#Geneva Protocol

[tf2addictedman]

Sulfur mustard is a human-made chemical warfare agent that causes blistering of the skin and mucous membranes on contact. This type of chemical warfare agent is called a vesicant or blistering agent. Sulfur mustard is known as “mustard gas,” “mustard agent,” or by the military designation “H” or “HD.”

Producing or stockpiling mustard gas is prohibited by the Chemical Weapons Convention. When the convention entered force in 1997, the parties declared worldwide stockpiles of 17,440 tonnes of mustard gas. As of December 2015, 86% of these stockpiles had been destroyed.

The 1925 Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare, commonly known as the 1925 Geneva Protocol, bans the use of chemical and bacteriological (biological) weapons in war.

#mustard gas #chemicals #frank the tormentor #henry the dummy #geneva protocol #art #my art

[carolinemillerbooks]

New Post has been published on Books by Caroline Miller

New Post has been published on https://www.booksbycarolinemiller.com/musings/the-futures-emerald-city/

The Future's Emerald City

A strategist for the democratic party, Lisa Smith, sums up her political view of the world. It’s radical that being reasonable is radical and being normal is abnormal. ( ”Radical Reason” by Joe Hagan, Vanity Fair, October 2022, pg.43.)  Profound as well as surprising, the comment comes from a magazine with a picture of an actress exposing skin on the cover.  Incongruity is a specialty of human beings.  Whether it works as a successful survival tactic remains to be seen. The average span for a mammalian species is 1 million years, so ours is young by 700,000 years.  (“The Beginning of History,” by William Macaskill, Foreign Affairs, Sept./Oct., 2022 pg. 13.)  Having proved we are clever enough to plunder the earth to meet our desires, we appear to have brought ourselves to the brink of extinction.  Either we will go up in a cloud of nuclear smoke because we can’t get along with each other, or we will compete until we fish the oceans dry. The world we have created is one we no longer can manage with ease.  As Smith portends, humans must reach a consensus about what is normal and abnormal soon. Most of us agree we aren’t in Kansas* anymore. Bill Clinton, our 42nd President, believes we can find our way to the Emerald City if we bypass a divided political system and place our faith in philanthropy.  The basis for his sentiment is insubstantial hope.   I think there is a longing for people to get together and meet with an end in mind.  I want to ask what people and what end Clinton promotes. The guiding principle at the moment seems to be the will to power. Without a driving incentive for cohesion, cooperation has as much chance to survive as a dead Lilly that is plunged into a water glass.   William Macaskill, a philosopher who teaches at Oxford University, approaches human survival differently than Clinton.  He begins with a question. Can humanity manage “the danger of its own genius?” (The Beginning of History,” Foreign Affairs, Sept/Oct 2022 pg. 12.) He believes we’d increase our longevity if we shifted our attention from the present to the future.  Do we want to preserve the planet for our descendants? Regardless of differences in religion, culture, or politics, a majority would opt to save the planet for our unborn generations. The question is, how do we achieve it? Macaskill isn’t alone in his concerns for the future. Writers Dani Rodrik and Stephen M. Walt make a startling proposal in “How to Build a Better Order.” (Foreign Affairs, Sept./Oct., 2022, pgs. 142-155.) Past attempts to reign in repugnant governments with sanctions do little to effect change or liberate the oppressed. Generally, the pain falls hardest upon the powerless. A future world, they say, will need to accommodate non-Western powers and tolerate greater diversity in national arrangements and practices. (Ibid, pg. 145)  That means the political stage must make room for dictatorships like North Korea, the Taliban, and the military dictatorship of Myanmar. Macaskill agrees and points out the benefits of bringing incorrigibles into the fold. With their existence no longer threatened, military spending in those countries would decline, and, presuming corruption doesn’t explode, some money might be left over to feed the hungry. The arrangement would reduce the need for cyber war, or nuclear and bioweapons. (“The Beginning of History,” by William Macaskill, Foreign Affairs, Sept./Oct., 2022 pg. 19.) History shows us cooperation between advisories is possible when mutual destruction is at stake. After World War I, nations turned their backs on gas warfare. A few leaders have flaunted the Geneva Protocol, but they are deemed to be war criminals and imprisoned if caught. Nuclear agreements, though old and out of date, remain in force for the same reason.  Cloning is another example of universal cooperation. That scientific breakthrough may be appropriate for farm animals, but no nation has broken with the consensus that human cloning is abhorrent.    Using the future to guide the present provides a greater incentive for cooperation than Clinton’s call for collaboration.  His appeal to our better angels ignores nature’s pecking order, the instrument for natural selection. Mutual survival is a more compelling incentive, especially when, today, people of all philosophies recognize that human life is at a flexion point. Those who imagine we can save the future by returning to the past are already dead, fossils of a bygone era.  Humans have no choice but to observe the dictates of time. We must go forward. If the future threatens our extinction, then we must change the rules of engagement. To quote Eric Hoffer, In times of change, learners inherit the earth, while the learned find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists.   *Reference to The Wizard of Oz.

