|
|
Post by Haighus on Nov 21, 2023 15:01:19 GMT -5
Nobody should condemn Israel for defending itself... I agree with the rest of your post. However, a lot of people are condemning this, especially those in the international law community. Under UN law, Israel is the occupier of Gaza and therefore does not have a legal right to defend itself against the people it is oppressing. That doesn't make what Hamas did right- they have committed obvious warcrimes too. However, Israel would have to cease occupying Gaza to have a right to self defense against the residents of that region. Before someone comments about how Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005- it still occupies the region under UN law as it controls the borders of Gaza and restricts access. |
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Nov 21, 2023 15:17:21 GMT -5
Nobody should condemn Israel for defending itself... I agree with the rest of your post. However, a lot of people are condemning this, especially those in the international law community. Under UN law, Israel is the occupier of Gaza and therefore does not have a legal right to defend itself against the people it is oppressing. That doesn't make what Hamas did right- they have committed obvious warcrimes too. However, Israel would have to cease occupying Gaza to have a right to self defense against the residents of that region. Before someone comments about how Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005- it still occupies the region under UN law as it controls the borders of Gaza and restricts access. I think this is a very difficult distinction, but even so there is a (limited) right to self-defense in international law in regards to war, because the UN is not the ultimate arbiter at this point given how it works. What is considered occupied territory and what is not? Which areas would it have the right of self-defense? What borders should we consider, as both can't agree on it? How do you define an attack outside of the current Gaza borders within current Israel like the 7th? Under UN law the invasion of Afghanistan was acceptable, yet Western forces were still occupying the country depending on perspective. What takes precedent when then discussing self-defense? Should stopping Hamas attacks such as these not be considered self-defense? If so, we go back to the how and proportionality of doing so. |
|
|
|
Post by Haighus on Nov 22, 2023 6:48:36 GMT -5
I agree with the rest of your post. However, a lot of people are condemning this, especially those in the international law community. Under UN law, Israel is the occupier of Gaza and therefore does not have a legal right to defend itself against the people it is oppressing. That doesn't make what Hamas did right- they have committed obvious warcrimes too. However, Israel would have to cease occupying Gaza to have a right to self defense against the residents of that region. Before someone comments about how Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005- it still occupies the region under UN law as it controls the borders of Gaza and restricts access. I think this is a very difficult distinction, but even so there is a (limited) right to self-defense in international law in regards to war, because the UN is not the ultimate arbiter at this point given how it works. What is considered occupied territory and what is not? Which areas would it have the right of self-defense? What borders should we consider, as both can't agree on it? How do you define an attack outside of the current Gaza borders within current Israel like the 7th? Under UN law the invasion of Afghanistan was acceptable, yet Western forces were still occupying the country depending on perspective. What takes precedent when then discussing self-defense? Should stopping Hamas attacks such as these not be considered self-defense? If so, we go back to the how and proportionality of doing so. Eh, I can't really comment on Afghanistan from a legal perspective, although I think that war was wrong. Afghanistan is a more complex situation than Palestine in my opinion, because it speaks to questions of neocolonialism rather than outright occupation in terms of the Al Qaeda attacks of 9/11. However, I wouldn't be surprised if it was an illegal occupation. Iraq definitely was, in my mind, as the premise for going to war was an outright falsehood (WMDs) and Western leaders knew that to be the case. I support those leaders being tried for this. To be clear, my response was only to say there are legitimate positions that state Israel does not have a right to self-defense against Gaza due to the position Israel has put Gaza into. I don't think that it is an unquestionable position that Israel can defend itself against Palestinians. I do find the arguments persuasive, and I don't think it is that difficult a distinction. Israel controls and oppresses the Gaza strip and Palestine in general against its self-determination as an independent state, therefore legally it is the aggressor by default in any engagement. Again, for clarity of people reading, I do not support Hamas and do not condone the warcrimes of the 07/10/2023 attacks. This is merely a knowledging the context that lead to them. Two wrongs do not make a right. |
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Nov 22, 2023 7:50:02 GMT -5
I don't think it is necessary to go much deeper into it, but to clarify: international law is not one cohesive packet. In some cases things can both be 'true' at once, where one section of laws goes into effect even if the overall situation is not legal (or you are the aggressor), such as with (certain) occupations. Legally speaking, this gives Israel some leeway, but not as much as they appear to be taking, although that is a difficult case to bring to court.
|
|
|
|
Post by Haighus on Nov 22, 2023 8:15:40 GMT -5
I don't think it is necessary to go much deeper into it, but to clarify: international law is not one cohesive packet. In some cases things can both be 'true' at once, where one section of laws goes into effect even if the overall situation is not legal (or you are the aggressor), such as with (certain) occupations. Legally speaking, this gives Israel some leeway, but not as much as they appear to be taking, although that is a difficult case to bring to court. That is fair. I do think Israel is on thin ice when the UN special rapporteur is talking about their position being probably illegal though. If they were not supported so strongly by the US they would likely be under a lot more pressure. As it happens, I think the question of genocide is much more likely to go to court as senior Israeli figures continue to say some very troubling things. |
|
|
|
Post by pacific on Nov 23, 2023 6:43:38 GMT -5
I think unfortunately Israel would have found a way to make it 'legal', at least in their own terms. Exactly the same thing happened with the US and Afghanistan, in the eyes of the US administration they *had* to take revenge for 9/11, even though the grounds for the US wholesale invasion of Afghanistan was arguably even more spurious than in this case.
