[rdtsc]

> Everyone else is a civilian that can only be directly targeted when and for as long as they directly participate in hostilities, such as by taking up arms, planning military operations, laying down mines, etc.

There is some incredible magic that often happens: as soon as anyone is targeted and killed, they immediately transform from civilians to "collaborators", "terrorists", "militants" etc. Of course everything is classified and restricted to avoid anyone snooping around and asking questions.

[skinkestek]

In Norway it is rather the other way:

We all know (if we stop and think) that a person can be both a teacher and a terrorist.

But according to media here almost every victim except top Hamas brass seems to be referred to by their whatever else they were besides terrorists and the terrorists (or even just soldier) part get hushed down.

[NomDePlum]

Can you site an example of this please?

It's contradictory to my understanding of what is happening.

By that, I mean, when the few remaining police left in Northern Gaza, who had reported to be critical to providing security for aid deliveries (and involved in coordination with Israel) where assassinated recently by Israel, and claimed as high ranking Hamas targets it pretty much cemented my opinion that nothing is true, or believable from Israel in this conflict.

How are you defining terrorist here as well? As other than the horrific events of October 7th, and the hostages from that day, the only visible acts of violence and terror associated with Palestine appear to be towards anyone Palestinian, journalists, aid workers and medical staff.

[skinkestek]

> How are you defining terrorist here as well? As other than the horrific events of October 7th, and the hostages from that day, the only visible acts of violence and terror associated with Palestine appear to be towards anyone Palestinian, journalists, aid workers and medical staff.

You can start with the large scale, multi year campaign of using MLRS ramps to shoot barrages of unguided rockets from Gaza and Lebanon into Israel.

That is indiscriminate - or even targeting civilians directly.

But because Israel has gone to extreme lengths to counter it there are few causalities these days and combined with medias extreme one-sidedness that means we don't even hear when they hit a hospital in Israel last year.

Cynically speaking, Iron Dome has been an expensive PR disaster for Israel, but that is what one get for caring about ones own citizens and not being allowed to just do counter battery fire until the enemy stops.

[ThinkBeat]

When people complain that disadvantaged people fighting asymmetrically use "unguided missiles" it makes me think that we need to provide them with the technology and means of production and infrastructure to shoot smart missiles instead.

That could in theory allow the asymmetris side to kill less civilians and more military targets.

Would that make the whole situation better? There would no longer be outrage that they use -unguided- missiles.

The unguided missiles that are used to today are of such poor quality that they seldom hit anything. A majority are tracked by Irondome but never targeted since the system predicts it wont do any harm

Properly targeted missiles would be far more likely to hit a target unless Iron Dome manages to shoot it down.

In the end is it not the case that "unguided" missiles are an advantage for IDF rather than a problem?

[skinkestek]

Alternatively we could withhold aid and make it clear we will only send what they need to survive until there has been a full month without attacks.

Since Israel doesn't attack first that will be the end of the hostilities.

We can then start discussing when and how to normalize the borders and reopen the airport as the situation normalizes.

[ThinkBeat]

I agree. No aid of any kind should be given to the IDF or anything associated with it period.

No money. No bombs, No shells. Nada.

We should sanction any country that provides any of the above as well as political and military leaders and companies in Israel.

Until hostilities end and a lasting negotiated peace is established.

[NomDePlum]

My understanding of what you have said:

Israel has had rockets fired at it. It was frightening for the population (understandably), but it didn't affect us much.

So I agree that's an impact of terrorism. But, it's really saying we haven't been impacted since October 7th is it not?

Not a criticism, and a good thing. My response is just related to earlier questions. Which are now reopened.

[skinkestek]

Sadly rocket barrages continued way after 07 of October.

Even during the short cease fire there was at least one rocket barrage.

Say what you want but they surely have manage to do the things they prioritize.

[zild3d]

> As other than the horrific events of October 7th, and the hostages from that day, the only visible acts of violence and terror associated with Palestine appear to be towards anyone Palestinian

That's a wildly inaccurate statement. There has been continual rockets fired into Israel, as well fairly regular incidents of stabbings, shootings, etc.

https://www.tzevaadom.co.il/en/

https://www.timesofisrael.com/three-seriously-wounded-in-ter...

