My initial takeaways confirm a lot of what you’ve heard me say.
There are some war crimes, no doubt, and no doubt that have been way over, reported such that people think it’s commonplace or part of an official policy. In SA’s complaint, for example, one apparent war crime was cited something like 19 different times in different sections of the complaint for different reasons. And many others had similar treatment. It’s laden with circular reasoning. Also, the most sensational claims, much like the most sensational claims in media, are often attributed to “reports.” In other words, the things that would make the best case for genocide are unattributed and therefore unlikely to be given ang weight bh the court (or by me).
It meets the definition of genocide because countries A, B, C, D, E,…etc. said it meets the definition of genocide where the list of countries supporting South Africa’s position are Iran, all of its proxies, and half a dozen other authoritarian-rum shitholes. Makes me wonder what is going on in South Africa that they are listed along with scuba, Iraq, Syria, Honduras, Pakistan, Malaysia, Namibia. That stood out.
More circular is stuff like:
It’s a genocide because…the Chief of the UN Security Counsel Said in December that nowhere was safe in Gaza and that the healthcare system was collapsing…total civilian casualties have increased since that statement…therefor the UN Security Council must agree that it is now genocide.
It’s a genocide because… Israel’s true goal is to expel all Palestinians from their homes permanently…the Jordanian foreign minister said that he thinks this is Israel’s goal…therefore that is Israel’s goal.
It’s a genocide because… Israel denies it meets the definition of genocide and says the war still has a ways to go…therefore it is genocide.
It’s a genocide because… Israel ordered civilians to evacuate Gaza and head south, many people did, a few handfuls of such refugees were killed while heading south… Therefore it’s genocide.
These are a few that jumped out. I see how people can read these allegations and say “see that’s a genocide.” The conclusions of South Africa are all consistent with the scope of Israel’s legitimate self defense. I say that because in my view Israel has a just and moral right to destroy the tunnels and kill every last member of Hamas. The tunnels are under Gaza City and there are apparently still hundreds or thousands of Hamas soldiers holed up in the tunnels dug in for a a guerilla campaign. That’s my starting point.
I’ll be going through the doc a little more this week. I’ll try to supplement this when I do.
It’s a genocide because…the Chief of the UN Security Counsel Said in December that nowhere was safe in Gaza and that the healthcare system was collapsing…total civilian casualties have increased since that statement…therefor the UN Security Council must agree that it is now genocide.
Could you explain to me what’s circular about this? Nowhere is safe in Gaza, as witnessed by people in Gaza, humanitarian workers in Gaza, medical staff in Gaza, journalists in Gaza, and experts on Gaza either in Gaza or outside Gaza, with areal footage, videos, and a consistent feed of evidence of destruction showing Israel bombing areas it deemed safe..
Seems to me like you are saying that the reason it’s circular is that the Chief of the UN Security Council used words to describe what we have thousands of videos of. Or…? It’s not like you have to take their word for it… and they don’t want you to do that either… you have thousands of reports to inspect as proof that they have presented over and over again.
I think that argument is circular because it didn’t even attempt to argue grounds for genocide. It merely states facts that the humanitarian picture is grim and that the healthcare system was in the verge of collapse. It seems obvious to me that the arguments don’t lead to the conclusion. I’m not sure how to explain it differently. It begins with the premise and goes back around tk the same premise. Part of this is because the entire document does not consider Israel’s position or include Israel’s explanations for things.
It’s a war, a war in a tiny city where the enemy is dug into the city itself and using civilians as human shields with the goal of intentional martyrdom.
The arguments do not consider perfectly valid reasons why the humanitarian picture is so grim and why the healthcare system in Gaza is collapsing: because Hamas built its war infrastructure underneath people’s houses, schools, hospitals, electrical and water infrastructure, and then use those places to launch terrorist attacks against innocent Israeli, including intentionally targeting women and children as a matter of purposeful strategy, as opposed to discordant, occasional war crimes, for which the Israeli’s responsible should absolutely be held accountable.
I get it, is real shots of hostages here and there, the shot some civilians here and there. By and large though Israel really is targeting Hamas and the tunnels and Hamas have for years deployed a strategy of maximizing civilian casualties to paint as immoral.
Like if you drive up to my house and open fire on it from your car, if I shoot back, is it my fault that you have your kids and your family in your car with you while you’re out doing drive-bys?
I’ve read a lot of books and have seen a lot of movies where war comes to a city, and the warriors tell the women and children to get out, while they stay behind to fight. That’s not what Hamas does. Apparently 1.8 million people left their homes and went and signed in at refugee camps. That means something like 600,000 to 800,000 people did not heed the calls for evacuation. It’s pretty impressive that only 25,000 people have died in this situation, a war in one of the most densely populated areas on the planet.
Of course if you ask Hamas, they don’t have one single fighter working for them, in fact, they don’t even exist, and everyone killed in every airstrike and every explosion and every shooting ever are innocent Palestinian civilians. In my book the Palestinian authorities and Hamas and even the Palestinian people have very little credibility when it comes to saying what happened in this theater.
I think there has been war crimes on both sides and the people responsible should be dealt with most harshly.
Like if you drive up to my house and open fire on it from your car, if I shoot back, is it my fault that you have your kids and your family in your car with you while you’re out doing drive-bys?
No. It’s not your fault.
But does this describe what’s happening on the ground today?
Others might see it more like this:
“If you drive up to my house and open fire on it from your car, then I come to your neighborhood with all my friends with guns, and I kill your wife, and I kill your son and your daughter and your dog, and then I blow up your house and the library next to you, is it my fault if your son, daughter, wife, and dog are dead?”
