I'm not going to ascribe any moral grading to these NK soldiers, for all I know they were forced to deploy against their will, or maybe they volunteered.
Either way, it doesn't matter. They were active participants in a conflict, and deployed within a war zone. That means they were legitimate military targets to be killed, or captured.
I hate this fictional couple already. Despite the fact that they're clearly upper middle class and educated, they're too lazy to capitalize "I", or his name.
Cases of genocide brought before the ICJ aren't based on Merriam-Webster, or the Cambridge Dictionary...
They use ratified international agreements, such as the CPPCG
Yes, the plain text of the international treaties that define genocide...
Or feeling like you're 35-40, when you're 70.
I'm not going to read the article, because I don't care enough to know about the biochemical mechanics at the moment, but it doesn't sound unreasonable to expect that medical science will continue to find new ways to extend the average lifespan, and quality of life, relatively speaking.
Whether or not this treatment will help in that, I don't know.
Did you really just say that if the indigenous inhabitants simply left their homes and wandered into the desert, then Israel wouldn't be forced to commit a genocide?
That's a curious new benchmark for posting comments and opinions on this subject. You can only do so if you also have case files and evidence to forward to local prosecutors and police of crimes in your area.
You just described a genocide, like one of the plain text definitions of a genocide. Mass murdering a group of people to steal their land.
Doesn't matter that you've made up a hypothetical fantasy scenario where they aren't caged in cornered, but have free movement, it's still a genocide.
Oh, and they aren't free to leave, they are caged and cornered.
So you're wrong, and you're wrong again.