skaarl

Very powerful image.

No

I wouldn't post this. It is too embarasing to be forced out from a 10,000,000$ tank by people with no economy and no army.

Hamas doesn’t follow the Geneva Convention on the treatment of POWs

What do you mean?

EDIT: I know you probably are just a genocide defender but in the case you are arguing with good faith then I will say this. The most important part of the law is that it applies to everyone.

Thus, following the Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land, when an occupation is already in place (Western Bank and Gaza Strip), the occupying state (Israel) cannot use militarized force in response to an armed attack; it can only use police force to restore order.

Thus, it is unclear how Israel as an occupant can claim the right to self-defense when it has been controlling, policing and making settlements in the OPT since 1967.

So with respect to IHL principles and proportionality, Israel was obligated to refrain from using starvation as a tactic against Gaza’s civilians, minimize harm to civilians and civilian infrastructure, and allow the return of displaced individuals post-conflict. However, in contrast, Israel closed all borders and severed essential services like electricity, water, and food supplies, as well as conducting airstrikes on densely populated areas and vital infrastructure. Israel’s armed forces launched air strikes on residential buildings, including apartments in the Rimal neighborhood in Gaza City; mosques; refugee camps, such as Jabalia Refugee Camp and Nuseirat Refugee Camp); and the UNRWA School in Central Gaza’s al-Maghazi refugee camp.

Israel’s attacks, which caused a humanitarian catastrophe by collectively punishing the entire population of Gaza, failed to meet the standards outlined in the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy. The disproportionate use of force, coupled with the dehumanizing rhetoric used against Palestinians and the manipulation of essential resources such as food, stands in violation of the proportionality requirement of the right to self-defense, IHL, and International Human Rights Law (IHRL). The Israeli Defense Minister’s order to deliberately siege food, electricity, and fuel as a wartime strategy violates IHL and constitutes a “war crime” under Article 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the Rome Statute, and could also potentially satisfy the legal criteria for the crime against humanity of inhumane acts (Article 7(1)(k)) of the Rome Statute. A complete siege, especially for an extended duration, is prohibited by IHL under Article 54(1) of the First Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions. This principle is also emphasized in Article 23 of the Fourth Geneva Convention and Article 70 of Additional Protocol I. Furthermore, the extensive damage caused to civilian infrastructure, including schools, hospitals, and media outlets, highlights the disproportionate nature of the military operations and violates Article 57 of the Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions.

I would still like to know how exactly you think what you did comment. It is telling that you apply the law to a non-state actor of a non-member observer state of the UN and actively do not apply any law to a full member signatory of the UN and Geneva Conventions, but please go on about the Geneva Conventions.

Isn't this exactly what negotiating with labor unions so workers have good quality of life was made to prevent?

More Americans will become terrorists, and it's no surprise. They have nothing to loose.

Funny that asking this is very downvoted.

Thank you, it looks good, and highly rated. RottenTomatoes also suggests this one

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_first_54_years

Thank you. No result for Zionist. Maybe someone else know?

I am going to start calling American children I want to silence "son of MAGA official" XD

spoiler: i don't want to silence any children and i am against genocide, no matter who the victim group is, no matter who the perpetrator group is

It is pathetic that among high voter suppression (due to Republican motions) the Democrats blame the people for not voting, instead of blaming voter suppression, or any of the other decades worth of inaction by Democrats to foresee and prepare for this. They have a two party system, it's not like the Republicans were a complete surprise

Totally agree "but here we are", but a better time would be 1992

https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amerikaanse_presidentsverkiezingen_1992

Is the Democrat master plan to have a one party system? Everyone always and only vote Democrat, because if the other party of a two party system ever gets in to power we are screwed! It doesn't sound like a good plan.

You guys had a good idea with Ross Perot in 1992. Look into that (especially how he got 0 electoral college votes) and maybe you'll have a better idea of what you should be doing, instead of blaming each other.