I do not know. To me, the text of the convention does not seem unreasonable, but I think that back in the late forties, they assumed the conflicts would be pretty much symmetrical. That is, the occupied country would evacuate and temporarily relocate its people; like Ukraine is doing, for example. In the case of Hamás, though, they would need to be more than just a group of terrorists showing zero care for the civilians in Gaza. They should be the ones negotiating refuge and safe harbor for their people, but instead, they use them as human shields and blame Israel. So you are right in this point, but I still think Israel should not have fallen for this trap and should continue only with the most surgical approach possible. I know how difficult and time-consuming that would be, but it would be the right thing to do. View quoted note →