Your country is complicit of Genocide

Forum rules
1.) No personal threats.
2.) No doxxing/revealing personal information.
3.) No spam.
4.) No circumventing press restrictions.
5.) No racism, sexism, homophobia, or derogatory posts.

Post a reply

Confirmation code
Enter the code exactly as it appears. All letters are case insensitive.
Smilies
:points: :-D :eyeroll: :neutral: :nmr: :razz: :raging: :-) ;) :( :sick: :o :? 8-) :x :shock: :lol: :cry: :evil: :?: :smirk: :!:
View more smilies
BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is OFF
Smilies are ON
Topic review
   

If you wish to attach one or more files enter the details below.

Expand view Topic review: Your country is complicit of Genocide

Re: Your country is complicit of Genocide

by CaptainFritz28 » Wed Jan 17, 2024 3:35 pm

orathaic wrote: ↑
Wed Jan 17, 2024 9:37 am
 It seems everyone is bogged down in history and definitions.

The Israeli state is not the people of Israel.

Hamas is not the Gazans or Palestinian people.

Complicit means supporting or aiding in the actions.

So first, the US and UK are complicit in the actions of the Israeli government (which many people in Israel are protesting against).

Second the holocaust is not the only example of how a genocide can be committed and I have learned recently it is only used to refer to the mass industrial slaughter of Europe's Jewish population - yes there were other groups targeted (Roma, homosexuals, trans people) - some of which were left imprisoned after the Nazi death camps were liberated (homo-phobic bigotry among the liberators). But the holocaust is a specific trans used only for one sub-section of Nazi Germay's genocidal project.

Lastly, Israel being guilty of genocide doesn't take away from the fact of Hamas's terrorism. The act of collective punishment is a war crime. So punishing Palestinians for the actions of Hamas is a war crime in itself.

Post script: Terrorist, in it current usage, means groups the western powers don't like who use or threaten to use violence. It is entirely a political term which ignored the state terrorism committed regularily by Imperialist powers.
First off, as I said before, no matter what, the US government is complicit of genocide. Whether that is by giving funds to Israel or to Iran, which we know gives that money to Hamas, the US has financially supported both sides, even if one is indirect.

I agree about the point regarding the holocaust. Yes, there have been other genocides committed, and there were others committed by the Nazis. The Holocaust is just the largest of these genocides.

As I've said, Israel has committed war crimes, and so I totally agree. However, I don't believe that the extermination of the Gazans is Israel's goal. Sure, a few government leaders said that, but as I previously mentioned, government leaders say a lot of things for the purpose of propaganda. And again, it took a lot more than just some top Nazi officials to make the Holocaust happen.

If Israel wanted to exterminate the Gazans, they could do it. It would be very easy for them to, as Hamas did on Oct. 7, go on a rampage and kill or kidnap all civilians in sight. This would be genocide. Sure, I don't agree with every action they have taken, but when they fire on neighborhoods or hospitals it is because they believe that Hamas is there, and they're almost always right. That doesn't mean that it is good that they kill civilians, but it does mean that their purpose is not genocide.

And the use of the word "terrorism" as something only committed by the enemies of the west, I think, is irrelevant here. It's a double standard, yes, but as Esq. Bert noted, that doesn't mean Hamas hasn't done it (which I think is a point you recognize).

In the end, I believe that Hamas has committed terrorism with the intent of eliminating Israel both ethnically and nationally, these being genocidal intentions. Israel has committed war crimes, with the intent of eliminating Hamas as a terrorist organization.

Re: Your country is complicit of Genocide

by CaptainFritz28 » Wed Jan 17, 2024 3:05 pm

And I definitely don't agree with the point Fritz keeps making about how Israel is the better government and so just deserves to "win" this conflict.
Of note, I don't think anyone "deserves" to win here. I'm simply saying that a two state solution is infeasible, and thus it is a matter of one side or the other "winning." I'm saying that based on history, the lesser of two evils is Israel.

Re: Your country is complicit of Genocide

by Esquire Bertissimmo » Wed Jan 17, 2024 2:58 pm

orathaic wrote: ↑
Wed Jan 17, 2024 9:37 am
 It seems everyone is bogged down in history and definitions.

The Israeli state is not the people of Israel.

Hamas is not the Gazans or Palestinian people.

Complicit means supporting or aiding in the actions.

So first, the US and UK are complicit in the actions of the Israeli government (which many people in Israel are protesting against).

Second the holocaust is not the only example of how a genocide can be committed and I have learned recently it is only used to refer to the mass industrial slaughter of Europe's Jewish population - yes there were other groups targeted (Roma, homosexuals, trans people) - some of which were left imprisoned after the Nazi death camps were liberated (homo-phobic bigotry among the liberators). But the holocaust is a specific trans used only for one sub-section of Nazi Germay's genocidal project.

Lastly, Israel being guilty of genocide doesn't take away from the fact of Hamas's terrorism. The act of collective punishment is a war crime. So punishing Palestinians for the actions of Hamas is a war crime in itself.