Not intending to make any justification or moral comparison in either direction, but it is objectively untrue that violence/terror has only been in one direction post Oct 7th

[NomDePlum]

Fair point. Apologies for not mentioning that.

[YZF]

Not sure what's the point of your last paragraph. Clearly there have been many documented visible "acts of violence" towards the IDF in Gaza. There have also been rockets fired from Gaza into Israel for weeks since Oct 7th and even in recent days. Plenty of "visible" acts of violence. By the way, Hamas also killed Palestinians they suspected of collaborating with Israel during this time.

Hamas Police is Hamas. Hamas is a terrorist organization (e.g. where I live in Canada). I.e. everyone in Hamas is a terrorist, at least in Canada, the US, the EU, and I'm pretty sure in Israel. They earned that by indiscriminately attacking civilians and according to organizations like Amnesty International committing crimes against humanity.

Soldiers, even if they commit war crimes, are not generally labelled as terrorists. I know sucks to be a terrorist. They fight by different rules so they get different names (they wear uniforms etc.).

[cess11]

The palestinians have a right to violent resistance to the occupation. On the Gaza strip they're denied international relations and trade so they can only make very primitive military equipment, which means that to reach an effect at all they pretty much have to fire unguided rockets into Israel. When they tried non-violent protest against the occupation, the "March of Return", by demonstrating at the border they were systematically mutilated by the IDF.

There is an alternative, sure, prepare for a year and then invade Israel. Which they did, after decades of "mowing the lawn" as the israelis call it.

The terror organisation classification of Hamas isn't as much about the political party or its affiliated militia as manufactured consent to relations with Israel and traditions among colonial states. The modern 'West' usually calls its enemies terrorist, like it did during the Mau Mau uprising. This is why so few states agree with this classification.

You don't have to like Hamas but compared to the PA they're not very corrupt, and since they stopped doing suicide bombings they've been quite successful as a resistance movement. Since several years back they've also been quite good at unifying and coordinating the political parties and militias on the Gaza strip in preparation for and during periods of israeli military aggression, including with their main competitor in Palestinian Islamic Jihad, socialists from PFLP/DFLP/Fatah movement, Iran's Mujahideen movement and so on.

Hamas isn't just a political party with a militia, it's also a charity movement. To most people it seems weird to call people terrorists because they take care of their vulnerable neighbours and run soup kitchens and the like.

[YZF]

People keep saying "right to a violent resistance" but it's not a thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_resist

Nobody has the "right" to kill other people. That's not a right.

Gaza was not occupied, so they specifically didn't have the right you claim they had that doesn't even exist.

> On the Gaza strip they're denied international relations and trade.

This is also not true. When Israel left in 2005 they pretty much had control of their destiny. They chose to elect Hamas, that said its goal is to kill all Jews in the world. They chose to keep attacking Israel after Israel left. The full blockade on Gaza from the Israeli side was only imposed after Hamas came to power in 2007. Gaza still has a border with Egypt where they were free to negotiate any trade or relationships they felt like. Except the Egyptians didn't like them any better than Israel because they supported ISIS in Sinai.

[dragonwriter]

> People keep saying “right to a violent resistance” but it’s not a thing

Your link says it is a thing:

“In international law, the right to resist is closely related to the principle of self-determination. It is widely recognized that a right to self-determination arises in situations of colonial domination, foreign occupation, and racist regimes that deny a segment of the population political participation. According to international law, states may not use force against the lawful exercise of self-determination, while those seeking self-determination may use military force if there is no other way to achieve their goals.”

> Gaza was not occupied,

Gaza was openly occupied until 2005, and after that Israel “disengaged” but still actively patrolled Gaza’s waters, maintained what was in effect a free fire zone on the Gaza side of the border (with declared entry rules and prohibitions within certain distances, but the shootings occurred both well beyond the declared distances and when civilians were complying with the declared conditions), and otherwise used military force to effectively dictate conditions inside Gaza.

Moreover, Palestine remains occupied whether or not the Gaza piece of it is.

[cess11]

Yes it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_right_to_resist

Yes it is. It definitely is. It's definitely very much a right to start killing soldiers if another country invades yours and starts occupying it.

Yes it is. Israel controls the borders, airspace, finances, communications, water, and so on. This amounts to occupation.

Your views are so very weird. IS in Sinai has executed people suspected of helping to supply weapons to the Gaza strip, they're at war with Hamas.

