|
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. |
United States43219 Posts
On July 04 2025 08:20 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2025 08:06 Billyboy wrote:On July 04 2025 07:49 WombaT wrote:On July 04 2025 04:38 Billyboy wrote:
I think it was the US pol thread, or somewhere, but it was discussed long before this about whether some of the big bombing campaigns were genocide or not. I believe most people agreed they were atrocious but not genocide. Have peoples minds changed on that? I'm thinking Korean war, German Blitz of UK, Dresden, Vietnam, atomic bombs, firebombing of Japan. No, war is awful and awful things happen in war. But all of those were intended to swing the tides of a war. The atomic bombs certainly did. Israel has already crushed the miltary capacity of those who oppose it. Including Iran at this point.Now they’re just shooting fish in a barrel. And the longer it goes the less justification for it there is In the initial phases of the war yeah sure, it’s not pretty but Israel did have a pretty good justification for going after Hamas. Now? Why are people dying in at times scores a day at fucking aid sites? Why are civilians being pummelled with munitions? Whether wants to sit debating the particulars of it being genocide or ethnic clashing or something else, maybe it doesn’t pass that threshold they’re still massacring civilians. They’re still territorially expanding. They’ve got prominent members of government sabre rattling. The upper estimate of deaths in the post October-7th period is equivalent to 20% of the entire population of my city Belfast, the Northern Irish capital. If I consider it in those terms, I mean it’s beyond heinous. 1 in 5 people I meet in my day to day simply wouldn’t exist at the current attrition rate. If I consider 1 in every 5 people I meet being dead, yeah that’s not fucking great. I mean that’s the reality, call it genocide, ethnic cleansing or not or whatever one fancies. It’s beyond repugnant. Hamas is crushed but continuing to fight and continuing to control Gaza, not unlike the Nazi's and Japan. The bombing was meant to kill the spirit of the country supporting them. The siege stuff has been a part of war since people started having walls. I do not think anyone, maybe premo I have not read all his posts, is arguing, or has argued that is not horrible. I do not think anyone has even argued that it is even a good strategy militarily. I do think it is stupid of the world, and I'm super disappointed in the UN and Europe for basically turning a blind eye in action but constantly putting it all on Israel. They are OBVIOUSLY for 100's of reasons not the people to enforce peace in GAZA until the people are strong enough to do it themselves. Hell the UN did not even enforce their own treaty in Southern Lebanon. They were the ones that did maybe the worst case of NIMBYism to create Israel with seemingly the idea of lets stick all the people we don't like in the Middle east and let them kill each other off. Or just as long as its not here we don't care. That does not let Israel off the hook, it is too bad that the UN is feckless when it comes to war crimes for seems like everyone at this point. But it is strange that the whole world thinks Israel is the right country to deal with the mess that is Gaza and the west bank. Why wouldn’t they put it all on Israel. It’s all Israel?
He’s saying that everyone, including the IDF, agrees that the IDF is not the right tool for the job and yet through their actions everyone is communicating that their preference is that the IDF continue. They put the job on Israel because the job of governing Gaza
1. Exists
2. Can’t be left to Hamas
3. Won’t be done by anyone else
|
Yeah but at the same time they have stopped every effort of giving the governance over to other people then Hamas. Like the pa, or any Organisation who would like to be allowed to give food to Palestinians. It's not like they did not choose this bed to sleep in.
