4 ms·

> efforts to exterminate the people whose land they're occupying Just because activists say a thing doesn't make it true. You should make more objective factua

> efforts to exterminate the people whose land they're occupying Just because activists say a thing doesn't make it true. You should make more objective factual claims instead of ambiguously defined or made up ones.

jacooper 1y ago
Amnesty and The International Association of Genocide Scholars both called it a genocide. The Un has announced that it's a human made famine. And the ICJ put an arrest Warren against the occupations leader. But sure all of them are wrong and you are right.
- tdeck 1y ago
  Let's not forget Doctors Without Borders (MSF). But many Israel supporters live in a reality distortion field where they're eternal victims and therefore can do no wrong. No amount of well documented war crimes or obvious lies from the Israeli government will make a dent, because Palestinian lives have exactly zero value to them.
- foxglacier 1y ago
  Honestly, they could be. Have you read those sources? Here's something I found from Amnesty International. 6.1.1 DIRECT ATTACKS ON CIVILIANS OR INDISCRIMINATE ATTACKS It lists 15 cases of air strikes which it uses to support its claim of killing/harming members of a group which is part of the definition of genocide. However, all/nearly all of them say "Amnesty International did not find any evidence of a military objective.". So it seems possible Amnesty just doesn't know the secret military information and Israel didn't disclose it to them. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Do you believe there can't possibly have been any military objectives that make those air strikes legitimate? [1] https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/mde15/8668/2024/en/ https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/mde15/8668/2024/en/
  - WastedCucumber 1y ago
    If a state attacks, just for example, civilian hospitals (which typically do not contain valid military targets) then, in my view, the burden of proof lies on the attacking state. Leaving aside, of course, the fact that attacking a civilian hospital, even one that has some military targets in it (say wounded combatants), would also certainly mean killing or injuring many invalid targets, and at that point you should really provide not just evidence of a military target but also evidence that you couldn't attack the target in any other way and that the target is valuable enough to justify the deaths of innocent people. Which Israel has not done, and really, can't do. Because there really aren't many targets worth bombing a hospital for.
    - foxglacier 1y ago
      Well yea if there was a trial. But now it's just a trial by media and guilty until proven innocent. That's not a good way to reach the correct conclusion. Hamas had bases in hospitals. Not just wounded fighters being treated. They stored weapons and housed fighters in them. They also built underground bases directly underneath hospital buildings. They specifically chose hospitals because they thought that would protect them from being attacked but it does make those hospitals a legitimate target.
      - a_paddy 1y ago
        Do you mean the claim that there was a command center under al-Shifa hospital? That was debunked over 18 months ago by multiple sources. None of the attacks on hospitals have been justifiable under the Geneva Conventions. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67453105 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67453105 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/nov/17/idf-evidence-so-far-falls-well-short-of-al-shifa-hospital-being-hamas-hq https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/nov/17/idf-evidence-s...
        foxglacier 1y ago
        Those aren't debunkings, they're "Israel hasn't convinced us yet."s.
  - tdeck 1y ago
    > So it seems possible Amnesty just doesn't know the secret military information and Israel didn't disclose it to them. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Do you believe there can't possibly have been any military objectives that make those air strikes legitimate? We don't know for sure that Hind Rajab wasn't planning attacks when she was supposed to be learning the alphabet either. Maybe she was leading a Hamas cell with a crayon, but the intelligence is too crucial to share! This style of argument is absurd.
    - foxglacier 1y ago
      One person being killed isn't a genocide or extermination.
      - a_paddy 1y ago
        No killing one person is not genocide, it's a murder. Killing 10,000's of women and children from a specific ethnic group, razing a significant percentage of buildings to the ground and forcibly displacing almost 2 million people while using starvation as a weapon of war, that's genocide.
        foxglacier 1y ago
        What else could they have done?
przems 1y ago
Sure, here's an objective factual claim. Over 65000 people were killed by the Israeli "Defense" Forces in Gaza since October 7th. 31% of them were children.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > Over 65000 people were killed by the Israeli "Defense" Forces in Gaza since October 7th. 31% of them were children When “roughly half” of Gaza’s population “are under the age of 18,” your statistic actually describes discretion [1]. As for total kills, the data I’ve seen on CCRs put the IDF’s actions in the precedents range of guerrilla wars. The way the IDF is conducting the war is, unfortunately, normal. What is not normal is the restriction of food, detention conditions and Netanyahu joining the Russia/China/Turkey club (along with Trump) on throwing out international law. [1] https://www.npr.org/2023/10/18/1206897328/half-of-gazas-population-is-under-18-heres-what-that-means-for-the-conflict https://www.npr.org/2023/10/18/1206897328/half-of-gazas-popu...
- foxglacier 1y ago
  Thank you. That's much more constructive and you can see from another reply that people are now able to evaluate and challenge them because they're claims of fact.
grimblee 1y ago
There's plenty of evidence that fact is true, it's not even worth discussing at this point

jacooper 1y ago

Amnesty and The International Association of Genocide Scholars both called it a genocide. The Un has announced that it's a human made famine. And the ICJ put an arrest Warren against the occupations leader. But sure all of them are wrong and you are right.

