[Mafia_Pizza]

They cannot manage enforcing rules in normal wars, so you want them to enforce them in cyber?

you've got a point here! Even in traditional warfare it results difficult to enforce those rules. Think about the bombing of the Gaza hospital, even though everybody knows that bombing a protected object may result in war crime, it is difficult to find who is to blame for it. And even finding who is to blame (who might be dead after the war) won't bring people back from the graves.... That's so fucked up.

Yes, but the funny part here? It wasn't the Israelis who bombed it
1. It was the Islamic Jihad rocket who hit the hospital. It was already proven by so many evidence.
2. According to international law, if you use a civilian area for military purposes, as Hamas is doing (again, proven by every evidence possible), the target "loses" its immunity given that the civilian population has received an early warning.

Yeah what you are saying about the rule of international law is true.

In this case, Hamas should not have used the civilian area (if originally considered as a protected object) in the first place.

I assume that the Israeli forces bombed the area as the hospital turned to a military object in this case.

However, the early warning in my opinion should be feasible! In this case, you cannot give an early warning let's say 2 hours before and expect hundred of people and patients to evacuate the building (we are talking about an hospital here!!!! people might not have been able to walk properly etc...)

[Fly1ngC1rcu5]

They cannot manage enforcing rules in normal wars, so you want them to enforce them in cyber?

you've got a point here! Even in traditional warfare it results difficult to enforce those rules. Think about the bombing of the Gaza hospital, even though everybody knows that bombing a protected object may result in war crime, it is difficult to find who is to blame for it. And even finding who is to blame (who might be dead after the war) won't bring people back from the graves.... That's so fucked up.

Yes, but the funny part here? It wasn't the Israelis who bombed it
1. It was the Islamic Jihad rocket who hit the hospital. It was already proven by so many evidence.
2. According to international law, if you use a civilian area for military purposes, as Hamas is doing (again, proven by every evidence possible), the target "loses" its immunity given that the civilian population has received an early warning.

Yeah what you are saying about the rule of international law is true.

In this case, Hamas should not have used the civilian area (if originally considered as a protected object) in the first place.

I assume that the Israeli forces bombed the area as the hospital turned to a military object in this case.

However, the early warning in my opinion should be feasible! In this case, you cannot give an early warning let's say 2 hours before and expect hundred of people and patients to evacuate the building (we are talking about an hospital here!!!! people might not have been able to walk properly etc...)

My explanation regarding international law was just an example. Israel did not bomb this hospital. An improvised rocket of the Islamic Jihad organization landed in the hospital's parking lot and killed 5 people (around 20% of their rockets fall in Gaza due to being faulty). It took Hamas (which is not known to be a reliable source, obviously) exactly 30 seconds "to count" 500 casualties and blame Israel.
Regarding early warnings, as far as I know Israel has given fair warnings. Al-Shifaa hospital for example wasn't even bombed. Israeli soldiers went in, found ammunition, Hamas tunnel shafts and more, and left. They gave the hospital crew a couple of days to move the patients.

[fairytales19]

no rule in war

[Mafia_Pizza]

They cannot manage enforcing rules in normal wars, so you want them to enforce them in cyber?

you've got a point here! Even in traditional warfare it results difficult to enforce those rules. Think about the bombing of the Gaza hospital, even though everybody knows that bombing a protected object may result in war crime, it is difficult to find who is to blame for it. And even finding who is to blame (who might be dead after the war) won't bring people back from the graves.... That's so fucked up.

Yes, but the funny part here? It wasn't the Israelis who bombed it
1. It was the Islamic Jihad rocket who hit the hospital. It was already proven by so many evidence.
2. According to international law, if you use a civilian area for military purposes, as Hamas is doing (again, proven by every evidence possible), the target "loses" its immunity given that the civilian population has received an early warning.

Yeah what you are saying about the rule of international law is true.

In this case, Hamas should not have used the civilian area (if originally considered as a protected object) in the first place.

I assume that the Israeli forces bombed the area as the hospital turned to a military object in this case.

However, the early warning in my opinion should be feasible! In this case, you cannot give an early warning let's say 2 hours before and expect hundred of people and patients to evacuate the building (we are talking about an hospital here!!!! people might not have been able to walk properly etc...)

My explanation regarding international law was just an example. Israel did not bomb this hospital. An improvised rocket of the Islamic Jihad organization landed in the hospital's parking lot and killed 5 people (around 20% of their rockets fall in Gaza due to being faulty). It took Hamas (which is not known to be a reliable source, obviously) exactly 30 seconds "to count" 500 casualties and blame Israel.
Regarding early warnings, as far as I know Israel has given fair warnings. Al-Shifaa hospital for example wasn't even bombed. Israeli soldiers went in, found ammunition, Hamas tunnel shafts and more, and left. They gave the hospital crew a couple of days to move the patients.

I understand. The thing is whether 2 days is feasible time to move patients. But interesting analysis!