|
On July 04 2025 08:39 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2025 08:17 Magic Powers wrote:On July 04 2025 07:53 Billyboy wrote:On July 04 2025 07:25 Magic Powers wrote:On July 04 2025 04:38 Billyboy wrote:
I think it was the US pol thread, or somewhere, but it was discussed long before this about whether some of the big bombing campaigns were genocide or not. I believe most people agreed they were atrocious but not genocide. Have peoples minds changed on that? I'm thinking Korean war, German Blitz of UK, Dresden, Vietnam, atomic bombs, firebombing of Japan. Some people did actually call the Vietnam war a genocide. Bertrand Russel and the International War Crimes Tribunal among them. Their ruling was unanimous, unfortunately they didn't have the means to enforce it. Tribunal members unanimously found the United States “guilty on all charges, including genocide, the use of forbidden weapons, maltreatment and killing of prisoners, violence and forceful movement of prisoners” in Vietnam and its neighbors Laos and Cambodia. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/01/opinion/did-america-commit-war-crimes-in-vietnam.html Interesting, I was talking about people here. Would you consider all the ones I listed genocide, none or which ones? I don't know tbh. I'm not as well read on the Vietnam war and the Korean war and the other examples. But I do think if a group of high repute rules that genocide did occur, that accusation should be taken very seriously. It should certainly not be dismissed until other equally reputable groups or scholars have made their own call. So there may well have been instances of genocide in one or some of the examples. What I'm seeing is that more and more scholars are coming to the conclusion that the Israel-Gaza war constitutes genocide. I'm not seeing any opposing trends. It sounds fair to listen to the scholars. Is it safe to say that amount of civilians killed or even % is not really a factor, or at least no a major one. Obviously there is some floor number, but that it is more about trying to erase a group of people than raw numbers.
Yeah, I would definitely agree with that. The true scale of death doesn't appear to be a major factor (after a certain number).
For example, in my opinion October 7 constitutes genocide by Hamas. It is more than terrorism, more than mass murder. It was a very obvious instance of a genocide. The fact that it was stopped at a negligible percentage of Israelis is irrelevant, because the side that stopped the killing wasn't Hamas. It was Israel. Hamas would've just kept murdering innocent Israeli people if they had been given a free choice.
Likewise Israel's aggression in Gaza after October 7 constitutes genocide as well for those same reasons. If Hamas had been able to stop the counter-aggression, I would still consider it genocide by the IDF. In this instance the IDF isn't going to be stopped, which is why so many more Palestinians had to die and are still dying. The reason why more Palestinians are dying is not that the war has to be fought for any reasons other than for the sake of genocide. There is no other motive that would make sense, because Israel has complete power to stop the war and withdraw without any meaningful consequences to the Israeli population. They're able to protect themselves from all aggression in the future without continuing to kill Palestinians in such disproportionate numbers. This is the reason why I've so adamantly called it a "war of aggression". It is strictly not for the sake of defense.
|
On June 28 2025 10:42 RJGooner wrote:
The reason the GHF exists is because Hamas has used international aid distribution as a means to sustain itself and its war effort.
GHF exists primarily as a way to get some blood on US hands.
Given all the US money and US citizens involved there can be no change of mind by any future administration.
|
United States43219 Posts
On July 04 2025 16:27 Broetchenholer wrote:
Yeah but at the same time they have stopped every effort of giving the governance over to other people then Hamas. Like the pa, or any Organisation who would like to be allowed to give food to Palestinians. It's not like they did not choose this bed to sleep in.
That’s simply not the case.
PA refuse to hold elections because they’re so unpopular compared to Hamas. They especially refuse to get involved with Gaza because they’re not idiots. Hamas murdered every possible rival for authority in Gaza because of course they did. There simply isn’t a government in exile waiting in the wings for Gaza, it’s a failed state that doesn’t have the bones on which you’d build state organs. For now it can be ruled only be men with guns and nobody else is volunteering.
|
At this point it's hard not to laugh, Israel is volunteering to govern Gaza because no one else wants to do it, such nobility, wow!
|
On July 04 2025 17:45 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2025 16:27 Broetchenholer wrote:
Yeah but at the same time they have stopped every effort of giving the governance over to other people then Hamas. Like the pa, or any Organisation who would like to be allowed to give food to Palestinians. It's not like they did not choose this bed to sleep in. That’s simply not the case. PA refuse to hold elections because they’re so unpopular compared to Hamas. They especially refuse to get involved with Gaza because they’re not idiots. Hamas murdered every possible rival for authority in Gaza because of course they did. There simply isn’t a government in exile waiting in the wings for Gaza, it’s a failed state that doesn’t have the bones on which you’d build state organs. For now it can be ruled only be men with guns and nobody else is volunteering.
Yeah but how did we arrive at that situation? Maybe because Israel made it very clear that "moderates" will not ever be useful to Palestinians because Israel will simply ignore them. At any point Israel could have shown their good face towards the West Bank to enable the pa to win some victories so that they might become less useless. They chose to keep them useless. They chose to keep taking their land. Hamas chose to be a terroristic death cult but Israel chose to keep them around as the only face of Palestinians because it makes them look less bad.
|
On July 04 2025 19:57 Jankisa wrote:
At this point it's hard not to laugh, Israel is volunteering to govern Gaza because no one else wants to do it, such nobility, wow!