#Bill Clinton #Dani Rodrik #Eric Hoffer #Geneva Protocol #human cloning #humans on the brink of extinction #including our enemies #Josh Hagan #Lisa Smith #mutual destruction and cohesion #nuclear agreements #philanthropy as world changing #Stephen M. Walt #The Emerald City #using the future to guide the present #William Macaskill

[othercrossee]

I miss zone

#z rambles #i miss my criminal in whatrver way u can think of ☝ #theyre shitty like . bad but #well zone premidlander and postmidlander r pretty much two different people #but im not ginna defend them that much #its true theyre awful and breaking every protocols and treat the geneva convention like a todo list #they look good doing it ☝

[eileenthecrow]

Dog committing war crimes by farting while the heater is on

#chemical warfare is a violation of the geneva protocol :/ #guess she missed the memo :/

[slippingbetweenthestars]

How goes writing on your fanfic? How goes next chapter? How do you come up with stuff? Writing process?

Wow! My first unsolicited fic ask! I'm going to assume that this is in reference to Growing Where Planted, as Black and White are Also Colors is a fairly niche story and hasn't been updated for a while.

It goeth fairly well! I've been busy with a lot of life stuff lately but I have a chapter almost drafted (mostly finished, really—I just need to add a bit to the conversation).

After that it gets slightly trickier because I'm having a hard time balancing different characters' perspectives. Specifically, whose perspective is relevant enough to show and how much should be shown? I get easily bogged down in tiny details, so it's hard to move the plot forward when I'm tempted to show each scene in its entirety from 2-4 perspectives. When I focus on one character, inevitably I ask myself what another character is doing during that time period, and the problem compounds.

Related to that challenge is the fact that this story is a bit of a grab bag of different tropes that I enjoy, but when you come at a story with "I want to include almost everything I like," scope creep becomes a problem. That this fic is so self-indulgent is hard because it means I'm tempted to just include everything, and not just tropes, but each of the 4 perspectives on one scene, etc.

I've also been toying with adding yet another subplot (*sigh*). Yes, I know that's a bad idea, given the challenges I've laid out. The problem is that I included a never-shown-on-camera four-year-old child by fandom default, and it's been a long time since I was regularly around kids of that age so I have no idea what to do. I can't even watch him to imitate a kid actor's mannerisms, because he exists in dialogue references only. No matter WHAT I do with Tony, I'm going to have to do a lot of research, unless I just decide to ignore him (hard to do—four year olds are not potted plants) or vamoose him away somehow. So I'm currently dealing with some mental resistance on that front, and since anything I do with Jackie or Pete involves Tony and the subplot would need setting up soon, I need to make a decision quickly.

Re: How I come up with stuff/writing process

While I do have a rough outline of major milestones in the story, I tend to be more of a discovery writer when it comes to characters, and a plot-hole filler when it comes to everything else. When the story was very young, I did a fair amount of brainstorming and wrote that down, so I have many pages of worldbuilding/plot bunnies to mine. At the brainstorming stage (though it still happens occasionally), the show's dialogue provided many odd little inconsistencies and unusual details that served as a jumping off point.

So, for example, how on earth did alternate earth circa 2006/7 get technologically advanced enough to produce direct-to-brain streaming? Forget airships (though that does give me some suggestions about how far back in the timeline changes extend to), wearable tech that interfaces directly with the brain suggests a massively different 20th century.

How did earth get advanced enough to create cybermen? To have an existing Geneva Bio-convention governing the creation of new life forms?? AKA a presumably internationally ratified agreement governing new life forms? That suggests cybermen have precedent.

From a Doylist perspective, Pete's world just had to sound right enough for the show, so when plot demands a reason that Cybermen aren't permitted, a big authority is needed, and so Geneva conventions are referenced but now with reference to bio-conventions. But from a Watsonian perspective...FOR THE LOVE OF SUSPENSION OF DISBELIEF, HOW???

Because the Geneva Convention isn't just a name for "high-falutin' government rules" that you can just swap around and have nothing change. It's a specific agreement made in the aftermath of a truly awful war (much like the earlier Geneva Conventions and the Hague Conventions), and they exist in the form that they do because of the specific horrors of the second World War. It's like "war crimes"—it's not just a name for 'bad things,' it means something specific, including conscripting children, using poison weapons, and torture (among other things).

So, if a bio-convention exists, when was it made? Why was it made? What does it contain? How does it fall short? What ramifications does that have? How does it affect my characters? How does it affect the sociopolitical landscape of Pete's world in the wake of the cyber crisis? Those are the kind of questions that prompted the plot of Planted.