[0xA1EF]

Israel withdrawing its soldiers from Gaza doesn't mean that Gaza is not under occupation. There's no Palestinian soveriegn state. All of Palestinian lands and the entire Palestinian population are under occupation, and according to International law, the responsibility of the occupier, and have the right to resist.

[WJW]

Nobody calls them terrorists because they run soup kitchens. People call them terrorists because they take children hostage and kill civilians. Destroying the Israel and killing its inhabitants is literally in their founding charter, and they act upon it whenever they get the chance. That is why they are terrorists.

[cess11]

No, they got the designation because they used suicide bombings in the nineties. But OK, so you'd call Israel a terrorist state then? And consider Israel the bigger problem due to the scale of their actions?

The Hamas charter is from 2017. Do you have any specific complaints about its contents?

[lo_zamoyski]

Hamas are terrorists, yes. But that doesn't mean you destroy them at all costs. It doesn't mean you can "mow the grass" in Gaza at such high civilian cost. And while destroying Israel is Hamas's stated goal, it's about as delusional as thinking the Jan. 6 rioters could have overthrown the US government. 30,000 Hamas fighting with crude weapons against the IDF, one of the most powerful and advanced armed forces in the world? Come on.

[Tainnor]

People can have different opinions on the way Israel is conducting this war. I know I am conflicted.

But Hamas is not a legitimate resistance movement. It is a fundamentalist, oppressive, terrorist regime. You do not stand to gain anything by associating with them.

[cess11]

I don't care whether they're considered legitimate or not, to me that's up to the palestinians to decide. Currently they're the most successful faction.

They've also shown a lot of ideological pragmatism compared to e.g. Hezbollah, and their main competitor on the Gaza strip is a splinter called Palestinian Islamic Jihad which considers Hamas too pragmatic, too invested in 'soft' projects like social or charity work. I'm not as sure that the alternatives are better.

[fakedang]

> You don't have to like Hamas but compared to the PA they're not very corrupt,

If your society's two choices are a.) lots of corruption, and b.) less corruption but with terrorism, then you've pretty much shown that you're incapable of self-governance as a people.

> and since they stopped doing suicide bombings they've been quite successful as a resistance movement. Since several years back they've also been quite good at unifying and coordinating the political parties and militias on the Gaza strip in preparation for and during periods of israeli military aggression, including with their main competitor in Palestinian Islamic Jihad, socialists from PFLP/DFLP/Fatah movement, Iran's Mujahideen movement and so on.

Sounds like if Israel didn't exist, these guys would just be fighting against Fatah instead. Or fighting between themselves.

[cess11]

What do you mean by "terrorism", exactly?

Yeah, possibly. In the West Bank militia groups have been fighting PA forces recently due to them harassing and killing militia men and generally assisting the IDF in the occupation. After the 2006 election the PA tried to oust Hamas from the Gaza strip and got violently expelled.

On the other hand, over the decades since 2006 Hamas has co-existed with lots of political movements in the Gaza strip and helped make sure their militias continued recruiting and exercising. It has been a politically repressive environment for sure, in large part because you can't survive as a political movement under occupation without developing a serious paranoia.

[NomDePlum]

What are the documented, visible acts of violence towards the IDF this year? I'm not questioning there haven't been any but it's difficult to imagine a more aggressive, punitive force at present. Everything I hear about them is them being the aggressor/instigator and in a high level of cases executioner.

On the execution of civilian police I don't find it acceptable to label civilians as you want and then execute them. Those are obvious war crimes. In the case I'm talking about the group of police were some of the last able to assist aid getting through and had been doing that in coordination with the IDF.

I find the reporting we get (UK) very IDF/Israel based, with no real perspective from Palestinians, but still it's clear that the deaths and suffering in the current conflict day to day are pretty much all a result of Israel's deliberate actions. It's not excusable what is happening.

Does it matter what you are called if you are deliberately committing war crimes?

If nothing else what will Israel be like as a place to live in with so many people who have deliberately and consciously decided to kill, starve, maime and persecute so many others? How will Palestine and Israel ever recover?

[cess11]

The resistance groups in Palestine publish videos of their operations pretty much daily, and the bigger ones publish text messages about their operations and political commentary several times daily.

If you follow their communications you'll see a lot of sniping, light artillery and RPG:d vehicles.

