Questions about Sinwar's Death

[u/PlinyToTrajan]

1. What they thought was an opposing soldier was heavily wounded and armed with a stick, which he threw at the drone. The I.D.F.'s response was to kill him with a sniper shot to the head and then bring down the building with tank fire.

Why haven't any Western journalists asked about what Israel's rules of engagement were? Was it legal to kill what appeared to be a badly wounded, dying enemy infantryman?

1. For months, reporters relied on U.S. and Israel intelligence assessments that said that Sinwar was hiding in a tunnel, surrounded by Israeli hostages, with whom he was protecting himself. This description tended to give an image of an insulated leader cowering in fear while putting ordinary people at risk. Instead, it's very plain that he died by chance, in combat with no hostages anywhere near. His corpse was diminutive; not a man who fed on ample rations. How much has the narrative been distorted?

2. Something written in the June, 2024 Wall Street Journal exclusive about Sinwar's private messages has stayed with me. "'Things went out of control,' Sinwar said in one of his messages, referring to gangs taking civilian women and children as hostages. 'People got caught up in this, and that should not have happened.'" Wall Street Journal, Jun. 10, 2024, "Gaza Chief’s Brutal Calculation: Civilian Bloodshed Will Help Hamas."

The description of the planning for the Oct. 7, 2023 attack as reported by the New York Times in its recent exclusive based on minutes of Hamas meetings went like this:

"At this point, preparations for the attack were roughly a month from completion, according to the June 2022 minutes. The plans included striking 46 positions staffed by the Israeli military division that guards the border, and then targeting a major air base and intelligence hub in southern Israel, as well as cities and villages."

"The leaders said it would be easier to target those residential areas if the military bases were overrun first — a prediction that proved to be correct on Oct. 7."

New York Times, Oct. 12, 2024, "Secret Documents Show Hamas Tried to Persuade Iran to Join Its Oct. 7 Attack."

Did Hamas' high command, including Sinwar, plan a bloody slaughter of Israeli civilians, or did they have a different plan that went awry? Was it or wasn't it in Sinwar's nature to viciously and indiscriminately kill in that manner? With Israel's control of information and limitations on access for foreign press, the full story of Oct. 7, 2023 remains elusive.

Given the materials the New York Times has access to, minutes of a string of Hamas meetings in which the Oct. 7, 2023 attacks were planned, has it given an adequate account of whether Hamas high command intended to perpetrate atrocities?

1. New York Times, Oct. 18, 2024, "What will become of Yahya Sinwar’s body?" "Israel often holds the corpses of Palestinians, hoping to use them in a future exchange with Hamas or other militant groups, just as Hamas has done with the bodies of hostages killed on or after the Hamas-led attack in Israel."

What the fuck?

[u/_II_I_I__I__I_I_II_]

The short answer is, no one in corporate America cares about any semblance of 'rules'.

Israel regularly kills innocent civilians, and the media does not care.

So I doubt they'll kick up any drama over Sinwar.

[u/FarmTeam → u/_II_I_I__I__I_I_II_]

Also, with regard to “1.” - no, by the rules of war, an enemy combatant is a legitimate target even if injured, as long as they are not attempting to surrender.

IOF has a long history of ignoring attempts to surrender and shooting the unarmed even if they are carrying white flags- but killing Sinwar wasn’t illegal on the rules of war.

[u/[deleted] → u/FarmTeam]

They kill their own, even if carrying white flags..

[u/Mike-Rosoft → u/FarmTeam]

Depends. Under the Geneva Conventions enemy combatants who are unconscious, or otherwise incapacitated and incapable of hostile actions by wounds or sickness, are considered to be hors de combat and must not be attacked. This is codified in the 1st Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions:

1. A person who is recognized or who, in the circumstances, should be recognized to be hors de combat shall not be made the object of attack.

2. A person is hors de combat if:

(a) He is in the power of an adverse Party;

(b) He clearly expresses an intention to surrender; or

(c) He has been rendered unconscious or is otherwise incapacitated by wounds or sickness, and therefore is incapable of defending himself;

provided that in any of these cases he abstains from any hostile act and does not attempt to escape.

(I guess Israel could try to claim a fig leaf of legality that he did not "abstain from any hostile act" because he threw a stick at the drone.)