The Israeli and US Genocide Double Act Thread

[Geronimo]

Seems like a significant portion of the Israeli population wants to exterminate Palestinians.

This is just how you feel about your impression of the significant portion of the Israeli population or are you referring to some kind of evidence?

[Jon Miller]

https://web.archive.org/web/20080405210125/http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/international_security_bt/137.php?nid=&id=&pnt=137&lb=brme

https://news.gallup.com/poll/161456/israelis-palestinians-pro-peace-process-not-hopeful.aspx

http://www.pcpsr.org/en/node/866

https://www.pcpsr.org/en/node/823

https://time.com/6333781/israel-hamas-poll-palestine/

Maybe the most recent https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2...ne%20too%20far.

JM

[N35t0r]

When (if ever) Israeli defence decisions start exercising genocidal intent there will be a dramatic and appalling change in the Israeli prosecution of the war and regardless of how other nations respond, the bulk of the damage will occur in a matter of hours rather than the endless months of operations seen so far. Further more, it's difficult to see how Israel could ever achieve a successful genocide or even ethnic cleansing using the tactics and strategies it has revealed so far in the post 7 October campaign.

Israel should show way more restraint towards civilians but let's wait to call it genocide until we actually see the genocide underway or at least ordered. Remember the Hutu's genocide of the Tutsis? Compare that to Israel's operations in Gaza.

I don't think that "we could have been more efficient at genocide" is a valid defense. Also, that they're just effective enough that the long-term effect is the same, but they still get billions in western arms and subsidies thanks to people there going "its not really genocide because they could be going at it so much harder" doesn't help their position.

Even if genocide is a "side effect" of a brutal and ruthless prosecution of war, it's not any less genocide.

Coupled with constant and ongoing land theft and murder in the West Bank, and sabotage of any possible avenue towards peace that doesn't involve Palestinians just dying or going away? The Israeli government for the past decades is only one step above Hamas.

[giblets]

Speaking of the 34% of Isrealis who say Israel's military response has "Not gone far enough", I wonder what would satisfy them

[Geronimo]

I don't think that "we could have been more efficient at genocide" is a valid defense. Also, that they're just effective enough that the long-term effect is the same, but they still get billions in western arms and subsidies thanks to people there going "its not really genocide because they could be going at it so much harder" doesn't help their position.

Even if genocide is a "side effect" of a brutal and ruthless prosecution of war, it's not any less genocide.

Coupled with constant and ongoing land theft and murder in the West Bank, and sabotage of any possible avenue towards peace that doesn't involve Palestinians just dying or going away? The Israeli government for the past decades is only one step above Hamas.

It definitely angers me to see this operation characterized as genocide and getting more attention than the Rwandan genocide did or the fact that US engaged in massive ethnic cleansing and overt genocide in the 19th century and this Israeli operation seems to receive more condemnation than any of that.

I think at worst this Israeli operation is like the Dresden firebombing, any of the ww2 city bombings in Japan, or any red army urban campaigns against entrenched defenders. The IDF had far more justification for requiring total victory after 7 October than any of the operations I just listed however and all of them did far less to spare civilians than the IDF is doing.

If we accept your concept of genocide then all sides in WW2 were guilty of genocide. Is that really a definition we want to use? Is that even a useful definition?

As far as Israel being just 1 step above Hamas how do you figure? Think of all the steps that Israel would have to take to mirror 7 October.

Hamas's relative lack of military capability is not moral strength. It's just weakness.
​​

[Lorizael]

I think talk of "genocide" is a distraction. Israel is killing a bunch of Palestinian civilians and children for reasons that have nothing to do with rescuing hostages. Call it what you want; it's bad. Also not sure judging badness on a per capita basis is really the way to go. If you only know one Jew and you kill them, you're not worse than Hitler.

[giblets]

But doctors also reported treating a steady stream of children, elderly people and others who were clearly not combatants with single bullet wounds to the head or chest.

Some of the physicians said that the types and locations of the wounds, and accounts of Palestinians who brought children to the hospital, led them to believe the victims were directly targeted by Israeli troops.

Other doctors said they did not know the circumstances of the shootings but that they were deeply troubled by the number of children who were severely wounded or killed by single gunshots, sometimes by high-calibre bullets causing extensive damage to young bodies.

In mid-February, a group of UN experts accused the Israeli military of targeting Palestinian civilians who are evidently not combatants, including children, as they sought shelter.

“We are shocked by reports of the deliberate targeting and extrajudicial killing of Palestinian women and children in places where they sought refuge, or while fleeing. Some of them were reportedly holding white pieces of cloth when they were killed by the Israeli army or affiliated forces,� the group said.

The Guardian shared descriptions and images of gunshot wounds suffered by eight children with military experts and forensic pathologists. They said it was difficult to conclusively determine the circumstances of the shootings based on the descriptions and photos alone, although in some of the cases they were able to identify ammunition used by the Israeli military.

Eyewitness accounts and video recordings appear to back up claims that Israeli soldiers have fired on civilians, including children, outside of combat with Hamas or other armed groups. In some cases, witnesses describe coming under fire while waving white flags. Haaretz reported on Saturday that Israel routinely fires on civilians in areas its military has declared a “combat zone�.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) deploy snipers – or sharpshooters, as the military calls them – during combat operations, often as part of elite units. They are trained to “target and eliminate particularly difficult terrorist threats�, according to the military’s own definition.