So this particular fic was a whole lot of "how can I fill these worldbuilding holes?" combined with some favorite tropes, "huh, Rose looks a lot harder than we last left her," and some extrapolation from her s4 cameos, then working from there. It's a lot of silly things treated seriously :)

#personal #fic stuff #fyi it's gen con 7 because what we call the geneva convention is technically the fourth geneva convention #and i'm including the protocols in the count number and altering the content therein slightly #look there are also some way more involved alternate histories i could have looked at #but...uh...look those are really serious things to deal with and it's already enough of a headache working with what i've got #before i go and decide to do the following: #change the ending of wwi / change the history of the weimar republic / unwrite the second world war / unwrite the holocaust #unwrite every single convention that came out of that / rewrite the entire history of europe #re-write ever single country that gained independence from colonial/imperial occupation because of the events of wwii #(oh and that's not to mention the fact that one silly little webcast apparently decided that all of south america IS A SINGLE COUNTRY??) #(i am ignoring that because i cannot afford to take that seriously. i cannot afford the landmines waiting for me #heck i haven't even decided whether or not whales scotland and ireland are part of the not-UK #(it's not the uk because it's canonically not a kingdom but a people's republic) #there are so so so many ways to offensively and ignorantly unwrite everyone's history) #and in the most loving way possible RTD absolutely did not understand things like nuclear weapons #despite using them for several plotlines #yes they can destroy life on earth as we know it #no they cannot destroy earth-the-planet as in the giant gravity rock #so i think i'm in a good place to decide to ignore details that are objectively ridiculous

[gamer2002]

Hi, I’m a lawyer. Do want to know what is really meant by a “#proportionate response” under international law? Then read on - and feel free to ask questions!

Under International Humanitarian Law, #proportionality requires that any degree of damage (up to and including death) to #civilians not be “excessive” in relation to the “military advantage anticipated from a strike against a military target.”

We are going to break that down, so everyone understands what exactly that means.

However, first, you should be aware that it is a misnomer that anytime #Palestinian civilians die after an #Israeli strike, it is automatically evidence of an Israeli war crime. This is completely false - the law does not work that way.

Simply, and unfortunately, the international rules of law recognize that civilians are often killed during war; and, most of the time, those deaths are actually not indicative of a war crime.

Instead, the legal test for “proportionality” requires that each individual strike be looked at with a particular balancing analysis.

First, here is a hard and fast rule: the strike must be intended to target a military objective; it is, therefore, an unlawful war crime to strike with the intent of targeting civilians without any military objective whatsoever.

Now, let’s get a little technical while still keeping it simple.

Under the First Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions of 1977 at both Article 51(5)(b) and Article 52(2), we know that when #Hamas uses its own population (or Israeli #hostages) as #humanshields - either by using them to shield themselves or to shield their weapons depots - Hamas has, under international law, turned civilians targets into military targets.

That means that when Hamas places weapons caches in and under schools, hospitals, mosques, etc., Hamas has made each of those places legitimate military targets.

So, it has been well-known for many years that Hamas purposefully placed its headquarters underground beneath the al-Shifa Hospital. In doing so, international law holds that the hospital is no longer just a civilian target, it is a legitimate military target.

That does not necessarily give the IDF carte blanche to attack hospitals, schools, mosques, etc.; however, it does mean that an IDF attack on a civilian target that has been made into a military target by Hamas’ use of human shields is not per se illegal under international law.

Instead, such a strike (as is the case with any strike conducted by a military like the IDF), must be analyzed through a balancing test.

One part of this balancing test performed by Israel before each strike is to determine whether the human shields in question are being used voluntarily or involuntarily.

If the human shields are being used voluntarily - meaning the human shields are there protecting Hamas and its weapons of their own volition - then the target remains a completely legitimate military target.

If the human shields are being used involuntarily - meaning Hamas is forcing people to act as human shields to protect themselves and/or their weapons - then the IDF must go back to the balancing test to determine whether the anticipated military advantage of a successful strike would outweigh the reasonably anticipated loss of civilian life.

Importantly, the IDF rules state that if it cannot determine whether a human shield is being used voluntarily or involuntarily, it must presume the civilian is being used against his or her own will and treat the civilians as an involuntary participant.

Assuming that there is a military target & that there may be human shields that are there involuntarily, the next step in the proportionality analysis for each individual strike (remember, proportionality is determined on a strike-by-strike basis, and not as the accumulation of strikes over time) is to try to determine the likely amount of damage to civilian persons and/or property as a result of the strike.

In other words, under international law, Israel must be able to give a sort of “value” to the anticipated impact on civilians (including potential civilian deaths). Simply, a smaller number of anticipated civilian casualties may make the strike proportionate if there is a significant military advantage to be gained by conducting the strike.

