3 ms·
> Walling off a population into a small area so you can control the people trapped inside is an occupation via any definition that matters. Having a wall on yo
by dismalaf 2y ago
> Walling off a population into a small area so you can control the people trapped inside is an occupation via any definition that matters.
Having a wall on your border is perfectly acceptable. Gazans were even allowed to work in Israel and many did (unfortunately lots of them provided intel to Hamas for Oct 7).
And no, having a wall isn't the definition of occupation.
- ceejayoz 2y ago> Having a wall on your border is perfectly acceptable. Sure. Israel goes further; they demolished the airport in 2002, have blockaded the port since 2007, and by treaty control access even via the Egyptian crossings (which they currently physically occupy as well). > And no, having a wall isn't the definition of occupation. Correct, but that wasn't my assertion. Control of the population within that wall makes it an occupation. It's the same difference between "I'm gonna wrap up in a blanket and stay in tonight" and "I'm under house arrest". > Gazans were even allowed to work in Israel... That doesn't necessarily make you free. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schindlerjuden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schindlerjuden "survived the years of the Nazi regime primarily through the intervention of Schindler, who afforded them protected status as industrial workers at his enamelware factory in Kraków". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_labor_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_labor_in_the_United_Stat... "provide services valued at $9 billion annually and produce over $2 billion in goods".