Talk:War crimes in the Israel–Hamas war

Edit Request: By Israel > Indiscriminate attacks

edit

A small typo/duplication:

”An NBC news investigation NBC News found…”

Suggested fix:

”An NBC News investigation found…” CurdyKai (talk) 08:50, 12 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Done CarmenEsparzaAmoux (talk) 14:08, 17 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Some claims concerning Hamas' usage of sexual violence got debunked

edit

https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-war-sexual-violence-zaka-ca7905bf9520b1e646f86d72cdf03244

I am not sure if this deserves a place within the article, but well, here is it. — Yours truly, ⚑ AtikaAtikawa 16:29, 22 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

I think Sexual and gender-based violence in the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel would be better. Selfstudier (talk) 16:35, 22 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
eh, sadly I can't talk there.. thanks anyway — Yours truly, ⚑ AtikaAtikawa 17:29, 22 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
I don't see his (initial) claim in the Sexual violence article. There is another claim made by him there, but it's not related as far as I can see. Alaexis¿question? 20:33, 22 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Edit request: By Israel > Indiscriminate attacks

edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.



The following paragraph only cites Al Jazeera as its source (which has no knowledge of the situation, considering the IDF's valid and probable response as Hamas wears civilian clothing). This paragraph should therefore be removed.

On 22 March, Al Jazeera released a video retrieved from an Israeli drone showing four unarmed Palestinians in Khan Younis who were killed by Israeli air attacks. Two were killed instantly, and the others were killed while trying to stumble and crawl away. Al-Jazeera reported that “it is clear from the pictures that these Palestinians were unarmed and posed no threat to anything or anyone”. This footage was described by the UN's special rapporteur Francesca Albanese as a part of the “colossal amount of evidence” of war crimes committed in Gaza by Israel. The IDF started the investigation of the footage and said that they had encountered militants in civilian clothes retrieving previously hidden weapons in that area. Public Transit User (talk) 01:19, 23 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Is this to say that Israel has the right to strike everyone in gaza because they may be "militants in civilian clothes retrieving previously hidden weapons in that area"? — Yours truly, ⚑ AtikaAtikawa 03:31, 23 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
@AtikaAtikawa Of course not! However, Al Jazeera is claiming that the people who the IDF killed were civilians (even though they have no knowledge about this), while the IDF says they were members of Hamas with a plausible explanation. This exact example seems rather one-sided. Public Transit User (talk) 03:55, 23 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
I'm not really sure, but ig it's common sense to assume that unarmed people wearing civilian clothings are indeed civilians rather than blowing them up with no firm proof that they're militants (AFAIK the IDF provided none) except a plausible explanation that can be used to justify killing anyone of fighting age. — Truly yours, ⚑ AtikaAtikawa 04:06, 23 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
@AtikaAtikawa We know that Hamas uses civilian clothes, and that shouldn't give them any immunity compared to if they followed basic laws of war and wore identifying clothing. We know that Israel has a lot of intelligence about various Hamas operatives, so they likely recognize some members of Hamas. Obviously the IDF will not provide secret intel about how much they know about various members of Hamas. The problem with this paragraph is that it is saying that Al Jazeera saw seemingly unarmed people and assumed they were innocent civilians, while the IDF is saying that that simply isn't true? Public Transit User (talk) 04:11, 23 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

<- You have not presented a valid argument for the removal of sourced information. The existence of multiple interpretations/narratives etc. is not a basis for the removal of sourced information. It is usually an argument for the addition of sourced information. We don't get to cherry pick information or interpretations. The objectives are WP:NPOV and WP:DUE compliance. This request should be declined or transformed into something that increases WP:NPOV and WP:DUE compliance. Sean.hoyland (talk) 04:42, 23 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

OK, I am closing this, it is essentially a conversation between two non EC editors. If desired please place a proper edit request in the form change X to Y, appropriately sourced and EC editors will decide whether to implement it. No argumentation is required. Selfstudier (talk) 09:19, 23 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 June 2024

edit
2600:1700:6C80:CC90:C085:3FD5:3080:44DB (talk) 19:25, 4 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thank you i made a correction. 2600:1700:6C80:CC90:C085:3FD5:3080:44DB (talk) 19:27, 4 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
  Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. If you're asking for the page name to be changed, that should be done at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Liu1126 (talk) 19:39, 4 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

edit request perfidy section add mention of use of civilian and hamas/pij uniforms and civilian vehicles by israel

edit

In the perfidy section, add "In a June 8th raid by israeli forces on Nuseirat refugee camp in central Gaza israeli forces used disguises including those of civilians and militants, such as Hamas or PIJ as well as disguised civilian vehicles in a raid that killed more than 270 Gazans and wounding 698, mostly civilians. "Eyewitnesses also said that they saw Israeli forces in disguise – dressed as Hamas fighters or civilians... They were dressed in military uniforms like resistance fighters, carrying helmets and wearing signs of the [Hamas] resistance" Contradicting video evidence and eyewitness reports israel denied using civilian vehicles, and refused to comment on if their forces used perfidious disguises, tactics israel has used in the past. The raid used the area around the humanitarian aid pier as part of the raid. Following the raid, and the injury of an aid worker at the site, humanitarian aid operations at the pier were stopped pending the outcome of a UN security assessment of aid worker safety. The US acknowledged that israel operated near the pier but states that israel did not use the pier itself in loading and unloading helicopters during the raid." referencing https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/10/middleeast/inside-israels-hostage-rescue-intl-dst/index.html (cnn for the quote) and https://abcnews.go.com/International/israeli-special-forces-dressed-palestinian-refugees-hostage-rescue/story?id=110995204 https://www.cnn.com/middleeast/live-news/israel-hamas-war-gaza-news-06-10-24/index.html Fanccr (talk) 00:47, 11 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

edit

Is there a consensus on linking Bearing Witness (2023 film)? That could be relevant if described in the text somewhere and linked there, but it doesn't seem relevant enough to be there in "see also" for "Massacres"?

It was paired with genocidal massacre, and together they seem like an implied opinion (a POV or synth problem) rather than a link to closely related information?

I replaced genocidal massacre with Allegations of genocide in the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel because that page is much more relevant, but I don't know what to do with the movie link?

MWQs (talk) 07:00, 2 July 2024 (UTC)Reply