[Cyph0n]

So the best you can say about Israel’s conduct over the course of the past 2.5 years is that it “warrants scrutiny”?

And if you want to play the number of victims game, even pre Oct 7 one side has always had it significantly worse than the other. After all, one side is a sovereign state that has a technologically advanced military, an air force, a navy, and air defense systems.

[dijit]

Remarkable. You've managed to read a comment that cited the ICJ, called out Israel's non-compliance with binding provisional measures, and explicitly said there's "plenty to condemn"; and concluded the position is that Israeli conduct merely "warrants scrutiny."

This isn't a conversation, it's not even engagement: that's just not reading.

On asymmetry: you've accidentally made the case for holding Israel to a higher standard. A nuclear-capable state with F-35s, Iron Dome and a $3.8bn annual US military subsidy [1] bears more responsibility for its choices than a militia in a blockaded strip of land; not less. That's what asymmetry actually means.

What it doesn't mean is that a music festival full of civilians somehow doesn't count. But nice try.

[1] https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12587

[Cyph0n]

> that Israel's conduct warrants scrutiny.

Was this not your choice of words?

> On asymmetry: you've accidentally made the case for holding Israel to a higher standard.

Huh? Are you replying to someone else?

Israel has killed 10s of thousands of civilians, a large portion of which are children. This along with many other factors - in addition to the higher standard expected from a sovereign state fighting an occupied people - is the reason we call it a genocide.