> Torture is not permitted under international law last time I checked, but US doesn't care and neither does EU.
That was the reason I said "(now, just)", is because it turns out the U.S. agrees with you that torture is not permitted, either at Guantanamo or anywhere else. That was also the reason I said the camp could just as well be in Kansas now, as torture is just as illegal in domestic U.S. prisons as it is in Guantanamo's prison camp.
> And I love the argument that unless you can prove Israel is deliberately targeting Palestinians, they are innocent
The argument applies both ways. If Hamas is shelling Israeli civilians then they are guilty of war crimes, full stop. Er, that is, unless they can make the claim that they were at least trying to aim for Israeli military targets and that their weapons just "missed" somehow.
> Obviously it is much easier to just blow up a building with a rocket if you've seen Hamas fighter entering it and noone seems to care if there are many civilians inside.
And if Israel has watched a Hamas fighter go into the building that's essentially affirmative evidence justifying the strike, as long as the proportionality requirement is still met.
Can you find buildings in Gaza holding concentrations of Hamas fighters and only Hamas fighters? If so let the IDF know, I'm sure they'd be quite happy to blow that one up instead of killing a bunch of Palestinian civilians.
But other than that it's easy to complain about the effects of a deliberate policy by Hamas to ensure civilians are co-located with all possible military targets. That's another war crime, by the way (violating the principle of distinction), but I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for people to call for Hamas to be tried for war crimes against their own people.