My mistake. I see your point.I do not see where I intimated anything of the kind.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
My mistake. I see your point.I do not see where I intimated anything of the kind.
Special forces assassinating Islamist militants who had been hospitalized while disguised as Doctors in the West Bank.
As per the Guardian article in the OP:I had not read anywhere that they were "hospitalized". Are you sure that isn't commentary added by whomever aggregated this story? Who said they were hospitalized?
As per Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/world/middl...nmen-west-bank-hospital-army-says-2024-01-30/
- The hospital's director, Dr. Naji Nazzal, said the Israeli team entered the hospital at around 5:30 a.m. (0330 GMT) and made its way stealthily to the third floor, ringing the bell to enter the ward where the men were sleeping.
"They executed the three men as they slept in the room," he told Reuters. "They executed them in cold blood by firing bullets directly into their heads in the room where they were being treated."
Basel Ghawazi was being treated after being partially paralysed
assassinating Islamist militants who had been hospitalized
Let's hope the HAMAS members do not learn that. Dont want them to dress up as IDF and start driving israeli tanks.I suppose I'll also add that undercover operations utilizing camouflage and subterfuge are not illegal ("perfidy") per international law.
Conduct of hostilities | How does law protect in war? - Online casebook
casebook.icrc.org
Camouflage certainly isn't illegal. However the issue isn't that these operatives were undercover, it's that they were dressing up as Doctors to conduct killings. Presenting that as just another instance of subterfuge is deliberately minimizing.that undercover operations utilizing camouflage and subterfuge are not illegal
Camouflage certainly isn't illegal. However the issue isn't that these operatives were undercover, it's that they were dressing up as Doctors to conduct killings. Presenting that as just another instance of subterfuge is deliberately minimizing.
At the very least I would expect people to acknowledge that this operation will further jeopardize the safety of Doctors in the future, where a patient may suspect their doctor is a combatant.
You previously wrote:How does it put Drs at risk? If you look at the video, The "faux-Drs" were carrying guns in plain view. Anyone carrying weapons in that manner is rightfully at risk.
If you acknowledge it being an undercover operation you might reasonably presume that they had concealed the weapons until needed. That is, prior to securing their position, they were posing as unarmed hospital personnel.I suppose I'll also add that undercover operations utilizing camouflage and subterfuge are not illegal ("perfidy") per international law.
Imagine for a moment that you're a doctor working in the West Bank.How does it put Drs at risk?
The expectation that hospital personnel could well be armed assassins clearly endangers hospital personnel.
Imagine for a moment that you're a doctor working in the West Bank.
You would not realistically know who in your hospital could have secret ties to an insurgent group.
So you go on doing your duty and treating patients, and unbeknownst to you one of your patients is a Hamas member.
This Hamas patient is likely threatened, paranoid and otherwise trigger happy to start with. He also now has a reason to distrust you because an assassin dressed up as one of your colleagues just killed his comrades.
Can you see why this would put you in an incredibly dangerous position, where you could be mistaken as a combatant and capped on a split-second judgment of a terrorist?