However, if Israel determines that the anticipated impact of a strike may cause many civilian casualties, it must make the difficult determination of whether the anticipated military advantage is so significant that it warrants carrying out the strike anyway.

So, if Hamas has a weapons depot underneath a house with two civilians inside, and that house has been used to fire 500 rockets at Israeli civilians, and it is reasonably expected that there are hundreds more rockets under that house, Israel can almost certainly carry out the strike within the confines of international law.

If that same house, however, had 10 families living inside, including many children, it could - and likely would - tip the scales of the proportionality balancing test toward Israel not being permitted to carry out the strike, even though the house has been used to attack Israeli civilians and can be expected to continue to be used to carry out attacks against Israeli civilians.

Now, that balancing test can always change. If that same house is being used to fire long-range, precision-guided missiles at Israel’s major population centers in places like #TelAviv (effectively putting millions of Israeli civilians in danger), the balancing test may tip back in favor of Israel being legally permitted to carry out the strike.

This all suggests the third and final step in the proportionality balancing test: the #IDF must determine and place a “value” on the anticipated military advantage that would be gained if it were to carry out a particular strike.

An attack on Hamas leadership and/or its weapons manufacturers would be considered a high value target. An attack on a single Hamas member who has no special skill, would be a much lower value military target.

Similarly, an attack on a small cache of mortars would have less military value that an attack on a large cache of advanced rockets that can reach large Israeli civilian population centers.

Once the @IDF determines the anticipated “value” of the likely effect on civilian persons and property and the anticipated “value” of the likely military advantage to be gained if the strike is carried out, the balancing test can be performed, and a certain amount of judgment must go into the determination of whether that strike would or would not be “proportionate.”

Importantly, this decision is so vital that the IDF does not simply permit a single solder on the ground with his or her hand on the proverbial (or actual) “trigger” to make that determination.

In fact, the decision of whether a strike is proportionate is not even left up to IDF officers. It’s not even left up to IDF Generals.

Instead, before any IDF strike can take place, IDF Guidelines provide that the proportionality balancing test must be presented to and analyzed by IDF military lawyers who then determine whether the strike is legally permissible as “proportionate” under international law and the rules of war.

And these IDF military lawyers are not mere patsies or people who simply “rubber stamp” what the IDF requests.

In fact, the IDF’s military lawyers work entirely independently of the IDF. They are outside of the chain of command and do not answer to anyone in the IDF, including a General (for example).

Plus, every IDF military lawyer knows he or she may very well be held to account if he or she makes a wrong decision based on the evidence available at the time.

Furthermore, sometimes the decisions to be made while balancing the likely military advantage against the likely civilian casualties can be so difficult that the legality of the strike is first brought to the Israeli Supreme Court for instant review.

Another important concept: the comparison of civilian body counts of #Israelis versus #Palestinians (to the extent those numbers can be trusted since they come directly from Hamas-only) is not relevant to a proportionality analysis. Each strike must be viewed individually to determine proportionality. It is not a test of the cumulative nature of the strikes.

Also, by simply comparing body counts, it does not factor in how many people killed were actually #HamasTerrorists, how many were Hamas collaborators there voluntarily, and it does not consider what military advantage was gained by Israel carrying out any individual strike.

As Israel is now in the process of seeking to secure the military advantage of preventing Hamas from having the capacity to carry out repeated attacks of the kind and nature seen on October 7th, Israel is permitted to act proportionately insofar as necessary to achieve that military objective (the elimination of Hamas and/or its ability to make war).

One more important fact people do not know, but that they should know: according to UN statistics of global conflict, the average civilian to combatant killed ratio is a rather appalling nine civilians killed for every one combatant killed.

That’s why civilian body counts in and of themselves are never indicative of a war crime. Each individual strike has to be analyzed, and unfortunately civilians always suffer disproportionately in wars.

In fact, while Israel is routinely criticized for any of its strikes that kill civilians, you may be surprised to know that Israel’s civilian to combatant ratio is routinely much lower than the nine to one average.

In the very last operation carried out by the IDF prior to October 7 (in Jenin), 0.6 civilians were killed for every one combatant killed.

In that conflict, not only were the IDF’s ratio numbers nowhere near the nine to one international average, but the IDF actually managed to kill more combatants than civilians - something that is extremely rare.

In truth, Israel is targeted by accusations of war crimes almost immediately by the media, by politicians, and by the UN General Assembly despite the fact that those accusations are near 100% of the time based neither in fact nor in law.

Since a proportionality balancing test must be used to determine whether a single specific Israeli strike falls within the confines of international law, someone providing an analysis must have all of the facts Israel considered before carrying out that strike as to the anticipated impact on civilians and the anticipated military advantage. Obviously, anyone who is making a snap judgment critical of Israel could not possibly have that information.

