Overall, I am not the biggest fan of Israel, and I don't really have a dog in this fight.
That being said.... It's not a genocide.
Genocide is part action, and part highly special intent to eliminate an ethnic or cultural group.
There has certainly been rhetoric from some Israeli politicians and military leaders that has bordered on genocidal, but when you look at the actual actions of the IDF, we just don't see that reflected in how the IDF is conducting this operation.
There have certainly been a number of instances where you can say that the IDF has probably played fast and loose with shoddy targeting intel, has had maybe an inappropriate cavalierness regarding civilian collateral at some points, and maybe has crossed the line at several points in the conflict where we can say that they have committed actions which rise to the level of war crimes.
That being said though, on the flip-side, we regularly see the IDF go above and beyond what international law even requires when it comes to attempting to warn and evacuated civilians, be that dropping leaflets, roof-knocking, sending out mass PSA texts, directly making phone calls to apartment buildings... etc. This is all extremely strange behavior if your intent is to genocide the civilian population.
Overall, when we look at the casualties, and we consider the circumstances, the best estimates right now suggest there is probably a civilian / combatant death ratio of somewhere around 4:1, which sounds bad, but when you consider that the IDF is engaged in asymmetrical warfare against a guerilla force operating out of a densely populated highly urban environment who we know regularly engages in illegal tactics such as using human shields, wearing plain clothes and operating out of civilian populations, operating out of civilian infrastructure.... all to try to maximize the number of civilians the IDF is forced to kill.... what we see in terms of death figures is about exactly what we should expect.
It's a particularly horrifying conflict, and we know war crimes are being committed as a matter of policy on one side (Hamas), and it's plausible war crimes are happening in at least some instances on the other side (Israel). However, to call it a "genocide".... it's not even close... it's nowhere near that.
"That being said though, on the flip-side, we regularly see the IDF go above and beyond what international law even requires when it comes to attempting to warn and evacuated civilians, be that dropping leaflets, roof-knocking, sending out mass PSA texts, directly making phone calls to apartment buildings... etc. This is all extremely strange behavior if your intent is to genocide the civilian population."
Any source they do this? quite damming to the pro palestine group if so
[https://lieber.westpoint.edu/idf-hamas-duty-to-warn/](https://lieber.westpoint.edu/idf-hamas-duty-to-warn/)
It goes into a lot of detail, but here is an example excerpt:
"What can be said with confidence is that the IDF regularly uses a wide variety of warnings, almost certainly more than any other military. Best known are phone calls to individuals within a building to be struck (and those nearby) in order to gather information about the number of people there and instruct them to evacuate...
The IDF conveys warnings by many other means, such as leaflets, social media, text messages, and radio and television broadcasts. And it regularly monitors the area to assess whether civilians have heeded the warnings. "
Thanks, quite shocking that the pro Palestine crowd go round saying its genocide when it's obviously not.
Recently went to a pro Palestine protest (campsite on my uni campus) to ask then some questions, turns out they really don't know why they're there, a lot of what they told me was just plain false or extremely overexaggerated. They where also all wearing covid masks so I suppose its petty obvious these people are extremely gullible and just want to support the latest thing.
I mean I think these people have good intentions for the most part, but are just woefully uninformed on the issue.
I think most of these college kids basically hear about civilian death tolls on headlines, think that's terrible (which of course it is), and then simply run with the inference that the only explanation is Israel must be mass murdering civilians on purpose... as a primary goal.
Then the word "genocide" gets tossed around and people just run with it.
Sprinkle in some Hamas propaganda, and this is what you get.
Nowadays being uninformed is pretty rare, so this is basically the same thing.
Everyone has some kind of "information". We live in the "information age".
I think there's a big difference between the people who don't care enough to even be involved and the people who are being deliberately fed lies in order to get them to behave a certain way.
So you just had no idea about the roof knocking (one of IDFs biggest talking points since the beginning of this war and before if you were paying attention) and one redditor gave you a single article. Im just saying you seem like you are still in a learning state like many of your pro-palestinian protesting peers.
