9 ms·

Is This Genocide?

82 points by whack 9y ago

throwaway5752 9y ago
Yes, obviously. It's obvious in the first paragraph. Why isn't the article called, the "The Rohingya Genocide". Didn't we learn anything from Rwanda?
- warent 9y ago
  My guess is that if you say "The Rohingya Genocide" then readers will assume it's a history lesson and skip the article. Whereas "Is This Genocide?" encourages readers to investigate on their own, hopefully educating more people in general
  - l8again 9y ago
    Hmmm.. Thanks for this perspective. It was quite lost on me, but maybe if it worked for you, it did for others too.
- l8again 9y ago
  Exactly what I was thinking. By putting a question mark in the title is taking away from the urgency of the situation. You really have to wonder?
- Someone 9y ago
  The USA ratified the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_Convention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_Convention. That makes Washington loath in using the word. So, the New York Times isn’t doubting this is genocide; it is asking Washington to acknowledge it and take action (http://www.economist.com/node/18772664 http://www.economist.com/node/18772664: As Samantha Power, an author who works for President Barack Obama, has disclosed, a paper by a Pentagon official urged caution in using the G-word: “Be careful …Genocide finding could commit [the government] to actually do something.”) I can’t find a reference, but I think there is a more recent, stronger statement by the USA that requires them to take action as soon as politics declares something as genocide anywhere in the world.
jkolem2 9y ago
How do we pressure our governments to do something? The US and EU already ban weapons sales to Myanmar but other countries are happy to step in and profit in their place, e.g. Israel providing training and selling weapons and vehicles to the very troops carrying out this genocide.
- adventured 9y ago
  Generally speaking, in cases like this, you have to actually physically intervene to stop the genocide. They're using machettes and other primitive means to do much of the killing, as in other genocide cases in very poor nations (like Rwanda or Cambodia). Sanctions are never enough against what are already extraordinarily poor nations (we've sanctioned North Korea for decades, as much as any nation can be, and they're proceeding apace with ICBM nukes). The question of stopping this kind of genocide is primarily: who is going to militarily intervene and in what manner.
- kurosaki1990 9y ago
  edited.
  - krapp 9y ago
    Please start making comments which have some intellectual substance or effort behind them, if you don't want to be quickly banned. Otherwise, if you only want to vent your spleen onto the internet without consequence, I'm sure you know where /pol/ is.
rubayeet 9y ago
What many do not realize that this crisis, while regional, has the potential to fuel global conflicts in near future. There are roughly 5 million refugees in Bangladesh at present, a country which itself has poor infrastructure and struggling under the weight of its over population. A large number of these refugees are children and young adults, who saw their villages burned, family members raped and killed. They will be easy prey to Jihadist propaganda. They will be recruited by extremist groups, they will commit atrocities in the name of revenge/religion, which in turn will increase the anti-muslim sentiments around the world. Nationalists and ultra-right leaders will use this as a platform to rise to power.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- kurosaki1990 9y ago
  This is how ISIS was created after USA terrorise Muslims in the region raping, killing.
  - adventured 9y ago
    That's incorrect. ISIS was created out of a power vacuum in the region, between the US being asked to leave Iraq and the Iraqi Government becoming strong enough to control its own security fully, and the Syrian civil war. Their creation had absolutely nothing to do with US military abuses of that sort (which is not the same thing as denying any such abuses took place), that's not even a very good attempt at scapegoating its creation. ISIS is just another in a very long line of warlord-type regimes that exist out of opportunism to seize power. There's nothing special about it. It's extremely similar to the types of factions that have dominated countries like Afghanistan for a thousand years.
    - fao_ 9y ago
      > Their creation had absolutely nothing to do with US military abuses of that sort (which is not the same thing as denying any such abuses took place), that's not even a very good attempt at scapegoating its creation. Actually, almost all of the ISIS higher-ups were radicalised within a US-run prisoner camp[0][1][2][3][4]. Many of the ISIS milita are US-trained soldiers whose funding got pulled, so of course, they went to the nearest employer. So yes, it absolutely is because of US abuses. If the US had run the camp correctly, there would have been no opportunity for the prisoners to radicalise one another. If the US had handled withdrawing properly, the militia wouldn't have gone to ISIS. Sure, it's not 100% the fault of the US, but to say that it has nothing to do with the US is just plain ignorant. [0]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/11/-sp-isis-the-inside-story https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/11/-sp-isis-the-i... [1]: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/camp-bucca-the-us-prison-that-became-the-birthplace-of-isis-9838905.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/camp-buc... [2]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/11/04/how-an-american-prison-helped-ignite-the-islamic-state/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/11/0... [3]: https://nypost.com/2015/05/30/how-the-us-created-the-camp-where-isis-was-born/ https://nypost.com/2015/05/30/how-the-us-created-the-camp-wh... [4]: https://www.unilad.co.uk/news/how-a-u-s-prison-camp-in-iraq-accidentally-formed-isis/ https://www.unilad.co.uk/news/how-a-u-s-prison-camp-in-iraq-...
canadian_voter 9y ago
I highly recommend the 2017 Massey Lecture that deals with genocide and the history of human rights. It's called In Search of a Better World by human rights lawyer Payam Akhavan. Listen to the whole thing for free[1] or check out the book[2]. [1] http://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/lecture-1-in-search-of-a-better-world-by-payam-akhavan-2017-cbc-massey-lectures-1.4389360 http://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/lecture-1-in-search-of-a-bette... [2] https://houseofanansi.com/products/in-search-of-a-better-world https://houseofanansi.com/products/in-search-of-a-better-wor...
VeronicaJJ123 9y ago
