undefined | Better HN

0 pointstsimionescu4y ago0 comments

If the Allies had started bombing German civilian targets more as they were gaining an upper hand, or even had they not subsided in their bombing of civilian targets, then yes, it would be the same, and it would not be excusable.

When fighting against a dirty enemy, it is mostly acceptable to be dirty in turn. But as your enemy is close to defeat and is losing any power to harm you, you're supposed to stop the dirty tactics that were necessary and (somewhat) justified earlier.

0 comments

eli_gottlieb4y ago

>But as your enemy is close to defeat and is losing any power to harm you, you're supposed to stop the dirty tactics that were necessary and (somewhat) justified earlier.

That is:

1) Not how international law actually works,

2) Not how anyone actually behaved in World War II,

3) Not remotely applicable before an official surrender is issued.

The law says that you have to call off military action and start releasing POWs into civilian life once their government surrenders. There is absolutely no legal or moral requirement to "let up" or "go easy" on a government that is strategically losing but refuses to surrender. This is especially so when the enemy has repeatedly invoked conditions of total war by violating the typical soldier/civilian distinction (eg: storing weapons in civilian dwellings, sending soldiers to attack without uniform or serial numbers, and various other tactics commonly labeled "terrorism" for lack of a unified legal category).

tsimionescuOP4y ago

> once their government surrenders

That's ok then, as the government of Gaza was created by Israel's own accord - so at least in 2005, we can both agree that there could have been no state of war between occupied Gaza and Israel. Then, in 2006 the Israeli backed government held free elections, in which the people of Gaza voted for Hamas. The immediate result, before Hamas had even formed a government (but after someone kidnapped 1 Israeli soldier), was intense hostility from Israel, bombing civilian infrastructure (a war crime, if indeed there is a war), arresting elected Hamas officials, denying Hamas members transit between Gaza and the West Bank, and other acts.

So, if you really want to claim there is an actual war, then this war can only be the one started in 2006 by Israel in a surprise attack in retaliation for the democratic vote of the people of Gaza. The war started then with a surprise attack and immediately resorting to war crimes by Israel (Gaza would follow suit with their own attack on Israeli civilians).

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse