[bots]

all the court has said is that Israel must take all reasonable measures to avoid genocide. They will argue that what they are doing is not genocide, so, nothing will change

[Stu]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

all the court has said is that Israel must take all reasonable measures to avoid genocide. They will argue that what they are doing is not genocide, so, nothing will change

Oh for sure I do think there's a very strong chance indeed nothing will change, but this isn't taking into account the domino effect prevalent in the interlocking politics of nation states.

It's the biggest PR blow yet for what - in Gallant's own words - is "eliminating everything" and fighting "human animals." Blows like this can result in increased pressure from the international community. It's certainly not going to lessen the chance that the U.S. takes another step to Netanyahu. That has a huge potential effect on everything from funding to the sheer will to prolong this conflict.

Anyway I'm forgetting what's important. Did the ICJ condemn Hamas?

[Nicky91]

*Palestinians protected group under Genocide Convention
*The court says it has jurisdiction to rule in the case.
*The court orders Israel to take measures to prevent acts of genocide in the Gaza Strip, must report back in one month.
*The court says Israel must prevent and punish incitement to genocide in the Strip.
*The court says Israel must allow humanitarian aid into the Strip.
*The court obliges Israel to take more measures to protect Palestinians but does not order it to end military operations in the Strip.

.



so how's Benny gonna react to that, i bet he'll ignore most of this, the power hungry moron he is, obsessed with the extreme far right

[The Slim Reaper]

Israel have done nothing wrong. Hamas, hamas. hamas.

to

ICJ doesn't mean anything and won't stop Israel.

[Nicky91]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Israel have done nothing wrong. Hamas, hamas. hamas.

to

ICJ doesn't mean anything and won't stop Israel.

of course it likely won't stop dictator Netanyahu in his desire of further stealing Gaza territory for his own nation

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

all the court has said is that Israel must take all reasonable measures to avoid genocide. They will argue that what they are doing is not genocide, so, nothing will change

Well there's not a strong argument to say they are committing genocide.

[arista]

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

Well there's not a strong argument to say they are committing genocide.

There is if you look at the actual definition of genocide and not just the generally understood definition of genocide. By the definition, some of their words and actions are actually openly genocidal. It's not just rounding up and killing everyone, and it doesn't need to be everyone - genocidal actions can be "in whole or in part". It doesn't have to be an intent of total destruction.

The important one if the definitions to remember: "Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions calculated to bring about it's destruction". And remember that this can be "in whole or in part". With that in mind, the expressed intent of Israeli forces to clear out Gaza - whether that be all of Gaza or just the north - is (by definition) genocidal in nature. They have outright stated this intent, and their actions are clearly within the description of "deliberately inflicting conditions" to force Palestinians out of Gaza.

[Stu]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

Well there's not a strong argument to say they are committing genocide.

International courts of justice and the wider international community seem to think there may be a genocide happening. Literal words from high ranking officials in the IDF seem to speak to wanting a genocide to happen.

What's 26,000 dead compared to a bit of personal cognitive dissonance, right?

[bots]

So it turns out that there were some UN employees that joined hamas for the attack on israel .... good to see the UN employees are impartial

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

There is if you look at the actual definition of genocide and not just the generally understood definition of genocide. By the definition, some of their words and actions are actually openly genocidal. It's not just rounding up and killing everyone, and it doesn't need to be everyone - genocidal actions can be "in whole or in part". It doesn't have to be an intent of total destruction.

The important one if the definitions to remember: "Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions calculated to bring about it's destruction". And remember that this can be "in whole or in part". With that in mind, the expressed intent of Israeli forces to clear out Gaza - whether that be all of Gaza or just the north - is (by definition) genocidal in nature. They have outright stated this intent, and their actions are clearly within the description of "deliberately inflicting conditions" to force Palestinians out of Gaza.

I do see what you're saying... but that definition makes it pretty broad - "in part"? So were the Palestinians' attack a few months back also genocidal?

Originally Posted by Stu

Literal words from high ranking officials in the IDF seem to speak to wanting a genocide to happen.

To which words are you referring?

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

I do see what you're saying... but that definition makes it pretty broad - "in part"? So were the Palestinians' attack a few months back also genocidal?

The goals of many (most) fundamentalist terrorist organisations could likely be described as genocidal but it's a little controversial and somewhat telling to be referring to Hamas as "the Palestinians".

At the end of the day though, looking with a little common sense, there is a vast difference between a handful of terrorists on gliders attacking a group of civilians, and the military of an organised, democratic, modern nation launching missile strikes and a ground invasion that kills tens of thousands of civilians and displaces millions.

It's not that any one death is "worse" than any other but there is an obvious difference in scale, here, and to pretend otherwise is disingenuous.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

The goals of many (most) fundamentalist terrorist organisations could likely be described as genocidal but it's a little controversial and somewhat telling to be referring to Hamas as "the Palestinians".

At the end of the day though, looking with a little common sense, there is a vast difference between a handful of terrorists on gliders attacking a group of civilians, and the military of an organised, democratic, modern nation launching missile strikes and a ground invasion that kills tens of thousands of civilians and displaces millions.

It's not that any one death is "worse" than any other but there is an obvious difference in scale, here, and to pretend otherwise is disingenuous.

Really good post.

I am just dismayed and deeply saddened.
With all involved.
I now honestly don't know what to think.

[bots]

i haven't looked at the detail of the war for some time, just occasional headlines that have attracted attention. Even if i was watching every moment, I don't think I could say anything with certainty given the amount of false information being pedalled.

My concern is escalation because that is looking more and more like it's inevitable and that will affect us big time

[arista]

A Drone bomber has killed
3 USA servicemen in Jordan.

[Nicky91]

Originally Posted by arista

A Drone bomber has killed
3 USA servicemen in Jordan.

vile Hamas now also attacking USA

[arista]

Originally Posted by Nicky91

vile Hamas now also attacking USA

President Biden has blamed Iran,

[Nicky91]

Originally Posted by arista

President Biden has blamed Iran,

of course he does


adding more fuel to the fire to the US-Iran relations

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

So it turns out that there were some UN employees that joined hamas for the attack on israel .... good to see the UN employees are impartial

not surprising unfortunately

[bots]

american congress are baying for blood

[arista]

[arista]

[arista]

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

So it turns out that there were some UN employees that joined hamas for the attack on israel .... good to see the UN employees are impartial

Not true. Israel have accused 0.04% of the only agency providing any aid to Gaza, of something to do wi9th Hamas. No facts, no details, just an Israeli accusation a couple of days after the ICJ called them out.

Can't be sure of anything, but I'm pretty confident that this is a load of manufactured propaganda bollocks.

it's a headline to change the direction of the news. Our politicians were in complete silence when the ICJ ruled, but as soon as Israel makes an allegation, they've suddenly found their voices again.

US and UK immediately stopped providing aid. This is only in the interests of those happy to watch the genocide continue.

[arista]