Post script: Terrorist, in it current usage, means groups the western powers don't like who use or threaten to use violence. It is entirely a political term which ignored the state terrorism committed regularily by Imperialist powers.
I agree with most of this. The Israeli state could commit a genocide without the express permission of its citizens, at least for a while. There is certainly a lot of Israeli state violence against Palestinian civilians. And I definitely don't agree with the point Fritz keeps making about how Israel is the better government and so just deserves to "win" this conflict.

I agree with your critique that more affluent states give an air of legitimacy to actions that, if they were taken by a weaker group, would be called "terrorism". But I don't think there is no such thing as terrorism. And Oct. 7 was terrorism and I wholesale reject the idea this is what legitimate freedom fighting looks like.

And I remain hung up by the term "genocide". The Holocaust wasn't the only genocide, but it was a crystal clear example of a distinctively exterminationist type of violence. Darfur, of course, is another. The situation in Gaza, to me, doesn't look like these conflicts. 300,000+ Iraqis died in the 2003 Iraq war, 2.2 million were displaced, much of their infrastructure was destroyed, but I suspect the US and its allies had a callous disregard for Iraqis lives, not that they were engaged in an anti-Iraqi genocide.

Re: Your country is complicit of Genocide

by orathaic » Wed Jan 17, 2024 9:37 am

It seems everyone is bogged down in history and definitions.

The Israeli state is not the people of Israel.

Hamas is not the Gazans or Palestinian people.

Complicit means supporting or aiding in the actions.

So first, the US and UK are complicit in the actions of the Israeli government (which many people in Israel are protesting against).

Second the holocaust is not the only example of how a genocide can be committed and I have learned recently it is only used to refer to the mass industrial slaughter of Europe's Jewish population - yes there were other groups targeted (Roma, homosexuals, trans people) - some of which were left imprisoned after the Nazi death camps were liberated (homo-phobic bigotry among the liberators). But the holocaust is a specific trans used only for one sub-section of Nazi Germay's genocidal project.

Lastly, Israel being guilty of genocide doesn't take away from the fact of Hamas's terrorism. The act of collective punishment is a war crime. So punishing Palestinians for the actions of Hamas is a war crime in itself.

Post script: Terrorist, in it current usage, means groups the western powers don't like who use or threaten to use violence. It is entirely a political term which ignored the state terrorism committed regularily by Imperialist powers.

Re: Your country is complicit of Genocide

by CaptainFritz28 » Tue Jan 16, 2024 4:48 pm

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 16, 2024 11:58 am
CaptainFritz28 wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 16, 2024 3:29 am
Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 16, 2024 1:09 am

Which side was living peacefully there in the fucking first place?

Was it the Zionists?

No it fucking was not. The Zionists arrived and forced the Palestinians out of their homes at gunpoint. How can you fucking reconcile the morality of that action, please?? This is the basic injustice that you ignore.
Do you really want to go back in time? How about the Ottoman Empire, which oppressed Jews in Israel for centuries, or the Romans, who initially gave the land the name "Palestine"? Do you not realize that the very name of Palestine is a symbol of oppression against Jews, albeit by an empire long gone?

Why do the Palestinians deserve a homeland but not the Jews? Why do we fault Israel for their oppression, but not the Ottomans of only 30 years before? Why the double standard?
I condemn the racist policies of the Ottoman Empire and call for it to be abolished.
Great. And what will you do for the people of Israel now, who were forced off their land by the Ottomans? Do they not have a "right to return" to their homeland?

Re: Your country is complicit of Genocide

by Esquire Bertissimmo » Tue Jan 16, 2024 3:04 pm

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 16, 2024 11:58 am
CaptainFritz28 wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 16, 2024 3:29 am
Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 16, 2024 1:09 am

Which side was living peacefully there in the fucking first place?

Was it the Zionists?

No it fucking was not. The Zionists arrived and forced the Palestinians out of their homes at gunpoint. How can you fucking reconcile the morality of that action, please?? This is the basic injustice that you ignore.
Do you really want to go back in time? How about the Ottoman Empire, which oppressed Jews in Israel for centuries, or the Romans, who initially gave the land the name "Palestine"? Do you not realize that the very name of Palestine is a symbol of oppression against Jews, albeit by an empire long gone?

Why do the Palestinians deserve a homeland but not the Jews? Why do we fault Israel for their oppression, but not the Ottomans of only 30 years before? Why the double standard?
I condemn the racist policies of the Ottoman Empire and call for it to be abolished.
Okay, but there still seems to be a real problem here.

The Levant has been controlled, at various points, by Canaanites, *Israelites*, The Assyrian Empire, The Babylonian Empire, The Persian Empire, The Roman Empire, The Byzantine Empire, an Islamic Caliphate, crusading Christians, Mamluks, the Ottoman Empire, Britain, and now modern Israel and Palestinian governments. Most likely, the "original" Canaanites displaced some group that was there before them too.