The point is they are not, no one is.
|
Israel is an occupying force because of the war, not because they needed to step in and govern Gaza.
Their tactical objectives involve occupying Gaza.
That means their responsibilities under international law necessarily involve a certain amount of government (for example, they have to ensure the local population has access to food and water etc.).
They are 'governing' Gaza because the law says they must govern Gaza, not because they heroically stepped in despite their wishes because no-one else did.
Actually they aren't really doing much governing, but hey what can you do?
|
On July 05 2025 04:33 Jockmcplop wrote:
Israel is an occupying force because of the war, not because they needed to step in and govern Gaza.
Their tactical objectives involve occupying Gaza.
That means their responsibilities under international law necessarily involve a certain amount of government (for example, they have to ensure the local population has access to food and water etc.).
They are 'governing' Gaza because the law says they must govern Gaza, not because they heroically stepped in despite their wishes because no-one else did.
Actually they aren't really doing much governing, but hey what can you do?
Why would you think is arguing with what I have said or even what Kwark said? I really can't figure out if many of your reading comprehension just sucks super bad or if your rage just blinds you, or if you just want to fight.
Someone else needs to step in because it is not working.
|
On July 05 2025 04:55 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2025 04:33 Jockmcplop wrote:
Israel is an occupying force because of the war, not because they needed to step in and govern Gaza.
Their tactical objectives involve occupying Gaza.
That means their responsibilities under international law necessarily involve a certain amount of government (for example, they have to ensure the local population has access to food and water etc.).
They are 'governing' Gaza because the law says they must govern Gaza, not because they heroically stepped in despite their wishes because no-one else did.
Actually they aren't really doing much governing, but hey what can you do? Why would you think is arguing with what I have said or even what Kwark said? I really can't figure out if many of your reading comprehension just sucks super bad or if your rage just blinds you, or if you just want to fight. Someone else needs to step in because it is not working.
I wasn't really trying to argue, just pointing out something that no-one had mentioned.
Its always nice to get a face full of random aggression from you on a Friday evening though, cheers man. I'm not sure how my post demonstrated any hatred of anyone but okay I guess. Maybe you were just waiting for someone to argue with. Are you missing Nebuchad maybe? I'm sure he'll be back soon.
|
On July 05 2025 04:58 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2025 04:55 Billyboy wrote:On July 05 2025 04:33 Jockmcplop wrote:
Israel is an occupying force because of the war, not because they needed to step in and govern Gaza.
Their tactical objectives involve occupying Gaza.
That means their responsibilities under international law necessarily involve a certain amount of government (for example, they have to ensure the local population has access to food and water etc.).
They are 'governing' Gaza because the law says they must govern Gaza, not because they heroically stepped in despite their wishes because no-one else did.
Actually they aren't really doing much governing, but hey what can you do? Why would you think is arguing with what I have said or even what Kwark said? I really can't figure out if many of your reading comprehension just sucks super bad or if your rage just blinds you, or if you just want to fight. Someone else needs to step in because it is not working. I wasn't really trying to argue, just pointing out something that no-one had mentioned. Its always nice to get a face full of random aggression from you on a Friday evening though, cheers man. I'm not sure how my post demonstrated any hatred of anyone but okay I guess. Maybe you were just waiting for someone to argue with. Are you missing Nebuchad maybe? I'm sure he'll be back soon.
I guess I misread the tone based on the general responses in here, including from you from time to time. My bad.
|
On July 05 2025 05:25 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2025 04:58 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 05 2025 04:55 Billyboy wrote:On July 05 2025 04:33 Jockmcplop wrote:
Israel is an occupying force because of the war, not because they needed to step in and govern Gaza.
Their tactical objectives involve occupying Gaza.
That means their responsibilities under international law necessarily involve a certain amount of government (for example, they have to ensure the local population has access to food and water etc.).
They are 'governing' Gaza because the law says they must govern Gaza, not because they heroically stepped in despite their wishes because no-one else did.