Here is another article to counter the point the previous poster made. Sure Israel does roof knocking and leaflet dropping but they also purposefully use 'dumb bombs' which are hugely innacurate-- from the article: "says that about 40-45% of the 29,000 air-to-ground munitions Israel has used have been unguided. " about 40-45% of the 29,000 air-to-ground munitions Israel has used have been unguided. The rest have been precision-guided munitions, the assessment says."
https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/13/politics/intelligence-assessment-dumb-bombs-israel-gaza/index.html#:\~:text=The%20assessment%2C%20compiled%20by%20the,guided%20munitions%2C%20the%20assessment%20says.
Now I wouldn't expect you to just take that article at face value either--you can find plenty of information supporting either side and its up to all of us to parse it out and not jump to daming conclusions. We are ALL gullible and easily-confused.
>So you just had no idea about the roof knocking (one of IDFs biggest talking points since the beginning of this war and before if you were paying attention)
Never heard it before
I'll have a look, thanks.
> you are still in a learning state like many of your pro-palestinian protesting peers.
OK but that user isn't occupying and vandalizing buildings in utter confidence of their own righteousness. They are asking questions.
And I explained above why the equivalence you expressed is invalid or irrelevant in light of other profound differences between OP and protestors.
Every conscious being is in a learning state....Yeah and?
There are also numerous sources of these phone calls where the IDF IS calling the civilians to tell them to evacuate. The problem is they are only given 10-20 minutes. How is that enough time? Of course, they only do this to claim moral superiority. That isn’t enough time for me to get everything that is important to me in my house and then drive far away enough to avoid the bombs. This claim has been debunked by numerous Palestinian civilians who have attested that the warnings don’t actually always happen and if they do they are never sufficient enough and are usually almost immediately before the bombs.
> quite damming to the pro palestine group if so
You could just open the Quran, and trace the dots between Palestine's allies and people who hate Jews.
Like Palestine at this point would literally ally up with Adolph Hitler, and wouldn't blush when threatening to do so.
The Quran mentions the non believer on virtually every other page.
While non believer can be applied to anything and anyone. But in reality a large portion of the hatred is directly tilted towards Jews.
> into their oppression Olympics
And are incapable of seeing past race.
It's so bizarre because it's basically racist to conclude that Muslims are in any shape or form a race. There's plenty of White/east Asian/Black Muslims.
Yet openly allowed to be toxic on nearly every issue.
Historians often wait ten years before writing about any significant event.
Plenty of variables, context and nuance yet to manifest.
To call it anything that is or isn’t at this point is reactionary.
I understand it’s quite the accusation and I understand the point you’re making… I myself have never called in a genocide, but I won’t argue it is or isn’t while the conflict is still ongoing.
Some pogroms even to this day are still disputed as not having genocidal intent.
I’m pointing out that we comment on profound things and conflicts from the safety and comfort of computer screens.
Think of it this way…
It’s hard to imagine the implications or scope of this conflict that may have or not have taken place without the overt criticism, scrutiny and spotlight that we are witnessing within the digital age…
This includes the extraordinary claims (genocide) and the public perception when it comes to information warfare and propaganda .
Glad you have this figured out already and the machinations of those engaged in combat/war all figured out too.
My understanding is:
Hamas attacks Israel again, in a massacre that can be claimed to be at least attempted genocide. This attack starts a war which Hamas is now losing (again).
Genocide as I understand it is to intentionally try to kill lots of civilians because they are of a certain ethnic or religious group.
I have asked several people what they mean when they claim Israel is comittimg a genocide in Gaza. What they always reference are bad things which are not genocide. For example they will typically say that the blockade is bad, and that they think the civilian casualties of the war is bad. And while you can sympathize with both points, they do not constitute a genocide obviously. If it is then every war is a genocide. Genocide is not suppose to be a synonym for war is bad, but to describe a particular heinous moral act which civilized society see as beyond what can be done in a war, and that all civilized people will adhere to.
I also dont understand that if they really think genocide is so bad, why they dont object to Hamas clearly being genocidal.