Some Palestinians are believed to be descended from the Canaanites, but so too are some Jews. And that's not the whole story. Palestinians also descend from those Arabs who *conquered* the land in the 7th century. Modern Palestinians likewise descend from other Arabs moving around the Ottoman Empire (i.e., Arabs moving onto a conquered land they were not original to).

Europeans are obsessed with the Aztecs because that's who they met first upon contact. But the Aztec's had somewhat recently dispossessed the Zapotecs with violent conquest. I suspect modern day Palestinians, who are an amalgam of groups living on conquered land, feel "original" to the West because that's who happened to be there when the British ruled.

I am also strongly repulsed by what happened in 1948 and by the continuation of that movement to take over Palestinian land. My concern with the Nakba and the modern settler movement isn't predicated on Palestinians originality to the land, but simply stems from the fact that people who have made a home and life themselves were/are being killed and/or uprooted. Likewise, while I agree that modern Israelis are an imposition on the people who immediately predated them, I look at millions of people living in modern Israel, many for several generations, and I think it's already too late to tell them to go away.

Re: Your country is complicit of Genocide

by Jamiet99uk » Tue Jan 16, 2024 11:58 am

CaptainFritz28 wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 16, 2024 3:29 am
Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 16, 2024 1:09 am
CaptainFritz28 wrote: ↑
Mon Jan 15, 2024 5:44 pm

The fact of the matter is that both sides claim the land for their own, and both sides are willing to kill for it. I personally don't think a two state solution is feasible, so it comes down to a question of - which side has historically taken care of their citizens better? If one side has to win, which is better to their people?

Put simply, history shows it to be Israel. I'm certainly not saying that Israel is by any means perfect, but what I am saying is that the governments that the Palestinians have chosen for themselves have been far worse than Israeli governments.

One side has to win. There really can't be a long term two state solution. Looking at the way Hamas treats their people and the way that Israel treats their people (even the Arabs), we see that Israel's government is by far the better choice.
Which side was living peacefully there in the fucking first place?

Was it the Zionists?

No it fucking was not. The Zionists arrived and forced the Palestinians out of their homes at gunpoint. How can you fucking reconcile the morality of that action, please?? This is the basic injustice that you ignore.
Do you really want to go back in time? How about the Ottoman Empire, which oppressed Jews in Israel for centuries, or the Romans, who initially gave the land the name "Palestine"? Do you not realize that the very name of Palestine is a symbol of oppression against Jews, albeit by an empire long gone?

Why do the Palestinians deserve a homeland but not the Jews? Why do we fault Israel for their oppression, but not the Ottomans of only 30 years before? Why the double standard?
I condemn the racist policies of the Ottoman Empire and call for it to be abolished.

Re: Your country is complicit of Genocide

by CaptainFritz28 » Tue Jan 16, 2024 7:45 am

principians wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 16, 2024 5:53 am
 I wonder who do you think has 'real knowledge' on the subject. I simply was not prioritizing reading a hamas declaration, but you know what, I might end up reading it just out of curiosity (probably it won't happen in the next couple of days though).
I suggest you do. You claimed that Hamas' intent is a two state solution, and that the 2017 charter is at the least ambiguous, and thus I would define real knowledge as having actually read something before citing it as your primary source for a claim.
principians wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 16, 2024 5:53 am
 And I guess you think it was a ethically a correct thing by Churchill (especially when I hope we can agree that it was totally false that 'all germans were nazis')? And you say "all germans are nazis" was propaganda but sure "all palestinians are hamas" isn't?
They are both propaganda. That's exactly my point.

Churchill didn't want every German to die, nor did he want a genocide of the Germans. He said what he did to bolster public support to win a war begun by the Germans.

I don't know if the Israeli Ministers you referenced want every Gazan to die, nor if they want a genocide of the Gazans. They say what they do to bolster public support to win a war begun by Hamas.
principians wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 16, 2024 5:53 am
 The Defence Minister Yoav Gallant said Israel is "fighting human animals" and "Gaza won’t return to what it was before. We will
eliminate everything . . . we will reach all places." (and he was not the only one talking about "human animals")

Heritage Minister, Amichai Eliyahu, said that Israel "must find ways for Gazans that are more painful than death"

The Minister of National Security, Itamar Ben-Gvir, "when we say that Hamas should be destroyed, it also means those who celebrate, those who
support, and those who hand out candy - they’re all terrorists, and they should also be destroyed"

