Human Rights Watch on Thursday accused Israel of using white phosphorus munitions in its military operations in Gaza and Lebanon, saying the use of such weapons puts civilians at risk of serious and long-term injury.
What’s next? Reading up on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict before jumping to an unnuanced conclusion?
No thanks. I think we should cheerlead for who we consider the ‘good guys’ based on nothing more than tiktok videos and what anonymous people on twitter say.
Says the person who didn’t even read the article thoroughly enough to catch OP’s mistake before the edit. Everyone is always looking for a way to feel superior. 😂
Reasons that the use of white phosphorous is considered worse than conventional munitions listed in the article (which you also didn’t read):
… the use of such weapons puts civilians at risk of serious and long-term injury … white phosphorus smokescreen munitions used during its 2008-2009 offensive in Gaza … drew war crimes allegations … Because it has legal uses, white phosphorus is not banned as a chemical weapon under international conventions, but it can cause serious burns and start fires. … is considered an incendiary weapon under Protocol III of the Convention on the Prohibition of Use of Certain Conventional Weapons. The protocol prohibits using incendiary weapons against military targets located among civilians, although Israel has not signed it and is not bound by it.
The HRW article goes into a bit more detail about how severe these serious injuries are, what happened during the 2008-2009 offensive that drew war crimes allegations, and Israel’s current stance on the use of white phosphours.
I think it’s good to read the article, they explain a lot of it and how Israel is refusing to comply with its ban as a weapon.
Sorry, you were right, it doesn’t explain too much in the article, but this from HRW explains it in much better details: https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/10/12/questions-and-answers-israels-use-white-phosphorus-gaza-and-lebanon
I caused confusion, it was my bad.
Read the article? Preposterous.
What’s next? Reading up on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict before jumping to an unnuanced conclusion?
No thanks. I think we should cheerlead for who we consider the ‘good guys’ based on nothing more than tiktok videos and what anonymous people on twitter say.
Says the person who didn’t even read the article thoroughly enough to catch OP’s mistake before the edit. Everyone is always looking for a way to feel superior. 😂
Reasons that the use of white phosphorous is considered worse than conventional munitions listed in the article (which you also didn’t read):
The HRW article goes into a bit more detail about how severe these serious injuries are, what happened during the 2008-2009 offensive that drew war crimes allegations, and Israel’s current stance on the use of white phosphours.
You’re welcome.
All I know is that there was a little fighting before, and now there is a lot of fighting.
BAD! BAD FIGHTING!
Preposterous? Didn’t you read it? It says white phosphorus. Big difference! /s