The mainstream israeli position is to hurry up and get it over with, there are daily protests demanding a change in government to one that, unlike Netanyahu who is perceived to use the military campaign to stay in office and avoid prosecution for corruption, would make a quick prisoner deal and then end the palestinian resistance as soon as possible.

Edit: And if you want to take a look at how IDF/Israel presents itself you'd look for soldiers on TikTok (preferred by israelis) or Facebook (preferred by foreign fighters), and Telegram channels like dead_terrorists. You'll notice some pretty stark differences.

Should probably also mention that you'll come across very NSFW, quite traumatising material.

[skinkestek]

> What are the documented, visible acts of violence towards the IDF this year?

Go to r/combatfootage on reddit.

Plenty there from all sides although you'll typically find the Ukrainian and Israeli viewspoints get more upvotes.

[KennyBlanken]

The person you're debating with is not interested in genuine debate. Look at their profile - it's an alt account for their religious dogma they're too embarrassed to associate with their public persona.

That is backed by them refusing to answer you with specific examples, engaging in a gish-gallop instead.

[skinkestek]

I am absolutely not ashamed.

I am just smart enough not to make it trivially easy for the entire internet to harass me.

[notsafetocomm]

Maybe it's because the overwhelming majority of the people being killed are actually just regular people?

[zmgsabst]

That’s always the case.

At 2:1 civilians to combatants, this is an unusually low civilian death count.

[Gabriel54]

Trying my best to assume this comment in good faith... Low compared to what? For reference, in the recent war in Ukraine (post 2022), there have been approximately 11,000 Ukrainian civilians killed and approximately 70,000 Ukrainian soldiers killed [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Russo-Ukrain...

[_djo_]

Not to get into the debate about that other war, but there have almost certainly been many more Ukrainian civilians killed than the 11 000 formally confirmed deaths. That's just the number that can be properly verified, mostly in Ukrainian-held territory, and nobody is entirely certain how many have died in the Russian-occupied regions. Ukraine claims a much larger number have died, including more than 25 000 in Mariupol alone, for instance, but that can't be independently verified because it's still Russian-held.

[NomDePlum]

This is at least as true in Gaza too is it not? And over a much shorter time frame, with a significantly smaller population.

The expectation is that there are at a minimum 15/20% dead under the bombed and decimated buildings. It could well be much, much higher, even double, or triple is not infeasible, given the large scale untargeted bombing, population dispersement and recognised IDF tactics that don't allow for groups to even consider searching and rescue operations in most cases but leave possible survivors buried under the rubble to die slowly and horribly.

The current numbers are just not even close to verifiable given the circumstances, but are statistically clearly far worse in terms of civilians on all measures.

[sir0010010]

Also Ukraine is a large country, civilians who were not drafted have mostly evacuated westward, and Poland and other countries have taken in other countless Ukrainian refugees. Meanwhile, Egypt has built barbed wire fences to prevent Palestinians from crossing the border and taking refuge there. And no other countries are presently accepting large numbers of Palestinian refugees at all.

[bawolff]

Usually you would compare it to other instances of urban combat.

E.g. you might compare it to ukrainian battles that took place in cities, but you wouldn't compare it to ukrainian battles that took place in the middle of nowhere where no civilians were. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualty_ratio has some things to compare against. Part of the problem is it is often hard to identify who is a civilian, and often different battles will categorize them differently. For example, in the iraq war us was accused of significantly undercounting civilian casualties. All this makes it hard to do direct comparisons.

[zmgsabst]

A similar anti-terrorist war featuring large amounts of urban conflict, eg Iraq (3:1) or Afghanistan (4:1.1) — since much of Ukraine is designated armies across open fields.

Numbers from:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualty_ratio

[throwaway6734]

Ukraine's troops are uniformed and fighting along a front, not trying to blend in with civilians in an urban area

[oa335]

Hamas’s Oct 7th attack also had a 2:1 civilian to soldier death ratio.

“The latest death toll from the attack is now 767 civilians, 20 hostages and 376 members of the security forces, giving a total of 1,163. One person remains missing.” https://www.barrons.com/news/new-tally-puts-october-7-attack...

[YZF]

Since we're quoting might as well: "Under the cover of thousands of rockets fired from Gaza, they killed indiscriminately in streets, houses, kibbutz communities and at a rave music festival.

