• PugJesus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Sabotaging dual-use communications devices that are used, specifically, by members of an enemy paramilitary group is not a clear-cut war crime. On the other hand, there is a very strong argument that ‘blind-firing’ such devices en-masse without regard for the proximity of civilians or possibility of civilian harm is a war crime via insufficiently discerning use of force. But even that is something that could probably be argued in a legitimately-unbiased international court - not that it’ll ever fucking get to one, considering Israel’s history with international courts.

    Either way, it’s a shite move that was only meant to escalate the situation so Bibi can stay in power a few more minutes. Vile shit.

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      “stress that booby-traps associated with objects in normal civilian daily use are prohibited, and that booby-traps must not be used in association with protected persons, protected objects (such as medical supplies, gravesites and cultural or religious property) or internationally recognized protective emblems or signs (such as the red cross and red crescent).[3] Several manuals further specify that booby-traps must not be used in connection with certain objects likely to attract civilians, such as children’s toys.”

      A cell phone is a normal civil daily use item and would attract use by civilians.

      This specifically would come from Rule 80, pertaining to booby traps. https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule80

      • PugJesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        20 minutes ago
        1. “Booby-trap” means any device or material which is designed, constructed or adapted to kill or injure and which functions unexpectedly when a person disturbs or approaches an apparently harmless object or performs an apparently safe act.

        As these were remotely detonated, they do not fit the definition of a booby trap. Rather, the issue becomes a war crime because of Israel’s choice to detonate, which was very likely done in a manner that was reckless and without regard for collateral damage.

    • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Hezbollah isn’t just a paramilitary group, though, it’s an actual political party in Lebanon.

      You’d have to have an extremely narrow understanding of who Hezbollah even is to claim the attack was legitimate

      Not to mention the intentional fear the strike created that now legitimizes Hezbollah’s mandate against Israel. Yea, it was ‘shite’, but it seems pretty well designed to manufacture fear and chaos and to bait Lebanon into a broader conflict.