Actually they aren't really doing much governing, but hey what can you do? Why would you think is arguing with what I have said or even what Kwark said? I really can't figure out if many of your reading comprehension just sucks super bad or if your rage just blinds you, or if you just want to fight. Someone else needs to step in because it is not working. I wasn't really trying to argue, just pointing out something that no-one had mentioned. Its always nice to get a face full of random aggression from you on a Friday evening though, cheers man. I'm not sure how my post demonstrated any hatred of anyone but okay I guess. Maybe you were just waiting for someone to argue with. Are you missing Nebuchad maybe? I'm sure he'll be back soon. I guess I misread the tone based on the general responses in here, including from you from time to time. My bad.
No worries 
|
There is apparently a ceasefire proposed to Hamas that Hamas has accepted with small changes, guess we will see if Israel accepts those. And who knows what is small to hamas. From reading earlier it appears to be a 60 day for 10 live hostages and 18 bodies. There is also a framework for the ceasefire to continue. 8 hostages alive will be released right away and then the bodies and rest later. A unspecified amount of prisoners will be released by the IDF.
https://x.com/FaytuksNetwork/status/1941206263322550706
Got the link from livemap
|
On July 05 2025 06:25 Billyboy wrote:There is apparently a ceasefire proposed to Hamas that Hamas has accepted with small changes, guess we will see if Israel accepts those. And who knows what is small to hamas. From reading earlier it appears to be a 60 day for 10 live hostages and 18 bodies. There is also a framework for the ceasefire to continue. 8 hostages alive will be released right away and then the bodies and rest later. A unspecified amount of prisoners will be released by the IDF. https://x.com/FaytuksNetwork/status/1941206263322550706 Got the link from livemap
I wish I could celebrate such news, but I can't overcome my cynicism. Hamas will keep repeating this process until all of Gaza's rubble has been turned into smaller rubble. Netanyahu will thank them for it and colonize the area. They're a perfect match. Perhaps one day they'll marry.
|
On July 04 2025 16:57 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On July 04 2025 08:39 Billyboy wrote:On July 04 2025 08:17 Magic Powers wrote:On July 04 2025 07:53 Billyboy wrote:On July 04 2025 07:25 Magic Powers wrote:On July 04 2025 04:38 Billyboy wrote:
I think it was the US pol thread, or somewhere, but it was discussed long before this about whether some of the big bombing campaigns were genocide or not. I believe most people agreed they were atrocious but not genocide. Have peoples minds changed on that? I'm thinking Korean war, German Blitz of UK, Dresden, Vietnam, atomic bombs, firebombing of Japan. Some people did actually call the Vietnam war a genocide. Bertrand Russel and the International War Crimes Tribunal among them. Their ruling was unanimous, unfortunately they didn't have the means to enforce it. Tribunal members unanimously found the United States “guilty on all charges, including genocide, the use of forbidden weapons, maltreatment and killing of prisoners, violence and forceful movement of prisoners” in Vietnam and its neighbors Laos and Cambodia. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/01/opinion/did-america-commit-war-crimes-in-vietnam.html Interesting, I was talking about people here. Would you consider all the ones I listed genocide, none or which ones? I don't know tbh. I'm not as well read on the Vietnam war and the Korean war and the other examples. But I do think if a group of high repute rules that genocide did occur, that accusation should be taken very seriously. It should certainly not be dismissed until other equally reputable groups or scholars have made their own call. So there may well have been instances of genocide in one or some of the examples. What I'm seeing is that more and more scholars are coming to the conclusion that the Israel-Gaza war constitutes genocide. I'm not seeing any opposing trends. It sounds fair to listen to the scholars. Is it safe to say that amount of civilians killed or even % is not really a factor, or at least no a major one. Obviously there is some floor number, but that it is more about trying to erase a group of people than raw numbers. Yeah, I would definitely agree with that. The true scale of death doesn't appear to be a major factor (after a certain number). For example, in my opinion October 7 constitutes genocide by Hamas. It is more than terrorism, more than mass murder. It was a very obvious instance of a genocide. The fact that it was stopped at a negligible percentage of Israelis is irrelevant, because the side that stopped the killing wasn't Hamas. It was Israel. Hamas would've just kept murdering innocent Israeli people if they had been given a free choice. Likewise Israel's aggression in Gaza after October 7 constitutes genocide as well for those same reasons. If Hamas had been able to stop the counter-aggression, I would still consider it genocide by the IDF. In this instance the IDF isn't going to be stopped, which is why so many more Palestinians had to die and are still dying. The reason why more Palestinians are dying is not that the war has to be fought for any reasons other than for the sake of genocide. There is no other motive that would make sense, because Israel has complete power to stop the war and withdraw without any meaningful consequences to the Israeli population. They're able to protect themselves from all aggression in the future without continuing to kill Palestinians in such disproportionate numbers. This is the reason why I've so adamantly called it a "war of aggression". It is strictly not for the sake of defense.
