418 karma · joined October 23, 2023
She very clearly stated, they didn't find or make any ruling on the plausibility of genocide, just that it was plausible that they might not be able to be protected in a case where a genocide were to happen.
They couldn't honestly claim there was any merit to the claim of genocide, but people were screaming for blood so they did this doublespeak thing where if you squint you can claim they 100% claim genocide is happening to mollify the anti-semites while not actually saying anything.
Essentially, she said, "we haven't found a genocide, but were a genocide to be attempted, it would be difficult to prevent" which is true in every single case of war, especially asymmetric warfare, where one side is much stronger than the other.
If someone were to bring a case against the US back in 2004 following the invasion of Iraq a similar finding would be totally within reason... but does anyone claim NATO committed genocide? No, but it's plausible that that there was a risk of irreparable harm to the Iraqi right to be protected from genocide.
Service desk job > L2 > L3 > company pays for a bunch of cloud training so they don't have to pay for another consultant > DevOps
or
CE/CS intern > tasked with implementing stuff in clouds > hired as Jr SWE, but still tasked with doing those devopsy things that the real devops team doesn't wanna do > jump a few times, each time still taking on devopsy stuff > Sr DevOps Admin
No, they had a very good reason: They hate Jews and do not believe Jews have any right to national sovereignty in their own land.
The court ruled that South Africa had plausible standing to bring a case defending Gazans, not that there was plausible genocide. Bringing wikipedia as a source about a very hot topic doesn't lend any support to your argument.
This whole thread is so strange, people keep claiming Palestinians cannot be trusted to rule themselves, while at the same time accusing Israel of genocide for not giving them the ability to rule themselves.
When people ask, “why don’t the Palestinians do more to defend themselves?” they generally mean doing defensive things, such as building anti-rocket defenses or bomb shelters like Israel does to protect their citizens. They don’t mean, “why didn’t the Palestinians attempt to commit more terrorist acts of genocide sooner?”
Also advocating for the bombing of a border crossing that has aid coming through it is a great way to prevent all future aid from passing through it. No one wants to be sitting target and if you start bombing the hand that feeds you the aid will stop. And the border crossing will be turned into a wall with snipers pointed at it.
As Jordan, Egypt, and the Lebanese government (until Hezbollah took over) have show, the solution to this conflict is very simple: make peace with Israel, sign trade agreements and you will prosper.
can you expand on what this means practically and how it differs from others?
[0]https://www.craft.do/#:~:text=(Actually)%20useful%20notifica...
If you ever wonder why. US medicine is so expensive: it’s bec there are 100 hands all reaching for their piece of your $120 annual checkup.
Or put another way, HIPPA is nice and all, but by the time all is said and done, 8-10 pairs of strangers eyes have seen your vagina fungus infection pharmacy bill.
Yea, that’s kinda what I thought when I saw this question, YC is basically all about getting startups funded, hn is basically in service of that goal, creating a thread specifically to compete with yc doesn’t seem like something hn would do.