5 ms·
> The rules aren't written by plucky revolutionaries, but the big powers. They, thus, fairly often favor people who fight like the big powers. I think this is
by wk_end 8mo ago
> The rules aren't written by plucky revolutionaries, but the big powers. They, thus, fairly often favor people who fight like the big powers.
I think this is one of the ugliest things about this particular war. While the IDF unquestionably committed various war crimes over the course of the conflict anyway, the bulk of what people found objectionable very well might have been done in total accordance with international law. Despite many failures and excesses, the IDF at least paid lip service to trying to do that, as a policy.
It's just that, the reality is, the rules are based on entirely different assumptions about how war is carried out. If they might lead to something resembling a "humane" war (hah!) when fought between, say, a relatively evenly matched France and Germany, they're quite ineffective at preventing a humanitarian catastrophe when you have a modern force attempting to siege an ultra-dense, militarized enclave run by an organization with no real hope of a conventional victory or interest in the well-being of its civilians.
And so you end up with this absurd situation where the world witnessed, over and over again, unimaginably horrible things being inflicted on the population of Gaza, and the Israelis responding - if we're being charitable, not entirely unreasonably - "Why are you getting mad at us? We're following the rules!"
It's just that, clearly, the rules are insufficient to match people's moral sentiments.
- eirini1 8mo ago> While the IDF unquestionably committed various war crimes over the course of the conflict anyway, the bulk of what people found objectionable very well might have been done in total accordance with international law. I think this is somewhat out of touch, the main reason this conflict has garnered so much attention is the amount of times Isreal commits war crimes.
- wk_end 8mo agoLet's suppose it could be demonstrated conclusively that every hospital in Gaza that Israel has bombed had Hamas militants operating out of them, as Israel has claimed. Do you think that'd silence Israel's critics about bombing hospitals? Do you think it should?
- worik 8mo ago> Do you think it should? No. This is asymmetrical warfare The only route Israel has to victory, now, is genocide. They need to stop and make peace before they earn a place with Pol Pot and Stalin as genociders
- joe_mamba 8mo ago>before they earn a place with Pol Pot and Stalin as genociders What makes you think Israel cares about a label more than conquest via genocide? Did the Nazis care about being called genocidal? If you want to stop IL you need to do it via force.
- mvdtnz 8mo agoThis is nonsense. The total annihilation of Hamas and disarmament of Gaza would be sufficient for Israel and you know it.
- manyaoman 8mo agoEven if that’s true, I can’t blame Gazans for refusing to become slaves.
- cess11 8mo agoWhy would the israelis prefer to deal with PIJ through some temporary disarmament? Anyone who listens for a bit to israeli mass media will soon be convinced that anything but the extermination of the palestinians is not enough. This is why they bulldoze everything archeological that does not play into zionist myth making. This is also why apartheid is common in local politics in Israel, and why the zionist guerillas and later IDF systematically destroyed the homes and property of the people they displaced, long before the appearance of Hamas. As I usually do, I'd also like to remind that the zionist movement is mainly a movement of christians.
- throwaway3060 8mo agoIf that was true, then why does it seem this conflict has gotten much more attention than the Russia-Ukraine war, which is on a much larger scale?
- ceejayoz 8mo agoThe power imbalance probably plays a role. Certainly no one's donating Patriot batteries and F-16s to Gaza. (I'm also not sure I'd consider the Russia/Ukraine war to be… undercovered in the press.)
- magic_hamster 8mo agoThe only country out of the four mentioned who was given a donation of arms is Ukraine.
- ceejayoz 8mo agoThat’s a gutsy claim. Delusional, but gutsy. https://www.ajc.org/news/what-every-american-should-know-about-us-aid-to-israel https://www.ajc.org/news/what-every-american-should-know-abo...
- cess11 8mo agoIt has been going on for a century or so. It is also a crime of occidental states. One could also argue that Palestine, Libya, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Sudan, Yemen and more places are in interconnected violent processes, where the 'axis' of Israel, the US, UAE, UK and allies are perpetrating heinous crimes without any semblance of accountability.
- throwaway3060 8mo agoFor much of that time frame, the Soviets were also meddling in the Middle East. That the middle east conflicts were themselves part of the Cold War rather than something unrelated, is knowledge that has gone forgotten in the West, I think.
- RobertoG 8mo agoWar is always terrible and a mess. The problem is that the intention is, very clearly, ethic cleansing. And that, is, not in accordance to international law. That's the reason they target humanitarian workers and journalist. And the reason they block things like baby formula from entering Gaza. Because the worst are the living conditions to the population, the better. If you think that the main intention of Israel is other than push those million of people that bother them out (or kill them if they don't go), I have a bridge to sell you. Hell, they even say that themselves. Go to listen to their politicians. By the way, if you are an European Union citizen, there is request to the commission to stop the EU-Israel commercial agreement. You can sign it here: https://eci.ec.europa.eu/055/public/#/screen/home https://eci.ec.europa.eu/055/public/#/screen/home
- worik 8mo ago> is, very clearly, ethic cleansing Yes. But. Those are weasel words. The correct, honest word, is genocide
- disgruntledphd2 8mo agoYup, the term ethnic cleansing became popular during the Yugoslavian civil war, so that UN states didn't have a legal obligation to intervene, as they would in the case of genocide.
- naasking 8mo agoEthnic cleansing and genocide are obviously not the same. If Israel's intent were to kill virtually all Gazans, that would be genocide, but it seems very plausible that they would be entirely satisfied if all Gazans just left Gaza, which would be ethnic cleansing.
- disgruntledphd2 8mo agoLook, I remember this being discussed at the time as a euphemism to avoid the necessity for intervention. The wikipedia article suggests that I'm not alone in this belief: "Both the definition and charge of ethnic cleansing is often disputed, with some researchers including and others excluding coercive assimilation or mass killings as a means of depopulating an area of a particular group,[6][7] or calling it a euphemism for genocide or cultural genocide.[8][9]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_cleansing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_cleansing