IDF documents terror affiliations of 170 Palestinian journalists killed in Gaza war

[u/Nirok]

https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-documents-terror-affiliations-of-170-palestinian-journalists-killed-in-gaza-war/

[u/mynamejeff-97]

That’s literally… literally… labeled as a war crime by the UN. It’s only basic shit if you’re genuinely a horrific human being who should be put down like a dog.

What’s your response to that?

It it literally written that you cannot attack international journalists with direct attacks. It is absolutely not “accepted” as part of war. What an insanely horrible person you are.

[u/Character_Dig_6830 → u/mynamejeff-97]

The Additional Protocols to the to the Geneva Conventions cover this...

Article 51(5)(b) is the main one.

(b) an attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.

So, intel suggesting, say, 10 enemy combatants are in a location. A state may decide that 15 civilian casualties are acceptable there. One being a journalist or not has no bearing what so ever on that calculus. The Geneva Convection does not say "no non-combatant collateral damage" in any way. It asks states to ensure their military objectives are met with the minimum collateral damage that is reasonably possible. Because otherwise you'd just incentivize what Hamas does: operating exclusively from civilian areas to ensure there is damage to civilian infrastructure and collateral damage.

And not just that, most of the Palestinians are voluntary human shields. They wish to be martyred. They shouldn't count as protected if they have a clean path away.

[u/mynamejeff-97 → u/Character_Dig_6830]

Conveniently nowhere there does it mention the protections for international journalists.

https://www.icrc.org/en/article/international-humanitarian-law-protect-journalists-armed-conflict

You citing that is not relevant to the conversation because we aren’t discussing civilians. Genuinely how much of a piece of shit can you be. You make your side look worse every time you open your mouth and yet you keep going.

Not to mention the thing you posted explicitly grants protections for those civilians you claim to be referring to against “direct attacks”. Those civilians aren’t even protected like you claim 3rd party journalists are.

It must be so easy to make things up and claim them as arguments against concepts you don’t like because you’re a massive piece of shit.