Israel is Coming Apart at the Seams, It Seems

1.

2. The world would be a better place if the people that died in wars were politicians and generals instead of children.

3. This dead asshole was living in Iran? Far, far away from the war his party started in October? How come when he does it it's cool and awesome, but when I suggest innocent civilians pack up and move out of Gaza for their own safety it's ethnic cleansing?

4. I'm glad he's dead, and I'm glad you're upset about it.

Nah. Israel tried a very long prison sentence with Yahwa Sinwar. Look where that got them.

Some folks just need killin'.

He wasn't living in Iran, and I suggest that you already understand the difference between voluntary movement of one person and forced movement of millions.

Well he sure isn't living there now

Yeah, former saves one life and the latter saves millions of lives. Or possibly the other way around, I can never remember.

Haniyeh was living a life of luxury in Qatar, backed by his hosts, that also have the sads that he was exploded. He is going to be sent back 'home' to Qatar to be buried.

The Qatari are far from the worst evil in the Middle East, but they clearly enjoy playing both sides against the middle, and profit from the ongoing war and misery.

Haniyeh himself had an estimated net worth of $4 billion. Just another example of how these evil fucks hurt their own people.

"Murdered." But @RickDeckard isn't a Hamas sympathizer. No way.

I am "upset" about it to the extent that it scuppers the ceasefire talks. I care less about him than any single one of the innocents being killed.

Yes, how dare Israel fight the war that Haniyeh and his cohorts started.

If Hamas had taken out Netanyahu on his visit to Washington, that would also have been murder and it would be uncontroversial to say so. These are questions of basic consistency that apply to everyone everywhere. They have nothing to do with political support.

Does it though? Maybe the Hamas "leaders" ruling Gaza remotely will care more about a ceasefire now that they know they're not immune from being targeted themselves. Skin in the game and all that.

Meh. It's complete bullshit that the politicians who wage wars are supposed to be off limits from being targeted during those wars.

Hamas can take out Netanyahu any time they like and I won't shed a tear. Maybe his replacement will be less of an asshole.

Yes, killing any person can constitute murder. But word choice matters. When you use the word murder, it implies being guilty of a crime. Israel killing this scumbag was not a crime. It was an act of war; a political assassination. One which Hamas sympathizers must be incensed by.

You may not like it or agree with them but there are in fact laws which apply to acts of war, and breaking those laws are in fact (war) crimes. Once again, this is the case for Hamas, Israel and every other entity in existence and refusing to abrogate the rules because "bad man dead lol" is basic consistency.

Hamas is a non-state actor.

And so...?

If Hamas had limited its operations to politicians and especially military personnel, that would have been legitimate armed resistance (but still an act of war). Raiding a music festival was not.

I give no fucks about laws written by wealthy old men to protect themselves from the consequences of their actions. Wars got a lot worse when kings and generals stopped participating battles directly.

You know, I might actually tend to agree that this could stand to be changed. Nevertheless, it is what it is right now. And Haniyeh's killing was illegal in more ways than just one - including in terms of the location where it happened.

It's also in question whether the assassination was aided by anti-regime Iranians, as has been questioned by several external analysts. The Iranian regime is VERY unpopular among it's own people, and repressed the Women's movement of 2022 very harshly. They had to go so far as to threaten Iranians with prison if they openly lauded Israel or criticized the IRGC.

The resurrection of the 'reformist' President that was recently elected might be due to internal pressures - no one can run without the Council of Clerics say so, and the fact they put up a 'reform' candidate might be a pressure relief valve.

Of course, it's also questionable whether that will work again. Clearly Iran is a functional theocracy and authoritarian state.

In the shower?

https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...-bodyguard/articleshow/112171214.cms?from=mdr

Wait, Rick is crying over a dead billionaire?

The enemy of my enemy is my friend, etc.

Maybe. Technically.
But something being technically illegal doesn't make it wrong.
It weakens Hamas. It weakens the Iranian regime. And it killed a known, unrepentant terrorist who was hiding from the law in friendly countries.

I may have confused him with another Hamas leader, but honestly, it isn't like he was out there saying the Oct. 7th attack was the wrong thing to do. So, the world is better with him dead.

https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...-bodyguard/articleshow/112171214.cms?from=mdr

Gay

But hygienic.

Billionaire Hamas leader.
I wonder how much that BILLIONAIRE could have legitimately helped "his" people.
I'm glad he's dead.

Under the Laws of Armed Conflict terrorists and other unlawful combatants aren’t protected the same as legitimate belligerents.

We have had this discussion before.

Yes, we have. On the most recent occasion you ducked out (almost your motif by now) when it was pointed out that this assertion is contested to say the least, the category of "illegal combatant" being a creation of the US and others for their own expediency. This has been a very active debate for literally decades and yet you pretend not to be aware of any of the arguments against your own position.

Here.

Got a link to this most recent discussion?

Because if it is this:

http://wordforge.net/index.php?posts/3515295/

What do you expect from me? Terrorists are clearly not covered the same as legitimate combatants. It spells it all out in plain text:

“Members of the armed forces of a Party to a conflict (other than medical personnel and chaplains covered by Article 33 of the Third [Geneva] Convention) are combatants, that is to say, they have the right to participate directly in hostilities."

Palestine is not a state, Hamas is not its armed forces and Hamas does not pretend to adhere to the LoAC therefore it does not enjoy the protections afforded by it.

This is pretty simple stuff.

Just because you say ‘Nuh-uh! Not everyone agrees the sky is blue’ in no way obligates me to debate you about it.