Mid East Israel declare war after Hamas attack III

Remove this Banner Ad

I said above that i considered that they'd done at least three of those things.

When you compare it with the examples that Wikipedia has described though, its not on the same scale.
Its almost as if Israel have tried to keep it in the context of a clumsy war, rather than lining the people up and shooting them.

If it was the aim to just kill them all, they could do it.
Not sure what their aim is tbh.
Oh there is plenty of footage out there of them just lining up people and shooting them - people gathering water, grandmothers walking the streets, people they capture then send into hospitals and snipe when they walk out, paraplegic people lying in hospital beds...etc
 
I'm just wondering when it is technically correct to call this a genocide?

When all Palestinians are dead? When they are scattered in foreign refugee camps?

When?

Anyone?

A few posters that no longer post in this thread won't believe it's genocide until the ICJ rules it as such.

Even then, they'll likely just chalk it up to the ICJ being a biased organisation out to get Israel.

So, never, I guess.
 
If it was the aim to just kill them all, they could do it.
Not sure what their aim is tbh.

I am sure there are videos of them doing that. One or two. I don't want to watch them. Couple of mass graves of people with wrists bound and bullet holes in their heads.

They drop bombs on refugee camps. On schools where kids are sheltering. In the early days they positioned snipers outside a religious structure (can't recall what it was) and sniped people who came out for water. The occupants were calling relatives in the UK for help.

Is that not "killing them"?

If not, what would you call "killing them"?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

A few posters that no longer post in this thread won't believe it's genocide until the ICJ rules it as such.

Even then, they'll likely just chalk it up to the ICJ being a biased organisation out to get Israel.

So, never, I guess.
there is always an excuse for genocide
 
I'm just wondering when it is technically correct to call this a genocide?

When all Palestinians are dead? When they are scattered in foreign refugee camps?

When?

Anyone?
The UNHR report, released in mid-May, concludes: “Israel has committed genocidal acts, namely killing, seriously harming, and inflicting conditions of life calculated, and intended to, bring about the physical destruction of Palestinians in Gaza,” says Susan Akram, a LAW clinical professor of law and director of LAW’s International Human Rights Clinic, who contributed to the report.
 
I said above that i considered that they'd done at least three of those things.

When you compare it with the examples that Wikipedia has described though, its not on the same scale.
Its almost as if Israel have tried to keep it in the context of a clumsy war, rather than lining the people up and shooting them.

If it was the aim to just kill them all, they could do it.
Not sure what their aim is tbh.

Please stop repeating this frankly stupid argument - if they wanted to kill them all they could.

Do you really think they could tactical nuke Gaza and just continue on with their day?

They need plausible deniability to keep their allies onside - even the US would draw the line at firing squads.

Their method is working when people say rubbish like this, as if its some sort of defence.

As for scale - there are plenty of examples with lesser casualty figures, it's not the measure of a genocide. Even the Nazis didn't try and kill 100%.

 
I'm just wondering when it is technically correct to call this a genocide?

When all Palestinians are dead? When they are scattered in foreign refugee camps?

When?

Anyone?
According to some posters in these parts... Yes, when they're all dead. Apparently, if Israel "really" wanted a genocide, they would have done it already!
 
Please stop repeating this frankly stupid argument - if they wanted to kill them all they could.

Do you really think they could tactical nuke Gaza and just continue on with their day?

They need plausible deniability to keep their allies onside - even the US would draw the line at firing squads.

Their method is working when people say rubbish like this, as if its some sort of defence.

As for scale - there are plenty of examples with lesser casualty figures, it's not the measure of a genocide. Even the Nazis didn't try and kill 100%.


I put that as a possible argument they might present.
But its irrelevant because they are clearly ( to me) committing genocide under

"Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction"​

 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

According to some posters in these parts... Yes, when they're all dead. Apparently, if Israel "really" wanted a genocide, they would have done it already!

Are you talking about me? Maybe i need to put something on X before you can take in what i said.
 
The Australian Parliament passing a symbolic motion recognising Palestine as a state will not stop the war. Ukraine is a state and that didn't stop the invasion - tell it to Vladimir Putin.

Whether Palestine is already a state or still needs to be created as part of a peace process is asking the wrong question. Civilians are dying now. We should not be using oxygen, airtime, or diplomatic capital on the question of statehood when this genocide needs to be ended urgently. The issue around Senator Fatima Payman and whether Australia should recognise Palestine is a distraction from the real issue - innocent people being starved and blown up.
 
Are you talking about me? Maybe i need to put something on X before you can take in what i said.
I wasn't singling out anyone in particular, but if you have said in here anything that resembles "if Israel really wanted to commit genocide they would have killed everyone by now" then yes, I'm talking about you (and anyone else who has posted drivel like this).
 
I wasn't singling out anyone in particular, but if you have said in here anything that resembles "if Israel really wanted to commit genocide they would have killed everyone by now" then yes, I'm talking about you (and anyone else who has posted drivel like this).

I was commenting on the way they were killing.
In places like Myanmar it was pretty systematic , they were destroying villages, lining up the men and boys and executing them.
Israel don't have that sort of method.
They are still going through the farce of having a war. The only reason i can think of why they are doing it that way is for future deniability. All those accidents and mistakes. Or do they have uncontrollable Zionist Zealots in their defence force?
 
The Australian Parliament passing a symbolic motion recognising Palestine as a state will not stop the war. Ukraine is a state and that didn't stop the invasion - tell it to Vladimir Putin.

Whether Palestine is already a state or still needs to be created as part of a peace process is asking the wrong question. Civilians are dying now. We should not be using oxygen, airtime, or diplomatic capital on the question of statehood when this genocide needs to be ended urgently. The issue around Senator Fatima Payman and whether Australia should recognise Palestine is a distraction from the real issue - innocent people being starved and blown up.
Yeah i agree - i get the feeling its just a delay tactic to not focus on Israel itself
 
soon its going to be antisemitic to say "Israel"
Mentioning that Muslims lived in Palestine before Zionism has been called anti-semitism many times.

And if you point out when a Zionist kills somebody, they call that Blood Libel.

But when the West Bank IDF Commander quits and says Settlers are causing violence and that the IDF has failed to stop it, the world just shrugs its shoulders and can't understand why Hamas exists because if we talk about it, Zionists will call us names.

 

Remove this Banner Ad

Mid East Israel declare war after Hamas attack III

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top