• livus
      link
      fedilink
      23
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      @idkwhatimdoing it’s only legal for smokescreens if you have taken all reasonable precautions to ensure that by doing so, you’re not also inflicting it on civillians.

      The injuries it produces are horrific.

      • Melkath
        link
        fedilink
        131 year ago

        We literally just watched them shell an entire city of civilians who complied with an order to leave all their earthly possessions and gather in the city center.

        They targeted the city center.

        • Khalic
          link
          fedilink
          -41 year ago

          Do you have a relatively reputable source for that? I saw this but only from a turkish news agency who has a lot of missinfo issues

          • Melkath
            link
            fedilink
            51 year ago

            Fair point.

            Murdock probably owns all of it and this is a good reminder that noone knows what the fuck happened except the people who were there.

      • @idkwhatimdoing@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -21 year ago

        Yes, which the article does not say they’ve failed to do. In fact, the article says that the videos submitted as evidence seem to support its legal use not in Gaza, but near Lebanon, and that Human Rights Watch submitted no videos at all showing white phosphorus in Gaza.

    • @filister@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      151 year ago

      But not in densely populated areas, because it can cause severe burns.

      White phosphorus, which can be used as a smokescreen or a weapon, has the potential to cause civilian harm due to the severe burns it causes and its lingering long-term effects on survivors. Its use in densely populated areas of Gaza violates the requirement under international humanitarian law that parties to the conflict take all feasible precautions to avoid civilian injury and loss of life.