politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Genocide is just too strong of a word. They are just disagreeing by murdering all their population. You see, it is just a disagreement.
1% of Gaza is dead.
"Murdering all their population."
Grow up.
The definition of genocide explicitly does not require a given percentage of a population.
In whole OR IN PART.
It's a genocide.
Israel's Genocide on Occupied Palestine
Others: AP News, Time, Reuters, Vox, CBC
That already exceeds the Bosnian genocide by more than 10,000 people.
Yes and in the Bosnian genocide there were not credible claims that the deceased were incidental casualties, which are permissive and expected in war. There were soldiers going door to door murdering families, lining them up and shooting them, sometimes hundreds at a time. You know, actual genocide.
Nothing like that has happened in Gaza, not even allegedly. There's been some mistakes and some definite war crimes. That's all war, though.
Nothing like that has happened, except for all the times IDF soldiers have admitted to doing it, and all the times the leadership had admitted to allowing or encouraging it
https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/2024-12-23/ty-article-opinion/.premium/when-you-enter-gaza-you-are-god-inside-the-minds-of-idf-soldiers-who-commit-war-crimes/00000193-f2a4-dc18-a3db-fee62b540000
There's just a minority pushing back openly
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5yx56ep165o.amp
If you are going to make a statement counter to the UN, Amnesty International, and the governments of Ireland and South Africa (among other institutions that I'm too lazy to link below) you're going to need more of a citation than "trust me bro."
https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/11/un-special-committee-finds-israels-warfare-methods-gaza-consistent-genocide
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/12/amnesty-international-concludes-israel-is-committing-genocide-against-palestinians-in-gaza/
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/07/world/europe/ireland-icj-israel-genocide.html
Just look at all the leaders and western institutions that say otherwise. Probably your own country's intelligence and diplomatic heads, probably your chief executive. The list of institutions that agree with me is much longer than your list of loudmouths. The question you should ask is when did South Africa and Ireland start working for Iran?
Ah, so trust me bro. Good day!
Hmm, but if they are larger in number, it doesn't necessarily mean they are right. Right? 🤔 Or am I misunderstanding your point?
Of course number doesn't make something right or wrong.
I also find persuasive the list of The country's in support of South Africa's complaint to the ICC; a bunch of religious dictatorships and monarchies with their own abysmal human rights records, compared to those who supported Israel, which includes like France, Australia, Japan, and even Canada. Canada is widely known for its cool head in international affairs and it's consistent stance where human rights are concerned, which might not be as aggressive as some wish, but they manage to maintain relations and push their agenda, which is usually shared by the western world, forward.
Yeah you're right about the distribution. I found this on Wikipedia on South Africa's genocide case against Israel Thought you might like it
It looks like Canada is neutral on the matter though. Like you said, they have a cool head. It's not unwise to be on the fence on a matter that doesn't relate to you directly.
https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/justin-trudeau-breaks-silence-over-canadas-position-on-israel-genocide-allegations/article_613ade0a-b16b-11ee-b3e1-4b98cc95f239.html
Oh thanks for the article! I think I read something similar on Wikipedia but generally it seems that his statements mean that Canada does not agree with the case but is not necessarily siding with anyone, at least not explicitly. I don't think they support South Africa nor Israel. I honestly respect Canada for its neutral stance on this... sometimes some things are just not one's business nor in one's interest so I feel like it's not a bad idea say that one respects the ICCs decisions but doesn't really agree with some of the cases while they are still under review.
I guess we will have to wait and see the decision. What do you expect the outcome to be? Do you think they have compelling evidence to prove it's a full blown genocide? I don't mean evidence like articles from biased media (like Al Jazera), but more like LEGAL evidence.
I don't know what the outcome will be. Of course I read the complaint and some of the initial legal opinions, as to jurisdiction, application of the conventions, and the preliminary injunction, and at this stage of the case, the decisions are based on the complainance statements and are presumed to be true. Like, if everything South Africa says happened really did happen exactly as they say, does the court have jurisdiction, do the convention supply, and did they state a plausible case for genocide?
My takeaways from the complaint are posted in detail elsewhere, but in summary it provided a lot of hyperlinks to news articles that were based on second and third hand reports, mostly from anonymous sources, with pretty half assed reporting.
For example, reading the articles, it's impossible to determine if you just read 10 articles about 10 different events, or 10 articles about the same event, because the articles don't include enough detail. Yet, if people read the same headline then times, they're going to think it must be true. I've gotten into it with people here on Lemmy where they tell me how wrong I am and just look at all these examples of Israel doing a thing, and then they post three examples all talking about the same one event and they don't even realize.