BTW the ICJ case is titled this:
I’ve read a good chunk of it so far.
My initial takeaways confirm a lot of what you’ve heard me say.
There are some war crimes, no doubt, and no doubt that have been way over, reported such that people think it’s commonplace or part of an official policy. In SA’s complaint, for example, one apparent war crime was cited something like 19 different times in different sections of the complaint for different reasons. And many others had similar treatment. It’s laden with circular reasoning. Also, the most sensational claims, much like the most sensational claims in media, are often attributed to “reports.” In other words, the things that would make the best case for genocide are unattributed and therefore unlikely to be given ang weight bh the court (or by me).
Can you give an example of circular reasoning?
It meets the definition of genocide because countries A, B, C, D, E,…etc. said it meets the definition of genocide where the list of countries supporting South Africa’s position are Iran, all of its proxies, and half a dozen other authoritarian-rum shitholes. Makes me wonder what is going on in South Africa that they are listed along with scuba, Iraq, Syria, Honduras, Pakistan, Malaysia, Namibia. That stood out.
More circular is stuff like:
It’s a genocide because…the Chief of the UN Security Counsel Said in December that nowhere was safe in Gaza and that the healthcare system was collapsing…total civilian casualties have increased since that statement…therefor the UN Security Council must agree that it is now genocide.
It’s a genocide because… Israel’s true goal is to expel all Palestinians from their homes permanently…the Jordanian foreign minister said that he thinks this is Israel’s goal…therefore that is Israel’s goal.
It’s a genocide because… Israel denies it meets the definition of genocide and says the war still has a ways to go…therefore it is genocide.
It’s a genocide because… Israel ordered civilians to evacuate Gaza and head south, many people did, a few handfuls of such refugees were killed while heading south… Therefore it’s genocide.
These are a few that jumped out. I see how people can read these allegations and say “see that’s a genocide.” The conclusions of South Africa are all consistent with the scope of Israel’s legitimate self defense. I say that because in my view Israel has a just and moral right to destroy the tunnels and kill every last member of Hamas. The tunnels are under Gaza City and there are apparently still hundreds or thousands of Hamas soldiers holed up in the tunnels dug in for a a guerilla campaign. That’s my starting point.
I’ll be going through the doc a little more this week. I’ll try to supplement this when I do.
Could you explain to me what’s circular about this? Nowhere is safe in Gaza, as witnessed by people in Gaza, humanitarian workers in Gaza, medical staff in Gaza, journalists in Gaza, and experts on Gaza either in Gaza or outside Gaza, with areal footage, videos, and a consistent feed of evidence of destruction showing Israel bombing areas it deemed safe..
Seems to me like you are saying that the reason it’s circular is that the Chief of the UN Security Council used words to describe what we have thousands of videos of. Or…? It’s not like you have to take their word for it… and they don’t want you to do that either… you have thousands of reports to inspect as proof that they have presented over and over again.
I think that argument is circular because it didn’t even attempt to argue grounds for genocide. It merely states facts that the humanitarian picture is grim and that the healthcare system was in the verge of collapse. It seems obvious to me that the arguments don’t lead to the conclusion. I’m not sure how to explain it differently. It begins with the premise and goes back around tk the same premise. Part of this is because the entire document does not consider Israel’s position or include Israel’s explanations for things.
It’s a war, a war in a tiny city where the enemy is dug into the city itself and using civilians as human shields with the goal of intentional martyrdom.
The arguments do not consider perfectly valid reasons why the humanitarian picture is so grim and why the healthcare system in Gaza is collapsing: because Hamas built its war infrastructure underneath people’s houses, schools, hospitals, electrical and water infrastructure, and then use those places to launch terrorist attacks against innocent Israeli, including intentionally targeting women and children as a matter of purposeful strategy, as opposed to discordant, occasional war crimes, for which the Israeli’s responsible should absolutely be held accountable.
I get it, is real shots of hostages here and there, the shot some civilians here and there. By and large though Israel really is targeting Hamas and the tunnels and Hamas have for years deployed a strategy of maximizing civilian casualties to paint as immoral.
Like if you drive up to my house and open fire on it from your car, if I shoot back, is it my fault that you have your kids and your family in your car with you while you’re out doing drive-bys?
I’ve read a lot of books and have seen a lot of movies where war comes to a city, and the warriors tell the women and children to get out, while they stay behind to fight. That’s not what Hamas does. Apparently 1.8 million people left their homes and went and signed in at refugee camps. That means something like 600,000 to 800,000 people did not heed the calls for evacuation. It’s pretty impressive that only 25,000 people have died in this situation, a war in one of the most densely populated areas on the planet.
Of course if you ask Hamas, they don’t have one single fighter working for them, in fact, they don’t even exist, and everyone killed in every airstrike and every explosion and every shooting ever are innocent Palestinian civilians. In my book the Palestinian authorities and Hamas and even the Palestinian people have very little credibility when it comes to saying what happened in this theater.
I think there has been war crimes on both sides and the people responsible should be dealt with most harshly.
No. It’s not your fault.
But does this describe what’s happening on the ground today?
Others might see it more like this:
“If you drive up to my house and open fire on it from your car, then I come to your neighborhood with all my friends with guns, and I kill your wife, and I kill your son and your daughter and your dog, and then I blow up your house and the library next to you, is it my fault if your son, daughter, wife, and dog are dead?”