Has enough been done to tackle incitement to genocide?

[Scirocco]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cze5w2wd4x0o

Yes and the IDF haven't finished destroying Gaza yet so it's a bit premature to talk of a rebuild. Surely a ceasefire is the current priority....

The way international law and treaties say it should be done, as a task for law enforcement. By sending in the military to shoot, drones & fighter jets to bomb, military bulldozers to destroy roads and such Israel is essentially doing acts of war on the populace of the West Bank.

Sadly, Spot on

Suicide bombings of civilians targets are not legitimate resistance.
Just like the thousands of bombs dropped by IDF killing tens of thousands of civilians since Oct 2023 and before this bomb ever happened are not legitimate self defence.

I think the illegal occupation ending is the best chance for peace and security for Israel and Palestinians.

Violence only creates more violence. It is the violence of illegal occupation dating from 1948 that created fertile ground for formation of violent terrorist groups. It is the violence of responding to terrorism using Dahiya doctrine which is the disproportionate targeting and killing of innocent civilians that has not only dehumanised Palestinians and sent Israelis down the dark path of current genocidal, but perpetuates the cycle of violence and terror in the region.

The occupation cannot be ended by a negotiated process. If it could, it would have ended in 1998 when it was agreed to end in 1993.

WWII was not a modern war. It predates the Geneva convention and modern international laws on the rules of war, including the law against genocide. Many attacks that were done during WWII would be considered unjustified and illegal today. Today’s laws were specifically written and agreed on by the UN to ensure that Never Again really meant never again for anyone. At least that was the intent. The consistent insistence on WWII as some sort of standard we should regress to is to scrap international law and go back to the days of WWII where millions can be murdered through genocide before anyone lifts a finger or spears out in condemnation instead of thousands.

I think you need to be more explicit. You date the 'illegal occupation' to 1948.

You say it 'ending' is the best chance of peace & security.

You say it cannot be ended by negotiation.

Exactly what occupation. If it doesnt end by a negotiated process how does it end?

What does peace & security look loke for Israrlis and Palestinians at the end?

Yes, the UN cannot even distribute aid in Gaza.

A ceasefire is the only path that will save lives now and in the future.

I am 100% sure you know what occupation we are referencing here as I was responding to you. You said the occupation can only be ended by negotiation- but your belief is unfounded because that was already tried and it failed. I am 100% sure you also know what peace and security look like for any civilian population. I feel I have been perfectly clear and explicit enough.

No Im sorry I dont understand at all. If there is no peace process then the only way of concluding this is for one side to destroy the other completely. Which side would that be and how is that consistent with peace and security for Israelis and Palestinians?
I also dont know what occupation you are talking about. The occupation of the West Bank was 1967. 1948 is the creation of the state of Israel when the jewish people returned to their ancestral homeland.

Maybe next time list the posters you want to respond to your questions to prevent any further unsolicited responses 🙄

Maybe next time you don't quite understand the question, please don't feel compelled to answer it.

While it is very tempting to tell you to go and read a history book as you have done to other posters, I will rise above the urge.

No, the only other way is not one side destroys the other completely.

There are numerous ways to enforce peace that do not rely on two warring factions to come to a negotiated agreement. We just need the international political will to do so. We seem to find this will easily when it comes to protecting shipping in the Red Sea because that endangers profits rather than people.

1948 included Israel invading and occupying lands set aside by the UN in 1947 for Palestine. The Nakba.

1967 was Israel starting the six day war, illegally taking and occupying the rest of the lands set aside by the UN for Palestine.

No. Nothing at all has been done.

So some sort of enforcement by the international community rather than negotiations involving Israelis and Palestinians? How would that work? An occupying force of some sort?

Yes, you’re right of course that WW2 is not "modern" in one sense, but I meant wars in which, unlike in the days before bomber planes, civilian areas can be easily targeted and attacks are not confined to battles between armies in battlefields or ships at sea, as in olden times.

Yes, I’m sure some of the tactics that were used in WW2 by the Allies as well as their enemies would be against the "rules" of modern warfare. Yet they helped defeat the Nazis, which was by no means a foregone conclusion. The trouble is that those who keep to the rules are often at a disadvantage against those who don’t. The Hamas cold-blooded massacre and rapes of civilians last October certainly broke all the "rules", but it doesn’t seem to have done them much harm in the opinions of a lot of people, does it? The abduction of hundreds of civilians was certainly against the "rules", but I’ve yet to see an international popular outcry demanding that they be released, or any penalty being suffered by Hamas for it.

Far from it. 'Resistance is justified' apparently.

The Hamas cold-blooded massacre and rapes of civilians last October certainly broke all the "rules", but it doesn’t seem to have done them much harm in the opinions of a lot of people, does it?
In the opinion of what people? And it has certainly done a lot of harm to the innocent people of Gaza

The abduction of hundreds of civilians was certainly against the "rules", but I’ve yet to see an international popular outcry demanding that they be released
There has been plenty of outcries for the hostages to be released where the hell have you been hiding? Calling for a ceasefire includes the release of hostages.

Israel are getting away with breaking plenty of rules

What an insightful contribution.

Than you

@Kindatired when the indefensible cannot be defended, the same things keep being wheeled out.

I’m just waiting for
It’s antisemitism

Why say this? So unnecessarily goady

@Scirocco

the same things keep being wheeled out.

What, like this?

I’m just waiting for
It’s antisemitism

Did you miss that part? Or did you agree that it was an acceptable thing to say?

How would you feel it if we started saying "I'm just waiting for...it's Islamophobia". Or to mirror the other favourites on here, "oh I suppose I'll get accused of Islamophobia now" and "If that makes me Islamophobic so be it". I genuinely wouldn't dream of saying this, because I would be (rightly) called Islamophobic for mocking and being intentionally antagonistic towards Muslims.

But you seem to ignore it every time.

@Scirocco @whataclownshow
It was a disgraceful comment as noone was saying any of those things. As for the burqa comment.....just not serious at all.

@SharonEllis These arguments are used as a basis to try to justify what is effectively genocide-the intentional destruction of a population in whole or in part. The extent of death and destruction is entirely foreseeable consequence of Israeli actions. Israel may find these consequences vaguely regrettable but decided to prosecute the war in this way regardless. The definition of genocide does not state that destruction of a population has to be the primary aim of the perpetrators- in this case it’s clear from the destruction of water treatment, sewage , schools, hospitals, places of worship, that Israel is aiming to cause forced migration as a subsidiary war objective.