Not disputing any of that except for your conclusion. Hamas lumping their military losses in with civilians is literally using the fog of war to create confusion.
The UN has been very clear about the rights of the child, and child soldiers are universally classified as victims regardless of whether they are armed or affiliated with a militant group. Israel isn’t actually allowed to carpet bomb child soldiers under international law.
Stop trying to frame this as the health administration trying to create confusion. Children are classified as civilians, period.
Also, wanna know something extremely fucked up? Half of Gaza’s population is under 18 and 70% of the population are under 30. The fact that Hamas uses child soldiers is shaped by the fact that Israel created conditions where boys can’t expect to live long enough to even become men.
You do see how Hamas employing child soldiers and then lumping them in with dead civilian numbers to generate outrage is deceptive though, right? Because that was my point.
Also, I find articulating my opinions actually makes them better. Often these are just angry thoughts buzzing around in my head, so writing them all out like this helps me focus my ideas. Don’t worry, I am not trying to convince anyone of anything when I argue on the internet.
I just did a fairly deep dive on this because it would be a horrible thing to argue about without a full understanding. You’re incorrect - a child soldier is a combatant under every relevant international law I could find, from the Geneva convention onwards. Further, there have been numerous horrific cases of soldiers having to shoot armed children, none of which has been labeled a war crime.
A particularly concise quote from the European journal of international law:
The starting points are articles 4(A) of the 1949 Third Geneva Convention and article 43 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, which provides for the definitional elements of what a combatant is under international humanitarian law, albeit overtly in the context of an international armed conflict. If a child is enrolled in the armed forces of a party to an international armed conflict, there seems to be no apparent basis in current international humanitarian law to characterize that child as anything other than as a combatant.
Not disputing any of that except for your conclusion. Hamas lumping their military losses in with civilians is literally using the fog of war to create confusion.
The UN has been very clear about the rights of the child, and child soldiers are universally classified as victims regardless of whether they are armed or affiliated with a militant group. Israel isn’t actually allowed to carpet bomb child soldiers under international law.
Stop trying to frame this as the health administration trying to create confusion. Children are classified as civilians, period.
Also, wanna know something extremely fucked up? Half of Gaza’s population is under 18 and 70% of the population are under 30. The fact that Hamas uses child soldiers is shaped by the fact that Israel created conditions where boys can’t expect to live long enough to even become men.
And now they’re just killing the boys.
You do see how Hamas employing child soldiers and then lumping them in with dead civilian numbers to generate outrage is deceptive though, right? Because that was my point.
It’s literally not deceptive because child soldiers are civilians under international law. Extra clarification isn’t necessary.
Hamas is doing nothing wrong by not identifying dead children as legitimate military targets, because they never are.
That’s an insane take and I think you know that. Let’s end this discussion here.
It’s insane that you think child soldiers are legitimate military targets.
We should end this discussion before I say something that gets me banned lol
Sometimes there isn’t a point worth making to someone with a position not worth holding. They’re just wasting your time.
It’s not like my time is valuable lol
Also, I find articulating my opinions actually makes them better. Often these are just angry thoughts buzzing around in my head, so writing them all out like this helps me focus my ideas. Don’t worry, I am not trying to convince anyone of anything when I argue on the internet.
Child soldiers are legitimate military targets the second they pose a military threat. That’s awful, but how war works. Have a nice day.
That’s literally not how it works under international law but okay, whatever
I just did a fairly deep dive on this because it would be a horrible thing to argue about without a full understanding. You’re incorrect - a child soldier is a combatant under every relevant international law I could find, from the Geneva convention onwards. Further, there have been numerous horrific cases of soldiers having to shoot armed children, none of which has been labeled a war crime.
A particularly concise quote from the European journal of international law: