tl;dr
You had me at “No”.
…you would be wrong. I didn’t say no.
I said I don’t know what the state of international law will be in five years’ time. I can’t say yes or no right now.
Fair enough. I’ll take you at your word.
Not in so many words, you didn’t.
…do you condemn the killing on Hind Rajab?
Before entering into the rabbit hole - let’s first establish and possibly agree on the point that I am trying to make: we may engage in debate over the definition of that word, and not convince each other; it is never the less completely possible for us to agree that what is being done is wrong and horrific, whatever the specific intent, and that pressure need be brought to bear to stop it.
That said - sure into the rabbit hole we go!
My understanding is that the specific intent matters most.
The analogy would be to the word “murder” or “premeditated homicide”: if someone is aiming a gun at me and my family, having stated they want to kill us, having taken a shot, having killed one of my children, and I fire at them with knowledge that a bystander may be hit, or even probably will be, but believe that is the only way to save my and my family’s lives, and indeed that bystander is hit and killed when I fire, am I guilty of “murdering” the bystander? Most jurisdictions not. Probably be found guilty on “involuntary manslaughter” not “premeditated homicide.” I did however recklessly fire with complete disregard for the bystander’s life believing it was necessary in order to save my own and my family’s lives.
Primary intent and motivation matters.
Specific to Gaza: if Israel was offered any other way to get the people pointing the guns at them, who have taken shots and killed family members, to be permanently disarmed, then the offer would be taken.
Again though - the point: this is a rabbit hole that potentially needlessly divides people in broad agreement. This does not work to provide security to Israel and it is a reckless disregard for the lives of others. Doing it in the name of Zionism has perverted the meaning of the word. Only America can pressure Israel to stop and funding is the tool that can work best.
This seems to be awfully generous to this Israeli government. ISTM there isn’t a single “overall intent”, but rather a wide variety of competing and overlapping concerns (based on the statements from many Israeli officials), ranging from “kill/expel all the Palestinians” to “WHITE HOT REVENGE for Oct 7th” to “keep Bibi and his allies in power” to “eliminate any chance of a two state solution” as well as (perhaps) a very small handful of public servants motivated by actual security for Israel and nothing else.
What if that combination causes and/or allows mass widespread killing and displacement of Gazans? Does that mean it’s not genocide just because not everyone involved explicitly desires to kill them all?
To me this is a particularly ungenerous assessment. Yes there are individuals in the government and out with those perspectives, but I do indeed believe that the majority view in the country is a misguided assessment of how security is best served and what costs are worth that misguided pursuit.
You excessively discount the magnitude that the Jewish people have been under historical existential threat and specifically the degree that Israel as a nation has been under, and continues to be under existential threat since its inception and to today. Not a fan of what is going on in Iran but one would have to be an idiot to not see a nuclear weapons enabled Iran as an existential threat to millions of lives in Israel.
IMO you’re both right/wrong.
A lot of the people who only want Israel to be safe and don’t believe they would ever commit more violence than is needed to achieve that goal and the people who want to expel Palestinians from Gaza are the same people. It’s a kind of fight or flight logic that motivates a lot of genocide/ethnic cleansing campaigns.
100%. It’s the kind of naive assessment that is made by armchair experts who enjoy the benefits of remote borders and very powerful navies.
(Paraphrased from G. Orwell).
My assessment was specifically about the elected Israeli government, not the Israeli people.
What a massive misreading of my post. Did you really miss that? How could I have made it more clear that I was taking about the Israeli government, not the Israeli people?
This goes for you, to, @QuickSilver. I think I was pretty damn clear, and it’s awfully hard not to see such a colossal misreading of my post as anything other than deliberate.
Within government as well as the people.
To be clear: aggressive actions taken in Gaza in the name of security have broad support across the Israeli public. There are disagreements to be sure but the broad aggressive posture and being willing to kill many to accomplish security is not being done by a minority in government forcing the actions.
If Bibi and his right wing alliance go in the next election don’t expect a sudden reversal of an Israeli presence in Gaza.
For all of its many faults, the Israeli government (historically) has largely been acting in the interest of its people. It’s the only country in the region that can legitimately make that claim.
This particular government (Bibi & Co.) has screwed the pooch and will hopefully pay the price in the coming election (and then some).
JFC. You’re so hard done by.
I recall posts in which you’ve tried to have it both ways in saying that Israel as a whole is responsible and deserves to be collectively punished, and now just the government.
I’m sure you’ll feel insulted and demand a cite. I don’t work for you. I’ll leave it to others to draw their own conclusions.
I agree, and will just mention that in your comparison to murder, it’s helpful to remember the existence of felony murder. But other than that I’m not gonna go any further down that rabbit hole.
And depraved indifference.
How does this conflict with my post? Basically all I was saying is that the Israeli government is colossally corrupt, morally, ethically, financially, and probably in every other way. So we can’t and shouldn’t remotely trust their stated goals are their real goals.
I’d say the same thing about the Trump administration. Do you really believe the Iran war was about real, legitimate concerns about Iranian nukes? That’s not remotely credible.
I’m not at all insulted. This is just another entry in the long book of “@QuickSilver makes uncited claims about me that he refuses to back up with anything at all”.
I’m disappointed, sure. It shouldn’t be hard to cite the claims you make about me, but you just don’t seem interested in that.
You strike me as the type.
Me? I try to backup any claims I make about other people, especially if I’m asked. But YMMV on that.
If you’re asking whether I’m mad they bombed Iranian nuclear facilities. No.
If you’re asking whether there are legitimate reasons to be concerned about a nuclear armed Iran. Yes.
If you’re asking whether everybody knew the Trump administration was going to fuck this up completely from day one. I mean…