• DarkGamer@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    If you’re going to define your movement as anti-genocidal you should really have a firm grasp on what genocide is and who is committing it:

    Article II of the Convention defines genocide as:
    … any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

    • (a) Killing members of the group;
    • (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
    • © 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.

    Hamas, what Israel has been clear they intend to destroy, is not a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. However, Jews/Israel/Israelis, what Hamas has been clear they intend to destroy, are. Therefore, legally Oct 7 was an act of genocide, and Israel’s war on Hamas is not. Such a designation has nothing to do with body count.

    I support Israel because I oppose the genocidal. Binding their hands and preventing them from retaliating in self-defense only serves to support genocidal Hamas by keeping them in power.

    • Kben@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      You support Israel because you oppose the genocidal.This is one of the most batshit insane things i have read on this site,you really cannot have typed that with a straight face.

    • SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      “Look at me displacing almost 2 million people and bombing their homes and cities whole to the ground one by one. It’s not a genocide though, because I haven’t explicitely claimed that my goal is to commit a genocide.”

      • DarkGamer@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s almost as if words mean things and have specific definitions, especially legal ones. Feel free to criticize such behaviors with different accurate words for things you don’t like.

            • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              On the other hand, genocide was committed in October, when Hamas brutally attacked the Jewish state, murdering an estimated 1,200 people, Schiff said.

              …and the article lost credibility. If what Israel is doing isn’t genocide, then what Hamas did can’t be genocide.

              Looked up the people quoted in the article. Rabbi Danny Schiff is an ethics lawyer from Pittsburgh, not a genocide scholar. Avi Ben-Hur, who is more qualified to speak on this said:

              “We have a monster on our doorstep,” he said. “We were caught asleep. We had horrible things done to us. It’s not a question of payback. We have to retrieve our safety and security so people can go back to their homes and live their lives like normal people. We have to degrade the monster’s offensive capabilities so this can’t happen again.” source.

              Calling them “monsters,” and dehumanizing people, doesn’t gain my trust.

              • DarkGamer@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                Oct 7 literally is an act of genocide, see my post above. You’re saying they don’t have credibility because you don’t understand what genocide is. This designation has nothing to do with body count.

                • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Even if the definition of “genocide” is ceded. The crimes against humanity outlined in the ICJ against Israel and the ongoing humanitarian crisis created by the ongoing conflict is damning.

                  If we wait to call it a “genocide” after it’s already been committed, then the world will have failed Palestine.

          • DarkGamer@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            If someone punches you to death, declaring they weren’t trying to kill you doesn’t make them any less guilty of murder.

            Actually, in the US it could. Intent is the difference between murder and manslaughter.

            • Aceticon@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              Curious how you moved the goal posts from “not openly stating one’s intent” which was used as justification to claim what Israel is doing is not a Genocide to “not having intent” which is what defines the difference between murder and manslaught.

              People are convicted of murder all the time when they didn’t openly said their intention was murder if it can be shown beyond reasonable doubt that it was their intention.

              So the previous poster’s point holds very well and you just further dug the grave on yours.

            • can@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              When it’s targeted at a specific group of people and there’s such a dramatic power imbalance, yes. Whether modern definitions agree or not.

        • Pennomi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          When entire civilian populations are bombed or starved, then yes. The US is not free of war crimes. They’re merely immune from the consequences.

          • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Not just the US. Chechnya was invaded by Russia. German civilians were bombed by the UK and USSR.

            In fact, it’s hard to find a large-scale modern war that didn’t cause thousands of civilian casualties.

            • Pennomi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              Absolutely, there were millions of civilian casualties in WWII. The difference here is that there have been, according to Israel, only 273 soldiers killed in ground operation combat vs the 13,000 civilians killed on Gaza’s side. (According to the new, lower estimates.) This is not so much a war as a one-sided beatdown.

              • DarkGamer@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                Are you really suggesting that every asymmetrical war that is conducted successfully is genocide? O.o

                • Pennomi@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  No, I’m saying that if a nation has such a huge advantage they also have more responsibility to select targets carefully so as to not kill noncombatants.

      • juicy@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        The thing is, Israel’s leaders have expressed genocidal intent over and over again. Just read South Africa’s allegations at the ICJ. They have the receipts.

    • anticolonialist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Take your hasbara bullshit somewhere else. According to that same organization you took your definition from, an occupying nation like Israel can not claim self defense when attacked

      • DarkGamer@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Sorry to invade your echo chamber with dissent. It must pain you to be reminded that not everyone agrees with you, that must be so hard for you.

        an occupying nation like Israel can not claim self defense when attacked

        Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005. A blockade is not an occupation.

        • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Say what?

          New York (20 October 2022) – There are reasonable grounds to conclude that the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory is now unlawful under international law due to its permanence and the Israeli Government’s de-facto annexation policies, according to the first report to the General Assembly issued today by the United Nations Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel.

          Oh, I forgor, the United Nations is Hamas now.