The future is uncertain and none of us definitively know how they'll rule, but anyone that gives a fuck on how they rule would want an immediate cease fire once they declared it a plausible genocide. That's a serious fucking label that doesn't get routinely applied while they investigate every incident.
We know you cant.
Plenty of actual educated scholars and historians have already proven that they are committing one.
Because they have to make the appearance of giving a shit. They're already losing enough support across the globe for their actions, if they make a deliberate attempt to go over the line in their brutality they risk actually losing the dumbasses that still believe that they are doing this justifiably.
Cite one person ITT supporting Hamas."Hamas doesn't use human shields :^)" also the quickness to condemn Israel for civilian casualties while refusing to acknowledge that Hamas purposefully puts them in harms way. It's telling. And here I thought only the far right was full of anti-semites. Also the ignoring the fact that most Palestinians support Hamas, and what happened on Oct 7th (as of earlier this year) according to polls, yet condemning Israeli's because of polls.
The courts didn't say those events don't count as genocide. The courts said nothing because they work on the timeframe of years. The courts haven't called it a genocide because courts are slow. Pretending the courts agree with you is disingenuous. Anyone who understands how the international courts work should not expect them to have a decision as of yet regardless of what's happening.
This is a picture of an apartment Israel struck in Syria, killing only the two occupants.
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/7/7c94e014.jpg
This is a picture of Gaza, one of the most densely populated areas in the Middle East.
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/2/218064a8.jpg
Why does a military with the capability of sniping two people with a missile need to level neighborhoods to eliminate their targets? Why do they wield a sledgehammer so irresponsibly when they're capable of surgical precision with a scalpel?
Thank you for proving my point. Israel does not even view any life of a Palestinian as worth caring about. Palestinians are simply cannon fodder.Then why hasn't Hamas claimed that Israel is the reason they can't negotiate a ceasefire (for not having enough alive hostages), seems like something they would capitalize on like... incredibly swiftly. Also if Israel doesn't consider them as people, then why are they letting any aid through at all? Why have any safe zones period? Why have any restraint? Idk, seems like a lot of things they are doing to stop the annihilation of an entire people.
Also thank you for proving that the Israelis don't actually give a shit about their own Hostages, since they do know that they are holding their own Hostages there, and continue to bomb indiscriminately.
Civillian targets are not legitamate targets.
Probably because of all the other times where they gave their "warnings" (those warnings are complete bullshit), they somehow, magically happened to still kill civillians.
Are you suggesting that Israel see that their strikes kill civillians and then put zero consideration into avoiding that for future strikes?
"They're still having babies and not dying out at a fast enough rate. Totally not genocide."
There are no safe routes because every time Israel says there are safe routes, they magically get bombed. For reasons. All the way up to the refugee camps. That get bombed. For reasons.
JFC.
I cannot wait til you catch a ban for this.
You're so close to getting it.
Yeah, Israel don't see it as comparable to that situation, because they don't care about civillian casualties, because they don't see Palestinians as people.
It should be obvious and yet here we are spelling it out for you. You said the "death toll would be higher if it was a genocide" implying you've concluded it's definitively not a genocide and that "international courts refuse to call it a genocide" implying the courts agreed with your decision when in fact very much have not reached that conclusion or any conclusion.
Why is Israel striking targets they know have human shields placed at them?
The use of human shields argument is another one that doesn't make a lot of sense.Using an example that personal is disingenuous as fuck, just saying. Also the circumstances are completely different. I don't think I've ever seen a worse analogy before in my life. You are comparing a scenario in which I actively know that someone is holding my mom hostage, to an active war zone in which Hamas prevents civilians from leaving after Israel warns them to.
Like, if someone was to take your mother as a "human shield" should you just blast away straight through your mother in order to get the bad guy?
Of course not, it's going to lead to an incredible amount of death and destruction, which is exactly what is going on.
That's of course if we were defining human shields in that conventional way.
However, Israel has done this thing where they have made "Human Shield" just mean "Hamas existed somewhere in the vicinity, we promise, sorry for all the dead bodies."
You haven't posted any proof that hospitals were not attacked. People here have heard the news.
What's your proof of aid? The World Central Kitchen convoy being bombed by Israel?
Citation needed.
I guess the WCK workers ignored those several warnings. Shame, that.
And yet they keep killing civillians.
