Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Conflict in the Middle East

Israel committing genocide in Gaza, world’s top scholars on the crime say

681 replies

Everexpanding · 01/09/2025 17:15

An overwhelming majority of members of the world’s leading genocide scholars’ association have backed a resolution stating that Israel’s actions in Gaza meet the legal definition of the crime.
Eighty-six per cent of those who voted in the 500-member International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) supported the motion. The resolution states that “Israel’s policies and actions in Gaza meet the legal definition of genocide in article II of the United Nations convention for the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide (1948).”

www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/01/israel-committing-genocide-in-gaza-worlds-top-scholars-on-the-say

Gaza | The Guardian

Latest news, sport, business, comment, analysis and reviews from the Guardian, the world's leading liberal voice

https://www.theguardian.com/world/gaza

OP posts:
Thread gallery
23
Martymcfly24 · 02/09/2025 19:29

Lolapusht · 02/09/2025 19:15

Yeah, but what does he actually know?

Ooh…did you just do an appeal to authority?! We’re not meant to do those any more. Did you not get the memo?

Edited

He' doesn't know an awful lot it's seems
He says it's a lie that Israel is illegally occupying Gaza.

CaramelPecan · 02/09/2025 19:41

Martymcfly24 · 02/09/2025 19:29

He' doesn't know an awful lot it's seems
He says it's a lie that Israel is illegally occupying Gaza.

It is a lie.

Just because something is repeated often enough, or even decided in a flawed legal opinion, doesn’t make it true.

Can you lay out the legal evidence for why you think it is?

This webinar sets out the legal argument and is very informative. It’s about an hour long but worthwhile listening to if you are interested in legal FACTS.

Lolapusht · 02/09/2025 19:43

Martymcfly24 · 02/09/2025 19:29

He' doesn't know an awful lot it's seems
He says it's a lie that Israel is illegally occupying Gaza.

Oh well, in that case discount everything he says now that you’ve so robustly discredited him…

Martymcfly24 · 02/09/2025 19:44

CaramelPecan · 02/09/2025 19:41

It is a lie.

Just because something is repeated often enough, or even decided in a flawed legal opinion, doesn’t make it true.

Can you lay out the legal evidence for why you think it is?

This webinar sets out the legal argument and is very informative. It’s about an hour long but worthwhile listening to if you are interested in legal FACTS.

I don't have an hour could you give me the shortened version of the FACTS why Israel is not illegally occupying Gaza

SharonEllis · 02/09/2025 19:46

Martymcfly24 · 02/09/2025 18:08

Oh I know they do.

You seem to be only interested in Hamas doing so like the poster so it's all fair.

If you read my post I said both sides need to take responsibility.

Martymcfly24 · 02/09/2025 19:49

Lolapusht · 02/09/2025 19:43

Oh well, in that case discount everything he says now that you’ve so robustly discredited him…

To be fair it's a pretty fundamental thing to the whole conflict to disagree with the ICJ and the UN about and kinda brings his whole opinion into disrepute.

Beachtastic · 02/09/2025 20:39

dairydebris · 02/09/2025 17:44

I would suggest those people have studied war over the last few centuries and know what humans are capable of.

Humans have kept it up for the entirety of their history.

I honestly think this is why male forums tend to be more sane than MN on this subject.

Rallentanda · 02/09/2025 20:41

Beachtastic · 02/09/2025 20:39

I honestly think this is why male forums tend to be more sane than MN on this subject.

I would rather poke my eyes out that hang about on any male forum. Are you a man?

Beachtastic · 02/09/2025 20:42

Rallentanda · 02/09/2025 20:41

I would rather poke my eyes out that hang about on any male forum. Are you a man?

Not last time I looked in my pants, no...?

Beachtastic · 02/09/2025 20:42

Are you a man hater? Does that feed into your view of the conflict?

Rallentanda · 02/09/2025 20:44

Beachtastic · 02/09/2025 20:42

Are you a man hater? Does that feed into your view of the conflict?