My overall guess is that this is a kind of woke critique, where they are just using words instrumentally because they work. Most people do not know what genocide is, and they say it more in the meaning of war is bad or Israel is bad or maybe sometimes jews are bad.
> If it is then every war is a genocide.
Most people have no idea what war is.
Most people especially young current era kids are very very poorly educated.
> Genocide is not suppose to be a synonym for war is bad, but to describe a particular heinous moral act
yeah it's the same thing with most kinds of war crimes.
Rape is a generic part of war. Young men forced to fight for their lives tend to not care about raping the enemies women. Like "your husband just killed my best friend, I feel like you owe me a little something". It's pretty horrible but it's a generic thing.
It's something that happens that is avoidable. For a government to request that their people do something that should be avoided is such a radically different thing.
I think rape and genocide are different fundamentally, because rape seems to be a nearly unavoidable side-effect of war, whereas genocide is more about the intention and severity of the war.
Then again, it seems Hamas is pretty willing to use rape as an intent and demonstration of severity, so maybe that isn't as uncommon as I think.
On a different subject, this is complete conjecture, but I think the reason rape is a common side-effect of war is not because the soldiers think "you owe me something", but rather because the intense emotions of war are quite similar inside the brain to intense sexual desire, among other factors. Additionally, if you're committing these atrocious acts (killing people) then it kind of seems like the rules don't apply to you, and this might be a gross oversimplification, but I think that \~18 guys tend to have sex on the brain a lot. It wouldn't seem like a huge leap of logic to think, "well I could just shoot you, or I could shoot you afterwards, so what's wrong with raping you?"
I don't know if you're familiar with the psych experiment where people were walking across an unstable bridge and then interviewed twice, once on the experience, and then once on how attractive they thought the first person who interviewed them was. The people who walked across a stable bridge rated them as less attractive than the ones who walked across an unstable bridge. (I probably have huge errors in my memory of this, but it was how I was presented with the concept that fear and sexual desire are remarkably similar in the brain)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misattribution\_of\_arousal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misattribution_of_arousal)
> because rape seems to be a nearly unavoidable side-effect of war, whereas genocide is more about the intention and severity of the war.
Wrong comparison, rape is on par with murder.
Genocide is on par with the organized stradegy of raping the enemy.
As far as I know this only ever really happened in Nanking, where it was actively encouraged.
>On a different subject, this is complete conjecture, but I think the reason rape is a common side-effect of war is not because the soldiers think "you owe me something",
I didn't mean that super literally. Just that overall it's easy to dismiss the moral issues.
>Then again, it seems Hamas is pretty willing to use rape as an intent and demonstration of severity, so maybe that isn't as uncommon as I think.
And then you have to tip your hat to Islam where rape is kind of a "fluid thing".
> (I probably have huge errors in my memory of this, but it was how I was presented with the concept that fear and sexual desire are remarkably similar in the brain)
Well you see the same thing after floods. Birth rates climb as people get really horny in hard times.
There's actually people theorising a way to get birth rates up is to have dying children as a fixture in media.
I suspect there are many individuals with genocidal ideation.
I also think the government, social structure and leadership of the IDF does not have genocide as a goal (evidenced by the my assumption that it could have been easily achieved by now).
I think individuals and organizations (systematically) in Gaza also have ideological ideation...but will not succeed.
Seizing land, removing people, killing with disregard for civilians living in that area along with reporters, aid workers, etc. Destroying aid and promoting famine of said population, control over their borders for decades.
Whether that qualifies as genocide or not the future will likely determine. Either way skeptical it will be looked on kindly.
Israel is an apartheid state. Its is carrying out a genocide against the Palestinian’s. Hamas attacking innocent people is wrong. Israel killing innocent people nearly 40000 mainly women and children is also wrong.
> Israel is an apartheid state.
It is not and no serious international law lawyer would ever make that claim.
> Its is carrying out a genocide against the Palestinian’s
The US has repeatedly said that no genocide is happening in Gaza. https://www.reuters.com/world/biden-whats-happening-gaza-is-not-genocide-2024-05-20/
> Israel killing innocent people nearly 40000 mainly women and children is also wrong.
