- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: How Should Israel Apply the Law of Armed Conflict During the Siege of Gaza?
Posted on 10/12/23 at 4:46 pm to Shakey
Posted on 10/12/23 at 4:46 pm to Shakey
In 2006, Hamas won the 2006 Palestinian legislative elections and assumed administrative control of Gaza Strip and West Bank. In 2007, Hamas led a military victory over Fatah, the secular Palestinian nationalist party, which had dominated the Palestinian National Authority.
Elections matter.
Elections matter.
Posted on 10/12/23 at 4:56 pm to texastigerr
quote:
In 2006, Hamas won the 2006 Palestinian legislative elections and assumed administrative control of Gaza Strip and West Bank
The West Bank is not controlled by Hamas, Palestinian Authority has controlled the West Bank since the 90s.
Posted on 10/12/23 at 4:57 pm to texastigerr
quote:Partly true, but Hamas hasn't allowed another election in 16 years.
In 2006, Hamas won the 2006 Palestinian legislative elections and assumed administrative control of Gaza Strip and West Bank. In 2007, Hamas led a military victory over Fatah, the secular Palestinian nationalist party, which had dominated the Palestinian National Authority.
Elections matter.
Posted on 10/12/23 at 5:25 pm to texastigerr
quote:
In 2006, Hamas won the 2006 Palestinian legislative elections and assumed administrative control of Gaza Strip and West Bank. In 2007, Hamas led a military victory over Fatah, the secular Palestinian nationalist party, which had dominated the Palestinian National Authority.
Elections matter.
I understand your point. Consider this hypothetical:
President Biden and his Democrat administration order a secret attack on Russia. Russia responds by seiging America with a barrage of indiscriminate rockets and missiles in preparation for a full-scale ground invasion. The Biden administration orders a stop on all Americans attempting to flee the U.S. and avoid the war. There is no way out and all civilians and their families are forced to remain in the conflict zone.
Although Russia has an obligation to mitigate civilian casualties, they use the same rationale you proposed. Does that change the calculation?
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News