Live coverage thread of the International Court of Justice and the case of South Africa vs. Israel.

  • DarkGamer
    link
    fedilink
    -16
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Palestinians are a national group and should qualify under the statutes, I didn’t think that was ever under question. Hamas, however, is a political group and therefore not protected. If those Israeli statements refer to them, I don’t believe they violate any statutes.

    Israel was fighting “human animals”.

    If this referred to Hamas militants, not Palestinians in general, it is not incitement to genocide.

    President Isaac Herzog saying, “It’s an entire nation out there that is responsible”.”

    An entire nation did in fact elect Hamas to power and to this day they enjoy popular support among Palestinians, which would in fact make them responsible for everything that followed from their leadership. Pointing this out is not incitement to violence against them.

    • @jordanlundOPM
      link
      English
      204 months ago

      The phrases "he had ordered ‘complete siege’ of Gaza City”, and later said “we will eliminate everything” sure doesn’t make it sound like they are interested in limiting it to Hamas.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        5
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        The siege is a war crime and most of the statements are straight genocidal. The Gallant quotes seem to have been from a poor translation by Bloomberg that spread everywhere – and used as evidence at the ICJ. They issued a correction a few days ago. He said “Gaza won’t return to what it was before. There will be no Hamas. We will eliminate everything.” That entire middle sentence was missing originally. He also said, “We are fighting human animals. This is the ISIS of Gaza.

      • DarkGamer
        link
        fedilink
        -134 months ago

        Everything, not everyone. It sounds like he’s referring to destroying infrastructure, not people, but I’m not in his head so I could be wrong.

        • @jordanlundOPM
          link
          English
          14
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          If your intent is to “eliminate everything”, that’s including non military targets, and would fall under Article II of the Genocide Convention:

          https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml

          "In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, 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."

        • jorge
          link
          fedilink
          English
          44 months ago

          Everything, not everyone

          Are “human animals” things or ones?

    • Retrowizard
      link
      fedilink
      144 months ago

      Except Hamas is the excuse and was never the real target. The real target are and always have been the Palestinian people.

      The popularity of Hamas is a consequence of 70+ years of subjugation under control of the settlers. The genocide of Palestinians didn’t start 100+ days ago; it started with the Nakba.

      • DarkGamer
        link
        fedilink
        -11
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Except Hamas is the excuse and was never the real target. The real target are and always have been the Palestinian people.

        Perhaps it seems that way because of the popular support of Hamas and intifada in Palestine, the fact that Hamas is comprised of Palestinians, and because they hide among civilians to maximize collateral damage.

        The popularity of Hamas is a consequence of 70+ years of subjugation under control of the settlers. The genocide of Palestinians didn’t start 100+ days ago; it started with the Nakba.

        And why did the Nakba happen? All the jew murdering. Jews started out legally buying lands until they were murdered and genocided and ethnically cleansed by Arab nationalists and neighboring Arab countries allied with Palestine. It’s incredible you see the constant aggressors as the victims.

        This is what happened when the shoe was on the other foot:

        For the first time in 1,000 years not a single Jew remains in the Jewish Quarter. Not a single building remains intact. This makes the Jews’ return here impossible

        “The operations of calculated destruction were set in motion. I Knew that the Jewish Quarter was densely populated with Jewish populations who caused their fighters a good deal of interference and difficulty. I embarked, therefore on shelling of the quarter with mortars creating harassment and destruction. Only for days after our entry into Jerusalem, the Jewish Quarter become their graveyard. Death and destruction reigned over it. As the down of May 28th was about to break, the Jewish Quarter emerged in convulsive cloud-a cloud of death and agony”

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamization_of_Jerusalem

        Yet somehow Israel is the bad guy and must be restrained, It is Israel who is genocidal for defending themselves, not the explicitly genocidal Hamas, not the constantly belligerent terrorists next door who target civilians and want to destroy Israel in whole in or in part.

        • Retrowizard
          link
          fedilink
          104 months ago

          And why did the Nakba happen? All the jew murdering.

          And that somehow justifies the displacement and genocide of the Palestinian people.

          Yet somehow Israel is the bad guy and must be restrained, It is Israel who is genocidal for defending themselves, not the explicitly genocidal Hamas, not the constantly belligerent terrorists next door who target civilians and want to destroy Israel in whole in or in part.

          Because it’s the Settlers that are commiting genocide.

          • DarkGamer
            link
            fedilink
            -11
            edit-2
            4 months ago
            • Starting a war and losing does in fact arguably justify annexation. Distance from those trying to murder you provides safety and security.
            • Peacefully living with Jews seems to have worked out pretty well for the Arabic 21% of Israel who stayed and currently enjoy full citizenship rights, it’s a shame those who left chose violence and continue to choose violence.
            • The only side that has committed genocide in this conflict or that to this day advocates for genocide in this conflict is the Palestinian side. I oppose genocide, which is why I stand with Israel.
        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          94 months ago

          Your quote from the Jordanian commander dates to after the Nakba. There was significant intercommunal conflict in Mandatory Palestine because of the mismanagement of Jewish migration by Britain, and escalating tensions from the “legal” land purchases you mentioned that had been occurring since the late 1800s. Yes, Jews attempted to purchase and settle uninhabited land, but the fact is big chunks of the land purchased were misappropriated under the Ottoman Land Code, and European Jews frequently expelled (by force if the implication wasn’t clear) the Arab Muslims they found living on it, who may have had no idea it was sold out from under them.