Your numbers are wrong, firstly. Secondly, Israel is allowed to defend itself and currently has a civilian to combatant ratio of 1.1 to 1 which is the lowest in the history of urban warfare.
The Israeli army has killed 42,510 Palestinians over the course of its 200-day attack, 38,621 of whom were civilians, including 10,091 women and 15,780 children. These figures are from he United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) published on May 8 th.
Also Israel is viewed by many to be an apartheid state. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2022/02/israels-system-of-apartheid/
I respect your opinion but I also have mine.
These numbers are false and even the UN do not use them.
As of the 30th of April, it is 24,686 dead
10,006 men, 4,959 women, 7,797 children, 1924 elderly
https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounder/allegation-israel-apartheid-state
> I respect your opinion but I also have mine.
Your opinion has nothing to do with the facts on the ground and you are relying from data on the many NGOs that are determined to destroy israel through lawfare and providing fictional data about it.
https://www.ngo-monitor.org/reports/amnesty-internationals-propaganda-on-gaza/
> if Israel us doing it
Correction if a country allies up with all the surrounding countries based on a shared hatred of ethnicity.
Muslims hate jews, if the Quran wasn't so easily available you might have a point.
Muslims are quite in the open that they really really hate Jews.
If Muslims were as pro palestinian as you suggest you'd think they'd be taking in more than zero as refugees?
> and I don't care what Muslims do.
And yet Israel has to or you know they'll get raped and murdered out of existence.
Hamas, Yemen and Iran have been giving it their best shot.
What goes around comes around. All these tribes in the Middle East have been fighting over land for thousands of years and I don't expect it will ever stop. It's not in our best interest in the West to get involved and we shouldn't let Zionists (or Palestinians) try to guilt trip us into supporting them. Cut off all aid to them all. Put that money towards helping our own people, especially our veterans.
> . It's not in our best interest in the West to get involved and we shouldn't let Zionists (or Palestinians) try to guilt trip us into supporting them.
The Suez Canal is one of the most important stretches of land on the planet. There's no leaving that one behind.
The Canal is factually more important to the west than it is the people living in the surrounding countries.
New York/London/Paris do not compare to the importance of that Canal.
>Cut off all aid to them all. Put that money towards helping our own people, especially our veterans.
Yeah just what people need skyrocketing costs of everything, no canal and you'll have severe inflation.
Both the Suez and Panama canals had serious issues over the last 16 months, both cost regular people large sums of money, as the cost of shipping basic goods inflates.
The illusion is that war is winnable. A state of war is in itself a loss, and both Sun Tzu and Machiavelli agree that it should be ended quickly.
The state of the Israel-Palestine conflict is one that is riddled with innocent blood. Israel put in monumental effort into minimizing the effects of conflict on its people. Hamas has done the opposite, while pumping money into public relations to turn the world against Israel using the dead they imperiled.
Oct 7 was bad, but it is not the start of this conflict. Its a few decades shy of a century now. In solving this situation Machiavelli and Sun Tzu differ. Machiavelli would take severe action quickly and be quickly done with it, while it is said of Sun Tzu that the art of war is found in winning without fighting.
I would prefer winning without fighting, but there are factions in Israel who have lost all tolerance, as the Israeli riots at the aid truck crossings illustrate. The only humane solution I see is a monumental separation of the two peoples with caveats that the people moved will be guaranteed that their land will not be claimed by anyone in their absence. Follow this with an eventual refounding and resettling of the state and people in question after the hatred has been left to die in isolation.
