3 ms·

No one is comflating war with genocide, but people need to stop pretending that the existence of a war contradicts the existence of a genocide.

jameshilliard 2mo ago
> No one is comflating war with genocide Anyone claiming Israel is committing genocide is quite obviously conflating the two.
- forestrywat 2mo ago
  Not at all obviously. Israel is committing a genocide. This is not really a matter of discussion... you think several parts of the UN, Amnesty International, Doctors Without Borders, the international association of genocide scholars, the international federation for human rights, Human Rights Watch, the Hague Group, the governments of Ghana, Malaysia, Mexico, China, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Spain, Ireland, (and dozens of others), the African Union, the Jewish voice for peace, and dozens of small orgs just all... got it wrong? Why should I believe a random HN comment warrior over literally hundreds of organizations and governments whose jobs include identifying genocide when it happens? What makes your case so compelling it stands up against all that and what my own eyes see? No. It's a genocide.
  - throw693278 2mo ago
    Nations and organizations with known old pre-existing political/religious animosity towards Israel do not count as valid opinions on the matter.
    - forestrywat 2mo ago
      Don't we typically call that ad hominem? And secondly, is your claim that every single one of these hundreds of large orgs are historically politically or religiously anti Israel? I get that of course Iran is not a valid opinion, but all the rest? That stretches credulity.
      - jameshilliard 2mo ago
        > Don't we typically call that ad hominem? I think we'd typically call that bias. > And secondly, is your claim that every single one of these hundreds of large orgs are historically politically or religiously anti Israel? Plenty of those organizations/countries do have historical problems when it comes to antisemitism which is obviously highly correlated with an anti-Israel bias. Which of these organizations/countries don't have a history of either blatant anti-Israel bias(i.e. clear double standards) and/or outright antisemitism?
  - jameshilliard 2mo ago
    > Not at all obviously. Israel is committing a genocide. This is not really a matter of discussion... you think several parts of the UN, Amnesty International, Doctors Without Borders, the international association of genocide scholars, the international federation for human rights, Human Rights Watch, the Hague Group, the governments of Ghana, Malaysia, Mexico, China, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Spain, Ireland, (and dozens of others), the African Union, the Jewish voice for peace, and dozens of small orgs just all... got it wrong? I could list organizations with the opposite view as well, but I don't really consider arguments from authority to be all that strong. > the international association of genocide scholars They have certainly had some interesting members[0]. > China Because they would be the ones to know?[1] > all... got it wrong? Obviously. > Why should I believe a random HN comment warrior over literally hundreds of organizations and governments whose jobs include identifying genocide when it happens? Facts actually do matter and when you look into the details it's clear that the claims of genocide are simply not backed up by the evidence. > What makes your case so compelling it stands up against all that and what my own eyes see? My case is simply that the evidence is insufficient to support the claim. [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20250903112024/https://genocidescholars.org/author/dolfy/ https://web.archive.org/web/20250903112024/https://genocides... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Uyghurs_in_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Uyghurs_in_Chin...
    - manyaoman 2mo ago
      >> China > Because they would be the ones to know?[1] > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Uyghurs_in_Chin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Uyghurs_in_Chin... Just so I understand correctly, are you implying here that you consider the persecution of Uyghurs a genocide?
      - jameshilliard 2mo ago
