this post was submitted on 27 May 2025
268 points (91.6% liked)
Microblog Memes
8387 readers
2616 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This section of ~~the Geneva Convention~~ international law. does not apply to a belligerent occupying force. Which is what Israel is.
The line "Israel has the right to defend itself" legally does not apply to Gaza or the West Bank.
Well the Greens are still voting to send weapons to the genocide. So it really doesn't sound like they disagree with Israel to me.
Wrong, see Article 2.
Yes it triggers article 51
Wrong again, this is Protocol I which Israel isn't a signatory to. What I linked is Convention I which Israel is a signatory to.
And this also has nothing to do with the claim you made even if they were, you claimed the Convention doesn't apply to occupying forces when it explicitly states that it does apply.
Also note that I'm not saying Israel did abide by it (doubt it honestly) just that they are subject to it.
You are right I confused the Geneva Convention for international law there i will correct it.
Edit: apparently the other poster switched trom international law to Geneva Convention which caused my confusion.
I don't quite follow, the Geneva Convention is international law. All international law is essentially just contracts between nation states, and the GC is one of those.
There are different coventions and signatures. There's the Geneva Convention, ICC, UN Charter and much more.
Here's a big UN document about what Israel can and cannot do under international law..
https://www.un.org/unispal/document/ceirpp-legal-study2023/#%3A%7E%3Atext=Second%2C+where+a+belligerent+occupation+follows+from%2Cproportionality%2C+the+resulting+occupation+may+become+illegal.
Well now you lost me entirely. All I wanted to say was that the Geneva Convention is (part of) international law.
Or in other words: Geneva Convention ⊊ International Law.
Hence my confusion about your confusion.
TL;DR.
Again, I wasn't agreeing with OP above, I was just pointing out that GC I Article 21 is applicable in Gaza since Israel is a signatory and thus Israel has to follow it (at least de jure if not de facto). This is the case even when Palestine isn't a signatory to GC I because of Article 2.