Not a hater but not enamoured by men as a species. I am just surprised by anyone who goes looking for the opinions of men!

ETA No my views on men do not alter my views on genocide.

SharonEllis · 02/09/2025 20:46

Rallentanda · 02/09/2025 20:44

Not a hater but not enamoured by men as a species. I am just surprised by anyone who goes looking for the opinions of men!

ETA No my views on men do not alter my views on genocide.

Edited

If we take out the men among the great world leading scholars of genocide I wonder how many opinions you are left with.

Beachtastic · 02/09/2025 20:46

Rallentanda · 02/09/2025 20:44

Not a hater but not enamoured by men as a species. I am just surprised by anyone who goes looking for the opinions of men!

ETA No my views on men do not alter my views on genocide.

Edited

a species...?! 🤔

I don't go looking for the opinions of men any more than I go looking for the opinions of women. I have found that male forums are less emotional and more pragmatic. Broad generalisation obvs!!

CaramelPecan · 02/09/2025 21:43

Martymcfly24 · 02/09/2025 19:44

I don't have an hour could you give me the shortened version of the FACTS why Israel is not illegally occupying Gaza

That video is my previous post explained how the ICJ came to their decision.

My biggest takeaway was that the ICJ opinion being ADVISORY is not legally binding so, importantly, cannot be legally challenged.

Fact finding and evidence presented by parties doesn’t have to be taken into consideration.

Israel’s valid security concerns were not taken into account and as the opinion was requested before Oct 7th, the events of that and future security concerns were not taken into account.

Additionally the President of the ICJ, now the Prime Minister of Lebanon, did not recuse himself despite obvious potential issues with bias.

The UN adopted the opinion as a non legally binding Resolution(i.e. a political statement) as predicted 2 months later, and on that basis the consensus is that Israel is an illegal occupier.

This video is 18 minutes long and clearly explains the international law that should have been applied and doesn’t seem to apply to Israel strangely enough.

Natasha is extremely clear, concise, and speaks factually which is probably why she gets so much hate!

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music that you love, upload original content and share it all with friends, family and the world on YouTube.

https://youtu.be/91iD2R_nhxo?feature=shared

TulipLavender · 02/09/2025 22:06

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

TulipLavender · 02/09/2025 22:41

CaramelPecan · 02/09/2025 21:43

That video is my previous post explained how the ICJ came to their decision.

My biggest takeaway was that the ICJ opinion being ADVISORY is not legally binding so, importantly, cannot be legally challenged.

Fact finding and evidence presented by parties doesn’t have to be taken into consideration.

Israel’s valid security concerns were not taken into account and as the opinion was requested before Oct 7th, the events of that and future security concerns were not taken into account.

Additionally the President of the ICJ, now the Prime Minister of Lebanon, did not recuse himself despite obvious potential issues with bias.

The UN adopted the opinion as a non legally binding Resolution(i.e. a political statement) as predicted 2 months later, and on that basis the consensus is that Israel is an illegal occupier.

This video is 18 minutes long and clearly explains the international law that should have been applied and doesn’t seem to apply to Israel strangely enough.

Natasha is extremely clear, concise, and speaks factually which is probably why she gets so much hate!

@CaramelPecan Can't see how Natasha can use the law of uti possidetis without making the state of Israel a non-Jewish majority apartheid state.

If uti possidetis juris is applied to Israel it cannot remain a Jewish state and a democratic state.

I'm not sure that this gives you the 'unfair to Israel' spin that you were hoping for.

Everexpanding · 02/09/2025 23:11

factor50fan · 02/09/2025 16:30

It was relative peace for that area of the Middle East. It was certainly more peaceful that October 7th to deliberately provoke a war. Hamas were continuing to murder Israeli citizens and launch rocket attacks from 2005 right up to Oct 7th 2023 yet Israel did not respond with war. What other country which has rockets launched at it does that? What other country which has rocket attacks launched at it would be expected not to respond with war?