To prove up the claims in court, South Africa is not going to be able to rely on hearsay and anonymous sources; Twitter posts aren't evidence. They're going to need names, dates, exact locations, credible witnesses, and Israel is going to have a chance to respond and cross-examine every claim.
A lot of the most sensational claims are going to fall apart when Israel's position is included. Like the headline might have said that no weapons were present, no terrorists were killed, just all kids and women. And when the IDF investigators present their evidence, it will show that there were weapons, or there were terrorists present.
A lot of claims fall apart now just with critical analysis. I recall a series of articles about a local doctor quoted as saying that he treated a boy who had been shot by an Israeli sniper, and others with similar wounds, but if you actually look at what the guy said, he based his opinion on the idea that because a kid had a hole through his center, it must have been fired by a sniper; he said something like 'only a sniper could be so accurate.' Maybe that sounds plausible, especially if you want to believe Israel is monstrous, but it's absurd on its face; emergency room doctors cannot identify the shooter or the motive or intended target from a bullet wound. It could have been fired from two miles away at some other target entirely. That's how bullets work.
On the other hand, there have definitely been what seems like some pretty egregious war crimes; IDF blames a lot of horrible things on freak accidents and mistakes. Some I'm sure are freak accidents snd honest mistakes, sometimes I find that unbelievable. So when the media reports a bunch of wild nonsense, sprinkled with a little truth, people find the nonsense believable. I tend to think that when any news articles makes me think "God damn, that's unbelievable," such as Israel sniping kids, it shouldn't be believed without extraordinary evidence.
I've found that a lot of the reporting has been like this, rhetorical or wildly exaggerated, claims that the declarant could not possibly know. In law that's called incompetence. Like the driver of a car could testify as to what they experienced, but would be incompetent to testify that a manufacturing defect caused a crash; you need a mechanic to say that, and at that, one who examined the car at issue.
A lot of the claims are circumstantial, which is fine, but if the reporting only includes one view of the circumstances, it's insufficient to draw a conclusion. Much of that sort of coverage begs a conclusion anyway. Al Jazeera constantly does this. They'll talk about one recent report, which is often just some random Twitter post with nothing else, just to have an article, and then they'll say "well Israel has been accused of this kind of thing several times before, so it must be true." Again, if people want to believe Israel is a monster, they're likely to accept the article at face value without thinking through the clearly false logic.
Further, part of the Hamas strategy is to lie and encourage people to lie. By their account, everyone killed is a woman or child, no terrorists are ever among the dead, and none of the dead ever had any weapons. Hospitals are always hospitals and schools are always schools. Israeli troops are getting in small arms fire fights everyday. Someone must be a terrorist, someone must have some weapons.
All this said, I'm not there, I don't know what's true or not, and like mostly everyone with an opinion on this stuff, I only have my experience and instincts to guide me, and this has been how I see it.
First off, thanks for the very detailed reply!
This is a very important point. Any numbers can be inflated. When early Zionists committed the Deir Yassin (?) massacre, many Palestinian freedom fighters inflated the real numbers to fear-monger others to join them in their fight. Some also downplayed the numbers for their own reasons. This is one of the things I've learned recently just reading about the history of this long conflict. Very interesting!
That being said, I've also come to understand that many evidence is video based and can be geolocated and confirmed using landmarks and so on. I doubt that they will only present their case using news articles with no footage/video evidence.
I totally agree that a history of war crimes doesn't mean Israel is committing all of them 🤣
However one thing that stood out for me was not having allowed adequate aid in. On one hand, Israel says it's providing enough aid. On the other hand, the UN and every other organization are talking about some of the difficulties of getting aid in and some decisions that Israel has taken sound ridiculous though! I read they didn't allow dates in, and many everyday items were branded as "dual use" and banned from entering (like scissors!!).
To me the news reports are too chaotic to make a case against Israel, but the throttling of aid entering while also conducting military operations at every single hospital in Gaza could, in my opinion, be strong indicators to use in a case against them at the ICC. Of course I know Hamas operates often from the midst of civilian crowds, but whether they were there in the hospitals or not may not play such a huge role because in the end a large number of civilians were harmed and life-saving and essential infrastructure was destroyed by Israel. It doesn't look good for them even though I understand why it was necessary.
No not at all. Israel actually prosecutes war criminals and will continue to do so. That's unlike Gaza, where war crimes are rewarded with cash prizes, paid in Iranian Dinar.
That's the leadership the world expects from Hamas; let everyone starve so they can build out tunnels and buy rocket launchers, get 50,000 people killed as voluntary and involuntary human shields, and then sit back and let Qatari and other anti-western media brainwash well-meaning folks such as you into thinking everyone in Gaza is getting killed, when it's really just a very small amount of people who just can't manage to stay away from Hamas like the other 99%.
