Israel hospitals instructed not to treat captured Hamas who have piled up in the public hospital sy

[hlthe2b]

3. I can understand prioritizing injured Israelis over enemy combatants (although that violates medical

ethics--at least in the US)...

But, to not treat them at all is a violation of the Geneva Conventions and Israel HAS declared war formally against Hamas:

If a military doctor encountered an injured enemy soldier, they had a duty under the Geneva Convention to render medical assistance if it was requested and feasible. The Geneva Convention, which took shape at the end of World War II, established the principles of humanitarian and health assistance in times of war.Mar 25, 2022

I think that that reference to "feasibility" does give some wiggle room for prioritizing Israeli patients, but total denial of care?


That would be a serious violation for US military doctors. Emotions are running high for good reason, but even domestic US doctors --especially those who treat trauma or drug overdoses--encounter this ethical dilemma--albeit with accused criminals, not enemy soldiers.

I appreciate the intensity of feelings and can readily put myself in the shoes of Israeli medical providers(and governmental officials), but I can't say this does not leave me concerned with respect to global precedence. And yes, I'd agree that the monstrous acts thus far of Hamas signal they would surely not reciprocate with any adherence to the GC, but we've certainly encountered that before in Iraq, Afghanistan, and even against some enemies in WWII , Korea, and Vietnam. At the same time adherence--where it existed-- has protected American lives. I'm not comfortable and cannot condone seeing this totally abandoned if care CAN be provided.


And lest anyone claim Israel has no obligations to the Geneva Conventions, it is, indeed a signatory:
Israel ratified the Geneva Conventions on July 6, 1951.