I have worked very closely with various Hindu and Buddhist groups and one Pakistani Muslim group. After observing many issues I realized that Muslim world has heavily invested in US politics through various means. I have sympathies for all refugees but tales that NYT has been telling is extremely one sided. This sort of biased reporting comes because Saudi and Pakistan invest into cultivating the journalists and think tanks. Sadly, activists on the ground can see this far too easily and they develop an adverse opinion about Muslims, even those who genuinely need our help. SJW and keyboard warriors will read NYT piece and feel sad but most of the activists on the ground will see this and only cringe at NYT. Biased media reporting hurts the cause of these refugees.
fsloth 9y ago
I've never cried by reading a news story but this one pushed me over the edge. I'm a 37 year old cynical bastard and I'm crying like a baby. 2017. Oh dear lord, no, we don't have flying cars yet but the genocides are doing just fine, thank you. Fuck.
vondur 9y ago
We are just arguing over semantics. It’s pure evil and needs to stop. I’m sure the US could intervene, but we’d need far more media coverage to generate outrage. Clinton was able to do it in the Balkans, but you’d need to convince the current administration to get a involved.
- Mikeb85 9y ago
  Babies in incubaters anyone? Not like it hasn't been done before... Outrage is easier to generate than proof.
  - vondur 9y ago
    I also didn’t consider that China would probably not be happy with the US in their backyard.
  - tptacek 9y ago
    I don't know what this even means. Proof of what? Which argument are you making now? That it's all "fake genocide"? Or that these people deserve it because they're "jihadis"?
    - Mikeb85 9y ago
      My comment is in reference to fake eyewitness testimony of atrocities which was used as justification to invade a country. Google 'babies in incubaters' and it should be clear.
      - tptacek 9y ago
        None of the results for this search had anything to do with the Rohingya Genocide. Things aren't false just because you want them to be. Every sane person wants these stories to be false. They are not.
        Mikeb85 9y ago
        It's a well known event in the lead-up to the original US invasion of Iraq. If you don't get why it's relevant then no point having a discussion.
thomas_howland 9y ago
I have no idea why an American should care one iota about some abstruse ethnic conflict literally on the other side of the world. You are spectacularly unlikely to be able to figure out based on thirdhand reporting who is metaphysically in the right, if there is such a party, and almost anything you do is likely to make the situation worse.
- AckSyn 9y ago
  We, as Americans, should employ more of a hands-off policy with the rest of the world. Playing "team America world police" is a drain on our resources and efforts - and above all absolutely needless. I don't care one whit what happens out there but from all 'boots on the ground' accounts, Myanmar is responding to long (years/decades) tolerated abuses by "refugees" by getting rid of them. If you're pissing off monks enough that they're moved to eradicate you from their lands, you've seriously screwed up.
Mikeb85 9y ago
The problem is that this 'genocide' hasn't been verified to be true. Survivors describe atrocities, yet none are verified by any sort of observer or independent source. The Rohingya have been waging jihad on Myanmar for 60 years, having initially tried to annex Rakhine state to join then East Pakistan, and have been involved in attacking Burmese civilians as well as police recently. To start a large scale conflict and intervene in Myanmar, some sort of actual proof of genocide should be necessary, no? Every news outlet just plays a merry go round of citing unverified reports and then each other, and no one questions it? Edit - also, the Rohingya have absolutely no motive to lie, right? Not like they've been involved in a jihad and insurrection for 60 years, right? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohingya_insurgency_in_Western_Myanmar https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohingya_insurgency_in_Weste...
- jjevanoorschot 9y ago
  Médecins Sans Frontières actually released a press release [1] two days ago reporting that more than 6,700 Rohingya have been killed in one month. That is their most conservative estimate. MSF does not use the word genocide, but their report points towards it IMO. I find the fact that you're suggesting that the atrocities are being made up by the Rohingya tasteless. Thousands of innocent people are being killed, that can't just be brushed aside because other members of their community have been involved in insurrection. [1]. http://www.msf.org/en/article/myanmarbangladesh-msf-surveys-estimate-least-6700-rohingya-were-killed-during-attacks http://www.msf.org/en/article/myanmarbangladesh-msf-surveys-...
  - Mikeb85 9y ago
    A survey of those in refugee camps in Bangladesh and then extrapolating those survey results to cover the whole population isn't actually proof of anything. They literally did a survey of survivors, they don't have any bodies. So questioning a lack of proof is tasteless, but it's ok to start a conflict or drum up widespread outrage because something might be true? The only reason I question things is because the Rohingya have literally been waging an insurrection for this entire generation's lives, they have ample motive to lie. Also, the MSF survey sample size was 2 thousand people, and they didn't verify any reports, just assumed they were true.
FryHigh 9y ago
Woah! Has to be the most heart wrenching article I’ve read in 2017! Babies and children slaughtered by hand, houses set on fire, in such large scale. The evil that exists in the world is just crazy. I kinda wish I didn’t read the article.
- tboyd47 9y ago
  Don't read the comments, they'll make it even worse.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
tboyd47 9y ago
To all the people saying the woman whose baby daughter was thrown in a fire was lying or the 14 year old girl who was raped by four soldiers was lying, fuck you. > The attack on Tula Toli has been well documented by human rights organizations, including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and Fortify Rights, and it is substantiated by satellite photos showing the burned huts. In all, I spoke to seven people who said they were survivors from Tula Toli, and their stories meshed and cross-confirmed one another.
- tptacek 9y ago
  Ordinarily I'd say a comment like that is inappropriate but "fuck all of this" was the comment I wanted to write immediately after reading this story, so all I've got is sympathy for that position.

