Hamas
If Hamas had attacked only IDF bases and outposts by surprise, including killing/kidnapping soldiers and women (without rape and beheading), would this have been a legitimate military action? And in general, if a soldier is on guard duty in the territories/or just standing at a bus stop, is it considered a terrorist crime if an Arab from the territories/Gaza harms him, or is it legitimate, as in a regular war, since he belongs to the enemy army? (In the current situation, I’m not sure that this can be answered freely… but let’s try 🙂 )
This intrigues me both from a moral and international law perspective.
In principle, war requires a declaration, and therefore it is contrary to the laws of war. But the justification for war (which does not exist for them) is also relevant.
What is the source of the fact that war requires a declaration? Isn't this simply implied by the enemy's actions? After all, part of the way war is waged is by surprising the enemy without declaring it in advance.
This is international law.
Adds that we were officially in a ceasefire with Hamas, so any offensive action by it is illegal and illegitimate.
And just as a curiosity - Japan attacked the United States at Pearl Harbor without declaring war, which was one of the justifications for the American government to drop a nuclear bomb on Japan (in polls conducted in the United States before the bomb was dropped, about a quarter of citizens thought that Japan should be completely destroyed)
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
