So yeah…your cites suck. You found some people who agree with you. Not hard to do these days.
More, you never actually debated the point. You just spammed shitty links.
I’m not impressed. Certainly not convinced. And even after I tried to de-escalate things and chill you just kept diving in and tried to be more and more offensive to get a rise out of me. I guess that worked for you at least.
…it wasn’t just a speech. It was the preamble to the UN Special Committee’s report into genocide in Gaza, that I also linked to.
Again: here’s that link:
Much more at the link.
Are you calling them an asshat? Was the article hyperbole and did they write it to be edgy and get a click?"
What kind of question is that?
Can anyone help me out here? What does “did it come to law” mean here, in the context of that particular cite?
I don’t think that there are thousands of Associate Professors of Holocaust and Genocide Studies out there, but if there were, I’m confident that the overwhelming majority would support Raz Segal’s assertion.
Because what Segal did was make a case. Something that you haven’t done. If there are scholars in Holocaust and Genocide out there that argue this isn’t a genocide, feel free to share them. But here’s the thing: the only definitive ruling we will get on this is going to be years away. (That’s IF the court remains in existence, because the way the world is going, it wouldn’t surprise me if we see a full-throated attack on IHL.) So all we are ever going to get is opinions.
And hold on a minute: why did you skip The International Court of Justice, and the submission by South Africa in their case on genocide?
Of course I fucking have.
Which is the basis of every single person and organisation that argues that this is a genocide. Every. Single. One.
What exactly do you think posting that again says? It doesn’t support your argument. It supports mine.
Written in fucking 2012. It has no relevance to this conflict. My argument is that both genocide AND ethnic cleansing is happening. So again: your cite supports mine.
They don’t actually have a “take on this.” It’s a list of definitions.
One simple question: how do these cites support the contention that what Israel is doing to Gaza is not genocide? None of them talk about what is happening right now in Gaza at all.
These either experts in this field, lawyers that compiled the case for genocide at the International Court of Justice, and the people on the Special Committee reporting directly to Secretary-General of the United Nations.
All of my cites dealt directly with the evidence, and used the genocide convention as a framework to make the case for genocide.
This “isn’t some people that agree with me.”
Laughably, you can’t even find anyone to agree with you.
I’m not a lawyer and I don’t play one on TV. Instead, I’ve cited lawyers and historians that specialise in this field who have made the case for genocide. Unlike you, I don’t think you should just take my word for it. I haven’t “spammed shitty links.” You just didn’t read them.
The Israeli response to Hamas is such a genocide that when they realized the made-up “30,000 civilian casulaties” number would have made it the least deadly bombing campaign in history in terms of civilian to target death ratio, they started looking for reasons to multiply the number by a factor of 4 or 5 that amounted to “vibes.”
Just ask the U.N., a completely reliable organization that is definitely not a branch of Hamas, whose members just happened to actively participate in rape and murder on October 7 and are still holding Israeli hostages in their homes.
In answer to the question, a race riot or a pogrom is something the Bad People do. Russians from 100 years ago are allowed to be Bad People (but are not Bad People anymore, especially when they rape toddlers in Ukraine in an anti-imperialist fashion). Arab Muslims are never allowed to be Bad People therefore nothing they do to Jews can be a pogrom or a race riot and you’re racist for thinking so.
A genocide is when Israel does something. It’s definitely not when China puts over a million Uyghurs in concentration camps, or when Russia kills 20,000 Ukrainians in a campaign that they openly state is designed to eliminate the Ukrainian culture and language while absorbing Ukraine into Russia.
The fact that Israel clearly does not have the means or goal to kill all the Arabs in the world or even make any appreciable dent in their population does not change the fact that Israel Doing Something is a genocide. If you just redefine the minute proportion of Arabs that Israel is at war with as something different called a “Palestinian,” then the numbers balance, especially when you get to make up the numbers anyway. Every Palestinian is a journalist, and a doctor, and four years old, and a civilian, and not a single person killed in Gaza in the past 14 months was a valid target, and “resistance” (chopping off the head of a woman with a garden tool while you gang-rape her) is always valid anyway so Israel isn’t really responding to any act of war and just decided to bomb these people for no reason.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. My understanding has always been that pogroms tend to be more organized and involve government support. Though the Chicago Race Riot involved white officers who refused to stop the violence of the white attackers, I’d be hesitant to call it a pogrom.
I see that some events that used to be called race riots, like the one in Tulsa in 1921, are now being called massacres, which seems to me to be a more accurate term.
The alleged “civilian to target death ratio” that Israel uses IS the actual made up number. Its based on nothing really. Just guesses, not even educated ones.
Yes, and…? I see no reason to doubt this report since it gels with multiple others. It’s a horse, not a zebra.
Would you like any one of numerous other reports on young kids being killed by IOF sniper fire? From a spectrum of different sources? Before I spend any effort, can you tell me who you would find reliable? Al Jazeera I assume is out. Guardian probably too leftist for you. Reuters? The BBC? The motherfucking New York Times meet your standards? Are those fake X-Rays in their article?
Or is it going to be more genocide denial instead?
What, you think they’re mistaking Gazan toddlers for the infamous Hamas Dwarf Brigades?
We’re talking about sniping here, not running gun battles (although those kill plenty of kids too)
In so many words? No, I doubt they feel they need to.
I think the average IOF soldier doesn’t need such orders.
These are the same IOF soldiers who will gleefully record and publically post video of themselves committing war crimes. Who torture and rape defenceless POWs.
Do I think that kind of scum would balk at sniping kids? No, I do not.