Previously, it’s been activists and claims that this might be genocide. I haven’t read the report yet. But I will, and I intend to leave my mind open as to whether this raises the profile of this war in my mind relative to domestic issues.
Previously, it’s been activists and claims that this might be genocide. I haven’t read the report yet. But I will, and I intend to leave my mind open as to whether this raises the profile of this war in my mind relative to domestic issues.
When you're imprisoned inside a walled high-security island and your greatest military capability is to kill 100s of people outside of it, your words indicating a desire to eradicate one of the most militarised, highly-financed and capable states in the world -- do carry a different significance.
One group has the capability to entirely destroy the other, is actively engaged in that pursuit, and its most senior political figures have indicated their intent to do so.
Another group has almost no military capabilities, insofar as they exist, they are presently engaged in a fight for their survival -- and otherwise, their entire civilian population is presently being decimated with their children being mass starved, and a very large percentage of their entire population dead or injured.
If you think words are to be interpted absent this context, then I cannot imagine you're very sincere in this.
> When you control the food and water supply for two million people, and turn that off for months until they are starved and malnourished -- then your words indicating this is deliberate, given it could only be deliberate anyway, are interpreted differently, yes.
You confuse "control" with "provide". Israel provides the Gaza strip with food, water, electricity. This is because UNRWA removed all need for the Gazans to develop their own self sufficiency.The water and electricity were cut off to pressure the governing body to return the babies that they kidnapped. Return the Gazans decide the want the services back, they are invited to return the hostages. That has been the stance since day one.
> When you're imprisoned inside a walled high-security island and your greatest military capability is to kill 100s of people outside of it, your words indicating a desire to eradicate one of the most militarised, highly-financed and capable states in the world -- do carry a different significance.
Yes, exactly. The Gazans publicly declare their intent to genocide. > One group has the capability to entirely destroy the other, is actively engaged in that pursuit, and its most senior political figures have indicated their intent to do so.
Exactly. The Muslims have not only the capacity to destroy the Jewish state, they are engaged in a multi-front effort to do so. Hamas is one of those fronts. The media is another one. > Another group has almost no military capabilities, insofar as they exist, they are presently engaged in a fight for their survival -- and otherwise, their entire civilian population is presently being decimated with their children being mass starved, and a very large percentage of their entire population dead or injured.
You are inverting the victim-perpetrator perception by trying to suggest the this conflict is Israel vs Gazans, whereas it is clear that the conflict is Muslim vs Jews. You need only to listen to Israel's enemies to understand that. Why those bodies are under no media nor UN scrutiny is very suspicious.If you doubt it, then tell me why Hezbollah attacked Israel the day after Hamas? Why are the Houthis involved? Why did Iran bomb us?
> If you think words are to be interpted absent this context, then I cannot imagine you're very sincere in this.
I actually imagine that you are sincere in your concern, and now that I've demonstrated that the charges against Israel are inverted you may reconsider your position.Show me the evidence. You can find Arabic speaking influencers eating out in Gaza on social media. You can find security camera images of full supermarkets. The facts on the ground don’t match the narrative.
Far from withholding food, most of the food coming into Gaza now is via the Israel government, which is doing an end run around Hamas to get food to the people. Because Hamas, not the IDF, was shooting up aid trucks and taking all the food, both for their own use and to sell at inflated prices.
Hamas via MENA media companies is pushing the narrative of a famine because controlling the food supply is a primary means of extracting money from the population to further the war. Get Americans and Europeans to donate to starving Gazans, to fill the coffers of Hamas.
You think Navi Pillay, who was the President on the Rwanda Tribunal (for genocide), is less competent than you & would sign off on mere "circular references"?
> For one thing, Israel doesn't know the name of every militant it kills
Does it at least know who it is raping?
The commission has previously found Israel to be guilty of crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza, including extermination, torture, rape, sexual violence and other inhumane acts, inhuman treatment, forcible transfer, persecution based on gender and starvation as a method of warfare.
https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-867600 > You think Navi Pillay, who was the President on the Rwanda Tribunal (for genocide), is less competent than you & would sign off on mere "circular references"?
No, I do not think that Navi Pillay is less competent than me. I do however see that she signed off on circular references. Her competence has little to do with her motivations. > Does it at least know who it is raping?