tdeck 1y ago
Let's not forget Doctors Without Borders (MSF). But many Israel supporters live in a reality distortion field where they're eternal victims and therefore can do no wrong. No amount of well documented war crimes or obvious lies from the Israeli government will make a dent, because Palestinian lives have exactly zero value to them.
foxglacier 1y ago
Honestly, they could be. Have you read those sources? Here's something I found from Amnesty International. 6.1.1 DIRECT ATTACKS ON CIVILIANS OR INDISCRIMINATE ATTACKS It lists 15 cases of air strikes which it uses to support its claim of killing/harming members of a group which is part of the definition of genocide. However, all/nearly all of them say "Amnesty International did not find any evidence of a military objective.". So it seems possible Amnesty just doesn't know the secret military information and Israel didn't disclose it to them. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Do you believe there can't possibly have been any military objectives that make those air strikes legitimate? [1] https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/mde15/8668/2024/en/ https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/mde15/8668/2024/en/
- WastedCucumber 1y ago
  If a state attacks, just for example, civilian hospitals (which typically do not contain valid military targets) then, in my view, the burden of proof lies on the attacking state. Leaving aside, of course, the fact that attacking a civilian hospital, even one that has some military targets in it (say wounded combatants), would also certainly mean killing or injuring many invalid targets, and at that point you should really provide not just evidence of a military target but also evidence that you couldn't attack the target in any other way and that the target is valuable enough to justify the deaths of innocent people. Which Israel has not done, and really, can't do. Because there really aren't many targets worth bombing a hospital for.
  - foxglacier 1y ago
    Well yea if there was a trial. But now it's just a trial by media and guilty until proven innocent. That's not a good way to reach the correct conclusion. Hamas had bases in hospitals. Not just wounded fighters being treated. They stored weapons and housed fighters in them. They also built underground bases directly underneath hospital buildings. They specifically chose hospitals because they thought that would protect them from being attacked but it does make those hospitals a legitimate target.
    - a_paddy 1y ago
      Do you mean the claim that there was a command center under al-Shifa hospital? That was debunked over 18 months ago by multiple sources. None of the attacks on hospitals have been justifiable under the Geneva Conventions. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67453105 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67453105 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/nov/17/idf-evidence-so-far-falls-well-short-of-al-shifa-hospital-being-hamas-hq https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/nov/17/idf-evidence-s...
      - foxglacier 1y ago
        Those aren't debunkings, they're "Israel hasn't convinced us yet."s.
- tdeck 1y ago
  > So it seems possible Amnesty just doesn't know the secret military information and Israel didn't disclose it to them. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Do you believe there can't possibly have been any military objectives that make those air strikes legitimate? We don't know for sure that Hind Rajab wasn't planning attacks when she was supposed to be learning the alphabet either. Maybe she was leading a Hamas cell with a crayon, but the intelligence is too crucial to share! This style of argument is absurd.
  - foxglacier 1y ago
    One person being killed isn't a genocide or extermination.
    - a_paddy 1y ago
      No killing one person is not genocide, it's a murder. Killing 10,000's of women and children from a specific ethnic group, razing a significant percentage of buildings to the ground and forcibly displacing almost 2 million people while using starvation as a weapon of war, that's genocide.
      - foxglacier 1y ago
        What else could they have done?

przems 1y ago

Sure, here's an objective factual claim. Over 65000 people were killed by the Israeli "Defense" Forces in Gaza since October 7th. 31% of them were children.

JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> Over 65000 people were killed by the Israeli "Defense" Forces in Gaza since October 7th. 31% of them were children When “roughly half” of Gaza’s population “are under the age of 18,” your statistic actually describes discretion [1]. As for total kills, the data I’ve seen on CCRs put the IDF’s actions in the precedents range of guerrilla wars. The way the IDF is conducting the war is, unfortunately, normal. What is not normal is the restriction of food, detention conditions and Netanyahu joining the Russia/China/Turkey club (along with Trump) on throwing out international law. [1] https://www.npr.org/2023/10/18/1206897328/half-of-gazas-population-is-under-18-heres-what-that-means-for-the-conflict https://www.npr.org/2023/10/18/1206897328/half-of-gazas-popu...
foxglacier 1y ago
Thank you. That's much more constructive and you can see from another reply that people are now able to evaluate and challenge them because they're claims of fact.

grimblee 1y ago

There's plenty of evidence that fact is true, it's not even worth discussing at this point