Always with the both sides trying to put Hamas and the IDF on some kind of a similar moral plane. So sick and tired of this.
Genocide requires intent. We know that Hamas' actions on 10/7 were genocidal because they literally filmed themselves killing people indiscriminately. Not to mention the Hamas charter and the exultant phone calls their fighters were making back to Gaza talking about how many Jews they killed.
You talk about "Israel's aggression in Gaza." No, sorry, it is not aggression. It is self-defense after they were attacked. If you're framing it as an aggression you are already off to a bad start.
Second, there is, in fact, a reason why (unfortunately) more civilians are dying. It is because Israel's war goal is to destroy Hamas and they are not yet destroyed. Just recently several IDF soldiers were killed in northern Gaza by a Hamas ambush. Israel has decided that Hamas CANNOT be allowed to reconstitute itself in Gaza because they have said repeatedly that they want to do more October 7ths. Israel has a right to take action against a terrorist group that launches rockets at it and tries to butcher its civilians. They tried living with Hamas and relying on military superiority to prevent deaths for 18 years and look how it turned out. Don't tell me that they're able to "protect themselves from all aggression in the future."
Third, there is no genocidal intent in Israeli war policy. The existing case law establishes that genocidal intent must be the only reasonable inference based on the facts or circumstances. If you're going to try to climb that mountain here you're going to have to contend with:
1. The fact that the civilian to militant death toll is actually quite low despite the conflict taking place in a densely populated urban environment against an enemy that doesn't wear uniforms, takes absolutely no precautions to shelter its civilians, doesn't allow civilians into its tunnel network, and routinely sets up military posts in civilian places like hospitals, mosques etc.
2. The fact that Israel literally in the middle of the war facilitated a vaccination campaign for children within the Gaza Strip
3. The fact that Israel issued evacuation warnings throughout the conflict and has tried to set up humanitarian zones
4. The fact that Israel has facilitated millions of tons of aid into the Gaza Strip throughout the war
So... is this all window dressing for Israel's genocidal intent? Good luck trying to make that argument. The fact that certain organizations and some scholars have incorrectly deemed this a genocide does not make it so. It is telling that some countries are literally trying to change the definition of genocide to try to apply it to Israel.
|
You are evidently very late to the party, or else you wouldn't be surprised that so many people call it a genocide. You might still deny it, but you wouldn't be surprised anymore.
|
On July 09 2025 16:24 Magic Powers wrote:
You are evidently very late to the party, or else you wouldn't be surprised that so many people call it a genocide. You might still deny it, but you wouldn't be surprised anymore.
Nah, I don't think I'm late to the party but you are right - I'm not surprised. The amount of misinformation that has been spread about this war from the very beginning is astounding. The genocide distortion is one of the worst because it attempts to put the IDF and Hamas on some kind of morally equivalent plane when the moral differences between the two sides are just so obvious.
In any case, the amount of people who may or may not call this a genocide really isn't the interesting thing here. I'd rather focus on this question: does the claim that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza have any substance based on the actual definition of the term and the facts and context on the ground? I just laid out for you the case that it doesn't.
Also WRT "so many people" saying it's genocide. I guess this is relative given that the official position of countries like the UK, France, Germany, Australia, the US, and yes, Austria, is that it is not a genocide.
|
This again.
"We have no intent" except for all the times cabinet members clearly stipulates their intent to get rid of palestinians in public.
|
On July 09 2025 12:58 RJGooner wrote:
Always with the both sides trying to put Hamas and the IDF on some kind of a similar moral plane. So sick and tired of this.
Have to agree with you there, this moral equivalence is disgusting since the IDF is much worse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