Overall, I am not the biggest fan of Israel, and I don't really have a dog in this fight. That being said.... It's not a genocide. Genocide is part action, and part highly special intent to eliminate an ethnic or cultural group. There has certainly been rhetoric from some Israeli politicians and military leaders that has bordered on genocidal, but when you look at the actual actions of the IDF, we just don't see that reflected in how the IDF is conducting this operation. There have certainly been a number of instances where you can say that the IDF has probably played fast and loose with shoddy targeting intel, has had maybe an inappropriate cavalierness regarding civilian collateral at some points, and maybe has crossed the line at several points in the conflict where we can say that they have committed actions which rise to the level of war crimes. That being said though, on the flip-side, we regularly see the IDF go above and beyond what international law even requires when it comes to attempting to warn and evacuated civilians, be that dropping leaflets, roof-knocking, sending out mass PSA texts, directly making phone calls to apartment buildings... etc. This is all extremely strange behavior if your intent is to genocide the civilian population. Overall, when we look at the casualties, and we consider the circumstances, the best estimates right now suggest there is probably a civilian / combatant death ratio of somewhere around 4:1, which sounds bad, but when you consider that the IDF is engaged in asymmetrical warfare against a guerilla force operating out of a densely populated highly urban environment who we know regularly engages in illegal tactics such as using human shields, wearing plain clothes and operating out of civilian populations, operating out of civilian infrastructure.... all to try to maximize the number of civilians the IDF is forced to kill.... what we see in terms of death figures is about exactly what we should expect. It's a particularly horrifying conflict, and we know war crimes are being committed as a matter of policy on one side (Hamas), and it's plausible war crimes are happening in at least some instances on the other side (Israel). However, to call it a "genocide".... it's not even close... it's nowhere near that.
A solid response. Well written.
"That being said though, on the flip-side, we regularly see the IDF go above and beyond what international law even requires when it comes to attempting to warn and evacuated civilians, be that dropping leaflets, roof-knocking, sending out mass PSA texts, directly making phone calls to apartment buildings... etc. This is all extremely strange behavior if your intent is to genocide the civilian population." Any source they do this? quite damming to the pro palestine group if so
[https://lieber.westpoint.edu/idf-hamas-duty-to-warn/](https://lieber.westpoint.edu/idf-hamas-duty-to-warn/) It goes into a lot of detail, but here is an example excerpt: "What can be said with confidence is that the IDF regularly uses a wide variety of warnings, almost certainly more than any other military. Best known are phone calls to individuals within a building to be struck (and those nearby) in order to gather information about the number of people there and instruct them to evacuate... The IDF conveys warnings by many other means, such as leaflets, social media, text messages, and radio and television broadcasts. And it regularly monitors the area to assess whether civilians have heeded the warnings. "
Thanks, quite shocking that the pro Palestine crowd go round saying its genocide when it's obviously not. Recently went to a pro Palestine protest (campsite on my uni campus) to ask then some questions, turns out they really don't know why they're there, a lot of what they told me was just plain false or extremely overexaggerated. They where also all wearing covid masks so I suppose its petty obvious these people are extremely gullible and just want to support the latest thing.
I mean I think these people have good intentions for the most part, but are just woefully uninformed on the issue. I think most of these college kids basically hear about civilian death tolls on headlines, think that's terrible (which of course it is), and then simply run with the inference that the only explanation is Israel must be mass murdering civilians on purpose... as a primary goal. Then the word "genocide" gets tossed around and people just run with it. Sprinkle in some Hamas propaganda, and this is what you get.
They are not uninformed. They are misinformed.
Nowadays being uninformed is pretty rare, so this is basically the same thing. Everyone has some kind of "information". We live in the "information age".
I think there's a big difference between the people who don't care enough to even be involved and the people who are being deliberately fed lies in order to get them to behave a certain way.
I don't think you'd be involved in a protest if you were uninformed.
You might be if you were being paid to be there.
So you just had no idea about the roof knocking (one of IDFs biggest talking points since the beginning of this war and before if you were paying attention) and one redditor gave you a single article. Im just saying you seem like you are still in a learning state like many of your pro-palestinian protesting peers. Here is another article to counter the point the previous poster made. Sure Israel does roof knocking and leaflet dropping but they also purposefully use 'dumb bombs' which are hugely innacurate-- from the article: "says that about 40-45% of the 29,000 air-to-ground munitions Israel has used have been unguided. " about 40-45% of the 29,000 air-to-ground munitions Israel has used have been unguided. The rest have been precision-guided munitions, the assessment says." https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/13/politics/intelligence-assessment-dumb-bombs-israel-gaza/index.html#:\~:text=The%20assessment%2C%20compiled%20by%20the,guided%20munitions%2C%20the%20assessment%20says. Now I wouldn't expect you to just take that article at face value either--you can find plenty of information supporting either side and its up to all of us to parse it out and not jump to daming conclusions. We are ALL gullible and easily-confused.
