The Geneva convention was established to minimise atrocities in conflicts. Israeli settlements in Gaza are illegal and violate the Geneva convention. Legality of Israeli settlements Article 51 of the Geneva convention prohibits indiscriminate attacks on civilian population yet Israel attacked hospitals with children inside. Whether you agree or not that Hamas were present, children cannot be viewed as combatants.so when no care was taken to protect them, does this not constitute a violation? According to save the children, 1 in 50 children in Gaza had been killed or injured. This is a very high proportion and does not show care being taken to prevent such casualties and therefore constitutes a violation.

So my question is simply, do supporters of Israel no longer support our believe in the Geneva convention, did you never, or how do you reconcile Israeli breaches of the Geneva convention? For balance I should add “do you not believe such violations are occurring and if so how did you come to this position?”

Answers other than only "they have the right to go after Hamas " please. The issue is how they are going after Hamas, not whether they should or not.

EDIT: Title changed to remove ambiguity about supporting Israel vs supporting their actions

  • a new sad me@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m an Israeli lefty and this is the first time I see an argument in favor of the settlements that I’m actually agreeing with. Thank you.

    • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Can I ask which part of the settlements you agree with?

      I don’t know what constitutes leftist in Israel right now, but I do respect Ofer Cassif, Ilan Pappe, Norman Finkelstein, Avi Schlaim, and any anti-zionist Israelis who are fighting for the equal rights of Palestinians.

        • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Oh my bad, I thought “I see an argument in favor of the settlements that I’m actually agreeing with” meant you agreed with the settlements.

          My view on Zionism is that it is fundamentally a settler colonial ideology, one founded and currently engaged in ethnic cleansing. And that the Apartheid Regime needs to change into a Secular One-State with equal rights and right of return for everyone

          • a new sad me@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Considering October 7th, and the war since then, do you think that this is a possible solution? I note that a lot of the the population are quite strong in the religion believes. And I note that both religions list revenge as part of their values. Do you think that enough trust can be built anytime soon?

            And also, about colonialism, there is no dispute that Jewish people lived in this land for generations. The comparison to e.g., France in Algier, is not a fair one here.

            • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              I agree with the views of Israeli Historians Ilan Pappe, Avi Schlaim that a One-State solution is the only permanent solution. I still support a Two-State solution in the meantime, as a foundation for Palestinian emancipation, but the on-the-ground reality of the settlements dividing the West Bank into hundreds of enclaves eats away at the viability of a permanent Two-State solution. Religion is not the primary element of the conflict, despite the religious ferver of many settlers and rhetoric of Israeli officials. The primary element is still the expulsion and domination of the native Palestinians through the use of Settlements and Apartheid. There cannot be a ‘democratic’ Jewish State (an ethnostate), without a Jewish majority, which presents what is called the ‘demographic problem.’ in the words of Ben-Gurion:

              There can be no stable and strong Jewish State so long as it has a Jewish majority of only 60 percent. - Ben-Gurion in an address to the central committee of the Histadrut on 30 December 1947

              I don’t believe the Israeli Government would ever agree to a One or Two State Solution, not unless there is enough internal secular and external international pressure.

              Claiming ancestral history does not justify ethnic cleansing, Settler Colonialism, or the existence of an ethnostate. ‘Transfer’ has always been fundamental to Zionism. Zionism is not Judaism, despite, as Israeli Adi Callai puts it, its weaponization of antisemitism. Jewish people have lived in historic Palestine for generations, despite the mass ethnic cleansing of Jewish people by the Romans during the Jewish-Roman Wars. Which is exactly why a Secular State, based on religious tolerance and equal rights, is the right way to end this conflict.