The IDF commit war crimes daily. You are completely delusional to blame the people being bombed and starved instead of the ones doing the bombing and starvation.
De-development via the Gaza Occupation
Page 402
The Gaza Strip: The Political Economy of De-Development - Third Edition by Sara M. Roy
Blockade, including Aid
Hamas began twenty years into the occupation during the first Intifada, with the goal of ending the occupation. Collective punishment has been a deliberate Israeli tactic for decades with the Dahiya doctrine. Violence such as suicide bombings and rockets escalated in response to Israeli enforcement of the occupation and apartheid.
After the 'disengagement' in 2007, this turned into a full blockade; where Israel has had control over the airspace, borders, and sea. Under the guise of 'dual-use' Israel has restricted food, allocating a minimum supply leading to over half of Gaza being food insecure; construction materials, medical supplies, and other basic necessities have also been restricted.
Peace Process and Solution
Hamas proposed a full prisoner swap as early as Oct 8th, and agreed to the US proposed UN Permanent Ceasefire Resolution. Additionally, Hamas has already agreed to no longer govern the Gaza Strip, as long as Palestinians receive liberation and a unified government can take place.
Both Hamas and Fatah have agreed to a Two-State solution based on the 1967 borders for decades. Oslo and Camp David were used by Israel to continue settlements in the West Bank and maintain an Apartheid, while preventing any actual Two-State solution
How Avi Shlaim moved from two-state solution to one-state solution
‘One state is a game changer’: A conversation with Ilan Pappe
One State Solution, Foreign Affairs
Human Shields
Hamas:
HRW on Laws-of-War Violations 2009
Agency Demands Full Respect for the Sanctity of Its Premises in Gaza - July 2014
HRW - Palestinian Armed Groups’ October 7 Assault on Israel
Israel:
Israel/OPT: Israeli attacks targeting Hamas and other armed group fighters that killed scores of displaced civilians in Rafah should be investigated as war crimes
HRW - Gaza: Unlawful Israeli Hospital Strikes Worsen Health Crisis
Additionally, there is extensive independent verification of Israel using Palestinians as Human Shields:
IDF uses Human Shields,
Including Children (2013 Report)
Palestinian children face unrelenting genocide, displacement, and systematic abuse throughout 2024
Israel “Systematically” Uses Gaza Children as Human Shields, Rights Group Finds 2024
Breaking The Silence - Testimonies from IDF Veterans
Deliberate Attacks on Civilians
Israel deliberately targets civilian areas. From in general with the Dahiya Doctrine to multiple systems deployed in Gaza to do so:
The Dahiya Doctrine & Israel’s Use of Disproportionate Force
‘A mass assassination factory’: Inside Israel’s calculated bombing of Gaza
Lavender
Where's Daddy
Israel also targets Israeli Soldiers and Civilians to prevent them being leveraged as hostages, known as the Hannibal Directive. Which was also used on Oct 7th.
Look I know this stuff is very hard and emotional. Not everything is a war crime. Using AI to track enemy combatants is not a war crime.
An airstrike that intentionally kills civilians, incidental to a legit military target, maybe very sad, but it is not a war crime. The assessment of strategic value is weighed against the overall conflict, not the specific attack, It's weighed against the decades of rocket attacks and suicide bombings by people hiding underground in population centers with impunity.
Yes, there's about 10 or 20 documented cases of Israeli soldiers using human Shields in horrific ways. Strapping them to the front of their car, literally holding them between them and gunfire. That's a war crime. It's also a crime under Israeli law. People get arrested for it and go to jail for it. It does not happen daily. In Gaza, being a human shield is a way of life. It is always a war crime to, whilst claiming the protections of international law, to willfully violate international law by failing to distinguish troops from civilians, by hiding amongst them and not wearing uniforms. That is the way of life in Gaza, points of pride even, legacy. That's infinitely more of a crime against humanity in the most literal terms.
Nah you just got tricked by wildly biased and incredible media reports tearing at your heart strings.
I haven't said anything false or u supported by years of evidence.
My grandchildren? Lol. This is a short footnote in history.
Could I ask. Especially that I'm just now learning about all of this... how are Gazans considered a human shield all together? Are they meant to protect the tunnels from attacks or?