Understand then, that when you see talking heads accusing Israel of “war crimes” immediately after and/or during Israeli strikes, that is not an actual legal analysis under international law of what constitutes a war crime.

Much more likely, what you are witnessing is part of Hamas’ ongoing psychological and propaganda warfare campaign of demonizing and delegitimizing the State of Israel in the eyes of public opinion.

#Hamas_is_ISIS #HamasisISIS #HamasISIS #HamasMonsters #October7massacre

#israel #israel hamas war #hamas #military #war crimes #war crime #war law #law #palestine #gaza #free palestine from hamas #free palestine

[queenie-says-free-palestine]

since some ppl refuse to recognize that these are war crimes:

article 18 of the fourth geneva convention

article 33 of the fourth geneva convention

clause 2 of article 75 of the additional protocol i of 1977, section iii, chapter i

article 79 of the additional protocol i of 1977, section iii, chapter iii

article 1 of the chemical weapons convention

article 3 of the fourth geneva convention

international crime court

article 27 of the hague convention (iv)

article 3 of the third geneva convention

also thought id add this article from october 18th, and you have to consider the crimes committed since then:

feel free to rb with more articles that say that what israel is doing consists of war crimes and crimes against humanity

#palestine #free palestine #gaza #israel #free gaza #from the river to the sea palestine will be free #save palestine #fuck israel #gaza strip #this is genocide #this is a genocide #genocide #palestinian genocide #stop the genocide #gaza genocide #ceasefire now #war crimes #crimes against humanity #international law #geneva convention

[gunsandspaceships]

Recruiting Peter in Civil War: a War Crime?

Today we are going to review this statement:

Tony “blackmailed a teenager to help fight his battles for him (Civil War) (which for the record, constitutes as a fucking war crime)”.

Part 1. Not a war crime: check my post about war crimes here. War crime is a crime committed during a war, by a party of the conflict.

MCU's “Civil War” was not a war. It was a conflict between a few people, that included one fight and a chase. The fight at the end of the movie between Tony and Steve with Bucky was not a part of this particular conflict, but a conflict on its own. From the government’s side, this situation was a law enforcement operation to capture a group of fugitives, where Tony’s side represented the law enforcement group under U.N. authority, not a nation’s armed forces.

The definition of Armed Forces: “the combined military, naval, and air forces of a nation”.

Source

In comics (Earth 616) it was indeed a war, but not in the MCU. That’s first.

Second, “Under the Statute of the International Criminal Court, conscripting or enlisting children into armed forces or groups constitutes a war crime in both international and non-international armed conflicts (ICC Statute, Article 8(2)(b)(xxvi) and (e)(vii)).”

Tony did not enlist Peter in the armed forces or the Avengers.

And third, “The bans on recruitment of children below the age of 15 enshrined in Article 77 of  Additional Protocol I, and in Article 4 of Additional Protocol II are also considered to prohibit accepting voluntary enlistment (P I, Art. 77 (2); P II, Art. 4(3)(c)).”

“2. The Parties to the conflict shall take all feasible measures in order that children who have not attained the age of fifteen years do not take a direct part in hostilities and, in particular, they shall refrain from recruiting them into their armed forces. In recruiting among those persons who have attained the age of fifteen years but who have not attained the age of eighteen years, the Parties to the conflict shall endeavour to give priority to those who are oldest.” (Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, Art. 77 (2)).

Here we got to an actual error from the SMFFH filmmakers’ side. Before SMFFH Peter’s age at the time of Civil War was planned to be 15 (see directors’ and screenwriters’ commentaries). In SMFFH Peter’s birthday was set to Aug 10, 2001, making him 14 years old at the time of Civil War. We cannot use random date placements made by SMFFH creators to define serious stuff, and also use another movie’s filmmakers’ decisions that were made after Civil War. So we must go with the fact that at the time of Civil War Peter was 15 years old, as was stated by the creators of CA:CW.

Conclusion: Peter was 15 years old, and if he were recruited to participate in a war, it would not be a war crime. But, he also was not enlisted in the armed forces. And Civil War was not an actual war, but a law enforcement operation under UN jurisdiction. So, yes, Tony is not a war criminal. Again. Very disappointing.

If you guys have any other ideas of how to accuse him of war crimes – go ahead. I’ll check them all.

#tony stark #iron man #mcu #marvel #the avengers #captain america civil war #peter parker #spiderman

[sevenoctober7]

Number of Journalists killed in wars:

Vietnam War: 63 journalists in 20 years

World War II: 67 journalists in 7 years

Gaza: 140 journalists in 6 months

This violates Article 79 of Additional Protocol (I) Geneva Conventions, but international law clearly does not apply to Israel

#palestine #gazaunderattack #gaza #free palestine #gaza hospital #israel is a terrorist state #غزة تحت القصف #فلسطين #طوفان الاقصي #غزة

[ftgrfk-blog]

On June 6, 2023, around 2:30 a.m., the russian occupiers blew up the dam of the Kakhov reservoir.

