P F Tinmore, Jroc, fanger, et al
In about 1582, a remarkable Spanish Judge declared in the findings of the court, that the “intentional killing of innocent persons, for example, women and children, is not allowable in war.” And that is where the concept of "immunity" originates; individual civilians extended the general protection against intentionally directed military operations.”
You let me know when a Palestinian drops a one ton bomb on an apartment building.
(COMMENT)
There is a big difference between what you suggest here and the definite military advantage to be gained when a Commander and Control High Value Target is directly targeted and some civilian casualties occur.
We all know that the Hostile Arab Palestinians intentionally conduct military operations in the vicinity of protected entities; in an attempt to use the immunity of the protected entity to provide cover for the military operations. When the HoAP locate their military operations in the immediate vicinity of densely populated areas to take advantage of the immunity, then the HoAP have violated Rule #23 in Customary IHL. Similarly, when the HoAP intentional fail to remove protected entities from the vicinity of their military operations, then the HoAP have violated Rule #24 in Customary IHL.
Don't just jump out there and suggest that there is some connection between the direct and intentional targeting
(confirmed by official praise as martyrs and heroes) of innocent civilians and Israeli combat operations against legitimate HoAP targets which the Palestinian Leadership snuggled into the protected population. THERE IS NOT!
The HoAP should never start a bar fight, and then run behind the barmaid for protection.
Most Respectfully,
R