• CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I mean, that makes a certain degree of sense, because if using protected places as a place to put one’s military operations doesn’t remove that protection, then it would become a common strategy to intentionally use vulnerable civilians as shields in that manner, and since no military is realistically going to just let their opponent attack them without a response when capable of delivering one, such a scenario would just lead to the whole idea of places like hospitals being protected being abandoned.

    • Copatus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Except in theory, you would want your hospitals protected regardless, even if it wasn’t a war crime to hide the military there. Because that’s where your population is vulnerable and being healed.

      Using your own population as shields is just next level. Those are the people you are supposedly fighting to protect in the first place.