No guys, unfortunately, it's not just Netanyahu.
Again, it requires a large majority of the people and the military (the soldiers themselves) to be in favor of genocide for genocide to actually happen. The Nazis needed a lot more than just Hitler, Göring, Goebbels, and Himmler to cause the Holocaust.
principians wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 16, 2024 5:53 am
 and later they bombed some of the places where they said people they could refuge
Which specific instance(s) are you referring to?
principians wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 16, 2024 5:53 am
 Ok, I appretiate your inputs about this. Here I'll just say I disagree, I think they are very different things conceptually.
While it doesn't really matter, since Hamas is both genocidal and terroristic and if what you claim is true Israel is just genocidal, I am rather curious as to your thoughts on this. Why do you disagree?
principians wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 16, 2024 5:53 am
 It's a bit ironic you say that when before you seemed to argue that Hamas does not want a two state solution and that seemed to be the reason you gave to label them genocidal.
I want a two state solution, but I recognize that it wont happen, largely because:
Hamas will only accept the full elimination of Israel so that Palestine can be "liberated."
principians wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 16, 2024 5:53 am
 Ok, so you really think this is a good argument.
I was referring specifically to Jamie here, but yes, yes I do. Otherwise, I wouldn't have made it.
The alternative is the conclusion that we should make things worse for both Jews and Arabs alike so that the Palestinians can be "liberated."
principians wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 16, 2024 5:53 am
 First I want to say that one of the reasons palestinians originally supported hamas, was because the other party, the ANP was percieved as very corrupt and that it was not really making anything to improve their lives.
Hamas is also very corrupt and not making anything to improve their lives. This is exactly my point.
principians wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 16, 2024 5:53 am
 Anyway, which criteria are you considering to talk about "good government"? and, are you considering at all the context in which side has been governing?
I am not talking about good government v bad government. I'm talking about less than ideal government v horrificly bad government.
principians wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 16, 2024 5:53 am
 Then, the spaniards would say "see, we are better governors than the american natives", and man, you could perfectly agree with them since while spaniards had a lot of material advantages, plus they would not sacrifice other human beings, nor keep the state of war that seemed prevalent before their arrival (talking about the situation in Mexico and Peru). And so you had spaniards putting natives under a system very similar to slavery and they ended up being so bad governors in Mexico at least, that in 300 years the population never recovered.
This doesn't change things. If the Spaniards were truly a better government then the natives, then things are better now than they would be had the natives remained in power.

And anyways, we must look at how things are, not how they could be. Israel is currently in power. They have done much, much better with the power which they have had than the Palestinians' government has done with the power which they have had. In the end, either the Palestinian or Israeli government will remain in power, but not both. It is a matter of choosing the lesser of two evils, and in this case that is Israel.
principians wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 16, 2024 5:53 am
 I'll finish with this, because this is the string of words where I definitely disagree the most with you. What, for the sake of what you most love, what do you mean by "win" here? This is not a game. The way things are evolving THERE IS NO WIN HERE, for no one.
Generally, wars are said to have been "won" by one side or another (i.e. "The Allies won WW2"). In reality, every side suffers loss. Obviously war is bad, and no one benefits from a war. But one side does "win" a war, and this is generally considered to be the side which suffers least from the outcome. Hence, one side has to suffer least from the outcome in this war, and they are the side which will win.

Re: Your country is complicit of Genocide

by principians » Tue Jan 16, 2024 5:53 am

Quite honestly, that's rather lazy. If you are going to make claims like "Hamas is in favor of a two state solution," at least know what you are talking about. It's not a long read, and to me it just demonstrates your lack of real knowledge on the subject. It is very clear about the fact that Hamas does not want a two state solution, so whoever reported that it is ambiguous, again, lied to you.
I wonder who do you think has 'real knowledge' on the subject. I simply was not prioritizing reading a hamas declaration, but you know what, I might end up reading it just out of curiosity (probably it won't happen in the next couple of days though).
Churchill said that all Germans are Nazis in WW2, and used that as a propaganda tactic. This dehumanized the Germans and made the public more supportive of the war.
And I guess you think it was a ethically a correct thing by Churchill (especially when I hope we can agree that it was totally false that 'all germans were nazis')? And you say "all germans are nazis" was propaganda but sure "all palestinians are hamas" isn't?
There have been war crimes, yes, but other than Netanyahu, you haven't shown how the people or military (by which I mean the soldiers themselves) are genocidal, which is what it takes to cause genocide.
The Defence Minister Yoav Gallant said Israel is "fighting human animals" and "Gaza won’t return to what it was before. We will
eliminate everything . . . we will reach all places." (and he was not the only one talking about "human animals")

Heritage Minister, Amichai Eliyahu, said that Israel "must find ways for Gazans that are more painful than death"

The Minister of National Security, Itamar Ben-Gvir, "when we say that Hamas should be destroyed, it also means those who celebrate, those who
support, and those who hand out candy - they’re all terrorists, and they should also be destroyed"

No guys, unfortunately, it's not just Netanyahu.
they have informed the Gazans to evacuate areas before bombing them

and later they bombed some of the places where they said people they could refuge
Conceptually, they are both just as evil as each other.
Ok, I appretiate your inputs about this. Here I'll just say I disagree, I think they are very different things conceptually.
I personally don't think a two state solution is feasible
It's a bit ironic you say that when before you seemed to argue that Hamas does not want a two state solution and that seemed to be the reason you gave to label them genocidal.
And anyways, you entirely disregarded my point that regardless of "who was there first," Israel is doing a much better job governing the land than the Palestinians ever have.
Ok, so you really think this is a good argument.

