Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Little Tich

(6,171 posts)
10. Google can make anyone an instant expert...
Fri Jul 22, 2016, 10:16 AM
Jul 2016
Protocol I
Source: Wikipedia
Protocol I is a 1977 amendment protocol to the Geneva Conventions relating to the protection of victims of international conflicts, where "armed conflicts in which peoples are fighting against colonial domination, alien occupation or racist regimes" are to be considered international conflicts.[1] It reaffirms the international laws of the original Geneva Conventions of 1949, but adds clarifications and new provisions to accommodate developments in modern international warfare that have taken place since the Second World War.


---

Articles 51 and 54 outlaw indiscriminate attacks on civilian populations, and destruction of food, water, and other materials needed for survival. Indiscriminate attacks include directly attacking civilian (non-military) targets, but also using technology such as biological weapons, nuclear weapons and land mines, whose scope of destruction cannot be limited.[6] A total war that does not distinguish between civilian and military targets is considered a war crime.

Read more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_I


Customary IHL

Source: International Committee of the Red Cross
Rule 6. Civilians’ Loss of Protection from Attack
Rule 6. Civilians are protected against attack, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities.

Summary
State practice establishes this rule as a norm of customary international law applicable in both international and non-international armed conflicts. The use of human shields is the subject of Rule 97.

International armed conflicts
The rule whereby civilians lose their protection against attack when and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities is contained in Article 51(3) of Additional Protocol I, to which no reservations have been made.

Read more: https://www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v1_rul_rule6#Fn_45_1


INTERPRETIVE guidance on the notion of Direct participation in hostilities under international humanitarian law
Source: ICRC, 2009
https://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/icrc-002-0990.pdf
"Additionally, 17 children were killed while participating in the hostilities..." oberliner Jul 2016 #1
Some Hamas militants were under 18, which is contrary to international law. Little Tich Jul 2016 #2
Child militants is a war crime. No need to defend Hamas. n/t shira Jul 2016 #4
"Did not take part in hostilities" does not mean "innocent civilians". shira Jul 2016 #3
i'm skeptical 6chars Jul 2016 #5
That's why it is important to know which foreign governments fund which organizations nt King_David Jul 2016 #7
B'tselem counts dead terrorists as innocent civilians. One of many examples... shira Jul 2016 #6
It seems as if the people in the café didn't participate in hostilities - they were watching TV. Little Tich Jul 2016 #8
They were terrorists, not innocent civilians killed for no reason whatsoever. shira Jul 2016 #9
Google can make anyone an instant expert... Little Tich Jul 2016 #10
So where is this 'continuous combat function' nonsense in IHL? shira Jul 2016 #11
Let's go over that paragraph from B'tselem... shira Jul 2016 #12
It seems as if you have a problem with the fundamental purpose of IHL, which is to protect civilians Little Tich Jul 2016 #15
IOW, you lost the argument. Bottom line is B'tselem lied, you know that.... shira Jul 2016 #16
You seem to misunderstand the IHL notion of direct participation of hostilities, Little Tich Jul 2016 #17
You should read my last post to you more carefully... shira Jul 2016 #18
The other B'tselem lie is WRT the Hamas dudes killed in the cafe.... shira Jul 2016 #19
The children's blood is on Hamas' hands FBaggins Jul 2016 #13
Exactly right King_David Jul 2016 #14
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Israel/Palestine»50 Days: More than 500 Ch...»Reply #10