• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -11 year ago

    But if it were a professional army conducting a genocide as you allege, wouldn’t they be much better at it? This is where I keep coming back to.

    I would agree with “professional army that is ranking military value significantly higher than minimizing civilian casualties” but that isn’t genocide.

    • @Maggoty
      link
      English
      11 year ago

      They don’t have to be doing it systematically to be doing it. And participation would still likely vary between units. It’s an extremely difficult thing to do psychologically. So some units are pulling all the military age men out to shoot and others are just shooting whoever they happen to see that’s not in an IDF uniform. Both are genocidal acts.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        0
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        OK… so any war crime is genocide now? It really feels like we’re broadening the definition substantially. And don’t get me wrong - war crimes are awful and should be prosecuted. But calling them all genocide feels… dilutive to systematic extermination of a people.

        • @Maggoty
          link
          English
          1
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Taken alone, no. But those are just two examples, of many to choose from, to show how genocide doesn’t necessarily mean trains and ovens.