This terrorist act created a mortal danger for Ukrainian citizens in the settlements on both banks of the Dnieper below the Kakhovsky Reservoir. This is an undeniable act of ecocide and an obvious war crime, the impact of which goes far beyond the borders of Ukraine and affects the ecosystem of the entire Black Sea region.

Also, this crime increases the threat of a nuclear disaster, since the capacity of the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant's cooling ponds depends on the water level in the Dnieper.

According to the Geneva Convention (Article 56 of Additional Protocol I 1977), actions to destroy dams are a war crime and can be equated to the use of weapons of mass destruction.

#russian terrorism #russian invasion #fuck russia #russia is a terrorist state #ukraine war #ukraine #ukrayna #standwithukraine #stand with ukraine #stop russia #russia terrorist state #nova kakhovka dam #nova kahovka

[i-am-aprl]

Israeli occupation army snipers execute a number of livestock in Bani Suhaila, east of Khan Yunis

Killing livestock in wars is considered a war crime according to international law, where the Geneva Conventions of 1949 protect civilians and their properties, and the Additional Protocol of 1977 expands this protection to include acts that affect the environment and food sources. The International Criminal Court also considers the widespread and unjustified destruction of property a war crime, and customary war laws protect food and agricultural resources as part of customary law in armed conflicts.

قناصة جيش الاحتلال الاسرائيلي تعدم عدد من المواشي في بني سهيلا شرق خانيونس

قتل المواشي في الحروب يعتبر جريمة حرب وفقًا للقانون الدولي، حيث تحمي اتفاقيات جنيف لعام 1949 المدنيين وممتلكاتهم، ويوسع البروتوكول الإضافي لعام 1977 هذه الحماية لتشمل الأعمال التي تؤثر على البيئة ومصادر الغذاء. كما تعتبر محكمة الجنايات الدولية التدمير الواسع النطاق وغير المبرر للممتلكات جريمة حرب، وتشمل القوانين الحربية العرفية حماية الموارد الغذائية والزراعية كجزء من القانون العرفي في النزاعات المسلحة.

#ceasefire #ceasfire now #free palestine #palestine #gaza #free gaza #israel #jerusalem #فلسطين #israelis are terrorists #israeli war crimes #israel is a terrorist state #israel is committing genocide #Israelis are war criminals #Israelis are Nazis #israeli genocide #i stand with palestine

[azurecanary]

Still absolutely insane to me that people heard Ahsoka "we don't torture" Tano say "Let's say i didn't use standard Jedi protocol" and took that to mean she violated the Geneva Conventions with Elsbeth as if she is not explicitly known for making smart remarks

HER NICKNAME IS LITERALLY SNIPS

#in-sane #star wars ahsoka #ahsoka tano #star wars

[girlactionfigure]

This series of tweets show #Hamas committed war crimes under multiple treaties by taking hostages. That’s because the prohibition on taking hostages is unquestionably a rule of customary international law - one the International Court of Justice has called an “elementary consideration of humanity.” See Paramilitary Activities Judgment (1986).

But one more treaty prohibiting hostage-taking that Hamas violated is Article 4 of the 1977 Additional Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions, which states:

1. All persons who do not take a direct part or who have ceased to take part in hostilities, whether or not their liberty has been restricted, are entitled to respect for their person, honor and convictions and religious practices …

2. Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, the following acts against the persons referred to in paragraph 1 are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever:

…

(c) taking of hostages

Like Common Article 3, this Article binds both “parties” of a conflict and does not require both parties to be “state actors.”

There are more applicable treaties - several more - but seriously, you get the point. 

Hamas' war crimes of taking 230+ hostages (like many of its other war crimes - stay tuned) is open and shut. 

Captain Allen

@CptAllenHistory

#GazaWar #HamasTerrorrists #HamasMassacre #HamasNazis #HamasisISIS #FreePalestineFromHamas #FreeTheHostages #FreethehostagesNOW

[eretzyisrael]

by Mark Goldfeder

Once again self-proclaimed international law experts are throwing around terms that they do not understand to accuse Israel of atrocities as it responds to a vicious attack from the terrorist group Hamas.

Today, these "experts" are concerned about the war crimes of "forcible transfer" and "deportation" as Israel tries to save innocent Palestinian civilians by warning them to leave Hamas strongholds.

