What did you do during the genocide in Gaza?

[ssd]

This is a brilliant article.

This will be taught in schools one day and our grandkids will ask us but what did you do when you knew this was happening?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/may/22/israel-gaza-genocide

How is "Deutschland den Deutschen" any more offensive (it makes me shudder!) than "may your village burn" or "death to the Arabs"?

If you're going to condition your objection to nationalist fervour on "who does it": just come out and say so!

Incidentally: I'm a fluent German speaker and nothing has horrified me quite as much as German Twitter opposite Palestinians.

If you can't see what is offensive about alluding to german nationalism in the context of Israel then there is no hope for you. Or this conversation.

What continually strikes me about the tone that papers like the Guardian strike is that there is a barely veiled anti semitism through the use of language and absence of balance.

The term genocide seems to be forced on people as a means to distort the reality of armed combat and frame a narrative where Israeli soldiers are systematically murdering civilians in cold blood with full backing of the state. The fact that 15000 Hamas fighters at least have died in the much bandied 50000 figure is airbrushed out of press pieces and I have not seen any desrition in the press about he firefights that have killed 900 Israeli soldiers.

Civilian casualties in by themselves are a tragedy but not a genocide. Genocide is a word being used to dehumanise soldiers by portraying them as monsters and by extension promoting hatred of Israelis. It is simply wrong to use such a loaded tern and it is not used by our main stream press or government for good reason.

Maybe the.joirnalist in question should reflect on her objectivity?

If you can't see what's offensive about "death to the Arabs" and "may your village burn" opposite Palestinians: likewise!

If your advocacy against exterminatory racism is dependent on "who does it" you are the problem! Literally!

Notably: "Death to the Arabs" is what was shouted today on the occasion of Jerusalem Day.

I am always happy to be conciliatory. But not opposite "it's fine to be aggressively nationalist - so long as you are MY KIND OF!"

I'm British, specifically English. Asking me to endorse that is, in my worldview, akin to asking me to endorse Tommy Robinson or join the Twitter outrage over that one woman who pleaded guilty to incitement.

Nationalism is destructive and wrong. Yes, including Jewish nationalism. Sorry, not sorry.

You’re speaking of bias while denying the many, many humanitarian organisations worldwide that have called this a genocide.

Amnesty international, the UN and other impartial human rights groups have labelled it a genocide, no it’s not just the “woke” Guardian terminology and no it’s not Israeli soldiers being dehumanised.

What on earth are you talking about? How many straw men can you fit into one post?

Amnesty literally changed the definition of genocide because the evidence did not fit the accepted definition.

Israel rejects the claim, shocker.
I’m yet to see any meaningful organisation reject Amnesty International’s findings.

It honestly blows my mind that people on this thread want to argue against the term genocide.

So why did Amnesty concede that the only way to make the charge fit was to change the definition?

It's just on this board that some posters do, not really seen it on other boards where the genocide is discussed as much.

In years to come when people discuss the genocide of Gaza, i wonder how some people will feel knowing they spent their time and energy arguing it wasn't happening.

Israel say that Amnesty did that.

Experts say “The claim that Amnesty International is inventing its own definition of genocide to tarnish Israel’s campaign is vexatious. It is an attempt to tarnish Amnesty International,”

And “with all legal questions, there are a range of plausible understandings and interpretations”.

“Amnesty International’s approach to the question falls well within the bounds of reasonable legal argument.”
In other words, Amnesty’s arguments fall along the lines of those you might expect to hear in an international courtroom.

“I actually thought it was laudable that Amnesty pays very careful attention to the existing case law by the ICJ and by other courts on the question of genocidal intent, and they are trying to construct an argument within the terms of the ICJ’s own language.”

https://www.thejournal.ie/amnesty-international-invented-definitiion-of-genocide-israel-gaza-6568231-Dec2024/

If you read further than Israeli propaganda it doesn't seem so straight forward.

Of genocide is a legal term then I guess future courts will have to gather evidence and prosecute a case publically looking at available evidence. I actually think this won't happen but I could be proven wrong. If you use the term genocide for the current Israeli response to October 7th how would you go about deceiving October 7th itself.....(but of a clue raping and killing unarmed civilians systematically with purpose is errrr......genocide).

You can see why Israelis are defensive with such bias against them but at a fundamental level western nations aren't going to abandon an ally of refuse arms to Istael......that is for the birds.

Be my guest! Come do explain why "Deutschland den Deutschen" is bad (it genuinely is and it terrifies me and it should terrify you) but "death to the Arabs" (same, contemporary) is not ...

They’ll deny it happened unfortunately.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-aims-to-capture-75-of-gaza-strip-in-2-months-in-new-offensive-against-hamas/

For balance this is how Israel describes its offensive in more prosaic language.

There are a lot of civilians being killed as part of this war. That is undeniable.
It’s not a genocide though. Every attack made by Israel has a terrorist in its sights.
Hamas can end most civilian deaths by not using them as human shields. Hamas can accelerate a truce by releasing the hostages. Hamas can assist in getting aid to the Gazan population by not stealing the contents to sell for their own profit, and providing safe passage.
Hamas want to continue the war. The blood of the Gazan children that are dying is on their hands only.

Who said death to the arabs isnt bad, who decided to compare these two phrases, what has it got to do with people delegitimising the state of Israrl which is what we were talking about. Everyone can see what you're doing, Im not engaging with you any more.

Every attack made by Israel has a terrorist in its sights.

Does it? How can you be so sure?

"Between 18 March and 9 April 2025, there were some 224 incidents of Israeli strikes on residential buildings and tents for internally displaced people," she told reporters in Geneva.

"In some 36 strikes about which the UN Human Rights Office corroborated information, the fatalities recorded so far were only women and children," she said.

That's a lot in less than month. How can we be so sure that that isn't deliberate from a country that has been open about the fact they wish to ethnically cleanse Gaza and who has some their citizens openly chanting about 'death to arabs' in the streets whilst being protected by the very people tasked with bombing Gaza?

www.france24.com/en/middle-east/20250411-un-finds-36-israeli-strikes-on-gaza-killed-only-women-and-children

https://www.haaretz.com/

even newspapers that are concerned about the war of course avoid the term genocide. Genocide just seems to be a term appropriated by those institutions antagonistic of Israel and continued use of the term in my opinion will only undermine the impartiality of such institutions.

-There is no genocide
-the total population does not grow in a genocide.
-approx 50,000 people have been killed a significant proportion of these are young fighting age men. This figure has been estimated by an analysis of the statistics from several sources and is believed to be the most accurate.
-Hamas has stolen all of the food entering Gaza, it is selling it for their war chest.
-if a country does not wish to have war casualties then they should not start a war.
Hamas encourages the death of noncombatants by using them as human shields.

The blood of the Gazan children that are dying is on their hands only.

Utter fucking nonsense that you can totally absolve Israel from literally any wrong doing.

History is not going to look kindly on people with this farcical view.

Nope, in reply to you.