[newacct583]

Seems not unlikely, though the IDF has been caught in lies like this in the past.

Still, blowing up civilian assets deliberately to get at nearby targets is supposed to be a war crime. There's like a whole treaty about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention

Now, sure, I know the reply will be that Hamas also violates the Geneva convention routinely. And then everyone will dive in to scream about how the other side did it first.

And nothing will get better, because the sad truth is that Hamas, the IDF and the right wing Israeli coalition are in effect allies in a coordinated struggle against moderates on both sides who'd (amazing, I know) prefer not blowing people up. Politics on the Paletstinian side are harder to analyze, but for sure Likud needs an active Hamas adversary to stay in power. They're barely hanging on every election.

[JoeyBananas]

Realistically there is no such thing as a war without the destruction of civilian assets. What do you suggest Israel should do if Hamas is firing rockets at them from within a city?

There are a lot of people who do want to blow each other up and that's just life

[newacct583]

> There are a lot of people who do want to blow each other up and that's just life

Right, but the notable intersection with US policy for non-Israeli folks like me is that the responds then becomes: maybe we should stop buying them bombs to do it with.

As I mentioned, right now the people with the bombs on both sides of that border have a very clear built-in incentive to use them. Take the incentive away and let's see what happens.

[himinlomax]

> Realistically there is no such thing as a war without the destruction of civilian assets

What are those treaties for?