Interesting that you offer standard hasbara explanations for all of this and yet you acknowledge lots of crimes and questionable activities. In these two comments you’ve said…
Amalek comments may be incitement to genocide
IDF has soldiers with extreme views who are more likely to commit war crimes or be “flexible” with rules of engagement.
IDF soldiers can get away with excessive violence and it’s easy to find a “military objective” to justify it.
Netanyahu is a bad guy.
the IDF has been much less restrained in this war compared to previous ones.
There are numerous cases of excessive violence and war crimes.
some soldiers were “abusing their power” to delay aid with inspections etc
The war has caused extreme suffering
War crimes definitely happened
“Possibly” crimes against humanity too.
It‘s not a genocide though.
Of course you can’t doubt they’ve committed acts of genocide. That is undeniable. And yet you can list all of this and still seem totally confident that there is no intent. It’s weird.
Intent for genocide is always stated very openly and publicly in historic cases. Check out Rwanda, where the radio called people to butcher their neighbors.
Indeed, Israel’s genocidal assault on Gaza is quite explicit, open, and unashamed. Perpetrators of genocide usually do not express their intentions so clearly, though there are exceptions.
And also this includes more of these examples of intent, including the media pushing for genocide as in your example.
It’s not only Israel’s leaders who are using such language. An interviewee on the pro-Netanyahu Channel 14 called for Israel to “turn Gaza to Dresden.” Channel 12, Israel’s most-watched news station, published a report about left-leaning Israelis calling to “dance on what used to be Gaza.” Meanwhile, genocidal verbs—calls to “erase” and “flatten” Gaza—have become omnipresent on Israeli social media. In Tel Aviv, a banner reading “Zero Gazans” was seen hanging from a bridge.
_
Hospitals are well documented to have been used as military bases by Hamas and other groups. It’s part of the pattern how they use civilian infrastructure for military purposes.
And yet there is no evidence of this in the current conflict? Unless you mean the calendar on the wall that definitely listed terrorists and not the days of the week and the gun in the MRI room?
The biggest obstacle to aid delivery is internal distribution inside Gaza.
Funny how Israel announces a “complete siege” including no food and water allowed in, people start to starve as a result, and somehow you don’t think this is Israel’s fault?
Human rights watch, Oxfam, B’tselem, the EU, a UN special committee , the IPC and many others have either described this as avoidable, or in most cases, have explicitly said Israel is/was using starvation as a weapon of war. So if the aid delivery was “good compared to other war zones” why all of the alarm? You are distorting the truth.
There are a handful of incidents you might refer to here. Some of them were crowds rushing soldiers, others were known terrorist gunmen hired as security or guides by aid NGOs.
Lol yeah there were plenty of flour massacres, but somehow you think none of it is Israel’s fault. You say crowds rushing soldiers, but someone opened fire AND THEN people started running, understandably. They’re a fucking solider with a gun, how can you possibly get spooked by hungry people wanting food? It’s a pathetic excuse. The link also details how the story was changed. Really interesting how you blame the crowds, because that what Israel decided to do too. Why is that? Do you just believe their story?
Killing innocents is legal under international humanitarian law, if a military objective is present and proportionality is respected.
Yeah the article about the lavender AI really calls proportionality into question. I don’t know how to tell for sure but I fucking doubt 20 innocents:1 possibly Hamas person, possibly not, is good enough.
Hamas itself has shown plenty of video footage of both the construction and the use of tunnels for military operations and weapons storage
I know tunnels exist, I just pointed out that Israel justifies specific military objectives based on tunnels but basically never show them. One case they used an animation. One case (I think from one of the blatant war crimes totally legal and normal sieges of hospitals) they refused to show journalists.
You show the same way of thinking, where the judgment is already passed before seeing the evidence.
I have presented evidence. Read the definition of genocide. Look at the evidence. Look at the public comments for intent. It is not hard.
If Israel was trying to kill as many Palestinians as possible, the numbers of dead would be much higher.
You mean "If Israel was trying to kill as many Palestinians as possible AND THEY DIDN’T CARE ABOUT HOW THEY LOOKED ON THE WORLD STAGE OR CREDIBLE ACCUSATIONS OF GENOCIDE, the numbers of dead would be much higher. " Yeah no shit.
If you believe both numbers that comes out as a ratio of civilians to militants of around 1:3. For warfare in a dense urban environment 1:10 is more typical.
Do you know the civilian to militant ratio on October 7th? 797 civilians, 379 militants. Around 2:1. So was that a very restrained and perfectly fine attack or all of a sudden is this argument totally fucking insane?
more of these examples of intent, including the media pushing for genocide as in your example
You simply don’t understand the requirements of intent for genocide, dolus specialis.