        > Just so I understand correctly, are you implying here that you consider the persecution of Uyghurs a genocide? Based on the publicly available evidence I would consider it to potentially be genocide, certainly it's more plausible than the accusations against Israel since China isn't at war with the Uyghurs from my understanding. However keep in mind International law requires Dolus Specialis(special intent) for something to be considered Genocide which is a very high bar. Note that war crimes or crimes against humanity alone would be insufficient to reach that bar.[0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocidal_intent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocidal_intent
- gosub100 2mo ago
  Take one look at Gaza on Google satellite view and it's clear what's going on.
  - jameshilliard 2mo ago
    Hamas built a tunnel network under most of Gaza, obviously since Israel wants to destroy that tunnel network(which is clearly a legitimate war goal) there will be severe infrastructure damage to the buildings above the tunnels. Destroying the military infrastructure of Hamas is obviously not genocide, that is something one would expect to happen during a war.
    - gosub100 2mo ago
      I don't care what they built. If you want to fight them, man up and go get them! US forces did this in Iraq. Let's see gods chosen people be so brave.
      - jameshilliard 2mo ago
        > I don't care what they built. If you want to fight them, man up and go get them! US forces did this in Iraq. Let's see gods chosen people be so brave. It's a war, military strategy doesn't tend to put much emphasis on making wars a fair fight. Israel isn't under any obligation to go out of their way to preserve structures built on top of military infrastructure(i.e. tunnels). There were certainly not tunnel networks in Iraq like there were in Gaza.
        gosub100 2mo ago
        Tunnel networks are not a reason to bomb civilian apartments. Let's arm both sides equally if you want to talk about a war. What would happen in a equal fight, do you think?
        jameshilliard 2mo ago
        > Tunnel networks are not a reason to bomb civilian apartments. According the laws of war military infrastructure(i.e. tunnels) is a valid reason. > Let's arm both sides equally if you want to talk about a war. Nobody at war wants the fight to be fair, they will always want to be on the winning side. > What would happen in a equal fight, do you think? If a fight were truly equal then neither side would win, so I guess if it were equal then the conflict would be even more endless since neither side would win.
- dragonwriter 2mo ago
  Israel has openly, multiple times over decades, stated policy objectives that meet the purpose definition of genocide, and committed every single act enumerated in the Genocide Convention as constituting Genocide when committed with a genocidal goal in pursuit of those objectives as if they were using the defintion as a checklist. That there were wars going on at the time does not make it any less of a genocide.
  - jameshilliard 2mo ago
    > That there were wars going on at the time does not make it any less of a genocide. If some act is in pursuit of a legitimate war goal then that typically negates it being considered an act of genocide from my understanding of international law.
    - dragonwriter 2mo ago
      > If some act is in pursuit of a legitimate war goal then that typically negates it being considered an act of genocide from my understanding of international law. Even if there was a dual-intent exception for acts that would be within the laws of war if done without genocidal intent (which there is not), it wouldn't apply to all the acts that are war crimes or crimes against humanity even aside from genocidal intent, such as those (including killings) done in the context or as part of collective punishment of civilian populations under occupation, use of starvation as a method of warfare, both deliberate and indiscriminate direct killing of civilians, etc.
      - jameshilliard 2mo ago
        > acts that are war crimes or crimes against humanity AFAIU per international law either war crimes or crimes against humanity do not by themselves mean there is a genocide. Almost all wars will see these crimes in isolated instances at a minimum, but that doesn't translate to genocide without the dolus specialis(special intent) factor as a deliberate policy(i.e. Nazi's implementing the Holocaust as policy).

