• Geobloke@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    He was in hospital because shrapnel had severed his spine. In the west bank. You can throw semantics at it, but going by the context I’d put money on him not being actively engaged in combat as he was incapable by your words

    • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      I think the best way to explain it is take the example to the extreme end - would bin laden have been capable of planning the 9/11 attacks from a hospital bed while not able to walk?

      Law and precident are literally semantics - the difference between a war crime with the penalty of death and a frowny face is literally the details.

      • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        So then literally no one is protected then. According to you anyone could be a terrorist committing thought crime.

        • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          Feel like I’m talking with people trying to find a reason to be offended. Take 5 seconds

          Is every protected person

          • a known member of a terrorist organization

          • been wounded conducting what are considered terrorist actions

          • in proximity to two other terrorists

          • before considering what other information may be held by IDF.