• gnuhaut@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    So some part of the government is genocidal and some other part isn’t? So you can just ignore what the prime minister and other people in charge are saying, because they are not really in charge? This is the stupidest argument I’ve ever heard, and Israel didn’t even make that argument in their defense. Instead they said: These are not the official orders, so that’s just talk basically. Despite the actual fucking evidence of what their troops are doing confirming it isn’t just talk.

    Hamas is impeding aid.

    Hamas is doing this all themselves! They’re stopping the aid! They blew up Gaza themselves (they said that in the courtroom)! They probably also turned off the water and electricity!? It’s easy to prove that Israel did all that stuff, and they said so. Here’s the Israeli defense minister:

    We are imposing a complete siege of Gaza. There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything will be closed.

    Must be one of those people not really in charge of anything and I must have imagined when they did that.

    You’re living in some alternate reality. Are you deliberately trying to mount the worst defense in order to make Israel look bad?

    • barsoap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      Instead they said: These are not the official orders, so that’s just talk basically.

      And there are some people in the ranks which don’t care that they’re told not to commit genocide. That constitutes genocidal intent of those individuals, but not of the state, which is what the ICJ is asked to judge. Now if Israel fails to prosecute those individuals then that could indeed would strengthen the case against Israel quite a bit, but that’s not what the case the ICJ is currently hearing is about.

      Hamas is doing this all themselves!

      Not everything, no, but they’re taking cover behind civilians to a ridiculous degree. Which then allows Israel, or aforementioned individuals, to write memos “we can’t drop stuff there that’s too risky”.

      Wasn’t there something about Israel not allowing aid organisations to buy food for Gaza in Israel? That’s quite a bit more damning but I don’t think SA put it forth as evidence. And as said with such things the ICJ would likely just say “yeah don’t do that” not “that’s genocidal”.

      You’re living in some alternate reality. Are you deliberately trying to mount the worst defense in order to make Israel look bad?

      As said: I believe Israel is committing a genocide. Separately from that, I also believe that what they’re doing is not enough for the ICJ to convict them of genocide because the ICJ and me have different standards.

      Don’t shoot the messenger.

      • gnuhaut@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        The leadership is putting out genocidal statements, and then, to cover their asses, they put “do this in accordance with international law” is some official order, probably on the recommendation of some lawyer. The soldiers all through the ranks repeat the genocidal language, and commit genocidal acts,over and over, nobody stopping them, and almost all of them defended and rationalized by Israeli spokespeople. Your assessment: Just individuals doing individual war crimes. Are you joking?

        • barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          The leadership is putting out genocidal statements, and then, to cover their asses, they put “do this in accordance with international law” is some official order, probably on the recommendation of some lawyer.

          Can you prove that in court. Do you have recorded conversations or such that would back that up.

          nobody stopping them

          At least some are being dragged before disciplinary tribunals. Are they fall guys? It’s a possibility but again you’d have to prove it. In dubio pro reo also applies to states.

          Your assessment: Just individuals doing individual war crimes. Are you joking?

          That’s not what my assessment is. One of my assessments is that there’s at the very least a group of ideologically connected individuals right-out enjoying committing those war crimes. I’ve been saying that the Kahanites are out for a genocide before the military operation even began. But the ICJ is there to convict states, not ideological minorities within a state that’s Israel’s responsibility and prerogative.

          The other is that that the ICJ won’t convict because even if the stuff can be proven, including all the fall-guy kind of stuff SA isn’t even putting forth evidence towards that end.

          • gnuhaut@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            10 months ago

            Can you prove that in court.

            Yes. They say that shit, and the lower ranks repeat it, and it gets done. Clearly the orders get relayed and implemented. What more proof do you need? It is nothing new that people lie when committing crimes to cover their asses. But you can actually look at what they’re doing to figure which of these statements is actually true: “We do everything in accordance with international law!” or “We will starve and bomb them until they leave or die!”.

            Israel almost never punishes any of their own soldiers, or even admits any wrongdoing, even in pretty clear-cut cases. Arguing that Israeli courts are going to stop the genocide is completely delusional. They haven’t done shit so far, and they have no track record of doing anything. That’s because this is not about individual war crimes, this is a systemic policy implemented and supported throughout all institutions of the Israeli state, coming from the very top. You just do not want to see it.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              What more proof do you need?

              You don’t have to prove it to me, but the ICJ. You’ll have to prove that all that behaviour is intentional, and not negligent. You have to prove that they’re evil as opposed to merely incompetent.

              If you want to complain about the ICJ complain about the ICJ. Complain about the very nature of legal philosophy if you want. But keep me out of it, this has been the gazillionth time you shot the messenger.