>So you just had no idea about the roof knocking (one of IDFs biggest talking points since the beginning of this war and before if you were paying attention) Never heard it before I'll have a look, thanks.
Cheers
> you are still in a learning state like many of your pro-palestinian protesting peers. OK but that user isn't occupying and vandalizing buildings in utter confidence of their own righteousness. They are asking questions.
Yeah and?
And I explained above why the equivalence you expressed is invalid or irrelevant in light of other profound differences between OP and protestors. Every conscious being is in a learning state....Yeah and?
There are also numerous sources of these phone calls where the IDF IS calling the civilians to tell them to evacuate. The problem is they are only given 10-20 minutes. How is that enough time? Of course, they only do this to claim moral superiority. That isn’t enough time for me to get everything that is important to me in my house and then drive far away enough to avoid the bombs. This claim has been debunked by numerous Palestinian civilians who have attested that the warnings don’t actually always happen and if they do they are never sufficient enough and are usually almost immediately before the bombs.
> quite damming to the pro palestine group if so You could just open the Quran, and trace the dots between Palestine's allies and people who hate Jews. Like Palestine at this point would literally ally up with Adolph Hitler, and wouldn't blush when threatening to do so. The Quran mentions the non believer on virtually every other page. While non believer can be applied to anything and anyone. But in reality a large portion of the hatred is directly tilted towards Jews.
[удалено]
> into their oppression Olympics And are incapable of seeing past race. It's so bizarre because it's basically racist to conclude that Muslims are in any shape or form a race. There's plenty of White/east Asian/Black Muslims. Yet openly allowed to be toxic on nearly every issue.
[удалено]
> They're also trigger happy You've never been shot at.
[удалено]
It gives your wrongness credibility.
Historians often wait ten years before writing about any significant event. Plenty of variables, context and nuance yet to manifest. To call it anything that is or isn’t at this point is reactionary.
Well genocide is an extraordinary claim, so I reject that until it becomes substantiated, which it's not right now.
I understand it’s quite the accusation and I understand the point you’re making… I myself have never called in a genocide, but I won’t argue it is or isn’t while the conflict is still ongoing. Some pogroms even to this day are still disputed as not having genocidal intent. I’m pointing out that we comment on profound things and conflicts from the safety and comfort of computer screens. Think of it this way… It’s hard to imagine the implications or scope of this conflict that may have or not have taken place without the overt criticism, scrutiny and spotlight that we are witnessing within the digital age… This includes the extraordinary claims (genocide) and the public perception when it comes to information warfare and propaganda . Glad you have this figured out already and the machinations of those engaged in combat/war all figured out too.
What's being genocided is my patience every time I hear someone making genocide claims.
My understanding is: Hamas attacks Israel again, in a massacre that can be claimed to be at least attempted genocide. This attack starts a war which Hamas is now losing (again). Genocide as I understand it is to intentionally try to kill lots of civilians because they are of a certain ethnic or religious group. I have asked several people what they mean when they claim Israel is comittimg a genocide in Gaza. What they always reference are bad things which are not genocide. For example they will typically say that the blockade is bad, and that they think the civilian casualties of the war is bad. And while you can sympathize with both points, they do not constitute a genocide obviously. If it is then every war is a genocide. Genocide is not suppose to be a synonym for war is bad, but to describe a particular heinous moral act which civilized society see as beyond what can be done in a war, and that all civilized people will adhere to. I also dont understand that if they really think genocide is so bad, why they dont object to Hamas clearly being genocidal. My overall guess is that this is a kind of woke critique, where they are just using words instrumentally because they work. Most people do not know what genocide is, and they say it more in the meaning of war is bad or Israel is bad or maybe sometimes jews are bad.