First I want to say that one of the reasons palestinians originally supported hamas, was because the other party, the ANP was percieved as very corrupt and that it was not really making anything to improve their lives.

Anyway, which criteria are you considering to talk about "good government"? and, are you considering at all the context in which side has been governing?

Then, the spaniards would say "see, we are better governors than the american natives", and man, you could perfectly agree with them since while spaniards had a lot of material advantages, plus they would not sacrifice other human beings, nor keep the state of war that seemed prevalent before their arrival (talking about the situation in Mexico and Peru). And so you had spaniards putting natives under a system very similar to slavery and they ended up being so bad governors in Mexico at least, that in 300 years the population never recovered.
One side has to win
I'll finish with this, because this is the string of words where I definitely disagree the most with you. What, for the sake of what you most love, what do you mean by "win" here? This is not a game. The way things are evolving THERE IS NO WIN HERE, for no one.

Re: Your country is complicit of Genocide

by CaptainFritz28 » Tue Jan 16, 2024 3:33 am

And anyways, you entirely disregarded my point that regardless of "who was there first," Israel is doing a much better job governing the land than the Palestinians ever have.

Re: Your country is complicit of Genocide

by CaptainFritz28 » Tue Jan 16, 2024 3:29 am

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 16, 2024 1:09 am
CaptainFritz28 wrote: ↑
Mon Jan 15, 2024 5:44 pm
principians wrote: ↑
Mon Jan 15, 2024 2:19 pm
 Just one more note. You're probably right, maybe we are in a (very disproportionate) war between 2 genocidal entities. Which to me at least, seems the saddest situation we've watched in our times
The fact of the matter is that both sides claim the land for their own, and both sides are willing to kill for it. I personally don't think a two state solution is feasible, so it comes down to a question of - which side has historically taken care of their citizens better? If one side has to win, which is better to their people?

Put simply, history shows it to be Israel. I'm certainly not saying that Israel is by any means perfect, but what I am saying is that the governments that the Palestinians have chosen for themselves have been far worse than Israeli governments.

One side has to win. There really can't be a long term two state solution. Looking at the way Hamas treats their people and the way that Israel treats their people (even the Arabs), we see that Israel's government is by far the better choice.
Which side was living peacefully there in the fucking first place?

Was it the Zionists?

No it fucking was not. The Zionists arrived and forced the Palestinians out of their homes at gunpoint. How can you fucking reconcile the morality of that action, please?? This is the basic injustice that you ignore.
Do you really want to go back in time? How about the Ottoman Empire, which oppressed Jews in Israel for centuries, or the Romans, who initially gave the land the name "Palestine"? Do you not realize that the very name of Palestine is a symbol of oppression against Jews, albeit by an empire long gone?

Why do the Palestinians deserve a homeland but not the Jews? Why do we fault Israel for their oppression, but not the Ottomans of only 30 years before? Why the double standard?

Re: Your country is complicit of Genocide

by Esquire Bertissimmo » Tue Jan 16, 2024 2:55 am

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 16, 2024 1:09 am
CaptainFritz28 wrote: ↑
Mon Jan 15, 2024 5:44 pm
principians wrote: ↑
Mon Jan 15, 2024 2:19 pm
 Just one more note. You're probably right, maybe we are in a (very disproportionate) war between 2 genocidal entities. Which to me at least, seems the saddest situation we've watched in our times
The fact of the matter is that both sides claim the land for their own, and both sides are willing to kill for it. I personally don't think a two state solution is feasible, so it comes down to a question of - which side has historically taken care of their citizens better? If one side has to win, which is better to their people?

Put simply, history shows it to be Israel. I'm certainly not saying that Israel is by any means perfect, but what I am saying is that the governments that the Palestinians have chosen for themselves have been far worse than Israeli governments.

One side has to win. There really can't be a long term two state solution. Looking at the way Hamas treats their people and the way that Israel treats their people (even the Arabs), we see that Israel's government is by far the better choice.
Which side was living peacefully there in the fucking first place?

Was it the Zionists?

No it fucking was not. The Zionists arrived and forced the Palestinians out of their homes at gunpoint. How can you fucking reconcile the morality of that action, please?? This is the basic injustice that you ignore.
Are colonizers forever deserving of violence against them until they leave?

I'm not trying to be glib. I agree it's relevant that the Palestinians were dispossessed in the recent past, and that an active settler movement continues to take their land. I just don't think that's the only relevant lens to see the current conflict from. Generations of Israelis, many of whom descend from refugees kicked out of nearby countries, can't be wished away.

The logical conclusion of "Jews existence on that land is inherently genocidal" is "so they have to leave", which is its own genocide.