But don't take my word for it, let's ask the United Nations what the war crimes "forcible transfer" and "deportation" mean when the entity involved is not Israel (emphasis added):

What are the crimes of deportation and forcible transfer? Forcing persons to leave the area where they reside can be a crime against humanity, a war crime or both. If they occur in the context of a widespread or systematic attack against the civilian population, deportation and forcible transfer are crimes against humanity. Deportation and forcible transfer occur when individuals are forced by expulsion or coercion from the place they were lawfully present, and there was no basis under international law for their displacement. When persons are displaced across an international border, it is called deportation. When such displacement occurs within a national boundary, it is called forcible transfer. Forced displacement does not require physical force and can be caused by the threat of force or coercion, duress or psychological oppression. A person is lawfully present in an area if they have a right under domestic or international law to be there, including refugees and stateless persons. International law allows the involuntary removal of persons only where it is strictly for the security of the persons or for imperative military reasons, but only for as long as the removal is necessary.

This is not, in fact, a close call.

Israel is attacking Hamas, not targeting the civilian population.

Israel has an overwhelming imperative military reason to ask civilians to leave (stopping a genocidal terrorist organization) and is doing so for the security of those persons. Not a war crime—quite the opposite. This is what just war looks like.

Actually, Israel is quite literally following the letter of international human rights law.

Per the Geneva Conventions, Article 58(a) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I: the parties to the conflict shall, to the maximum extent feasible, "without prejudice to Article 49 of the Fourth Convention, endeavor to remove the civilian population, individual civilians and civilian objects under their control from the vicinity of military objectives."

Per Article 57, 1(c) "effective advance warning shall be given of attacks which may affect the civilian population, unless circumstances do not permit."

To review—Israel is engaging in a lawful, proportionate attack against a genocidal enemy force. The war crimes of forcible transfer require evidence of illicit intent; the opposite is true here. Israel has already evacuated hundreds of thousands of its own citizens to keep them out of harms' way; now Israel is desperately trying to save the lives of Palestinian civilians as well ,even at the expense of telegraphing its own attacks. Meanwhile, Hamas is ordering people to stay in harms' way, as human shields, so they can then complain to an undiscerning media about how many civilians Israel killed.

By any definition, Israel's warnings are an act of morality, if not grace. But once again, when it comes to Israel, somehow the rules are different.

#international law #war crimes #geneva convntions #israel #hamas #gaza

[justacynicalromantic]

A wave with a height of 4-5 m will hit the Antonivsky bridge east of Kherson after 7 p.m. After that, the water will rise up the Ingulets River, and after 4-5 days - the water will rise up the Bug River to Mykolaiv.

Several smaller towns and villages on both sides of the Dnieper will be flooded, and when the wave reaches them, it can be very dangerous and cause human casualties.

The isthmus at the end of the bay outside the Dnieper delta (Kinbourn spit) will be heavily flooded and almost completely submerged, although this will begin approximately 50 hours after the dam breach.

❗️Demolition of the dam in Nova Kakhovka by the Russian Federation terrorist forces

is a war crime according to the Geneva Convention.

The destruction of hydroelectric power plants is considered a weapon of mass destruction and a war crime of indiscriminate action, according to Article 56 of Additional Protocol I of 1977.

Secondary effects:

❗️Zaporizka NPP

The supply of cooling water to Europe's largest nuclear power plant, ZANP, which requires cooling even for shut-down reactors, is likely to stop.

❗️ North Crimean Channel

The supply of water to Crimea will stop again. Simply, a shot in the foot. They were going to stay there for a long time. Or not?

❗️ Reclamation of Tavria and the Kakhovsky Canal

The supply of water to the field irrigation systems of the Kherson, Dnipropetrovsk, and Zaporizhia regions will be stopped, and mainly on the occupied lands. It is not clear whether processing is currently taking place there, but without water it will definitely lose its meaning.

Many cities and villages that consume it from the Kakhovsky Canal will remain without drinking water, in particular occupied Berdyansk.

❗️ Kryvyi Rih

The 600,000-strong industrial city consumed 70% of its drinking water from the Kakhovsky Reservoir - now there will be difficulties with this.

❗️ Factories

Without a sufficient amount of water, the work of large industrial enterprises of the metallurgical industry in Marhanka, Nikopol, and Pokrov will have to be stopped.

❗️ Demographics

According to the information of the ecologist Maksym Soroka, up to 400,000 refugees affected by the dam explosion and, in the long term, up to 1,500,000 climate refugees may arrive in other regions in the near future.

❗️ Ecology is the worst!

A one-time reduction of water in a huge reservoir will lead to unpredictable ecological consequences: the death of a large number of fish, waterlogging of drained lands and a change in the climatic regime of the region.

⭕️ On the other hand, the sandy bottom will open and we will get a new desert with all the climatic consequences, such as a decrease in precipitation, dust storms, and a rise in temperature in the region. And accordingly, the risk of drought in the fields of central and southern Ukraine is greater.

