LogFAQs > #979466209

Rosstin316 posted...

Everyone here should choose option 3, but they wont.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68006607.amp

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/gaza-suffers-famine-level-shortages-mass-death-imminent-un-backed-monitor-says-2024-03-18/

https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2024/3/15/massacre-israel-forces-attack-crowds-waiting-for-aid-in-gaza-killing-21

https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-in-talks-with-congo-and-other-countries-on-gaza-voluntary-migration-plan/amp/

https://www.npr.org/2024/01/26/1227078791/icj-israel-genocide-gaza-palestinians-south-africa

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/02/israel-defying-icj-ruling-to-prevent-genocide-by-failing-to-allow-adequate-humanitarian-aid-to-reach-gaza/

https://www.icij.org/inside-icij/2024/02/over-75-of-all-journalists-killed-in-2023-died-in-gaza-war-per-cpj/

The only way a well informed person can justify options 2 or 3 is if they're only concerned about the question as a formal one in regards to strict & specific definitions of genocide per various definitions of international treaties. But "will the ICJ rule that sufficient evidence shows Israel fully met the current accepted definitions of genocide" is a separate question. Netanyahu is used to operating through the boundaries of international law and knows where his strategic allies are & are not willing to look the other way. He understands how to accomplish the intent of a genocide without forcing unanimous international intervention.