Israel’s Account of Attack on Aid Convoy Raises Wider Legal Questions, Experts Say (link, no paywall)
The featured New York Times article basically trashes the IDF for collateral damage that happens in wartime. Excerpts below:
Second, one has to wonder what Jose Andre, World Food Kitchen was thinking or if he had an agenda. Surely, he could have found some other famished part of the world to aid. As it was, when aid is delivered in an active combat zone, one is "dancing in the middle of a three-lane highway."
The featured New York Times article basically trashes the IDF for collateral damage that happens in wartime. Excerpts below:
First of all the presumption of civilian status ignores the fact that terrorist organizations routinely feign civilian status and then hide behind the skirts of women and children. If the IDF observed this doctrine they could never kill Hamas operatives. They don’t wear uniforms. What all of this breathless coverage ignores, as well, is the obligation to pressure Hamas to “stop the war.” This war has been, in any objective sense, started and lost be Hamas. Sadat “stopped the war” in 1977 by journeying to and recognizing Israel, as did Jordan in 1994. Even Kaiser Wilhelm’s Germany similarly “stopped the war” in 1918. The world has no obligation to stop a war so that the loser can continue, with utter futility, to extract a toll on its own soldiers and enemy civilians.New York Times said:
Second, one has to wonder what Jose Andre, World Food Kitchen was thinking or if he had an agenda. Surely, he could have found some other famished part of the world to aid. As it was, when aid is delivered in an active combat zone, one is "dancing in the middle of a three-lane highway."
