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
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Gaza has been burnt to the ground [View all]Celerity
(49,521 posts)204. that stance would perhaps end with you up on trial for war crimes if you were the supreme commander of a nation
and put that posture into play on a kinetic basis
you said:
A central notion under international humanitarian law is the principle of proportionality: even if an attack is allowed, it must not be excessive in relation to the expected military advantage.
https://www.diakonia.se/ihl/resources/international-humanitarian-law/ihl-principle-proportionality/
The principle of proportionality (Article 51(5) (b) API) states that even if there is a clear military target it is not possible to attack it if the expected harm to civilians, or civilian property, is excessive in relation to the expected military advantage. This is one of the most difficult rules of international humanitarian law (IHL) to apply as it requires a balance between two factors with little relevance to each other.
The principle of proportionality is also recognised as customary international law in Rule 14 of the ICRC study on customary international law.

The rule does accept that some civilian harm may be acceptable but it must be carefully weighed up against the military advantage to be gained. The rule of proportionality is the relevant rule whenever people talk of collateral damage. Even if the principle of proportionality is adhered to, the warring parties must still abide by rules on precautions in attack.

Article 51 - Protection of the civilian population
https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/article-51
1. The civilian population and individual civilians shall enjoy general protection against dangers arising from military operations. To give effect to this protection, the following rules, which are additional to other applicable rules of international law, shall be observed in all circumstances.
2. The civilian population as such, as well as individual civilians, shall not be the object of attack. Acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population are prohibited.
3. Civilians shall enjoy the protection afforded by this Section, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities.
4. Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited. Indiscriminate attacks are:
(a) those which are not directed at a specific military objective;
(b) those which employ a method or means of combat which cannot be directed at a specific military objective; or
(c) those which employ a method or means of combat the effects of which cannot be limited as required by this Protocol;
and consequently, in each such case, are of a nature to strike military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction.
5. Among others, the following types of attacks are to be considered as indiscriminate:
(a) an attack by bombardment by any methods or means which treats as a single military objective a number of clearly separated and distinct military objectives located in a city, town, village or other area containing a similar concentration of civilians or civilian objects; and
(b) an attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.
6. Attacks against the civilian population or civilians by way of reprisals are prohibited.
7. The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations. The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations.
8. Any violation of these prohibitions shall not release the Parties to the conflict from their legal obligations with respect to the civilian population and civilians, including the obligation to take the precautionary measures provided for in Article 57 .
you said:
I believe retaliation in an unprovoked war has no guardrails..
A central notion under international humanitarian law is the principle of proportionality: even if an attack is allowed, it must not be excessive in relation to the expected military advantage.
https://www.diakonia.se/ihl/resources/international-humanitarian-law/ihl-principle-proportionality/
The principle of proportionality (Article 51(5) (b) API) states that even if there is a clear military target it is not possible to attack it if the expected harm to civilians, or civilian property, is excessive in relation to the expected military advantage. This is one of the most difficult rules of international humanitarian law (IHL) to apply as it requires a balance between two factors with little relevance to each other.
The principle of proportionality is also recognised as customary international law in Rule 14 of the ICRC study on customary international law.

The rule does accept that some civilian harm may be acceptable but it must be carefully weighed up against the military advantage to be gained. The rule of proportionality is the relevant rule whenever people talk of collateral damage. Even if the principle of proportionality is adhered to, the warring parties must still abide by rules on precautions in attack.

Article 51 - Protection of the civilian population
https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/article-51
1. The civilian population and individual civilians shall enjoy general protection against dangers arising from military operations. To give effect to this protection, the following rules, which are additional to other applicable rules of international law, shall be observed in all circumstances.
2. The civilian population as such, as well as individual civilians, shall not be the object of attack. Acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population are prohibited.
3. Civilians shall enjoy the protection afforded by this Section, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities.
4. Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited. Indiscriminate attacks are:
(a) those which are not directed at a specific military objective;
(b) those which employ a method or means of combat which cannot be directed at a specific military objective; or
(c) those which employ a method or means of combat the effects of which cannot be limited as required by this Protocol;
and consequently, in each such case, are of a nature to strike military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction.
5. Among others, the following types of attacks are to be considered as indiscriminate:
(a) an attack by bombardment by any methods or means which treats as a single military objective a number of clearly separated and distinct military objectives located in a city, town, village or other area containing a similar concentration of civilians or civilian objects; and
(b) an attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.
6. Attacks against the civilian population or civilians by way of reprisals are prohibited.
7. The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations. The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations.
8. Any violation of these prohibitions shall not release the Parties to the conflict from their legal obligations with respect to the civilian population and civilians, including the obligation to take the precautionary measures provided for in Article 57 .
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
6 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
253 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