82 points by whack 9y ago

Yes, obviously. It's obvious in the first paragraph. Why isn't the article called, the "The Rohingya Genocide". Didn't we learn anything from Rwanda?

warent 9y ago
My guess is that if you say "The Rohingya Genocide" then readers will assume it's a history lesson and skip the article. Whereas "Is This Genocide?" encourages readers to investigate on their own, hopefully educating more people in general
- l8again 9y ago
  Hmmm.. Thanks for this perspective. It was quite lost on me, but maybe if it worked for you, it did for others too.
l8again 9y ago
Exactly what I was thinking. By putting a question mark in the title is taking away from the urgency of the situation. You really have to wonder?
Someone 9y ago
The USA ratified the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_Convention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_Convention. That makes Washington loath in using the word. So, the New York Times isn’t doubting this is genocide; it is asking Washington to acknowledge it and take action (http://www.economist.com/node/18772664 http://www.economist.com/node/18772664: As Samantha Power, an author who works for President Barack Obama, has disclosed, a paper by a Pentagon official urged caution in using the G-word: “Be careful …Genocide finding could commit [the government] to actually do something.”) I can’t find a reference, but I think there is a more recent, stronger statement by the USA that requires them to take action as soon as politics declares something as genocide anywhere in the world.

jkolem2 9y ago

How do we pressure our governments to do something? The US and EU already ban weapons sales to Myanmar but other countries are happy to step in and profit in their place, e.g. Israel providing training and selling weapons and vehicles to the very troops carrying out this genocide.

adventured 9y ago
Generally speaking, in cases like this, you have to actually physically intervene to stop the genocide. They're using machettes and other primitive means to do much of the killing, as in other genocide cases in very poor nations (like Rwanda or Cambodia). Sanctions are never enough against what are already extraordinarily poor nations (we've sanctioned North Korea for decades, as much as any nation can be, and they're proceeding apace with ICBM nukes). The question of stopping this kind of genocide is primarily: who is going to militarily intervene and in what manner.
kurosaki1990 9y ago
edited.
- krapp 9y ago
  Please start making comments which have some intellectual substance or effort behind them, if you don't want to be quickly banned. Otherwise, if you only want to vent your spleen onto the internet without consequence, I'm sure you know where /pol/ is.

