Evidence of Israel's unlawful use of white phosphorus in southern Lebanon as cross-border hostilities escalate
amnesty.org
The Israeli army fired artillery shells containing white phosphorus, an incendiary weapon, in military operations along Lebanon’s southern border between 10 and 16 October 2023.
You are viewing a single comment
Define genocide then detail with trustworthy sources why this meets it.
I'm tired of people pontificating that this is genocide who cannot even define what genocide is. The other side are those that can define genocide but fully trust Hamas sources while distrusting Western sources.
... You dolt
From the UN:
The popular understanding of what constitutes genocide tends to be broader than the content of the norm under international law. Article II of the Genocide Convention contains a narrow definition of the crime of genocide, which includes two main elements:
A mental element: the "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such"; and
A physical element, which includes the following five acts, enumerated exhaustively:
Killing members of the group
https://www.timesofisrael.com/palestinian-shot-dead-by-settler-while-harvesting-olives-in-west-bank-report/
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/26/world/middleeast/gaza-death-toll-israel.html
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-middle-east-67262375
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group
https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/10/1143017
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/31/west-bank-palestinian-villages-israeli-army-settlers
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/17/crisis-gaza-why-food-water-power-running-out
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the groupForcibly transferring children of the group to another groupThere's a few from Al Jazeera but to prevent collective screeching i left it out.
Wow you can’t just bring up some made up noname nonsense like the UN, they’re antisemitic terrorists!
I only trust real sources like Israeli newspapers.
It stand for Unknown News-source. How can Hamas do this
There UN source simply defines them at war, not genocide. Name a war that did not produce suffering. The UN source does not show that they are intentionally targeting a people, just that they are suffering as they target the elected Hamas government.
Elected how many years ago? What was the average age in Gaza, again?
If we want to talk about elected governments, the genocidal Israeli government has much more legitimacy in claiming it represents it's constituents.
Literally no one is questioning Israel's legitimacy in government except Hamas. Nobody here in this thread is anyway.
You still missed the point though as they are not doing collective punishment. Collateral damage is not collective punishment.
The point was you keep mentioning Hamas as an elected government even though that is laughable at this point, whereas the people of Israel seem to be pretty on board with genocide.
As for collective punishment, I think the entire population of Gaza has been suffering collective punishment for years, but certainly the moment Israel cut off food, power, and water they were engaging in collective punishment. Like really obviously, you'd have to be either really dumb or really dishonest to say otherwise.
He’s Israeli, it’s in his material interests to pretend his country isn’t doing exactly what they publicly admit they’re doing.
I agree that Hamas should not be the government of Palestine and that the people would have difficulty removing them even if they wanted them gone. Who do you suggest should do it? I still do not understand what the legitimacy of the Israeli government has to do with the legitimacy of the Palestinian one.
Israel is at war right now. Certainly, the literal laws have changed to that of armed conflict. Making claims against it that do not cite international laws that they are signatory to are irrelevant. I don't think understanding the legal status of the conflict is me being dumb or dishonest. It certainly shows that I may not be talking on the same level of education or experience. That's the funny thing about the internet. You never really know exactly who or what you are talking to.
Hamas became the leadership in Gaza because Isreal funded religious extremism that became Hamas to oppose the PLO, part of which was the secular democratic socialist Fatah party led by Yassar Arafat.
Isreal is responsible for the violence and more violence will not end this conflict unless genocide is the goal.
So, that's why relations immediately soured between them when the election was over? There is no possibility at all that what you are saying was the intended result or effect of Israel even if true.
This narrative is also completely fabricated to decrease Palistinian autonomy. Yasser Arafat's death is largely considered to be what caused the instability. Your narrative only works to continue the narrative that the Palistinians should not have a sovereign state more than any distrust of Israel.
isnt that's hamas's goal though? they want to drive Israeli into the sea and create a new arab caliphate. not going to get there without massive genocide.
In time of fighting demon, one should take note not to turn into demon themselves because by then we will have two demon.
I guess they didnt pay attention in class
Based on those definitions, what Israel went through is considered genocide against them and multiple times including the recent attacks as they absolutely targeted Israeli civilians.
This is an overly broad definition and includes literally every war ever. Air strikes against seemingly military targets that end up not being military targets does not constitute genocide. Not by a long shot.
Your UN article simply states that there is suffering. Name a single war where that wasn't the case. Is all war genocide? Your other articles simply define that they are at war in response to a massive terrorist attack. That is not genocide by this definition as it does not define the difference between a justified defensive war and a genocide.
Israel was at war the second they were attacked. War is not pretty. It is not genocide. You would be far better off scoping your argument outside of the confines of the current conflict as they were attacked by an elected organization by Palestine.
Yes.
Yes, that's literally what the Geneva Conventions is about.
One casualty, no. Twenty casualty, no, but that might be a war crime. Eight thousands casualty and rising, including hostages, that is a large group. It include targeting refugee camp, place of worship that house refugees, hospital, evacuation route, that is genocide.
Terrible argument because that's not how genocide is defined, 0 point for the mental gymnastic. Genocide is a motive, not all war is genocide. But yes, a lot of war tend to consist the element of genocide because of one stronger group trying to eliminate a weaker group, including Israel - Palestine conflict, where Israel has been oppressing Palestine for decades.
