For two days, Shaymaa Ziara has been seeing messages in WhatsApp group chats from family and friends in Gaza about how to keep themselves safe from white phosphorous bombs that are allegedly part of Israel’s airstrikes on Gaza.

Ziara, who lives in Markham, Ont., said her father, three siblings and pregnant sister-in-law are currently in Gaza, moving from building to building in an effort to avoid the constant bombardments from Israel since hostilities began after Hamas militants launched a stunning and brutal attack in Israel on Saturday.

Videos of white phosphorus munitions allegedly deployed in Gaza have been circulating online for several days.

On Thursday, Human Rights Watch said it has confirmed that these munitions are being used over the Gaza City port using videos posted on Oct. 10 and 11, and interviewing two people from the al-Mina area in Gaza City who described the strikes.

    • salton@lemmy.world
      329·
      1 year ago

      It’s completely allowed by the rules of war. You’re just not allowed to use it to target civilians themselves. I saw that it was used in an open field near the border where there was heavy fighting against Hamas Terrorists.

      • out@lemmynsfw.com
        81·
        1 year ago

        Yes, that’s what the article says, but:

        #A need for legal clarity on use

        International law does not classify white phosphorous as a chemical or incendiary weapon, and its use in war is not prohibited, said Houchang Hassan-Yari, professor emeritus of politics and international relations at the Royal Military College of Canada in Kingston, Ont. But its impact when used in civilian areas muddies the waters.

        “Generally speaking, the bomb is used to blind the anti-air system of the other side because the fume that it generates covers the attackers,” Hassan-Yari said. “But the consequence if the bomb is used against the humans, many believe is a war crime. So it’s not very clear cut … and there is a need for clarity by UN agencies to confirm whether this bomb should … be identified as a chemical weapon.”

        ##What counts as a chemical weapon and how to tell who’s using one

        According to groups like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, the use of white phosphorous bombs, which ignite when in contact with oxygen, in densely populated areas — like the 365 sq. km Gaza Strip that is home to more than two million people — violates international humanitarian law.

        • salton@lemmy.world
          114·
          1 year ago

          But what? Where are all of the Muslim countries railing against Russia for using it to burn whole villages of Ukraines?

          • out@lemmynsfw.com
            7·
            1 year ago

            Idk, I haven’t read up on it. But for one, where are all the western countries railing against Israel for using it?

            It’s a human rights organization that’s bringing this up not a country so that is irrelevant.

            And why the fuck does it even matter? White phosphorus is bad, end of story.

            • salton@lemmy.world
              113·
              1 year ago

              It’s nasty if it gets in contact with humans but that doesn’t mean that it is inherently evil. They haven’t crossed some sort of line in weapons ethics. It’s an accepted tool on the battlefield with multiple uses having nothing to do with directly harming people. It’s like saying water is bad because you drank several gallons and your brain swelled up from the osmotic pressure. Heck even flamethrowers are perfectly fine to use in war.

              • out@lemmynsfw.com
                4·
                1 year ago

                Refusing to use a less lethal tool seems pretty evil.

                I know it’s a great smokescreen but that doesn’t make it okay.

                Just because the current main users of white phosphorus are the US, Israel, and Russia. Doesn’t make it an accepted and especially an acceptable tool.

                Heck even flamethrowers are perfectly fine to use in war. Sure, but not indiscriminately on civilians.

                • salton@lemmy.world
                  16·
                  1 year ago

                  But you’re trying to argue that it passes some ethical boundary even being used in its most mundane things. It’s fine if we differ in that opinion.

                  • out@lemmynsfw.com
                    5·
                    1 year ago

                    It doesn’t matter what the intention is, if people are seriously injured by it and you still use it on people (including civilians) with that knowledge.