quotingI do not know. To me, the text of the convention does not seem unreasonable, but I think that back in the late forties, they assumed the conflicts would be pretty much symmetrical. That is, the occupied country would evacuate and temporarily relocate its people; like Ukraine is doing, for example. In the case of Hamás, though, they would need to be more than just a group of terrorists showing zero care for the civilians in Gaza. They should be the ones negotiating refuge and safe harbor for their people, but instead, they use them as human shields and blame Israel.
nevent1q…99ey
So you are right in this point, but I still think Israel should not have fallen for this trap and should continue only with the most surgical approach possible. I know how difficult and time-consuming that would be, but it would be the right thing to do.
nevent1q…28f2
Aida on Nostr: If you think what Israel is doing in Gaza is not kosher, I agree with you. But it is ...
If you think what Israel is doing in Gaza is not kosher, I agree with you. But it is not as simple as it might seem at first glance. Shouldn’t the local government, aka Hamás, be responsible for evacuating civilians? Why are they not negotiating the rescue of their own people? You know, using civilians as human shields is a war crime as well.