Gaza put Hamas in charge a s Gaza keeps Hamas in charge. Despite that, Hamas members do things such as:
telling Gazan's that airstrike warnings people receive via SMS and phone calls are hoaxes, and that they should stay where they are;
physically blocking escape routes;
shooting people trying to flee;
brainwashing or indoctrinating their close family and friends, and most loyal supporters, to huddle up in rooms with them in hopes that it will stop the Hamas member(s) from being killed in an airstrike by making the incidental casualties too great;
building hundreds of miles of tunnels in an area only 25 miles wide--used exclusively for organizing and commanding Hamas activities, smuggling rockets, rocket launchers, other munitions and weapons, fighters, including suicide bombers, mass shooters, hostage takers, along with hostsges, so, in other words, building legitimate military targets where regular people are most concentrated--with shafts leading under and often into major population centers such as schools, hospitals, large apartment buildings, and markets;
by traveling with large groups of civilians into areas designated for civilians, and then using those places for command and control purposes, such as Hamas members who have been killed in and near humanitarian corridors and camps;
refusing to wear uniforms or distinguish themselves from the innocent people they hide behind/under;
encouraging through promotion and literally cash rewards for a culture of "martyrdom," in which the only civil obligation more revered than adding to the civilian death toll is to actually kill someone from Israel;
using the same neighborhoods, week after week, to launch rockets indiscriminately at civilians in Israel, making those neighborhood a legit military target (see above about encouraging people to ignore air strike warnings).
This is Hamas's only real strategy at this point: to get as many civilians killed as possible. That's why the death toll is so high. This strategy often works but ofter October 7, when the tunnels were literally used to launch a mass shooting of over 1,000 innocent people, with hundreds more taken hostage, the tunnels are obviously fair targets when combined with a reasonable attempt to warn innocent people, such as the initial and subsequent repeated orders to evacuate Gaza City, and the millions and millions of phone calls and SMS messages sent warning people of incoming strikes.
Here's a story that has stuck with me, and note the bit about how he was up against Hamas posts on Facebook that told his neighbors not to leave their homes:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67327079
This culture has robbed generations of ever knowing hope, and has killed countless people. The seemingly high number of civilian casualties is a feature of Hamas's strategy, so that they can then cry foul, and trick well meaning westerners into joining Hamas in their opposition to Israel and subsidize their terror through charity to the innocent public. If the people of Gaza actually had to bear the consequences of Hamas's leadership (starvation, dehydration, and abject poverty), they wouldn't stand for it, let alone support it. It's a miracle Hamas has failed to get killed more than 1 out of every 100 citizens, and it's because of Israeli restraint that that number holds, and it's why the IDF says it's the most ethical army in the world; any other army would have flattened such an opponent decades ago. That's how I see it.
Thanks for the thorough explanation! I would like to see some links for some things you mentioned (like the warnings being a hoax and blocking escape routes)... but most of the other stuff I was able to find online easily with google.
But so... does Israel value the destruction of Hamas more than the civilian lives of Palestinians in Gaza? I feel like the cost is too high. 🤔 don't get me wrong, I am not a general but I don't feel like I'd be okay with firing into a crowd of children and women in a residential area to kill X number of combatants, even if they snuck into these areas designated for civilians only 😅😅
I'm not in a position to say what I would do, like, if I was asked to press the button to drop the bomb. I don't feel like I'd be okay with it either. By the time the person who does press it gets there, they probably have their mind made up as to what they're going to do, through their training and customs.
There's a story that I remember from, I want to say at least 10 years ago, about an Israeli pilot who was ordered to bomb a building from which rockets were being launched at Israel, and the standard warnings were given ("roof knocking," where they essentially fire percussive blanks at the building first, if memory serves), and as the plane flew by the pilot could see dozens of people on the roof of the building, waving at him, and I believe he did not drop the bomb. JFK famously said, "ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." My neighbor is Canada. They want their people to pay taxes, vote, serve on juries, occasionally to join the military, and be decent to each other. The government in Gaza wants it's people to go stand on the roof, and would give your family a pension not for a career of service, but for being a suicide attacker. What if Gaza was your neighbor?
It's been decades of Hamas leadership and even before Hamas, decades more of extremist violence was also accepted and encouraged by its predecessors, the PA and the PLO, the latter being more of a criminal gang than anything resembling a government. Today, Hamas rules by assassinating any local opposition, such as a prominent fellow in North Gaza who, for the crime of calling for elections, got beaten to death in front of his family and neighbors.
For how many years of suicide bombings and daily rocket attacks would you turn the other cheek, before saying okay ladies and gentleman, gtfo the way, because we're going to now bomb all the tunnels and every Hamas member we can find. I'd imagine not very many, unlikely 70+ years. Palestine, and especially the nationalists in Gaza, who again, are in charge, have rejected every opportunity for peace. They've turned every institution and public utility into instruments of international crime and terror.
