Middle East Conflict

[jim tolmies perm]

Just saw Suella Braverman on Sky calling pro-Palestinian protests ‘hate marches’ after today's Cobra meeting.

Suella Braverman calls pro-Palestine demos ‘hate marches’

Home secretary claims protesters want to ‘erase Israel from the map’ by chanting in support of Palestine

www.theguardian.com

The woman is a dangerous loon

 

[Dax777]

The deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group

Well, let's start with: Aim of destroying that nation or group. How does killing 1700 people, many of whom weren't Israelis, or even Jews, translate into an attack "with the aim of destroying that nation or group"? They may have that rhetoric in their "manifesto" but they aren't capable of carrying it out, and you were talking about the October 7 attack, not a campaign. So it immediately falls short there.

The act must be committed with the intent to destroy the group in whole or in part, even if the access of the perpetrator is limited. As the case might be here for Hamas. I.e it was only able to commit Genocide in the Kibuts.

Also, that they are incapable put more accurately ( that you believe they are incapable of accomplish their goals) isn't a legitimate defense to Genocide. They planned a genocide and acted in furtherance of achieving that goal. Even when they shoot rockets indiscriminately into Israel, they do so in attempts to further their genocidal aim that they preach consistently.

... any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
— Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article 2[7]

Article 3 defines the crimes that can be punished under the convention:

(a) Genocide;(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;(d) Attempt to commit genocide;(e) Complicity in genocide.
— Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article 3[7]

Then the numbers involved: 1,700 on an Israeli population of 10 million is it? 7-8 million Jews? That isn't genocidal either.

Again,they don't have to kill a million. They had the intent to wipe out the Jews and carried out the act as best they could achieve it. This is a distinction too many miss.

The murders were for the intent of commiting a genocide.

Then you have the target of the attack. I know for a fact from Thai people who are back in Thailand now, that Hamas knew they were killing foreigners and even said they were under orders to kill foreigners, some of them could even say hello in Thai to the people they were attacking. Why were they doing that? To attract global attention to their terrorist attack. Unless I am mistaken, people committing genocide generally want to keep it quiet and with a plausible deniability of provable intent, which is a prerequisite for a charge of genocide.

1. Two things can be true at the same time. They could have killed foreigners. I'm sure they did as they don't particularly care for life. I mean they sometimes kill Palestinians too if they get in the way. But there instructions and plan ( which they trained for over a year for, was to attack a series of Kibbutz and murder all the inhabitants. Whom they knew quite well were almost ALL Jews ( and Jewish sympathizers).

So, No, killing foreigners who they viewed as sympathetic to Israel does not undemine the intent and Conspiracy to commit a genocide.

Anyway, I could go on. But it was a terrorist attack, not genocide. In the same way that what the Israelis are doing is committing war crimes against the civilian population, not committing genocide. Yet.

Absolutely, it was a terror attack, sure. But it was also an act in furtherance of the group's stated objective of genocide. I'm not the one saying this. They readily admit to it.

All imo, of course, which is why I said imo before.

Fair enough. You gave it a worthy attempt.

 

[Dax777]

It's a shame Netanyahu didn't think about what was best for Israel when adopting a strategy of favouring Hamas over the Palestinian Authority and allowing money to funnel through to them. He put them where they are.

I agree it is a shame. But that doesn't change what's required today.

If you raise a cub in the city ( very dumb idea, agreed) and then it's start maiming people in the City when it got older. Sure, it was dumb and irresponsible to have raised a wild animal in the City. But now that it's loose and killing people, the goal is to neutralize it before it causes any more damage.

 

[Vialli98]

If an hospital is being used for military purpose, then it becomes a legitimate target.
Asking sick people to move out of arms way is the noble thing to do by any military. They would be better anywhere else than dead. I saw a video of one car blown up in the south and that looks like a roadside bomb.
Does the 7,000 figure include the 500+ people Islamic Jihad rockets killed in that hospital? What about those peope killed by failed rocket launches within Gaza (30% of rockets launched fall within Gaza)?

Hamas stated clearly in their charter, what their aims are. They want to rid Palestine of Jews. Now this is what genocide looks like. But it seems they can do no wrong in some people's eyes.
Many people are homeless all over the world due to military conflict. It's not unique to Gaza. If you don't want Gazans to be homeless, then you should support any effort to rid the place of Hamas.

Even if there are innocent civilians there? Yeah that's barbaric. Asking sick people, disabled people, paralysed people, elderly people, children who literally can't move out of the way to move out of the way while Israel levels their homes, their entire neighbourhoods, murders entire families is very noble. Well done Israel. It's not like they're also bombing the places they're telling them to go to, so what good is these 'noble warnings' when the civilians get bombed into oblivion in the places they were told to flee to.

