Israel ‘hit squad’ kill 3 Palestinians in West Bank Hospital

Play silly games, win silly prices.

Unlawful combatants don’t get the Geneva protections for combatants. This means they do not have a right to kill like soldiers do without being prosecuted for murder. If they are captured, they are not POWs and do not have the rights or protections of POWs.

Instead, unlawful combatants are still considered to be civilians and they have the Geneva convention protections and rights of civilians unless they are visibly armed so as to present a threat or engaging in an attack.

Quick googles very rarely give one the whole picture.

How far would you take this, though? What standard of evidence would you require for someone to be "fair game"?

This is especially pertinent in the case of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, where the word "terrorist" is used by some in a manner essentially synonymous with "Palestinian".

I have a friend who spent time in an Israeli prison as a supposed "terrorist". His crime: "taking part in a political demonstration while Palestinian". Would it be okay to kill him?

What about someone who merely considered taking part but did not end up going? Still okay?

At what point do you become a "terrorist"? Is pre-emptive action okay? If so: how far do your plans have to be advanced for it to be legitimate to take you out? Detailed plan? Rough idea? Intention? When you decide, in principle, that it is - vice versa - generally speaking defensible to "take those fuckers out"?

Because: you yourself have actually arrived at the last point - and since I suspect you would not be okay with being labelled dangerous and approved for summary execution, you might wish to more clearly define when someone becomes a target.

Bin Laden had confessed on video tape numerous times that he was behind the 9/11 and other attacks so he wasn’t just a suspect. He was also a high value target being the #1 leader of the terrorist organisation.

In addition, he was targeted in his private, defended by armed combatants compound, which is a legitimate place to target unlike a hospital or school.

Finally, it was a “kill or capture” mission by the Navy Seals. They raided the compound with the intent to arrest him if he surrendered. He did not order his men to surrender but to fight. So even though he himself was unarmed, he was shot in a short fire fight when his defenders fought the Seals. There was one unarmed woman with Bin Laden but when she lunged at the Seals, she was killed in the cross fire.

There were many survivors- men, women, children that were not killed but restrained with plastic zip ties.

"The conclusion that unlawful combatants, including terrorist organizations and organizations that harbor them, are not subject to Geneva Convention protection also has other important consequences besides national security and the collection of life-saving military intelligence."

A very quick Google will help you with this.

Imagine the effect this had on the medical and nursing staff and other patients 🥺 imagine the sheer terror. Imagine knowing this could happen again and again, they had enough to fear as it was , now this new terror… IDF stalking hospital corridors executing people.

Well if the Israeli forces are tried for this as a war crime, fair enough but at least there are three fewer terrorists in the world

It’s an international rule book that Israel signed up to called the Geneva Convention and the Paris Accords. “it doesn’t work like that” is one of the most ignorant things you can say on the matter.

Again, following the international laws of armed conflict is how you fight back. It’s not a rule book that says wait for it to happen again. Do nothing, repeat.

@Dulra I agree that a society that respects the law's processes is preferable to me too. I imagine the concern in Israel over the Supreme Court reforms may have had a similar basis.

Like this paramedic in Jenin, assaulted by the IDF just a day or so ago. How can healthcare workers be treated like this

I would have thought so. It was more complicated though because they were not in their jurisdiction so couldn't arrest him and I'm doubtful the US has extradition agreements with Pakistan. I wouldn't consider the US a beacon of morality either though. Guantanamo bay wasn't exactly legal

I can't remember why they didn't arrest and try him now. Do you know? It seems so long ago.

It’s not ‘they are bad people…but’

It is that they are people, not rabid animals to be put down.
Human beings with the human right to due process in a court of law if suspected of terrorism or war crimes.

Itmar Ben Gvir was once a suspected terrorist. He was convicted in a Jerusalem court of the lesser crime of supporting terrorism. Would it have been ok to just murder him instead of arresting him and allowing him is right to due process in a court of law?

Does hospitals, as protected places according to international law mean nothing now? How are the continuous attacks on health care infrastructure being justified? That's what really irks me
Hospitals have a protected status for a reason, yet we are seeing attacks on health care workers, and buildings almost daily in Gaza. Is this now going to be the norm for the occupied territories too?

That's fine but I would prefer to live in society that follows the rule of law. I would feel a lot safer.

Thing is the US does similar, they also carry out targeted stikes and drone strikes. Would you allay that Bin Laden was unlawfully executed, for instance? Should he have been arrested and brought to trial instead?

Hamas committed the most appalling atrocities on innocent people but you seem to some how wave that away and bizarrely quote some sort of rule book at the very people who were brutally attacked and abducted. It doesn’t work like that. The Israelis are going wait until it happens again , they are going to fight back.

100% Guildford four/ Birmingham six innocent men imprisoned for terrorism and years later proved innocent thank god they weren't executed

Yes, OK @hogmanayhoolie But it's the process that raises questions. Maybe these men did terrible things, and maybe they deserved it. But if execution without trial is normalised, how do you know they will always get the right people? Mistakes happen, that's why democracies have rigorous legal systems, for the sake of checks and balances.

Absolutely that's how we want all evil murdering scum to be treated but it's illegal! There are plenty of examples from other countries where terrorists, injured after carrying out their terrorist attack, are treated in hospitals under armed guard and tight security and arrested and charged once deemed fit by medical staff. But not the IDF the most moral army in the world and Israel the only democracy in the middle east, they've got other ideas

I don't share your certainty that no one is supporting terrorists

Some posters think they are "bad people...but"

I am disgusted by the terrorists, for their goals, their actions, their greed and how they treat their own

I just don't think Israel should have to beat terrorists with one arm tied behind their back

The fewer terrorists stealing aid and hiding in schools and hospitals, the fewer deaths all round

I genuinely don't care about how and where they are offed and am also genuinely disgusted at all the crying over these poor men "assassinated in cold blood"

And it's made headlines across the world so everyone can see the moral army in action

No, it’s a new unprecedented, completely illegal low.

Lying in a hospital bed as an injured patient, partially paralysed is not hiding in a hospital. 🙄

International law forbids combatants going into a hospital to kill injured enemy combatants receiving treatment.

Thats why the military field hospitals have big red crosses or crescents on them because they are not a target. They cannot be raided, attacked, or besieged.