The rest of the world would not care one iota how Gazans want to worship and pray, even live like it's the 14th century, if they stayed inside their borders and exported something other than illegal terrorism, but they won't. Every public dollar in Gaza gets squandered, stolen from the general population, and turned over to what is at this time and unwinnable war against Israel.
Israel has to intercept thousands of rockets per month launched at its civilians at a cost of $40,000 to $50,000 per rocket. And that's been going on since 2007, prior to witch the rockets often hit rheir targets. For how many years would your country spend billions of dollars strictly on defending itself from rocket attacks before blowing up the tunnels from which the rocket attacks are carried out?
And, by the way, this is all in the context of Iranian aggression. The rockets and rocket launchers are mostly made in Iran, featuring some supplies from North Korea, each of whom are the first and second largest funders of the tunnels in Gaza. And this is in the context of the fact that Israel is a burgeoning democracy, the only such government in the region, and I believe democracy is the only form of government even capable of granting lasting human rights; certainly not a monarchy or religious dictatorship, where any such rights are basically imaginary, capable of being taken away on the whim of someone claiming to hear the voice of Dog.
I think that at this point there is a general consensus in Israel and in the halls of concerned intelligence and diplomatic circles around the world that Hamas will not be a part of the remainder of this century, and it's in this context that the incidental casualties are weighed against achieving that objective.
October 7 scared the Israeli people. It wasn't in any way a military operation. It was purely a terrorist attack. Hamas members were driving in on motorbikes, just firing AK-47s at cars full of families on their way out to dinner, or whatever. I think the Israeli people overwhelmingly feel that enough is enough, and if the people of Gaza aren't going to get rid of Hamas, then that must mean a good chunk of the people support Hamas. I mean, where are the cooperators? Where are the Gazans openly calling for Hamas to surrender? I see the Gazan efforts in social and regular media to blame every civilian death on Israel, and to say that no terrorists are ever killed in the bombings, only women and kids. Where are the Gazan efforts on social and regular media to identify, locate, and arrest Hamas members?
I think the Isrealis and others I mentioned feel that 1 in 100 is prettu acceptable, in context, although there are certainly many people in Israel who still want to seek other solutions and who find the number of civilian casualties unacceptable. And because Israel is a democracy, those people may freely speak out, we can see their social and regular media campaigns, and there's a very good chance that the current government in Israel gets voted out at the next election.
Personally, I find the civilian casualties horrific, but feel that the mission of destroying Hamas and their ability to carry out further attacks on Israel and on their own people, including by mental and social subjugation, to be far more important than 1 in 100 lives.
I just don't see any merit to the argument that this is an intentional genocide, though with twisted facts and unattributed reports pedaled by Hamas themselves, it certainly has an appearance of one. In a genocide though, the Killing apparatus gets more efficient with time. In a genocide, there are no warnings before a bomb drops. The aggressornin a genocide doesn't let flow food, water and medicine into the hands of the people they're trying to kill. It seems to me that Israel is taking every reasonable precaution to limit civilian casualties, and sending in food, water, and medicine, and that it is the cultural exemplar set by Hamas that readily explains the excess deaths; Hamas could surrender tomorrow, turn the place over to an interim government, and join a meaningful ceasefire, and not one more bomb would fall.
When I consider the strength and tactics of Hamas, they have absolutely zero chance of accomplishing any mission of theirs through military means. They are simply outnumbered and outgunned. Their only possible effective strategy is through international law, and for that to succeed the number of civilians killed must be unacceptable to the west. It is only that context that October 7 makes any strategic sense; what was the purpose of the attack if not to provoke Israel to start bombing tunnels and bombing Hamas? Similarly, only in this context do Hamas's movements and tactics make any sense; why surround themselves with family and friends, hide under schools and hospitals, and block evacuations if not to ensure excess civilians are killed?
The article I linked above contained a paragraph describing some hoax calls by Hamas and posted on Facebook after an IDF bombing warning was issued. Here's some other links with video and audio recordings:
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/378465
https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-gaza-resident-says-hamas-preventing-evacuations-thousands-return-north/
https://www.ynetnews.com/article/bjqk4hpft
https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/israel-hamas-war-gaza-strip/card/hamas-tells-civilians-not-to-evacuate-to-the-south-T9TX4p5KHl930OHJDyfp
https://www.israelhayom.com/2024/10/14/hamas-blocks-gazans-from-evacuating-to-safe-zones/
Huge thanks for the links.
I hope this is just really bad satire and not your actual beliefs.
Hasbara troll for sure. Only makes stupid ass comments like that.
Except for all my other comments.