I would argue that there's no better time to attempt to influence an incumbent.
jimmiles
Apr 2024
#241
sorry to hear that the level of devastation doesn't meet your criteria, I guess tell Netanyahu to speed it up
Celerity
Apr 2024
#12
the dis-proportionality of response long ago crossed into war crimes territory IMHO, but hey, some assholes
Celerity
Apr 2024
#66
Yeah, you got that right. When Jared talked about developing beachfront property in Gaza, it made
PatrickforB
Apr 2024
#114
From Likud (and other smaller radical RW parties) all the way back to the early 20th century Revisionist Zionists
Celerity
Apr 2024
#248
Totally, straight from Naomi Klein. The oligarchs will move in with bulldozers as soon as all the people are dead and
PatrickforB
Apr 2024
#116
Netanyahu can have Slobodan's cell at The Hague., buildings CAN be rebuilt, but NOT the THIRTY-THREE THOUSAND lives.
TeamProg
Apr 2024
#62
These pictures are worth a thousand words. Innocent people keep being killed and there needs to be PEACE now.
PatrickforB
Apr 2024
#113
The end game for Israel & the Palestinians in not pretty. No one, Arab or West, is looking to send $$$ to rebuild Gaza
dutch777
Apr 2024
#4
Jared's a proven idiot. Go ahead. No one in their right mind would vacation there
oldsoftie
Apr 2024
#236
Not rebuild? Oh yes they will. They can't wait to build condos for more Israelis.
flying_wahini
Apr 2024
#17
that stance would perhaps end with you up on trial for war crimes if you were the supreme commander of a nation
Celerity
Apr 2024
#204
If Ukraine is committing war crimes then there should be accountability. Same for Russia, Hamas, and Israel, and any
Celerity
Apr 2024
#213
Finally reality-who started this war with permission for Hammas to start this war-Palestinians
Stargazer99
Apr 2024
#78
As have the Palestinians. If you look at total death tolls for the two sides since 1948, you will find it staggeringly
Celerity
Apr 2024
#216
in each of those examples they still have the ability to release their hostages
oldsoftie
Apr 2024
#191
Wanton destruction of civilian culture and infrastructure far past meaningful defense is not war. nt
PufPuf23
Apr 2024
#138
Look where the tunnel systems are located. Thats where you have to destroy everything.
oldsoftie
Apr 2024
#162
... and mass starving and using food as a weapon. We expect terrorists to act like terrorists
uponit7771
Apr 2024
#178
Nakba: Arab nations attack nascent Israel in order to commit ethnic cleansing
Bad Thoughts
Apr 2024
#120
I will say that some people view Hamas as freedom fighters, as crazy as that may sound. nt
LexVegas
Apr 2024
#10
Not just fine with it, they wear their keffiyeh they bought on Amazon and pretend to be one of them.
SunSeeker
Apr 2024
#102
I've read that many Gazans view Hamas as the only thing that stands between them and Israeli attacks.
Earth-shine
Apr 2024
#21
Who started this war? I don't remember the Jews starting the slaughtering in fact just the opposite
Stargazer99
Apr 2024
#81
If enough Palestinian people realize this, that could be the surest demise of Hamas.
Martin Eden
Apr 2024
#223
Are you pretending that antisemitism hasn't become a problem at these protests?
Sympthsical
Apr 2024
#57
Yes these protesters Spread their Sickening Anti-Semitic Ugly Ass Hate All Over the Place.
Cha
Apr 2024
#226
Except that Israel was in possession of a Hamas document that detailed what they were planning.
LuvLoogie
Apr 2024
#242
Yes, I know and agree. I was referring more to the mythic and emotional resonance that has taken hold,
TheRickles
Apr 2024
#85
There are many who believe the Hamas propaganda (and who also repeat it in various political forums.)
Oopsie Daisy
Apr 2024
#126
Hamas isn't starving people The Chef said Bibi is and Chef has more credibility
uponit7771
Apr 2024
#98
Yes, they are. Through their cowardly efforts of blending-in with civilians *
Oopsie Daisy
Apr 2024
#125
YES HAMAS IS Starving Palestinians.. Hamas is NOT Clean.. They're Fucking Terrorists.
Cha
Apr 2024
#228
Peace would involve a two state solution. Something that Netanyahu and Hamas will never allow.
Autumn
Apr 2024
#53
Same goes for KKK and Americans? Dehumanizing people with broad negative generalizations isn't progressive
uponit7771
Apr 2024
#175
Guess i missed the part where the KKK was in control of government for a few decades
Mountainguy
Apr 2024
#183
It is day 200 - any sympathy for hostages being held? That's a rhetorical question.
TBF
Apr 2024
#54
"[Hamas] had to have factored in from the start that Gaza City above them would be leveled by the Israelis. So be it.
betsuni
Apr 2024
#76
Deuteronomy provides motivation for genocide. Compromise in a religious war is blasphemy, in Canaan or in Congress.
Marcuse
Apr 2024
#112
This is utterly unforgivable. Israel has made itself into the world's pariah.
Sky Jewels
Apr 2024
#153
Yet, Hamas is still bombing Israel. I don't know where they are getting their rockets from. Six rockets on Apr 23
LeftInTX
Apr 2024
#155
Yes, radical religious fundamentalist Hamas terrorist are immoral and soulless.
betsuni
Apr 2024
#234