Israel using weapons in line with international law, not blocking Gaza aid, says US

[Beastly Boy]

The US has deemed Israel to be in compliance with a new national security memorandum after it received a written assurance from Jerusalem that it is using American weapons in line with international law and is not blocking humanitarian assistance in Gaza.

This assurance came last week via a “credible high-level official who has the ability and authority to make decisions and commitments about the issues at the heart of the assurances,” State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller said, referring to the letter sent by Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.

“These assurances are prospective, but of course, our view of them is informed by our ongoing assessments of Israel’s conduct in the war in Gaza,” Miller said during a press briefing.

“We’ve had ongoing assessments of Israel’s compliance with international humanitarian law. We have not found them to be in violation, either when it comes to the conduct of the war or the provision of humanitarian assistance. We view those assurances through that ongoing work we have done,” he said.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-using-weapons-in-line-with-international-law-not-blocking-gaza-aid-says-us/

[jimfields33]

1. Glad to hear Israel is following international law. I didn't doubt they were.

Just glad we confirmed it. It would be awful if Israel wasn’t following international law.

[angrychair]

2. Sooo

Because Israel said they were in compliance, we just take their word for it? Because they would never lie. Goodness, we cannot be that gullible.

[Beastly Boy]

3. The assessment comes from a "credible high-level official who has the ability and authority to make decisions",

"informed by our ongoing assessments of Israel’s conduct in the war in Gaza", as per State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller.

Of course, anyone can arbitrarily dismiss a US State Department official spokesperson for any reason or no reason at all, and that would, as you mentioned, depend on one's gullibility.

[angrychair]

4. Yes, I know

After Matthew Miller's name the article goes on to say:

referring to the letter sent by Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.

In other words Matt there was citing a letter from the Israeli defense minister

So those assurances are largely based on the word of the Israeli defense minister.
A man I might add is a far right ally of Bibi.

[Beastly Boy]

5. He wasn't "citing" the letter sent by the Israeli defense minister, he was "referring" to it.

As the article states, quoting Blinken, "Gallant’s written assurance is a new condition the US placed on all aid recipients, laid out in a memo signed by Biden on February 8. US security aid recipients were already required to use the funds in line with international law, though the request for written assurances was new."

The US assessment was based on its own established review process, and, to facilitate that process, the letter was requested by the US as part of their evaluation.

[angrychair]

10. How could we possibly know?

We have no assets on the ground but we do have video of them shooting into a crowd running for a truck full of food assistance.
We do have video of absurdly long lines of trucks trying to get into Gaza from Egypt that are being stopped by IDF forces from entering Gaza.
Bibi still insists that Israel will launch a large scale military assault of Rafah.

So unless these people think the rest of the world is blind and stupid, these statements seem counter to video and other first hand accounts.

[Beastly Boy]

11. Are you suggesting that the US cannot possibly know the outcomes of their own assessments?

Is the State Department the "these people" you are referring to who "think the rest of the world is blind and stupid"?

And, to fool the world, the State Department makes statements without knowing WTF they are talking about?

And the only sources available to the State Department that go into their assessments are what is available to "us" through videos and statements on social media?

No, I suspect that the State Department, along with the rest of the world, is not blind and stupid enough to make assessments based on Al Jazeera articles that use unverified witness accounts and Hamas propaganda.

With a few exceptions, perhaps.

[angrychair]

13. I don't consider

Hamas or Israel to be an unbiased arbiter of truth of what is actually happening in Gaza.
I also think the State Dept would absolutely bend the truth and give an abundance of deference to Israel.

A full scale assault of Rafah, as Bibi has insisted they will do, will kill tens of thousands of innocent people. If not more. They have no where else to go.
A reminder that a majority of Gaza's population is women and children.

[Mountainguy]

23. You think we don't have assets?

I think that would be a very naive assumption of our surveillance and intelligence capabilities.

Also, I'd trust what the US thinks about the situation on the ground over tiktok and Al Jazeera.

[Ping Tung]

6. I guess "legal" bombs, artillery shells, and bullets are harmless.

Jello bombs? Marshmallow artillery, and cotton ball bullets?

Legal murder?

[Beastly Boy]

7. As per US, Israel is in compliance with international law.

No better way to engage in adult discussion of that assessment than a head-first plunge into ridiculous over the top hyperbole that are way besides the point, right?

[Ping Tung]

8. I'm just replying to the idiotic assertion that killing is "legal" and "humanitarian".

The 30,000 dead Palestinians and 1200 dead Israelis are all "legally" dead.

[Beastly Boy]

12. No, you are replying to an assessment of the State Department.

You are DEFLECTING to what you think you are replying to. And your deflections are preposterously off target.

See the difference?

[Ping Tung]

14. I remember all too well when the State Dept, the presidents, and congress

all claimed that we were killing Vietnamese, Cambodian, and Laotian people for Humanitarian reasons and doing so Legally.

[Beastly Boy]

15. You are still replying to a State department assessment.

And you are still deflecting.

[Ping Tung]

16. Deflecting from what?

[Beastly Boy]

18. Deflecting from the current dpartment of State assessment, which is the subject of the OP.

Not a word about what exactly in this assessment you find objectionable, and not a single rational reason why.

How does a fifty year old recollection, regardless of how well you remember it, have any relevance to the State Department assessment of a different issue, in a different conflict, fifty years later, in a different part of the world, under different circumstances, with different belligerent combatants, which is the subject of the OP?

[Ping Tung]

19. You say that the State Department says that killing and starving people agrees with International Law.

I say that despite what International Law and the State Department says, killing and starving people is murder and a war crime.

That's my opinion and the opinion of people around the world who agree with it. Biden is coming around to calling for a ceasefire and the release of humanitarian aid to the citizens of Gaza. I think that the State Department will back Biden on that. Senator Charles Schumer is calling for the ousting of Bibi, a ceasefire, and aid to the Palestinians. Senator Bernie Sanders goes further and calls the use of starvation as a method of war a war crime and calls for cutting of U.S. aid to "Netanyahu's war".

Joe Biden
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/biden-reacts-palestinian-protesters-point-rcna145181

Bernie Sanders

Your turn to "deflect"?

[Beastly Boy]

20. This is not what I say. But I am getting a feeling that I can use my time more productively than

respond to every absurdity you come up wih.

Excuse me while I step outside to watch grass grow.

[Cha]

22. Yes, I believe you can put your time to Better use..

But I Thank You for trying so well to Explain to them what the OP is actually about no matter How Many Deflections they come up with.

Very patiently I might add.

[LexVegas]

9. But what does Hamas and Al Jazeera say? nt

[Goodheart]

17. Such a fucking stupid situation. We're supplying Israel with bombs while feeding their targets.

And then Netanyahu disrespects both our wishes and our President.

Stop supplying Israel with military aid until they agree with us on how their military should not be used.

President Biden, you know I love you... but come on, man.

[Beastly Boy]

21. Are we feeding Hamas?

Because that's who Israel's targets are. I was under an impression that we are trying to feed Hamas' human shields.