• livus@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    @idkwhatimdoing it’s only legal for smokescreens if you have taken all reasonable precautions to ensure that by doing so, you’re not also inflicting it on civillians.

    The injuries it produces are horrific.

    • Melkath@kbin.socialBanned from community
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      We literally just watched them shell an entire city of civilians who complied with an order to leave all their earthly possessions and gather in the city center.

      They targeted the city center.

      • Khalic@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        2 years ago

        Do you have a relatively reputable source for that? I saw this but only from a turkish news agency who has a lot of missinfo issues

        • Melkath@kbin.socialBanned from community
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Fair point.

          Murdock probably owns all of it and this is a good reminder that noone knows what the fuck happened except the people who were there.

    • idkwhatimdoing@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 years ago

      Yes, which the article does not say they’ve failed to do. In fact, the article says that the videos submitted as evidence seem to support its legal use not in Gaza, but near Lebanon, and that Human Rights Watch submitted no videos at all showing white phosphorus in Gaza.