• catloaf@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    I don’t know. Has targeting those types of infrastructure historically been categorized as a war crime?

    • PugJesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      No, dual-use facilities are generally regarded as legitimate targets so long as civilian workers are not explicitly targeted in the way one might target enemy personnel.

    • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      The point is that the law is difficult to administer clearly because ‘dual-use’ is too vague. Russia’s been hitting electrical facilities all across Ukraine for over a year, and they’ve been saying they’re all legal military targets, even if they’re serving a major city (including hospitals, critical civilian services, ect). The more hawkish crowd here is pretty selective when classifying war crimes depending on the parties involved, and even the UNSC is unable to make clear rulings (they don’t have any teeth, anyway), especially when they involve an American-backed ally.

      Israel has been hitting schools, Mosques, orphanages, ect, and they’ve thus far gotten away with it by arguing they were being used by Hamas. I wouldn’t put much stock in what’s being said is ‘fair-play’ or not. It’s all questionable and it’s all an escalation that nobody really wants.