top | item 45557564

(no title)

lkrubner | 4 months ago

[flagged]

discuss

order

danparsonson|4 months ago

This is a deeply naive take that ignores the composition of the current Israeli government and decades of history.

nashashmi|4 months ago

I guess since Nazis had Jewish officers, and labor camps for Jews, they would not be totally genocidal either. Being genocidal does not mean you don’t do certain things that are humanely appropriate. For example, the concentration camps had a hospital for the sick. Nazis were still genocidal.

lkrubner|4 months ago

You are making up your own, personal definition of genocide. But "genocide" has a specific definition under international law, and it is a crime of intent. Israel clearly had no intent to permanently remove the people of Gaza, since Israel was happy to sign a ceasefire as soon as they could get their hostages back. Everything else that occurred is just ordinary war. Without the intent to permanently erase a culture or a people, it cannot be genocide under the law, since the intent is missing.

There is the separate issue of war crimes. Some commanders in the IDF may not have shown due caution towards civilians. That will eventually be adjudicated in the courts. But that is a separate charge and has nothing to do with genocide.

I remain baffled why some people want to take the various charges that could be made against Israel and conflate all of the charges with the charge of genocide. The charge of genocide has become deeply attractive to a large number of people, even when other charges would be easier to prove and have more evidence to support them. But for some reason "war crime" is not as attractive as "genocide" and so supporters of the people of Gaza have developed an emotional commitment to fighting for the charge which they cannot possibly prove, because events have undermined their narrative.

Scarblac|4 months ago

> Genocide is defined under international law as a crime of intent. Israel was happy to sign a ceasefire agreement as soon as Hamas offered to return the hostages. Therefore Israel had no intent of removing the people of Gaza from Gaza, therefore there was no genocide. This was simply an ordinary war.

It can be both, an ordinary war that is also used as cover for genocide while it is ongoing.

spwa4|4 months ago

And yet Wikipedia has no problem avoiding the word genocide when some parties are involved, even when the consensus is that the Kremlin has committed genocide, multiple times, during a conflict. It's even convicted before the ICC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Ukrainian_War

Note: before you point out that that page does mention genocide, read what you found. It details Putin's fake claim that Ukraine is committing genocide, several times, and does not mention that the Kremlin has committed at least 5 separate campaigns of genocide (so far) in Ukraine.

Wikipedia has a pretty damn serious case of extreme leftist bias (meaning there are many instance of leftist bias on wikipedia where most people I consider lifelong leftists would not accept that as a reasonable leftist position.