• Brkdncr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    63
    ·
    1 month ago

    I don’t get this. It’s war, there isn’t much law. You can have agreements between countries, but is it really law if it’s not enforceable?

    • ArbiterXero@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 month ago

      Well, that’s up to debate.

      In war there are still rules of engagement and expectations about things like “child soldiers” and “civilian casualties” and “collective punishments” etc….

      But also, how much to those rules actually stop people?

      Which rules are worth breaking if they prevent open war and millions of deaths?

      No idea. Some deep philosophising and rationalisations around all of it is required regardless of your stance

    • Pennomi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s enforceable. A war between two countries does not exist in a vacuum. The whole rest of the world can impose sanctions against the violator.

      Whether they will in this case is another matter entirely.

      • MrNesser@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 month ago

        Problem with sanctions is they haven’t proved Israel did this. Its plausible deniability

        • homura1650@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          22
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Part of plausible deniability is that it has to be plausible. There has been no plausible argument presented that Israel did not do the pager and walkie talkie attack. For that matter, there hasn’t even been a denial about it.

          • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Then again a denial would also not be plausible. Either way, saying nothing is their best course of action.

      • Brkdncr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 month ago

        Is that law though? No one is going to jail. Sounds more a contract or agreement.

          • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            The difference is enforcement capabilities. Geopolitical enforcement is not impossible it just gets murky quick. So many different priorities.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      There is international law and there are international war crimes. This could very well be a war crime. It needs to be investigated.

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 month ago

      There’s plenty of law of war.

      But you’re right, laws are worth northing if they’re not followed or enforced.