Doesn’t mean it’s true. Remember the source. A toddler can’t even lift an RPG
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_child_suicide_bombers_b...
> At the height of the phenomenon, Avraham Burg, former chairman of the Jewish Agency for Israel, speaker of Israel's Knesset and interim President of Israel, stated his view that, given Israeli indifference to the tortured lives of Palestinian children under occupation, suicide bombings come as no surprise.
... Palestinians have been tortured from birth for decades. Acting surprised when they fight back is either disingenuous or stupid, or both.
Presumably recruiting 17 year olds is against international law.
But for a guerrilla fighting group that doesn't care about international law, a 17 year old is almost the ideal recruit. They can fight almost as effectively as an 18 year old can, and if they die in combat you can also claim, technically truthfully, that the enemy is deliberately targeting children.
The IDF has lawyers involved in many targeting decisions and other decisions. There is a department dedicated to it: https://www.idf.il/en/mini-sites/military-advocate-general-s...
podcast: "The Lawyer who Advises the IDF on Law of War issues in Gaza"
https://law-disrupted.fm/idf-lawyer-advises-war-gaza-militar...
Now whether the right-wing soldier who has seen his friends murdered in a music festival and has been sent in with a tank into Gaza care? Very likely less so. Does every member of this right wing government care? Likely less. However the independent court system in Israel can also enforce the various conventions Israel is a signatory to (e.g. the Geneva convention). The situation where young soldiers are in Gaza armed to the teeth fighting an enemy that blends in with civilians is the creation of Hamas.
If Israel follows international law 100% you will still see a lot dead toddlers in this kind of warfare. So just that fact doesn't prove much.
This is very wrong.
Targeting hospitals without clear proof of military activity is against international law. As is collective punishment, using starvation as a weapon of war, and many other things which are currently being livestreamed to the world.
If you understand a topic this poorly, why not read a little about it before 'contributing' to the discussion?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/30/uk-government-...
When even Tory lawyers are telling their government that they are arming a genocidal state and need to stop immediately or be liable for war crimes...
Even more so, it's impossible to fight an _assymetric_ war without pissing a lot of people off.
> Targeting hospitals without clear proof of military activity is against international law.
What's "clear proof" is in the eye of the beholder.
> As is collective punishment, using starvation as a weapon of war
I'm actually willing to give Israel the benefit of doubt here, as they actually have no experience whatsoever in coordinating large scale aid deliveries, even if delays somewhat further their goal of punishing palestinians.
> UK government lawyers say Israel is breaking international law, claims top Tory in leaked recording
So what? Every major player on the world stage breaks international law whenever they damn well please, UK, US, Israel, China, Russia, they all do, to the point where in my eyes "x is breaking international law" is a completely worthless statement. Nobody is really going to do anything about it if you're on the right side of the new iron curtain.
This might be very cynical from me, but honestly, can you name the last time when the words “international law” carried any real weight?
Unfortunately, that side doesn’t exist in this world. Civilians have died in every war ever known to man. Whether they are kids or not is completely irrelevant.
Glibly dismissing this as "shit happens" is soul-rot.
If you really believe that, I’ve got a bridge to sell you. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_armed_confli...
https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/03/1147512
There's even a picture, if that helps. Hope you kept the receipt for that bridge.
The article also mentions like 6 different UN agencies and is directly on the main UN website.
Anything else you want to get dramatically wrong to defend the world's most documented genocide?