Lots of people seem to have learned what “war” is in the last few months and are shocked that it includes large numbers of civilian casualties.
Israel has the equipment and capability to wipe Gaza off the map if they wanted to. If this were an actual genocide and killing Palestinians was the only goal, there would be way, WAY more casualties.
Now, is Israel committing war crimes? Absolutely. So is Hamas. So is nearly any armed group that finds themselves in a conflict. War is brutal and turns men into monsters capable of horrendous things. But this doesn’t fit the definition of genocide and it cheapens the word to try and frame it that way.
It’s “the VAST majority of deaths are innocent civilians”. It’s like if Texas kidnapped 5 random citizens to kill every time someone was given the death sentence. Would you say that’s acceptable because it’s just “collateral damage”?
This is by design on the part of Hamas though. It doesn’t excuse the situation, but it does make it more complicated especially with regard to intent, which has to matter when considering charges of genocide.
Mate if they orchestrated a complete mass murder in an instant, absolutely no one would be able to defend it. This way, people get to just say “well, it’s war”.
Right. Because if their goal was to wipe out all Palestinians, they would of course put all of their efforts and resources towards that without letting international politics affect what they do and how they do it… /s
Lots of people seem to have learned what “war” is in the last few months and are shocked that it includes large numbers of civilian casualties.
Israel has the equipment and capability to wipe Gaza off the map if they wanted to. If this were an actual genocide and killing Palestinians was the only goal, there would be way, WAY more casualties.
Now, is Israel committing war crimes? Absolutely. So is Hamas. So is nearly any armed group that finds themselves in a conflict. War is brutal and turns men into monsters capable of horrendous things. But this doesn’t fit the definition of genocide and it cheapens the word to try and frame it that way.
It’s not “large numbers of civilian casualties”
It’s “the VAST majority of deaths are innocent civilians”. It’s like if Texas kidnapped 5 random citizens to kill every time someone was given the death sentence. Would you say that’s acceptable because it’s just “collateral damage”?
This is by design on the part of Hamas though. It doesn’t excuse the situation, but it does make it more complicated especially with regard to intent, which has to matter when considering charges of genocide.
Mate if they orchestrated a complete mass murder in an instant, absolutely no one would be able to defend it. This way, people get to just say “well, it’s war”.
It’s a genocide. Your point is they could probably be more efficient and obvious about the civilian murder. Therefore, it’s not a genocide.
Your point is moronic.
Right. Because if their goal was to wipe out all Palestinians, they would of course put all of their efforts and resources towards that without letting international politics affect what they do and how they do it… /s
“Everyone warcrimes actually” is a pretty weak take.