The commentary I have read from Israelis is that the crimes committed against Israel are worse for that country than 9/11 was for the US, mostly due to the nature in which the attacks were committed.
The Israeli administration has committed a cardinal sin in allowing it to take place, and so it is now over-compensating by pursuing what it sees as the 'next best thing', and the only way to save some face, which is the eradication of Hamas. It's not possible to achieve this using air-power only (in the same way the US could not do it in Vietnam or Afghanistan, it is impossible to wipe out a hidden/guerrilla force in this manner no matter how many hills or forests you flatten) and so it must commit ground troops and as a result the conflict has escalated.
The whole thing is just a horrible, ugly sequence of events. A proportion of the Israeli population and administration want blood and revenge for what happened in the Hamas attacks, I'm not sure how long it will continue before it is sated and we have to hope that there are no further escalations beyond the already unacceptable level of 'collateral' damage.
|
|
|
|
Post by Haighus on Nov 23, 2023 7:02:22 GMT -5
To be honest, I don't think it is possible to defeat a determined guerilla operation with military force alone unless you extirpate the entire host population.
Sadly Israel appears to be aiming for that latter approach.
|
|
|
|
Post by pacific on Nov 23, 2023 10:28:02 GMT -5
To be honest, I don't think it is possible to defeat a determined guerilla operation with military force alone unless you extirpate the entire host population. Sadly Israel appears to be aiming for that latter approach. Yes absolutely, it's a complete folly. The British, Russian, Americans realised that in Afghanistan. The Americans should have learned that lesson from Vietnam, or indeed from the Russians in Afghanistan (who were far less restrained in their attempts to limit collateral damage). The Israeli's will find it now again in Gaza. And there will now be another generation of young Palestinians who will be ripe for recruiting by Hamas, or whichever other extremist organisation, as they grow older. And so the cycle continues. |
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Nov 23, 2023 12:22:04 GMT -5
Technically it should be possible? The problem with most occupations is that the guerilla movement just needs to hold its breath till the foreigners leave, but Israel is never leaving. We have seen 'local' governments come out on top (violently or with the carrot and stick), because they have no option or pressure of leaving. The examples aren't great morally speaking (Soviet-Union, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Britain in South Africa etc.), but there are a good number of 'wins' by the government/occupiers in history too.
The problem is that the only way Israel knows is violence. If they helped Palestinians and actually tried to improve their lives, Isreal might be able to take away a lot of support that currently relies on heavy handed Israeli action. Or you could argue that Israel isn't going far enough (if you don't care about morality), because an almost constant occupation is keeping the West Bank a lot more 'quiet' by Israeli norms.
|
|
|
|
Post by herzlos on Nov 23, 2023 14:00:14 GMT -5
You *could* get rid of a militant group if you can get the local population onside and turned against them. But that's not going to happen here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Nov 23, 2023 14:47:32 GMT -5
Not politically beneficial to a decent part of Israeli parties.
|
|
|
|
Post by Haighus on Nov 24, 2023 10:14:44 GMT -5
Technically it should be possible? The problem with most occupations is that the guerilla movement just needs to hold its breath till the foreigners leave, but Israel is never leaving. We have seen 'local' governments come out on top (violently or with the carrot and stick), because they have no option or pressure of leaving. The examples aren't great morally speaking (Soviet-Union, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Britain in South Africa etc.), but there are a good number of 'wins' by the government/occupiers in history too. The problem is that the only way Israel knows is violence. If they helped Palestinians and actually tried to improve their lives, Isreal might be able to take away a lot of support that currently relies on heavy handed Israeli action. Or you could argue that Israel isn't going far enough (if you don't care about morality), because an almost constant occupation is keeping the West Bank a lot more 'quiet' by Israeli norms. I don't think it is possible with military force alone to defeat a determined guerilla movement. You can suppress it for a long time if willing to invest the resources, but it will remain a thorn in the side of the occupying force unless non-military factors are brought into play or the host population is removed or destroyed. I fully agree that if Israel used non-military methods and improved the material conditions of Gaza palestinians (instead of worsening them) and gave them proper rights, then defeating Hamas/whoever will succeed Hamas becomes much more plausible. They are not making any actions to do so though. |
|
|
|
Post by bobtheinquisitor on Nov 29, 2023 13:36:40 GMT -5
So, apparently Israeli forces raided a Palestinian camp in Jenin in the West Bank. In the middle of the ceasefire.
|
|
nfe
OT Cowboy
Posts: 211
|
Post by nfe on Nov 29, 2023 14:05:37 GMT -5
So, apparently Israeli forces raided a Palestinian camp in Jenin in the West Bank. In the middle of the ceasefire. I guess they'll argue that the ceasefire is specifically with Hamas in Gaza - for what it's worth rockets were fired into Israel from Gaza 15 minutes after the ceasefire started. |
|
|
|
Post by easye on Jan 9, 2024 12:01:58 GMT -5
|
|