Hamas are disgusting, bloodthirsty terrorists. Sadly, Israel are also disgusting bloodthirsty terrorists. You don't get to drop thousands of bombs on people indiscriminately every day for weeks and weeks and then still try to claim some kind of moral purity and superiority. Palestinian civilians aren't any more fair game than Israeli civilians are, and the fact you are trying make that claim is utterly abhorrent.

 

[halfcenturyup]

People always say this but it's not true. The goal is to debilitate the organization beyond effective capabilities.

We've seen it done to other similar ideological groups effectively before. The moneybags are in Qatar and you'd target those for assassination too.

But decimating the foot soldiers, the cache of ammunition in Gaza and the built up underground networks around Gaza.

Contrary to popular claims, these groups grow when they attack and win accolades. They shrink when they get pummeled. You can successfully reduce this group into an ineffective terror group. Coz no one likes joining losing groups.

Consideration should be made for paying informants too.

You just called Hamas an ideological group, even though you denied it was in a previous post .....

Look, I don't have a horse in this race but coming out with things like the Hamas attack was genocide, that what the Israelis are currently doing is genocide, that civilians have to face the consequences if they can't leave a protected area or "what else can Israel do?" as if there are no alternatives just doesn't progress any debate. All those points are nonsense.

Imho.

 

[Vialli98]

It's worth pointing out that the "warnings" are being broadcast by IDF spokesmen in English & Hebrew, over the internet or on TV.

The people supposedly being warned don't speak English and have no internet access or electricity.

They are nothing more than a fig leaf to excuse the death and destruction that has happened and is to come. "Oh well we warned them, not our fault".

Straight out of the IRA play book.

Also, it's not like Israel aren't dropping bombs in the south and the Rafah crossing, so to telling these civilians to flee the north because a bomb is coming is not the noble gesture that is being claimed, when Israel are bombing the shit out the very places they're telling civilians to flee to.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I agree it is a shame. But that doesn't change what's required today.

If you raise a cub in the city ( very dumb idea, agreed) and then it's start maiming people in the City when it got older. Sure, it was dumb and irresponsible to have raised a wild animal in the City. But now that it's loose and killing people, the goal is to neutralize it before it causes any more damage.

You would do it humanely? Or just throw grenades at it?

 

[domalino]

Also, it's not like Israel aren't dropping bombs in the south and the Rafah crossing, so to telling these civilians to flee the north because a bomb is coming is not the noble gesture that is being claimed, when Israel are bombing the shit out the very places they're telling civilians to flee to.

Another IRA classic. Plant 2 bombs, warn people about the first driving the evacuees towards the second.

 

[halfcenturyup]

The act must be committed with the intent to destroy the group in whole or in part, even if the access of the perpetrator is limited. As the case might be here for Hamas. I.e it was only able to commit Genocide in the Kibuts.

Also, that they are incapable put more accurately ( that you believe they are incapable of accomplish their goals) isn't a legitimate defense to Genocide. They planned a genocide and acted in furtherance of achieving that goal. Even when they shoot rockets indiscriminately into Israel, they do so in attempts to further their genocidal aim that they preach consistently.


Article 3 defines the crimes that can be punished under the convention:





Again,they don't have to kill a million. They had the intent to wipe out the Jews and carried out the act as best they could achieve it. This is a distinction too many miss.

The murders were for the intent of commiting a genocide.



1. Two things can be true at the same time. They could have killed foreigners. I'm sure they did as they don't particularly care for life. I mean they sometimes kill Palestinians too if they get in the way. But there instructions and plan ( which they trained for over a year for, was to attack a series of Kibbutz and murder all the inhabitants. Whom they knew quite well were almost ALL Jews ( and Jewish sympathizers).

So, No, killing foreigners who they viewed as sympathetic to Israel does not undemine the intent and Conspiracy to commit a genocide.


Absolutely, it was a terror attack, sure. But it was also an act in furtherance of the group's stated objective of genocide. I'm not the one saying this. They readily admit to it.


Fair enough. You gave it a worthy attempt.

:) You are very gracious, but still very wrong imo.

 

[Ducado]

There is no defence for Hamas they are a nihilist terror group

And I have not read one post on here that does, most people including myself realise that what Israel is doing is counter productive because it's just treating the symptom rather than the cause, also I don't really think it's possible to wipe them out without killing many thousands of innocent civilians, some it would seem think it's a price worth paying, even if it's proven that it won't work without a political and economic solution to the plight of Palestinians