• @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      36
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      That is what the genocide denier wants you to think. It obviously isn’t a semantics argument though.

      • BlinkerFluid
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -11 year ago

        I still wouldn’t base my entire opinion on someone over one discussion regarding whether something is or isn’t a genocide. I hope he doesn’t like diet coke or chew with his mouth open.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        This link doesn’t support the claim that the UN called these events a genocide. It lists all sorts of human rights violations on a massive scale, but it doesn’t use the word genocide.

        I suppose the crux of the matter is that it was the USA, not the UN, and then some of its close allies who named the events a “genocide”.

        After this the frontiers harden, nobody talks any more about the actual events, but about the terminology.

        • @[email protected]OPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          81 year ago

          The UN can’t classify acts as genocides as per its rules. However, it can supply resources for independent international organisations to come to their own conclusions, in which case, most classify it as a genocide.

      • AnonStoleMyPants
        link
        fedilink
        English
        111 year ago

        UN is not calling it a genocide though? The entire report your link refers to does not mention genocide. It does make a clear point of massive discrimination etc though ä.

        • @[email protected]OPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          51 year ago

          The UN can’t classify acts as genocides as per its rules. However, it can supply resources for independent international organisations to come to their own conclusions, in which case, most classify it as a genocide.