Re: Your country is complicit of Genocide

by Jamiet99uk » Tue Jan 16, 2024 1:09 am

CaptainFritz28 wrote: ↑
Mon Jan 15, 2024 5:44 pm
principians wrote: ↑
Mon Jan 15, 2024 2:19 pm
 Just one more note. You're probably right, maybe we are in a (very disproportionate) war between 2 genocidal entities. Which to me at least, seems the saddest situation we've watched in our times
The fact of the matter is that both sides claim the land for their own, and both sides are willing to kill for it. I personally don't think a two state solution is feasible, so it comes down to a question of - which side has historically taken care of their citizens better? If one side has to win, which is better to their people?

Put simply, history shows it to be Israel. I'm certainly not saying that Israel is by any means perfect, but what I am saying is that the governments that the Palestinians have chosen for themselves have been far worse than Israeli governments.

One side has to win. There really can't be a long term two state solution. Looking at the way Hamas treats their people and the way that Israel treats their people (even the Arabs), we see that Israel's government is by far the better choice.
Which side was living peacefully there in the fucking first place?

Was it the Zionists?

No it fucking was not. The Zionists arrived and forced the Palestinians out of their homes at gunpoint. How can you fucking reconcile the morality of that action, please?? This is the basic injustice that you ignore.

Re: Your country is complicit of Genocide

by Jamiet99uk » Tue Jan 16, 2024 1:07 am

That's the conclusion. Israel's conduct is oppressive and murderous. Israel is the aggressor and the oppressor. They need to allow Gaza and the West Bank to breathe; they refuse to do so. Israel is intent on genocide, it's happening before our eyes.

Re: Your country is complicit of Genocide

by Esquire Bertissimmo » Mon Jan 15, 2024 9:41 pm

I wonder if the definition of "genocide" is really that revealing.

My country (Canada) has agonized endlessly over whether the word "genocide" applies to its historical and, separately, its modern relationship with First Nations peoples. Ultimately, recognizing the past and present harm to Indigenous people caused by settlers seems important regardless of whether or not any particular case is widely agreed to meet the criteria of "genocide".

Consider three harms being caused to groups of Muslims today:
- China interns Muslims, denies them all sorts of personal freedoms, and seeks to erase their identity and faith, but stops short of killing them en masse (although there is some forced sterilization)
- Pakistan is forcibly and violently displacing hundreds of thousands of Afghan refugees
- Israel is committing war crimes as part of its war on Hamas, resulting in the displacement and death of many Palestinian civilians

Each of these plausibly meets the ICJ's definition for genocide (directly killing members of the group; creating conditions that kill or displace members of the group; creating conditions that will prevent births within the group). Yet none of these look like the Holocaust and it will be hard in each case to know whether the goal is truly extermination, or just some other goal (counter insurgency, cracking down on undocumented migrants, etc.) that also entails state-sanctioned violence against particular groups.

Whether Israel's war against Gaza is "genocidal" seems like something that won't ever be settled. Either this current war is a clumsy effort to improve Israel's security, or it's a nefarious effort to displace and murder as many Palestinians as possible. But what evidence would we accept in either direction?

Disgusting things said by some Israeli politicians, including the PM, are less than conclusive - the views of other politicians, the IDF, and the Israeli public matter, and they are not aligned in this vision. If it is a genocide today because of Bibi, will it still be a genocide if a less horrible PM is elected but similar military actions continue? I suspect any other Israel PM would have conducted a ground war in Gaza following Oct. 7.

The Palestinian civilian death count is high and rising, but some amount of this is the inevitable consequence of urban warfare against Hamas, a fundamentalist government known to maximize civilian casualties on its own side in certain circumstances. How many deaths would make us sure the goal is genocide and not security?

If the war ends today and Gaza remains inhabited by hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, it won't be clear whether this was just a partial genocide or not a genocide at all. IThe goal may have been to kill or displace as many Palestinians as possible, but it just wasn't easy to finish the job. Or maybe Israel refrained from killing every Gazan, even though it has the firepower to do so quite easily, because this military operation really is aimed at securing Israel from terror attacks.

I personally lean towards the idea that the conflict in Gaza isn't clearly "genocidal", since it seems to be aimed at something other than just some "final solution" to the Palestinian problem. I think some amount of conflict against Hamas was a necessary consequence of Oct. 7 and that any conflict of this nature would incur terrible civilian costs. And yet, I don't know how many Palestinian civilian deaths I could countenance as being justified by Israel's approach to obliterating Hamas.

Even if Israel's conduct doesn't meet the bar of "genocidal", I would still want to say that extreme disregard for Palestinian lives (e.g., war crimes, restricting civilian aid, etc.) in the course of an anti-terror operation is unacceptable.