rubayeet 9y ago

What many do not realize that this crisis, while regional, has the potential to fuel global conflicts in near future. There are roughly 5 million refugees in Bangladesh at present, a country which itself has poor infrastructure and struggling under the weight of its over population. A large number of these refugees are children and young adults, who saw their villages burned, family members raped and killed. They will be easy prey to Jihadist propaganda. They will be recruited by extremist groups, they will commit atrocities in the name of revenge/religion, which in turn will increase the anti-muslim sentiments around the world. Nationalists and ultra-right leaders will use this as a platform to rise to power.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
kurosaki1990 9y ago
This is how ISIS was created after USA terrorise Muslims in the region raping, killing.
- adventured 9y ago
  That's incorrect. ISIS was created out of a power vacuum in the region, between the US being asked to leave Iraq and the Iraqi Government becoming strong enough to control its own security fully, and the Syrian civil war. Their creation had absolutely nothing to do with US military abuses of that sort (which is not the same thing as denying any such abuses took place), that's not even a very good attempt at scapegoating its creation. ISIS is just another in a very long line of warlord-type regimes that exist out of opportunism to seize power. There's nothing special about it. It's extremely similar to the types of factions that have dominated countries like Afghanistan for a thousand years.
  - fao_ 9y ago
    > Their creation had absolutely nothing to do with US military abuses of that sort (which is not the same thing as denying any such abuses took place), that's not even a very good attempt at scapegoating its creation. Actually, almost all of the ISIS higher-ups were radicalised within a US-run prisoner camp[0][1][2][3][4]. Many of the ISIS milita are US-trained soldiers whose funding got pulled, so of course, they went to the nearest employer. So yes, it absolutely is because of US abuses. If the US had run the camp correctly, there would have been no opportunity for the prisoners to radicalise one another. If the US had handled withdrawing properly, the militia wouldn't have gone to ISIS. Sure, it's not 100% the fault of the US, but to say that it has nothing to do with the US is just plain ignorant. [0]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/11/-sp-isis-the-inside-story https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/11/-sp-isis-the-i... [1]: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/camp-bucca-the-us-prison-that-became-the-birthplace-of-isis-9838905.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/camp-buc... [2]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/11/04/how-an-american-prison-helped-ignite-the-islamic-state/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/11/0... [3]: https://nypost.com/2015/05/30/how-the-us-created-the-camp-where-isis-was-born/ https://nypost.com/2015/05/30/how-the-us-created-the-camp-wh... [4]: https://www.unilad.co.uk/news/how-a-u-s-prison-camp-in-iraq-accidentally-formed-isis/ https://www.unilad.co.uk/news/how-a-u-s-prison-camp-in-iraq-...

canadian_voter 9y ago

I highly recommend the 2017 Massey Lecture that deals with genocide and the history of human rights. It's called In Search of a Better World by human rights lawyer Payam Akhavan. Listen to the whole thing for free[1] or check out the book[2]. [1] http://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/lecture-1-in-search-of-a-better-world-by-payam-akhavan-2017-cbc-massey-lectures-1.4389360 http://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/lecture-1-in-search-of-a-bette... [2] https://houseofanansi.com/products/in-search-of-a-better-world https://houseofanansi.com/products/in-search-of-a-better-wor...

VeronicaJJ123 9y ago

I have worked very closely with various Hindu and Buddhist groups and one Pakistani Muslim group. After observing many issues I realized that Muslim world has heavily invested in US politics through various means. I have sympathies for all refugees but tales that NYT has been telling is extremely one sided. This sort of biased reporting comes because Saudi and Pakistan invest into cultivating the journalists and think tanks. Sadly, activists on the ground can see this far too easily and they develop an adverse opinion about Muslims, even those who genuinely need our help. SJW and keyboard warriors will read NYT piece and feel sad but most of the activists on the ground will see this and only cringe at NYT. Biased media reporting hurts the cause of these refugees.

fsloth 9y ago

I've never cried by reading a news story but this one pushed me over the edge. I'm a 37 year old cynical bastard and I'm crying like a baby. 2017. Oh dear lord, no, we don't have flying cars yet but the genocides are doing just fine, thank you. Fuck.

vondur 9y ago

We are just arguing over semantics. It’s pure evil and needs to stop. I’m sure the US could intervene, but we’d need far more media coverage to generate outrage. Clinton was able to do it in the Balkans, but you’d need to convince the current administration to get a involved.