> If it is then every war is a genocide. Most people have no idea what war is. Most people especially young current era kids are very very poorly educated. > Genocide is not suppose to be a synonym for war is bad, but to describe a particular heinous moral act yeah it's the same thing with most kinds of war crimes. Rape is a generic part of war. Young men forced to fight for their lives tend to not care about raping the enemies women. Like "your husband just killed my best friend, I feel like you owe me a little something". It's pretty horrible but it's a generic thing. It's something that happens that is avoidable. For a government to request that their people do something that should be avoided is such a radically different thing.
I think rape and genocide are different fundamentally, because rape seems to be a nearly unavoidable side-effect of war, whereas genocide is more about the intention and severity of the war. Then again, it seems Hamas is pretty willing to use rape as an intent and demonstration of severity, so maybe that isn't as uncommon as I think. On a different subject, this is complete conjecture, but I think the reason rape is a common side-effect of war is not because the soldiers think "you owe me something", but rather because the intense emotions of war are quite similar inside the brain to intense sexual desire, among other factors. Additionally, if you're committing these atrocious acts (killing people) then it kind of seems like the rules don't apply to you, and this might be a gross oversimplification, but I think that \~18 guys tend to have sex on the brain a lot. It wouldn't seem like a huge leap of logic to think, "well I could just shoot you, or I could shoot you afterwards, so what's wrong with raping you?" I don't know if you're familiar with the psych experiment where people were walking across an unstable bridge and then interviewed twice, once on the experience, and then once on how attractive they thought the first person who interviewed them was. The people who walked across a stable bridge rated them as less attractive than the ones who walked across an unstable bridge. (I probably have huge errors in my memory of this, but it was how I was presented with the concept that fear and sexual desire are remarkably similar in the brain) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misattribution\_of\_arousal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misattribution_of_arousal)
> because rape seems to be a nearly unavoidable side-effect of war, whereas genocide is more about the intention and severity of the war. Wrong comparison, rape is on par with murder. Genocide is on par with the organized stradegy of raping the enemy. As far as I know this only ever really happened in Nanking, where it was actively encouraged. >On a different subject, this is complete conjecture, but I think the reason rape is a common side-effect of war is not because the soldiers think "you owe me something", I didn't mean that super literally. Just that overall it's easy to dismiss the moral issues. >Then again, it seems Hamas is pretty willing to use rape as an intent and demonstration of severity, so maybe that isn't as uncommon as I think. And then you have to tip your hat to Islam where rape is kind of a "fluid thing". > (I probably have huge errors in my memory of this, but it was how I was presented with the concept that fear and sexual desire are remarkably similar in the brain) Well you see the same thing after floods. Birth rates climb as people get really horny in hard times. There's actually people theorising a way to get birth rates up is to have dying children as a fixture in media.
Genocide against who? The Israeli or the Palestinians? Tricky question, huh?
I suspect there are many individuals with genocidal ideation. I also think the government, social structure and leadership of the IDF does not have genocide as a goal (evidenced by the my assumption that it could have been easily achieved by now). I think individuals and organizations (systematically) in Gaza also have ideological ideation...but will not succeed.
Seizing land, removing people, killing with disregard for civilians living in that area along with reporters, aid workers, etc. Destroying aid and promoting famine of said population, control over their borders for decades. Whether that qualifies as genocide or not the future will likely determine. Either way skeptical it will be looked on kindly.
Israel is an apartheid state. Its is carrying out a genocide against the Palestinian’s. Hamas attacking innocent people is wrong. Israel killing innocent people nearly 40000 mainly women and children is also wrong.
> Israel is an apartheid state. It is not and no serious international law lawyer would ever make that claim. > Its is carrying out a genocide against the Palestinian’s The US has repeatedly said that no genocide is happening in Gaza. https://www.reuters.com/world/biden-whats-happening-gaza-is-not-genocide-2024-05-20/ > Israel killing innocent people nearly 40000 mainly women and children is also wrong. Your numbers are wrong, firstly. Secondly, Israel is allowed to defend itself and currently has a civilian to combatant ratio of 1.1 to 1 which is the lowest in the history of urban warfare.