jameshilliard 2mo ago

> No one is comflating war with genocide Anyone claiming Israel is committing genocide is quite obviously conflating the two.

forestrywat 2mo ago
Not at all obviously. Israel is committing a genocide. This is not really a matter of discussion... you think several parts of the UN, Amnesty International, Doctors Without Borders, the international association of genocide scholars, the international federation for human rights, Human Rights Watch, the Hague Group, the governments of Ghana, Malaysia, Mexico, China, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Spain, Ireland, (and dozens of others), the African Union, the Jewish voice for peace, and dozens of small orgs just all... got it wrong? Why should I believe a random HN comment warrior over literally hundreds of organizations and governments whose jobs include identifying genocide when it happens? What makes your case so compelling it stands up against all that and what my own eyes see? No. It's a genocide.
- throw693278 2mo ago
  Nations and organizations with known old pre-existing political/religious animosity towards Israel do not count as valid opinions on the matter.
  - forestrywat 2mo ago
    Don't we typically call that ad hominem? And secondly, is your claim that every single one of these hundreds of large orgs are historically politically or religiously anti Israel? I get that of course Iran is not a valid opinion, but all the rest? That stretches credulity.
    - jameshilliard 2mo ago
      > Don't we typically call that ad hominem? I think we'd typically call that bias. > And secondly, is your claim that every single one of these hundreds of large orgs are historically politically or religiously anti Israel? Plenty of those organizations/countries do have historical problems when it comes to antisemitism which is obviously highly correlated with an anti-Israel bias. Which of these organizations/countries don't have a history of either blatant anti-Israel bias(i.e. clear double standards) and/or outright antisemitism?
- jameshilliard 2mo ago
  > Not at all obviously. Israel is committing a genocide. This is not really a matter of discussion... you think several parts of the UN, Amnesty International, Doctors Without Borders, the international association of genocide scholars, the international federation for human rights, Human Rights Watch, the Hague Group, the governments of Ghana, Malaysia, Mexico, China, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Spain, Ireland, (and dozens of others), the African Union, the Jewish voice for peace, and dozens of small orgs just all... got it wrong? I could list organizations with the opposite view as well, but I don't really consider arguments from authority to be all that strong. > the international association of genocide scholars They have certainly had some interesting members[0]. > China Because they would be the ones to know?[1] > all... got it wrong? Obviously. > Why should I believe a random HN comment warrior over literally hundreds of organizations and governments whose jobs include identifying genocide when it happens? Facts actually do matter and when you look into the details it's clear that the claims of genocide are simply not backed up by the evidence. > What makes your case so compelling it stands up against all that and what my own eyes see? My case is simply that the evidence is insufficient to support the claim. [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20250903112024/https://genocidescholars.org/author/dolfy/ https://web.archive.org/web/20250903112024/https://genocides... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Uyghurs_in_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Uyghurs_in_Chin...
  - manyaoman 2mo ago
    >> China > Because they would be the ones to know?[1] > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Uyghurs_in_Chin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Uyghurs_in_Chin... Just so I understand correctly, are you implying here that you consider the persecution of Uyghurs a genocide?
    - jameshilliard 2mo ago
      > Just so I understand correctly, are you implying here that you consider the persecution of Uyghurs a genocide? Based on the publicly available evidence I would consider it to potentially be genocide, certainly it's more plausible than the accusations against Israel since China isn't at war with the Uyghurs from my understanding. However keep in mind International law requires Dolus Specialis(special intent) for something to be considered Genocide which is a very high bar. Note that war crimes or crimes against humanity alone would be insufficient to reach that bar.[0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocidal_intent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocidal_intent
gosub100 2mo ago
Take one look at Gaza on Google satellite view and it's clear what's going on.
- jameshilliard 2mo ago
  Hamas built a tunnel network under most of Gaza, obviously since Israel wants to destroy that tunnel network(which is clearly a legitimate war goal) there will be severe infrastructure damage to the buildings above the tunnels. Destroying the military infrastructure of Hamas is obviously not genocide, that is something one would expect to happen during a war.
  - gosub100 2mo ago
    I don't care what they built. If you want to fight them, man up and go get them! US forces did this in Iraq. Let's see gods chosen people be so brave.
    - jameshilliard 2mo ago
      > I don't care what they built. If you want to fight them, man up and go get them! US forces did this in Iraq. Let's see gods chosen people be so brave. It's a war, military strategy doesn't tend to put much emphasis on making wars a fair fight. Israel isn't under any obligation to go out of their way to preserve structures built on top of military infrastructure(i.e. tunnels). There were certainly not tunnel networks in Iraq like there were in Gaza.
      - gosub100 2mo ago
        Tunnel networks are not a reason to bomb civilian apartments. Let's arm both sides equally if you want to talk about a war. What would happen in a equal fight, do you think?
        jameshilliard 2mo ago
        > Tunnel networks are not a reason to bomb civilian apartments. According the laws of war military infrastructure(i.e. tunnels) is a valid reason. > Let's arm both sides equally if you want to talk about a war. Nobody at war wants the fight to be fair, they will always want to be on the winning side. > What would happen in a equal fight, do you think? If a fight were truly equal then neither side would win, so I guess if it were equal then the conflict would be even more endless since neither side would win.
dragonwriter 2mo ago
Israel has openly, multiple times over decades, stated policy objectives that meet the purpose definition of genocide, and committed every single act enumerated in the Genocide Convention as constituting Genocide when committed with a genocidal goal in pursuit of those objectives as if they were using the defintion as a checklist. That there were wars going on at the time does not make it any less of a genocide.
- jameshilliard 2mo ago
  > That there were wars going on at the time does not make it any less of a genocide. If some act is in pursuit of a legitimate war goal then that typically negates it being considered an act of genocide from my understanding of international law.
  - dragonwriter 2mo ago
    > If some act is in pursuit of a legitimate war goal then that typically negates it being considered an act of genocide from my understanding of international law. Even if there was a dual-intent exception for acts that would be within the laws of war if done without genocidal intent (which there is not), it wouldn't apply to all the acts that are war crimes or crimes against humanity even aside from genocidal intent, such as those (including killings) done in the context or as part of collective punishment of civilian populations under occupation, use of starvation as a method of warfare, both deliberate and indiscriminate direct killing of civilians, etc.
    - jameshilliard 2mo ago
      > acts that are war crimes or crimes against humanity AFAIU per international law either war crimes or crimes against humanity do not by themselves mean there is a genocide. Almost all wars will see these crimes in isolated instances at a minimum, but that doesn't translate to genocide without the dolus specialis(special intent) factor as a deliberate policy(i.e. Nazi's implementing the Holocaust as policy).