It took more than three days of heavy fighting for the Israeli army to regain control, and left the country deeply traumatised by violence unseen since the country's formation in 1948.

Police are still working to assess the scale of the sexual violence that was reported alongside the killings."

I'm pretty sure "security forces" includes police and possibly firefighters and even ambulance drivers. What I found in the IDF site is 282 soldiers: https://www.gov.il/en/departments/news/swords-of-iron-idf-ca...

So the ratio is more like over 3:1. More importantly your statement not true ("civilian to soldier").

[oa335]

3:1 ratio = wanton indiscriminate terroristic destruction Thus 2:1 ratio = ?

[SZJX]

So even if the ratio is slightly lower (also debatable whether every death they count as “combatant” is accurate), this makes a fundamental difference in terms of IDF’s behavior compared to that of who they designate as “terrorists”?

[wahnfrieden]

Much of that was Israeli friendly fire

[oa335]

Indeed, both at kibbutz’s and the music festival https://youtu.be/3cPeRSVgUpQ

[lukan]

Well, depends how exactly you classify people as "combatant".

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-03-31/ty-article-ma...

[tmnvix]

This could only be possible if you are assuming all males killed are Hamas militants. In other words, absurd.

[elygre]

This is probably obvious, but just to make sure: This is the opinion of skinkestek, and not an objective truth. As another Norwegian, I do not share this opinion.

[skinkestek]

To avoid a back and forth here, people should feel free to find a way to analyse the confidence levels that newspapers use when quoting the different sides.

- what entities are quoted using netral or confidence signaling language like "sier" (says), "i følge" (according to) and similar, "data fra" (data from)

- what entities are quoted using language that gives low trust connotations: "påstår" (claims, but in Norwegian signalling low confidence)

Feel free to also compare how the claimed Israeli bombing of a hospital early during Israels response affected the front pages, vs when it became clear that it was a rocket engine from Gaza that had hit a mostly empty parking lot ourside a hospital and left a dent in the asphalt.

Since I argue in good faith I also encourage you elygre to provide similar ways to try to get something measurable to show your perspective.

I pride myself (for the lack of a better term) with being able to change my views based on listening to others and have done so both when it comes to drug policies (I have gone from very strict to liberal), economics (I used to be anti socialism, now I have come to appreciate and defend our current Norwegian system very much), and I used to defend Israel in ways that I don't do anymore.

[boppo1]

What about the World Central Kitchen people? Aid workers and terrorists?

[skinkestek]

No!

And someone needs to be held accountable whatever the reason is.

[SZJX]

And again, what would be the reason why a lot of people trying to live a “normal” life feel compelled to take up arms?

Many will call it resistance in an occupied territory in a lot of other contexts.

By this logic when the Nazis killed members of the resistance, of course they were also fighters in addition to whatever day jobs they had.

[Aerroon]

Another one is when you label any 15+ year old male as "military age" and treat them as combatants.

[jiggawatts]

On the flip side, in this war many of the Gaza combatants are either irregular forces or militants deliberately wearing civilian clothing.

So if some guy in a track suit and flip-flops uses an anti tank grenade launcher, discards the empty tube, walks away, and gets lit up, then the next day the Internet is awash with videos of the “IDF murdering a civilian!”

For reference, I think both sides are in the wrong in this conflict, and Israel more than Gaza.

However, the Internet is full of armchair international law experts that are being played like a fiddle by Hamas’ propaganda arm.

Speaking of international laws of combat: no protections apply to non-uniformed combatants pretending to be civilians. None. They can be tortured, executed on the spot, whatever.

If you want protections to apply to you, then wear a uniform or never go anywhere near a gun.

[singleshot_]

While perfidy is a violation of the law of war, summary execution is not a generally-acceptable penalty under IHL.

[bandrami]

Huh? Summary execution has always been the punishment for perfidy under the laws of war.

[elygre]

Do you have a reference for that? Even as perfidy is a war crime, we do not generally allow for summary execution for war criminals.

[bandrami]

ICRC says perfidy places you outside of the bounds of protection of international law:

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule65

[elygre]

I looked at that page before writing my comment.

