• FishFace@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    So the relevance to this article, I take it, is that you suspect this attack was not a use of white phosphorous for smoke or signalling, because in the past, when having been accused of using white phosphorous in a city, the IDF initially denied it but then admitted it may have been used improperly, and you are therefore skeptical of their good faith this time around?

    Perfectly reasonable.

    Does not justify labelling this a definite war crime which is what you and Amnesty have done.

    • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Israel has a history of doing exactly what we’re talking about, lying about it, and promising not to do it again, before repeating the cycle.

      I suspect this in the same way that I suspected Russian’s “border-adjacent exercises” then “special military operation” were a*similarly thinly veiled excuse for an invasion - it’s very clear what’s happening from a clear pattern of behaviour that spans decades.

      I may be more charitable if Israel’s treatment of the Palestinian population wasn’t indiscriminately hostile and deadly, and their rhetoric so genocidal. They’re also committing war crimes by cutting off food water, power, trade and movement - Palestinians are now being starved to death.

      Israel is doing what they’ve said they want to, she have done in the past - I don’t understand why you’d even try to defend this.