Israeli and foreign human rights groups have documented a long history of snipers firing on unarmed Palestinians, including children, in Gaza and the West Bank.

Palestinians in Gaza also report a terrifying new development in the latest Gaza war – armed drones able to hover over streets and pick off individuals. Called quadcopters, some of these drones are used as remote-control snipers that Palestinians say have been used to shoot civilians.
​
​

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/02/gaza-palestinian-children-killed-idf-israel-war

Genocide.

[Dauphin]

I think at worst this Israeli operation is like the Dresden firebombing, any of the ww2 city bombings in Japan, or any red army urban campaigns against entrenched defenders. The IDF had far more justification for requiring total victory after 7 October than any of the operations I just listed however and all of them did far less to spare civilians than the IDF is doing.

​​

The firebombings were generally considered immoral at the time, and became war crimes in the post-war thinking.

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule13

[Dauphin]

It definitely angers me to see this operation characterized as genocide and getting more attention than the Rwandan genocide did or the fact that US engaged in massive ethnic cleansing and overt genocide in the 19th century and this Israeli operation seems to receive more condemnation than any of that.

​​

If either of those things were happening today, I'd think they should get a lot of condemnation. They'd be worse acts that what Israel is presently executing. But they aren't.

Salting Carthage would have been bad too (if it happened). FWIW

[Geronimo]

I think talk of "genocide" is a distraction. Israel is killing a bunch of Palestinian civilians and children for reasons that have nothing to do with rescuing hostages. Call it what you want; it's bad. Also not sure judging badness on a per capita basis is really the way to go. If you only know one Jew and you kill them, you're not worse than Hitler.

I'm interested in learning more about how we know that the reasons Israel is killing a bunch of the Palestinian civilians and children have nothing to do with rescuing hostages. Are you referring to their declared aims of "destroying Hamas" or do you have some source that says the operation is not being pursued as a result of the hostages still held by Hamas?

[Geronimo]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/02/gaza-palestinian-children-killed-idf-israel-war

Genocide.

That doesn't make it genocide. that doesn't even come close to the bar set for establishing genocide. It sounds more like rogue units and rogue soldiers than a campaign to kill off the civilians. Compare these accounts to mass graves that are associated with other genocides.

[Geronimo]

I think talk of "genocide" is a distraction. Israel is killing a bunch of Palestinian civilians and children for reasons that have nothing to do with rescuing hostages. Call it what you want; it's bad. Also not sure judging badness on a per capita basis is really the way to go. If you only know one Jew and you kill them, you're not worse than Hitler.

no. it's not a 'distraction'. Calling any of Israel's campaign "genocide" at any level above possible rogue tactical or individual units is wrong and it's a grave injustice to those who *have* in fact been victims of actual genocides. We don't even have evidence to confirm the possibility that genocide is being pursued at even the individual soldier level.

The discussion that seeks to reduce the appalling level of civilian casualties needs to call it what it is. Careless disregard for elevating civilian lives over military objectives. Using the hyperbole of calling it "genocide" may help the accusers virtue signal and feel more indignant but it's just going to lead to greater cynicism and indifference from the people who could actually force a difference when they hear such a message.

[Geronimo]

The firebombings were generally considered immoral at the time, and became war crimes in the post-war thinking.

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/cu...-ihl/v1/rule13

I think individual war crimes need to be pursued on a case by case basis in Gaza. None of them should be labelled "genocide" however, especially at the top level of the command.

[Geronimo]

If either of those things were happening today, I'd think they should get a lot of condemnation. They'd be worse acts that what Israel is presently executing. But they aren't.

Salting Carthage would have been bad too (if it happened). FWIW

I wish you were right. I think in Rwanda people saw a narrative of one comparatively impoverished nation of sub-Saharan Africans attempting to wipe out another comparatively impoverished nation of sub-Saharan Africans in the same country and that wasn't a sufficiently compelling narrative to get them all riled up back then. Sadly I can't see how it would get them appreciably more interested or motivated in condemning or mitigating today than it did back then. The reason Israel is facing so much condemnation today is virtue signaling. The IDF plays the role of the evil rich colonizer as well as that of the crusading kafir depending on the audience and that is getting it judged by a much higher standard.

This hyperbole will probably backfire. Calm, informed, unexaggerated and painstakingly accurate criticism and pressure would be vastly more effective at moderating the IDFs potential war crimes than any amount of these unhinged genocide accusations.

[Dauphin]

I think individual war crimes need to be pursued on a case by case basis in Gaza. None of them should be labelled "genocide" however, especially at the top level of the command.

I don't really care about the label. Legal definition and public perceptions can give differing accounts of what term is applicable. To the extent I have any knowledge of what is actually happening, I would observe Israel actions are excessive, with willful disregard for civilians and with little connection to their purported aims. That said, there is an information war and I won't claim to know the truth of what is actually happening. Counterpoint. Fvck Hamas.

Realpolitik will have more impact than any sense of legal / natural justice, or karma / public opinion, or me taking a position. I still got an earful for the neutral stance. My brother's wife (not even remotely Jewish, but whose sister's husband is Israeli and was or is in the IDF) ranted at me last Christmas for being neutral and not 'picking' Israel's side in the conflict.