is your problem.

Try reading again. You'll get it.