Seems pretty clear. I admit I'm struggling with this one but it's getting clearer the more I read.
Geneva Convention:
@Fellixe Terrorist orgs are generally not entitled to special protections, nor are they civilians.
@stueytheround Yes, though I don't think the fact that the current conflict is against terrorists gives Israel the freedom to employ tactics that are against the Geneva Conventions.
I'm not screaming "genocide" here. I'm very sympathetic to the fact that Israel is fighting not only direct terrorism but a proxy war against larger outside terrorist organizations and terrorist supporting states. But they seem to have fucked up employing this tactic. This rule is designed for exactly this scenario
@Fellixe I don't think that what Israel just did breaks the above convention as written. That's what I mean.
@Fellixe
The objects were not attached to persons protected under humanitarian law, nor were they likely to attract civilians.
@stueytheround @Fellixe
Absolutely Felixe, terrorists are exempt from any Geneva Convention.
@Anemone @stueytheround @Fellixe
However, since there was no way to know who might be standing in proximity to the wearer, it is problematic. What if one of them were wearing his pager on a standing-room-only bus next to a stranger's face?
@EileenKCarpenter "Might attract civilians" in other words, this law is designed to prevent the use of boobytraps to *deliberately* target civilians.
Like, for instance, suicide bombings in marketplaces.
I'm not saying it's a good thing, but non-targeted civilian casualties are not in breach of the above law.