The lack of water in the Kakhovsky Sea will lead to the drying of the fields of southern Ukraine with further desertification. The Zaporizhzhia NPP and dozens (if not hundreds) of large factories will have to be closed, which will not have enough water and electricity for production processes.

Accordingly, the population will leave this region en masse due to the impossibility of living in difficult climatic conditions and due to the lack of water and jobs.

#ukraine #ecological catastrophe #ecology #climate #war crimes #terrorism

[quercus-queer]

Happy Thanksgiving otherwise known as Drama with a Side of Turkey... if someone picks a fight with you about current events here is a very brief surface level list of talking points

According to Article 3 of the Geneva Convention and Article 6 of Additional Protocol II collective punishment is a war crime.

Israel Katz himself is quoted as saying "they [Gazans] will not receive a drop of water or a single battery until they leave the world."

Furthermore Article 51 of the Berlin Rules on Water Resources prohibits combatants (in this case the Israeli military from removing water infrastructure.

International Humanitarian Law prohibits any siege depriving civilians of essential goods while Yoav Gallant's "defense tactics" are a complete blockade of Gaza. It is well documented by the United Nations and journalists how deprived the civilians in Gaza are by the Israeli aggression.

The so-called gracious “evacuations” ordered by Israel is a crime according to the International Criminal Court under forcible transfer. 

The use of white phosphorus violates Protocol III of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons as the Israeli army is using it directly against human beings in a civilian setting.

Gaza is one of the most densely populated areas on earth with 47.3% of the population being under 18 there is no circumstance in which any incendiary weapon should be deployed in Gaza let alone community centers.

In case there is doubt, there are videos of white phosphorous being used in broad daylight and on hospitals (Al-Durrah Children's Hospital).

The air strikes themselves violate international law as Daniel Hagari himself has stated that the emphasis of the Israeli air strikes is on damage and not on accuracy.

The Israeli government has carried out air strikes on the Al-Shati refugee camp sheltering over 90,000 refugees from Israeli aggression.

Targeting commercial centers like the Jabalia camp market which has been attacked multiple times since October 7th is a war crime. 

It is a war crime to target buildings dedicated to education or charitable purposes.

On October 17th Israel carried out an airstrike on the United Nations Relief and Works Agency school in the Al-Maghazi refugee camp. A United Nations school within a refugee camp.

Israeli officials later claimed United Nations workers are Hamas allies

Medical neutrality as described under the Geneva Convention has been violated as stated by the World Health Organization…

Every hospital bombed is another war crime Israel has committed. Bringing back the white phosphorus issue, Israel hit Al-Durrah Children's Hospital with white phosphorus munition. Bringing back water resources and collective punishment (which I hope we established was bad), the remaining hospitals are collapsing due to lack of electricity and water. 

"But Hamas tunnels! Human shields! Guards! Weapons!" None of that negates a hospital's protected status as described in the Geneva Convention.

It is a war crime to attack buildings dedicated to religion regardless of who is housed but especially if its housing refugees... obviously... again its in the Geneva Convention.

The Church of Saint Porphyrius, the Al-Gharbi mosque, Yassin mosque, and Al-Sousi mosque have been directly attacked

The intentional targeting of journalists is a war crime according to the Council of Europe.

There are 31 journalists who have been killed along with their families being targeted.

On October 10th Israel bombed a residential building (war crime) which also contained journalist offices (war crime). You can take a pick of whether they were targeting civilians or journalists, either way it’s a war crime. 

Killing surrendered civilians OR SURRENDERED COMBATANTS is again a war crime.

Israeli officials still have no comment on the video of IDF forces executing four unarmed Palestinian men kneeling on the ground (one of which was waving white clothing).

Videos have also surfaced of IDF soldiers violating international law by assaulting detainees and committing sexual humiliation.

Israel has expanded their attack to neighboring countries by carrying out air strikes in Lebanon, ready to fulfill their manifest destiny of Greater Israel.

Under the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, Israeli settlement of Palestine is a war crime. Obviously that is beyond a lot of peoples willingness to comprehend so lets reiterate what is happening right now. 

The average age of dead people in Gaza is 5.

More facts: Israel does not reflect the Jewish people or Jewish values they are a settler colonial state enacting apartheid and committing genocide. Conflating Israel with jewish people is anti-semetic. Evangelicals are the largest zionist group in the world because they are anti-semetic. AIPAC is the largest donor to politicians. Israel has systemically harmed holocaust survivors (1/3 of survivors in Israel are in poverty, they called them "soap bars", and said they were "inferior" as they were like "sheep to the slaughter"). Israel has violated Ethiopian Jewish woman's autonomy (Depo-Provera (contraceptive) every three months in Israeli clinics without their knowledge) and police brutality. Israel is a safe haven for pedophiles.

#gaza #palestine #israel #boycott israel #free palestine #thanksgiving #I’ll add more links to articles if this gets any traction