Also, using the birth rate argument is another example of a logical fallacy. Poor and socially underdeveloped countries tend to reproduce at a high rate, especially in the Middle East, due to religious and cultural differences as well. And it's also well documented that when a marginalized group is feeling threatened that the birth rates often increase due to the fear of extinction.
Combine that with the fact that Gaza is the most densely populated area in the world and it's slowly been suffocated over the past decades til today, and it's going to lead to a high birth rate. It's gross to try to use this as a justification for how it's not genocide.
No it isn't logical because Israel shouldn't be bombing places that they know have human shields.
Oh, you're just outright denying genocide can exist at all at this point, and not just the Palestinian genocide.
Yeah, that's not a great way to continue that sentence.
They say plausible because they are still investigating not because they think it isnt.
The fuck you aren't.
Nope...just you discounting and justifying the killing of women and children by it.
someone who supported bernie jerking off israel is maybe the most pathetic thing imaginable. the exact kind of person that is totally clueless about the things they say that they support and is just going with whatever is trendy on the internet atm
You didn't answer the question about the Uyghur genocide.
Israel has been stopping food, medical supplies, and has been attacking hospitals. The only one that hasn't been happening is (e).
Samurontai posted...
The most hard-right Pro-Ukrainian, Bernie supporter you'll ever meet, because that makes sense? lmao, you could always just reply to my point rather than attack me, you know?
You're the one making the accusation, so why do you believe this is a genocide?
They are killing men women and children, they are telling people to to certain spots to be safe, then they bomb them there, their military sings about killing them all and leaving none alive. Babies are killed in incubators and pregnant women are run over by bulldozers.
He's already used the Hard-Right "human shield" excuse so there you go.
On one hand, there's literally dozens of Holocaust Scholars, Genocide Scholars, and historians that have studied the region that almost unanimously conclude that this is a genocide, and currently an ongoing case in the ICJ attempting to prove its a genocide (one that you could of course read their argument as to how it applies for yourself, but of course you would never do that)
On the other hand, there's basically just Israel, saying: no cause human shields and terror babies and terror tunnels and "We have to defeat Hamas"
https://www.npr.org/2024/01/26/1227078791/icj-israel-genocide-gaza-palestinians-south-africa
This is the part where you repeat yourself, telling us we can't officially call it a genocide until the situation deteriorates from "plausible" genocide to actual genocide, as if the distinction really matters to anyone but pedants.
Do you use the same logic for the Uyghur genocide?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_Convention
Article 2 of the Convention defines genocide as:
... any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Oh shit. Ok Full mask off. We have a true hard-right believer here. It's Eagles on steroids.
So what according to you, would make this be a genocide?
Seriously.
"To me you have to kill 100,000 to be genocide so just 30,000 is no big deal!!!"
There's no number to a genocide. You've simply assigned an arbitrary number that Israel would have to meet in order to qualify for a genocide to fit your narrative.
Do you think that Israel can just rack an even higher death toll at will and other countries that aren't as closely aligned with Israel won't speak out to what's going on? They want it to be a slow burn so they can get away with it.
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/un-expert-says-israel-has-committed-genocide-gaza-calls-arms-embargo-2024-03-26
No.
No, that isn't what the polls I've seen asked.
I'm not particularly interested in whataboutisms or attempts to paint people being subjected to genocide as responsible for or deserving of the atrocities being committed against them, which is very obviously what you're trying to push here, so feel free to keep your thoughts to yourself. Or make them more explicit so we can just report you.
The IDF tell you this?
During the last ceasefire Israel was exposed for sniping civilians, including children, during a time when they "shouldn't have been" (they should never be sniping civilians, however you get my point). Yes, Hamas did eventually break that ceasefire themselves, however if I'm not mistaken Israel was still sniping people like the very first day of the ceasefire.
Nothing Israel does is in good faith, the IDF literally murdered 3 of their own hostages who had escaped, were shirtless & waving white flags, begging for help in Hebrew, and were gunned down by the IDF who no doubt thought they were just killing more Palestinian civilians nobody would care about. But whoops, it was their own people they were meant to save.
Because the ceasefire is only ever a temporary agreement. Never actually a means to an end and only a means to get all hostages back (which is obviously a good thing) but then Israel will continue bombing the moment the hostages are returned, and because they now have the hostages back, they'll bomb even more relentlessly since they don't have to worry about how bad it looks to keep bombing even with their hostages in the target area.
Yeah, the 20% of Israel's population that is Arab polls very strongly in favor of ending the war which brings the total polling up to... 25%.