It says that perfidy is a war crime. However, I don’t see anything supporting summary execution.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_execution says the following:

“Francs-tireurs (a term originating in the Franco-Prussian War) are enemy civilians or militia who continue to fight in territory occupied by a warring party and do not wear military uniforms, and may otherwise be known as guerrillas, partisans, insurgents, etc. Though they could be legally jailed or executed by most armies a century ago, the experience of World War II influenced nations occupied by foreign forces to change the law to protect this group.”

[singleshot_]

How would one know perfidy occurred?

The search term that might help here is “previous judgment, pronounced by a regularly constituted court.”

Also: if one is outside of the protection of IHL/LOAC, might other laws protect him?

[doom2]

> However, the Internet is full of armchair international law experts that are being played like a fiddle by Hamas’ propaganda arm.

And Israeli hasbara? I see a lot of this take, that everyone is just blindly trusting, eg, casualty counts from the Gazan health ministry, but there seems to be very little questioning of and critical thinking about the propaganda the IDF is spreading in this conflict. Why should we take their word for it that killing a bunch of aid workers[1] was just a mistake, for example?

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/02/israel-idf-air...

[Quanttek]

> Speaking of international laws of combat: no protections apply to non-uniformed combatants pretending to be civilians. None. They can be tortured, executed on the spot, whatever.

Speaking of "armchair international law experts", this is completely wrong.

BLUF: Failing to distinguish does not deprive you of fundamental guarantees of humane treatment, including the prohibition of torture and summary execution - both of which are war crimes.

The individual obligation to distinguish is linked to Prisoner of War (POW) status - those who do not distinguish, do not get the protections of that status. That is the only consequence of the failure to distinguish. All those persons who are not POWs are automatically civilians, as made clear by the residual clause in Article 4(4) Fourth Geneva Convention (GC IV). While civilians can be interned for "imperative reasons of security", they are entitled to their own detailed treatment obligations (Articles 79-135 GC IV). In any case, even if they are somehow not entitled to that treatment, the fundamental humane treatment guarantees of Art 27 GC IV [1] and Art 75 Additional Protocol I [2] (which, as customary law, applies to all parties to a conflict) nonetheless apply. If we argue that it is a non-international armed conflict (which knows neither POW status nor the obligation to distinguish), Common Article 3 [3] similarly obligates humane treatment. Humane treatment is also a norm under customary law [4].

Under these rules, you cannot torture people and you cannot summarily execute people [4]. Read the provisions yourself. In fact, summary execution and torture are actual war crimes [5]. If you want to punish a person, you need to give them a fair trial (IHL does not prohibit the death penalty).

You seem to be hinting at the Bush-era "illegal enemy combatant" theory but even the Bush Admin never argued that those persons are not entitled to humane treatment (it was mostly about fair trial rights), and the US (as its lone defender) has long since abandoned the position.

Whether Hamas is actually subject to such an obligation to distinguish is highly controversial. On one level is the issue of conflict classification, since POW status and the obligation to distinguish only exist in the law of international armed conflict (IAC). If we accept that there is an IAC (e.g. because of the military occupation), then the question still arises if Hamas somehow "belongs" to the State of Palestine or if they should just be seen as civilians directly participating in hostilities or as being in a parallel non-international armed conflict between Hamas and Israel. In turn, if we accept that there is an obligation to distinguish applicable to Hamas, then Israel also needs to treat Hamas fighters that distinguished as POWs (and, as set out above, if they failed to distinguish, as civilians).

[1]: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949/art...

[2]: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/arti...

[3]: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949/art...

[4]: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule87 https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule89 https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule90

[5]: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule156

[mitthrowaway2]

> On the flip side, in this war many of the Gaza combatants are either irregular forces or militants deliberately wearing civilian clothing.

I'd be more inclined to believe that this was all it was, if the IDF didn't just blow up a convoy of foreign aid workers who had already received clearance and pre-registered their route with the IDF.

Sure, accidents happen, but it speaks volumes to the general level of diligence that goes into approving each strike, and this makes me very skeptical that other incidents that get coverage are simply attacks on plainclothed militants.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/article-israel-air-str...

[ein0p]

Children and women do not shoot up tanks

[andsoitis]

> women do not shoot up tanks

There’s quite a bit of literature, history, statistics on women terrorists as well as soldiers.

[goatsi]

In the linked article the only check the IDF was still using on the target list provided by the AI was discarding any and all targets it selected who were women, as they don't believe Hamas would use them as fighters.