Re: Your country is complicit of Genocide

by CaptainFritz28 » Mon Jan 15, 2024 5:44 pm

principians wrote: ↑
Mon Jan 15, 2024 2:19 pm
 Just one more note. You're probably right, maybe we are in a (very disproportionate) war between 2 genocidal entities. Which to me at least, seems the saddest situation we've watched in our times
The fact of the matter is that both sides claim the land for their own, and both sides are willing to kill for it. I personally don't think a two state solution is feasible, so it comes down to a question of - which side has historically taken care of their citizens better? If one side has to win, which is better to their people?

Put simply, history shows it to be Israel. I'm certainly not saying that Israel is by any means perfect, but what I am saying is that the governments that the Palestinians have chosen for themselves have been far worse than Israeli governments.

One side has to win. There really can't be a long term two state solution. Looking at the way Hamas treats their people and the way that Israel treats their people (even the Arabs), we see that Israel's government is by far the better choice.

Re: Your country is complicit of Genocide

by CaptainFritz28 » Mon Jan 15, 2024 5:36 pm

principians wrote: ↑
Mon Jan 15, 2024 2:14 pm
 Since I don't plan to read the full document, which is reportedly ambiguous, I'll just admit that I was not accurately informed about it. Still I see adifference when comparing this
Quite honestly, that's rather lazy. If you are going to make claims like "Hamas is in favor of a two state solution," at least know what you are talking about. It's not a long read, and to me it just demonstrates your lack of real knowledge on the subject. It is very clear about the fact that Hamas does not want a two state solution, so whoever reported that it is ambiguous, again, lied to you.
principians wrote: ↑
Mon Jan 15, 2024 2:14 pm
 Which, btw, is far from being the only similar declaration by members of the government and idf, that not only use political terms like 'liberation' but seem blatantly aiming to dehumanize palestinian people. Just a couple of days ago, Netanyahu said, for instance: "This is a war of the sons of light against the sons of darkness".
Churchill said that all Germans are Nazis in WW2, and used that as a propaganda tactic. This dehumanized the Germans and made the public more supportive of the war.

So yeah, Netanyahu is going to say stuff like that. It's propaganda. Again, we don't see actual genocide going on. There have been war crimes, yes, but other than Netanyahu, you haven't shown how the people or military (by which I mean the soldiers themselves) are genocidal, which is what it takes to cause genocide.

The fact that more Gazans have died than is necessary (which is something I've conceded but is not actually a proven point) does not imply genocide. Why are civilians dying? Because Hamas puts themselves under hospitals and neighborhoods. There is evidence of that. To take out Hamas, the instigators of a genocidally intended terrorist attack, Israel has been forced to make choices that have killed civilians. However, they have informed the Gazans to evacuate areas before bombing them, they have not gone around killing Gazans for fun, and they are fighting an organization who wants as many civilians to die as possible.
principians wrote: ↑
Mon Jan 15, 2024 2:14 pm
 And you know why I have a particular problem with genocide vs. terrorism (though of couse I won't deny there can be genocidal terrorism). When there's a political intention of erasing a people, the leader usually won't say "let's kill the frenchmen, I so command you". There's always a previous dehumanization process, which history shows us tends to create mass murders much easier than just terrorism.
That still doesn't make one as an idea any more inherently evil than the other. Typically, yes, genocides usually kill more people. In that sense, genocide is worse, because it has historically been used for more harm. Conceptually, they are both just as evil as each other.

Re: Your country is complicit of Genocide

by principians » Mon Jan 15, 2024 2:19 pm

Just one more note. You're probably right, maybe we are in a (very disproportionate) war between 2 genocidal entities. Which to me at least, seems the saddest situation we've watched in our times

Re: Your country is complicit of Genocide

by principians » Mon Jan 15, 2024 2:14 pm

"The Zionist project is a racist, aggressive, colonial and expansionist project based on seizing the properties of others; it is hostile to the Palestinian people and to their aspiration for freedom, liberation, return and self-determination. The Israeli entity is the plaything of the Zionist project and its base of aggression."
I just want to say that Sout Africa case has provided arguments that would back up this one.
I don't know who told you that Hamas is in favor of a two state solution, but whoever it is lied.
Since I don't plan to read the full document, which is reportedly ambiguous, I'll just admit that I was not accurately informed about it. Still I see adifference when comparing this
Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea
with
Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy[a] all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants
Which, btw, is far from being the only similar declaration by members of the government and idf, that not only use political terms like 'liberation' but seem blatantly aiming to dehumanize palestinian people. Just a couple of days ago, Netanyahu said, for instance: "This is a war of the sons of light against the sons of darkness".

And you know why I have a particular problem with genocide vs. terrorism (though of couse I won't deny there can be genocidal terrorism). When there's a political intention of erasing a people, the leader usually won't say "let's kill the frenchmen, I so command you". There's always a previous dehumanization process, which history shows us tends to create mass murders much easier than just terrorism.