Apply the context of the article to the definition of genocide.
Genocide did not define whether it's defensive nor offensive, nor the Geneva Conventions give a shit about how you think it should be. As it stand, being the defensive party does not give them any right to commit the atrocity they're currently doing.
Using your line of thinking, Hamas is not genocidal group because war is not pretty.
And in return, they murdered 8000 non-combatant of the people that they successfully dehumanised, just like all the conflict they have with Palestine for decades.
Holocaust Denial Trope also detailed on what people do to deny the holocaust, but lets swap some letter:
HolocaustPalestinian Genocide Have Been ExaggeratedJewsHamas Invented theHolocaustPalestinian Genocide for Financial and Political GainHolocaustPalestinian Genocide is aZionistHamas Political ToolJewsPalestinian are Responsible for Their Own PersecutionWouldn't be too far off from what is happening today.
The key difference to your last paragraph and the current situation is the trustworthiness of the narrative. Hamas has been shown time and time again to show complete disregard to the truth when they make claims of war crimes and civilians killed by Israel. I am sorry that you have any trust in them at all but you should validate your sources. Every militant struck is claimed to be a civilian. Every single one.
Are you saying of the 8700 death, all of them are combatant? Or are you saying it's okay to kill 100 non-combatant to get to that 1 combatant? How many combatant were kill? Do you have any source to claim otherwise? Or is it all out from your own ass?
It's funny when a genocide denial trying to argue about genocide denial trope, they fit right into it.
I'm saying that you literally cannot trust the things they say and it's been proven more often than not. It's extremely well documented.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/10/24/hamas-israel-death-toll-health-ministry-trustworthy-reuters/
https://www.google.com/amp/s/time.com/3035937/gaza-israel-hamas-palestinian-casualties/%3famp=true
"Over a year later, after the news media had moved on, Hamas Interior Minister Fathi Hammad enumerated Hamas fatalities at 600 to 700, a figure close to the Israeli estimate of 709 and about three times higher than the figure of 236 combatants provided by PCHR in 2009 and cited in the Goldstone Report."
It is immensely consistent over time and they do it because it works.
https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-war-gaza-health-ministry-health-death-toll-59470820308b31f1faf73c703400b033
Fact still remain about half of that casualty is civilian in that conflict. 700 civilian. Fact still remain that the disregard of Israel toward the civilian is always consistent in their assault.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/camera-committee-for-accuracy-in-middle-east-reporting-and-analysis/
Sure, a media that mark all Palestinian as terrorist, we should listen to that.
But here you're just moving the goal post.
Genocide: the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group.
See the
blown up hospital, the blown up camp, the thousands of dead Palestinian civilians, the refugees bombed while trying to use the designated route out, or maybe just the leaked report with details of Israel's plan to ethically cleanse Palestinians in Gaza.Or, idk, just open your fucking eyes. You have to either be a fucking moron or intentionally ignorant, to both be aware of what's happening over there and still think it's not genocide.
Keep your head in the sand if you want. Fucking moron.
Edit: I'll concede on the hospital. Anyone care to refute my other points, or maybe touch on today's (11/1) bombing of the refugee camp?
The one Palestinian forced blew up? That's still standing?
See everyone else's comments on how inaccurate your statements are. We are not the ones with our heads in the sand. Stop trusting Palestinian government sources. It's literally Hamas. There's a reason that they beat the Israelis to the narrative. They do not validate their information. They say whatever makes Israel look bad, no matter what the truth is.
This is exactly the shit people are talking about. Palestine blew up a gathering of people at that hospital, then everyone just takes Palestine's word for it and yells at Israel for something Palestine did.
ftfy
The elected government of Palestine, Hamas. Yes, that organization. Yet they still are targeting Hamas instead of intentionally enacting collective punishment.
Ftfy
Israel is at war. Collective punishment is no longer a relevant claim. They have declared war on the government of Palestine, Hamas. They are no longer in competition and are no longer attempting to use these controls to prevent violence. There is nothing illegal or genocidal about it right now while they conduct literal war.
Geneva Conventions is literally the treaty meant for oversee war and prevent war crime. You're speaking out from your ass again.
Cite from it then. You didn't mention it before. Genocide is defined in far more than just the multiple Geneva conventions and so far no one has shown an understanding of it. Cite from it.
No, i already cite mine on another comment, YOU cite your source for your claim first. If you said it isn't genocide, then cite your source to counter mine instead of talking from your ass, like genocide-denial always do.
The burden of proof is on the claim maker. Kindly prove that you are not a robot made by fairies in Mordor if you think the burden of proof is otherwise.
You claimed this:
Now cite your source.
You want me to cite a source that says that you are allowed to conduct collateral damage and attack supply lines while at war? That burden of proof is still on you. Nothing in the Geneva Conventions forbids it.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity-crimes/Doc.34_AP-I-EN.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi524K1oqWCAxU5lGoFHcJQCt0QFnoECDYQAQ&usg=AOvVaw2_QT30xBqnzFxMi476FkEu