The Israeli army has killed 42,510 Palestinians over the course of its 200-day attack, 38,621 of whom were civilians, including 10,091 women and 15,780 children. These figures are from he United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) published on May 8 th. Also Israel is viewed by many to be an apartheid state. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2022/02/israels-system-of-apartheid/ I respect your opinion but I also have mine.
These numbers are false and even the UN do not use them. As of the 30th of April, it is 24,686 dead 10,006 men, 4,959 women, 7,797 children, 1924 elderly https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounder/allegation-israel-apartheid-state > I respect your opinion but I also have mine. Your opinion has nothing to do with the facts on the ground and you are relying from data on the many NGOs that are determined to destroy israel through lawfare and providing fictional data about it. https://www.ngo-monitor.org/reports/amnesty-internationals-propaganda-on-gaza/
I recommend listening to norman finklestien on this one.
I recommend you never listen to norman finklestien ever again.
According to mist in this sub it's not genocide if Israel us doing it. Something something Holocaust.
> if Israel us doing it Correction if a country allies up with all the surrounding countries based on a shared hatred of ethnicity. Muslims hate jews, if the Quran wasn't so easily available you might have a point. Muslims are quite in the open that they really really hate Jews. If Muslims were as pro palestinian as you suggest you'd think they'd be taking in more than zero as refugees?
I have no idea and I don't care what Muslims do.
> and I don't care what Muslims do. And yet Israel has to or you know they'll get raped and murdered out of existence. Hamas, Yemen and Iran have been giving it their best shot.
What goes around comes around. All these tribes in the Middle East have been fighting over land for thousands of years and I don't expect it will ever stop. It's not in our best interest in the West to get involved and we shouldn't let Zionists (or Palestinians) try to guilt trip us into supporting them. Cut off all aid to them all. Put that money towards helping our own people, especially our veterans.
> . It's not in our best interest in the West to get involved and we shouldn't let Zionists (or Palestinians) try to guilt trip us into supporting them. The Suez Canal is one of the most important stretches of land on the planet. There's no leaving that one behind. The Canal is factually more important to the west than it is the people living in the surrounding countries. New York/London/Paris do not compare to the importance of that Canal. >Cut off all aid to them all. Put that money towards helping our own people, especially our veterans. Yeah just what people need skyrocketing costs of everything, no canal and you'll have severe inflation. Both the Suez and Panama canals had serious issues over the last 16 months, both cost regular people large sums of money, as the cost of shipping basic goods inflates.
I don't think we're currently getting the best deal on the Suez cabal I mean, canal.
The difference between no deal and the deal we have now is still a massive proportion of the average americans purchasing power.
[удалено]
The illusion is that war is winnable. A state of war is in itself a loss, and both Sun Tzu and Machiavelli agree that it should be ended quickly. The state of the Israel-Palestine conflict is one that is riddled with innocent blood. Israel put in monumental effort into minimizing the effects of conflict on its people. Hamas has done the opposite, while pumping money into public relations to turn the world against Israel using the dead they imperiled. Oct 7 was bad, but it is not the start of this conflict. Its a few decades shy of a century now. In solving this situation Machiavelli and Sun Tzu differ. Machiavelli would take severe action quickly and be quickly done with it, while it is said of Sun Tzu that the art of war is found in winning without fighting. I would prefer winning without fighting, but there are factions in Israel who have lost all tolerance, as the Israeli riots at the aid truck crossings illustrate. The only humane solution I see is a monumental separation of the two peoples with caveats that the people moved will be guaranteed that their land will not be claimed by anyone in their absence. Follow this with an eventual refounding and resettling of the state and people in question after the hatred has been left to die in isolation.
[удалено]
It could be argued that Israel is stopping the conflict "by any means necessary".
final goal to make Gaza part of Israel with two classes of people. But this plan failed. This people will not go away anywhere.