this post was submitted on 09 Jun 2024
229 points (89.6% liked)

World News

38847 readers
2268 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Israel’s leadership is pushing the allegations that Hamas fighters raped Israeli women during the October 7 attacks for its own political objectives while the government’s ongoing refusal to allow the United Nations to conduct a full investigation into the matter threatens to hinder any evidence, advocates have warned.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The OP article makes a big deal, too, about this distinction between Israeli women who were raped by Hamas fighters because the Hamas fighters wanted to rape, as opposed to because their commanders told them to go out and rape. I'm not sure that's a super impactful distinction. Why do you think it's an important distinction?

(Actually, the OP article says something stupider than that; it says that "some reports have asserted that those acts and other reported atrocities were committed by civilians and those not affiliated" with Hamas, without explaining what the fuck they're even talking about, but I'm giving the benefit of the doubt and dealing mostly with their treatment that it's important whether or not Hamas "ordered it" to happen, which is still stupid to me but not transparently absurd like the idea that unaffiliated civilians suddenly started coming in and raping all these Israeli women at the same time that the October 7th attacks were going on.)

[–] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

There's a huge difference between isolated incidents, and the systemic use of rape as a weapon of war.

One's a regular criminal offense, and the other is Hague War Crime Tribal level of offense.

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Not even slightly. Or, I mean, not for quite a while; the treatment of rape in war has evolved past what you are describing since quite some time ago.

  • Pre World War 2: Shit happens, they're soldiers, what are you going to do
  • World War 2 through 1993: Hey I think they shouldn't do that
  • 1993: UN declares systematic rape to be a war crime <-- you are here
  • 1993-2008: Various minor redefinitions over a series of resolutions

Then in 2008, the UN took the fairly sensible when you think about it step of saying that if you are fielding an army, and that army is raping people with any regularity, then that is your problem i.e. a crime against humanity and you don't get to mount the defense that you didn't tell them to, and so it's not your problem if it is happening.

Your viewpoint is disgusting and explicitly rape-apologist, as well as in this case legally incorrect.

[–] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Are you relying to the wrong the wrong comment? Or did you just not read mine correctly...?

Before I lay into the absurdity of your response as it relates to my comment, please double check.

Because it should be obvious that my comment adheres to the UN charter you reference and I never claimed that systemic only includes weaponized rape ordered through the chain of command.

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

You said that a soldier raping a civilian is a regular criminal offense. I cited the UN resolution that says among other things:

The Council demanded that all parties to armed conflict take immediate and appropriate measures to protect civilians, including by, among others, enforcing appropriate military disciplinary measures and upholding the principle of command responsibility; training troops on the categorical prohibition of all forms of sexual violence against civilians; debunking myths that fuel sexual violence; and vetting armed and security forces to take into account past sexual violence.

I mean, it's possible that we're saying the same thing; sort of contingent on what you mean exactly by "isolated incidents". I am saying that widespread rape on October 7th is indicative of a war crime regardless of whether approval for it came through Hamas's chain of command. Is that what you're saying?