Mikeb85 9y ago
Babies in incubaters anyone? Not like it hasn't been done before... Outrage is easier to generate than proof.
- vondur 9y ago
  I also didn’t consider that China would probably not be happy with the US in their backyard.
- tptacek 9y ago
  I don't know what this even means. Proof of what? Which argument are you making now? That it's all "fake genocide"? Or that these people deserve it because they're "jihadis"?
  - Mikeb85 9y ago
    My comment is in reference to fake eyewitness testimony of atrocities which was used as justification to invade a country. Google 'babies in incubaters' and it should be clear.
    - tptacek 9y ago
      None of the results for this search had anything to do with the Rohingya Genocide. Things aren't false just because you want them to be. Every sane person wants these stories to be false. They are not.
      - Mikeb85 9y ago
        It's a well known event in the lead-up to the original US invasion of Iraq. If you don't get why it's relevant then no point having a discussion.

thomas_howland 9y ago

I have no idea why an American should care one iota about some abstruse ethnic conflict literally on the other side of the world. You are spectacularly unlikely to be able to figure out based on thirdhand reporting who is metaphysically in the right, if there is such a party, and almost anything you do is likely to make the situation worse.

AckSyn 9y ago
We, as Americans, should employ more of a hands-off policy with the rest of the world. Playing "team America world police" is a drain on our resources and efforts - and above all absolutely needless. I don't care one whit what happens out there but from all 'boots on the ground' accounts, Myanmar is responding to long (years/decades) tolerated abuses by "refugees" by getting rid of them. If you're pissing off monks enough that they're moved to eradicate you from their lands, you've seriously screwed up.

Mikeb85 9y ago

The problem is that this 'genocide' hasn't been verified to be true. Survivors describe atrocities, yet none are verified by any sort of observer or independent source. The Rohingya have been waging jihad on Myanmar for 60 years, having initially tried to annex Rakhine state to join then East Pakistan, and have been involved in attacking Burmese civilians as well as police recently. To start a large scale conflict and intervene in Myanmar, some sort of actual proof of genocide should be necessary, no? Every news outlet just plays a merry go round of citing unverified reports and then each other, and no one questions it? Edit - also, the Rohingya have absolutely no motive to lie, right? Not like they've been involved in a jihad and insurrection for 60 years, right? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohingya_insurgency_in_Western_Myanmar https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohingya_insurgency_in_Weste...

jjevanoorschot 9y ago
Médecins Sans Frontières actually released a press release [1] two days ago reporting that more than 6,700 Rohingya have been killed in one month. That is their most conservative estimate. MSF does not use the word genocide, but their report points towards it IMO. I find the fact that you're suggesting that the atrocities are being made up by the Rohingya tasteless. Thousands of innocent people are being killed, that can't just be brushed aside because other members of their community have been involved in insurrection. [1]. http://www.msf.org/en/article/myanmarbangladesh-msf-surveys-estimate-least-6700-rohingya-were-killed-during-attacks http://www.msf.org/en/article/myanmarbangladesh-msf-surveys-...
- Mikeb85 9y ago
  A survey of those in refugee camps in Bangladesh and then extrapolating those survey results to cover the whole population isn't actually proof of anything. They literally did a survey of survivors, they don't have any bodies. So questioning a lack of proof is tasteless, but it's ok to start a conflict or drum up widespread outrage because something might be true? The only reason I question things is because the Rohingya have literally been waging an insurrection for this entire generation's lives, they have ample motive to lie. Also, the MSF survey sample size was 2 thousand people, and they didn't verify any reports, just assumed they were true.

FryHigh 9y ago

Woah! Has to be the most heart wrenching article I’ve read in 2017! Babies and children slaughtered by hand, houses set on fire, in such large scale. The evil that exists in the world is just crazy. I kinda wish I didn’t read the article.

tboyd47 9y ago
Don't read the comments, they'll make it even worse.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

tboyd47 9y ago

To all the people saying the woman whose baby daughter was thrown in a fire was lying or the 14 year old girl who was raped by four soldiers was lying, fuck you. > The attack on Tula Toli has been well documented by human rights organizations, including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and Fortify Rights, and it is substantiated by satellite photos showing the burned huts. In all, I spoke to seven people who said they were survivors from Tula Toli, and their stories meshed and cross-confirmed one another.

tptacek 9y ago
Ordinarily I'd say a comment like that is inappropriate but "fuck all of this" was the comment I wanted to write immediately after reading this story, so all I've got is sympathy for that position.