Re: Your country is complicit of Genocide

by CaptainFritz28 » Mon Jan 15, 2024 4:56 am

principians wrote: ↑
Mon Jan 15, 2024 4:19 am
 Here we can see an interesting example of what I said in my previous post. While it's true that when hamas was created they talked about the destruction of Israel, in 2017 they published another declaration where they say they're fine with a 2 states solution, so how would you really prove that the today's hamas intention is genocidal?
From Hamas' 2017 Charter:

"Palestine symbolises the resistance that shall continue until liberation is accomplished, until the return is fulfilled and until a fully sovereign state is established with Jerusalem as its capital."
"Palestine, which extends from the River Jordan in the east to the Mediterranean in the west and from Ras al-Naqurah in the north to Umm al-Rashrash in the south, is an integral territorial unit. It is the land and the home of the Palestinian people."
"Not one stone of Jerusalem can be surrendered or relinquished."
"The Zionist project is a racist, aggressive, colonial and expansionist project based on seizing the properties of others; it is hostile to the Palestinian people and to their aspiration for freedom, liberation, return and self-determination. The Israeli entity is the plaything of the Zionist project and its base of aggression."
"The following are considered null and void: the Balfour Declaration, the British Mandate Document, the UN Palestine Partition Resolution, and whatever resolutions and measures that derive from them or are similar to them. The establishment of “Israel” is entirely illegal and contravenes the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and goes against their will and the will of the Ummah"
"Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea."

"Resisting the occupation with all means and methods is a legitimate right guaranteed by divine laws and by international norms and laws. At the heart of these lies armed resistance, which is regarded as the strategic choice for protecting the principles and the rights of the Palestinian people."

" A real state of Palestine is a state that has been liberated. There is no alternative to a fully sovereign Palestinian State on the entire national Palestinian soil, with Jerusalem as its capital."

I don't know who told you that Hamas is in favor of a two state solution, but whoever it is lied.

Hamas intends to destroy the national, religious, and ethnic group of what they refer to as Zionists, which they define as the entity of Israel, in totality. They intend to do this by using awful crimes aimed at terrifying civilians for political ends, which includes the intentional targeting and killing of civilians.

This is, per your definitions, genocide and terrorism.
principians wrote: ↑
Mon Jan 15, 2024 4:19 am
 Now, before people starts suggesting that I'm trying to defend or support hamas in any way, I'd like to state this clearly: I think hamas is a NOT DEFENSIBLE foundamentalist group that has actually brought nothing but tragedy to the palestinian people.
I agree. I am not claiming that you believe this, but I am claiming that you are misguided if you claim that Hamas is not a terroristic genocidal organization when they claim that they are just that.
principians wrote: ↑
Mon Jan 15, 2024 4:19 am
 The problem here is that one of those genocidal israeli leaders is the very prime minister, the chief of the state, as one may infer from his declaration from november 3, where he referenced the Amalek biblical passage that literally reads:
Again, Israel has their share of genocidal politicians. Thus far, they have only been genocidal in word, and have not been wiping mass amounts of Gazans of the face of the Earth for fun as a genocidal politician would do in deed. Sure, more civilians have been killed than necessary. You seemed to miss my point about war crimes.
principians wrote: ↑
Mon Jan 15, 2024 4:19 am
 So, when trying to justify a genocide against the palestinian people you use hamas as if hamas and the palestinian people were the same thing. If you say hamas is terrorist and Israel is doing as hamas would do, what does it convert Israel into?
A) I am not justifying the unnecessary killing of civilians. Again, see my point about war crimes.

B) A good majority of the Palestinian people agree with Hamas. I cite a public opinion poll conducted by the Arab World for Research and Development, an organization based out of Palestine:
https://www.awrad.org/files/server/polls/polls2023/Public%20Opinion%20Poll%20-%20Gaza%20War%202023%20-%20Tables%20of%20Results.pdf
principians wrote: ↑
Mon Jan 15, 2024 4:19 am
 I don't deny the right of Israel to defend itself or to try to avoid something like October 7 to repeat. But to punish the assassination of 1200, you proceed to an operation that takes lives of 33000 and makes the live of hundreds of thousands more miserable to point of starvation. And you refuse to stop even when number 1 adn number 2 of hamas already fell and you have virtual control of the north of Gaza, because you want to 'totally anihilate hamas'. To be honest I'm amazed how there's people that seems unable to see the lack of proportion here.
Israel knows that if they do what they've done in the past, and assassinate a few leaders and do a few airstrikes, they will not have solved the problem. This is what they've tried in the past, and it didn't work. Also, again, see my point about war crimes.

principians wrote: ↑
Mon Jan 15, 2024 4:19 am
 Really? ok
Neither is inherently worse than the other. Terrorism can be genocide, and vice versa. You may kill 100 million people in a terrorist attack without the purpose of targeting a specific ethnic, national, or religious group, or you may kill 10 people with genocidal intent. Neither terrorism or genocide inherently kills more than the other, nor is either inherently more evil than the other. They're both disgusting, horrific things, and they're both evil.

Top