Yes. The single incident of rape - a group of soldiers ramming a broomstick up the ass of a captured terrorist who had murdered people - was done by known soldiers and they are being prosecuted. And we know the identity of the man who was raped.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NsAo2j6aih0
This is not about israel incidentally hitting civilians. It's about the deliberate policy of mass starvation, withholding of water, withholding of medical supplies (incubators, pain killers, the lot), and the placing of the only "allowed" aid-distribution centres (4 out of a previous 400) in the middle of active war zones -- so that to recieve any aid at all, you have to go through active fire.
This has nothing to do with israel's actions against Hamas.
There's a very large list of actions that can only be targeted against the civilian population, and have aimed-at and realised a genocide.
Sending food wherever, leads to it being captured by Hamas / local militias (for lack of a better word) so you have to distribute where you can protect it.
But of course where you have soldiers is where you'll take fire.
Maybe she cared about your own people, you wouldn't engage in places where humanitarian aid was being distributed
Which means that at least 83% are.
There is nothing "legitimate" about it.
The head of this alleged body is a staunch anti-Israel activist who is not taken seriously.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navi_Pillay#Israel-Gaza_confli...
"On 25 July 2014, the United States Congress published a letter addressed to Pillay by over 100 members in which the signatories asserted that the Human Rights Council "cannot be taken seriously as a human rights organisation" over their handling of the 2014 Israel–Gaza conflict "
Wait, you know people who were killed by Hamas? You can’t even pretend to be impartial.
The point is that, as someone with limited stakes in this war and limited exposure to its history until recently, unbiased sources have been hard to come by. The entire definition of genocide has been politicised. That isn't a criticism of anyone doing it--language is a powerful tool, and it's fair game to try and bend definitions to one's advantage. But all that makes piercing the veil on whether this is the horribleness of war being selectively cited, or a selectively horrible war, tough.
This report cuts through that. The evidence is compelling, albeit less primary than I'd have hoped. The writing is clear and impartial. (Though again, a lot of secondary sourcing.) It doesn't seek to answer who is at fault for what is, essentially, an intractable multigenerational conflict (even before we involve proxies). It just seeks to simply answer a question, and in my opinion, having now skimmed (but not deeply contemplated) it, it does.
The balance of evidence suggests Israel is prosecuting a genocide against the people of Palestine. That creates legitimacy for escalating a regional conflict (one among money, I may add, and nowhere close to the deadliest) into an international peacekeeping operation.
Unfortunately, all of this rests on a system of international law that basically all the great powers of this generation (China, then Russia, and now America and India) have undermined.
> international peacekeeping operation
Just like those international peace keepers abetted Hezbollah, providing them intel and cover, even illuminating our assets via spotlights for Hezbollah?Or just like those international peacekeepers who filmed Hezbollah breach our border, kill soldiers, abduct others? And then when this was discovered, refused to share the unedited video with Israel?
We don't trust the UN. So which international peace keepers do you propose?
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I don’t know! But the point of peacekeepers is the belligerents lose their votes.
> Ooh, can we dismiss all statements from someone who is related to someone who worked for the Israeli government or was in the IDF too?
Isn't that exactly what is done? I've been accused of being impartial and biased many times right here on HN due to being Israeli. Should we not also acknowledge her impartiality and bias?The phrase "my brother and I against my cousin, my cousin and I against my neighbor, my neighbor and I against the neighboring state, the neighboring state and I against the world" is a paraphrase of an Arabic phrase the nicely summarises the relevant culture. I'll show you a clearer example of why the PA and Hamas are united in the front against Israel. You are aware that Shii Hezbollah and Iran are currently aligned with Suni Hamas against Israel, yes? Do you know what Hezbollah will do to Hamas if they ever overcome Israel? The current war in Gaza will look like a picnic. Go look at what is happening right now in Syria if you are unfamiliar, or ISIS, or Google for any other Shii-Sunni conflict.
In English you have the expression "united we stand, divided we fall". The Arabic expression that I mentioned pretty much encompasses that "united we stand" part, without the self-interest of "divided we fall".
And if you think the UN rapporteur is too biased to do their job correctly, why do you care what the UN does?
No, no more than someone who predicts a market crash every day is proven right the one time they nail it. The quality and objectivity of the analysis matters. Not just the conclusion.
Odd you can't reconcile that both parties can be correct
> she analysed evidence and arrived to the same conclusion as the ruling you qre recognizing today.
No, the UNHCR's conclusion is based on her report. Your argument is circular.