Incitement is not enough. There are people in Israel, who want a genocide, but it’s neither policy, nor are the acts conclusive.
Funny how Israel announces a “complete siege” including no food and water allowed in, people start to starve as a result
The numbers of death attributed to starvation in Gaza amounts to less than a dozen. Compare that to what happened at the same time in Sudan.
Look, there’s undeniably a bunch of terrible stuff happening, but it’s not a genocide.
Do you know the civilian to militant ratio on October 7th? 797 civilians, 379 militants. Around 2:1. So was that a very restrained and perfectly fine attack or all of a sudden is this argument totally fucking insane?
A music festival is not a valid military objective. You seem confused about this idea.
You simply don’t understand the requirements of intent for genocide, dolus specialis.
Maybe. Perhaps you can explain it to me? Why is the genocide scholar whose post I linked wrong, and you right?
A music festival is not a valid military objective. You seem confused about this idea.
I note you didn’t comment on the ratio. It was a rhetorical point, you said the 1:3 ratio is good and presumably that this is evidence against genocidal intent. So to continue, the military objectives were the militants killed, unfortunately there was some collateral damage. According to your logic this is a totally legit explanation. I think that is wrong in both cases.
Interesting that you offer standard hasbara explanations for all of this and yet you acknowledge lots of crimes and questionable activities. In these two comments you’ve said…
Of course you can’t doubt they’ve committed acts of genocide. That is undeniable. And yet you can list all of this and still seem totally confident that there is no intent. It’s weird.
Not true, according to an actual genocide scholar: https://jewishcurrents.org/a-textbook-case-of-genocide
And also this includes more of these examples of intent, including the media pushing for genocide as in your example.
_
And yet there is no evidence of this in the current conflict? Unless you mean the calendar on the wall that definitely listed terrorists and not the days of the week and the gun in the MRI room?
Funny how Israel announces a “complete siege” including no food and water allowed in, people start to starve as a result, and somehow you don’t think this is Israel’s fault?
Human rights watch, Oxfam, B’tselem, the EU, a UN special committee , the IPC and many others have either described this as avoidable, or in most cases, have explicitly said Israel is/was using starvation as a weapon of war. So if the aid delivery was “good compared to other war zones” why all of the alarm? You are distorting the truth.
Lol yeah there were plenty of flour massacres, but somehow you think none of it is Israel’s fault. You say crowds rushing soldiers, but someone opened fire AND THEN people started running, understandably. They’re a fucking solider with a gun, how can you possibly get spooked by hungry people wanting food? It’s a pathetic excuse. The link also details how the story was changed. Really interesting how you blame the crowds, because that what Israel decided to do too. Why is that? Do you just believe their story?
Yeah the article about the lavender AI really calls proportionality into question. I don’t know how to tell for sure but I fucking doubt 20 innocents:1 possibly Hamas person, possibly not, is good enough.
I know tunnels exist, I just pointed out that Israel justifies specific military objectives based on tunnels but basically never show them. One case they used an animation. One case (I think from one of the
blatant war crimestotally legal and normal sieges of hospitals) they refused to show journalists.I have presented evidence. Read the definition of genocide. Look at the evidence. Look at the public comments for intent. It is not hard.
You mean "If Israel was trying to kill as many Palestinians as possible AND THEY DIDN’T CARE ABOUT HOW THEY LOOKED ON THE WORLD STAGE OR CREDIBLE ACCUSATIONS OF GENOCIDE, the numbers of dead would be much higher. " Yeah no shit.
Do you know the civilian to militant ratio on October 7th? 797 civilians, 379 militants. Around 2:1. So was that a very restrained and perfectly fine attack or all of a sudden is this argument totally fucking insane?
You simply don’t understand the requirements of intent for genocide, dolus specialis.
Incitement is not enough. There are people in Israel, who want a genocide, but it’s neither policy, nor are the acts conclusive.
The numbers of death attributed to starvation in Gaza amounts to less than a dozen. Compare that to what happened at the same time in Sudan.
Look, there’s undeniably a bunch of terrible stuff happening, but it’s not a genocide.
A music festival is not a valid military objective. You seem confused about this idea.
Maybe. Perhaps you can explain it to me? Why is the genocide scholar whose post I linked wrong, and you right?
I note you didn’t comment on the ratio. It was a rhetorical point, you said the 1:3 ratio is good and presumably that this is evidence against genocidal intent. So to continue, the military objectives were the militants killed, unfortunately there was some collateral damage. According to your logic this is a totally legit explanation. I think that is wrong in both cases.