• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    122 months 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?

    • Pennomi
      link
      fedilink
      English
      462 months 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.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          222 months 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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      232 months ago

      There’s plenty of law of war.

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

    • Flying Squid
      link
      fedilink
      152 months ago

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

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      102 months 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