But of course, your narrative removes Hamas, and the rest of the middle east countries and factions who are seeking to destroy Israel, from the picture. Because doing that makes Israel look irrational and bad, rather than a nation trying to secure its survival from a host of players intent on its complete destruction.

And are you really saying that Hamas spending its resources on preparing for war rather than building peace was the right thing to do? Are you really saying that this should be wiped from our reckoning of Israel's actions? And of Hamas's actions?

Edited

To quote “”It was certainly more peaceful that October 7th to deliberately provoke a war. Hamas were continuing to murder Israeli citizens and launch rocket attacks from 2005 right up to Oct 7th 2023 yet Israel did not respond with war.” ??? Please don’t spread misinformation Israel was far from a peaceful neighbour

What about operation Cast Lead in 2008?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/07/ten-years-first-war-gaza-operation-cast-lead-israel-brute-force

what about the peaceful Palestinian protestors killed it injured in 2018?
190 killed and 28,000 injured in a year of bloodshed
www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2019/mar/29/a-year-of-bloodshed-at-gaza-border-protests

Ten years after the first war on Gaza, Israel still plans endless brute force | Avi Shlaim

Operation Cast Lead killed 1,417 people. Chillingly, the generals call their repeated bombardments ‘mowing the lawn’, says academic Avi Shlaim

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/07/ten-years-first-war-gaza-operation-cast-lead-israel-brute-force

OP posts:
CaramelPecan · 03/09/2025 01:17

TulipLavender · 02/09/2025 22:41

@CaramelPecan Can't see how Natasha can use the law of uti possidetis without making the state of Israel a non-Jewish majority apartheid state.

If uti possidetis juris is applied to Israel it cannot remain a Jewish state and a democratic state.

I'm not sure that this gives you the 'unfair to Israel' spin that you were hoping for.

I wasn’t trying to spin anything. The facts speak for themselves and what my posts were addressing was whether Israel were illegal occupiers.

In 1967 it would have been stupidly suicidal for Israel to absorb a large hostile Arab population, although you could argue the Palestinians may well have had a better outcome today if they had.

Israel would obviously have had to give them full citizenship rights, as they did to the existing Arab Israeli population, with all the terrorism that would have enabled.

Israel was left to administer Gaza and the West Bank under military rule due to obvious security concerns because Egypt and Jordan refused to take them back under land for peace deals because of Palestinian violence and uprisings while under their control, the Palestinians have rejected all peaceful solutions and even having been given their own autonomous State in Gaza, they immediately elected a terrorist organisation with a mandate to annihilate Israel!

If you want to spin it as ‘Israel want all the land for Greater Israel’, perhaps you should look at factual history?

Israel could have ethnically cleansed Arabs from the West Bank and Egypt in 1967 and absorbed the land into Israel (in the same way 1 million Jews were ethically cleansed from surrounding Arab countries). There was an Arab population of 1 million then in Jordan and the West Bank then, (no Jews) although how many moved into the area from Jordan and Egypt during the 19 years of Jordanian and Egyptian illegal occupation is anyone’s guess. It is said that a large proportion of today’s Palestinians originated from Egypt in Gaza and from Lebanon and Jordan in the West Bank.

Israel have consistently tried to make land for peace deals in the face of horrific terrorist attacks while still having to counter valid security concerns, hence Area C of the West Bank and the blockade of Gaza.

I mean you’d have to completely delusional to deny that.

CaramelPecan · 03/09/2025 01:33

Everexpanding · 02/09/2025 23:11

To quote “”It was certainly more peaceful that October 7th to deliberately provoke a war. Hamas were continuing to murder Israeli citizens and launch rocket attacks from 2005 right up to Oct 7th 2023 yet Israel did not respond with war.” ??? Please don’t spread misinformation Israel was far from a peaceful neighbour

What about operation Cast Lead in 2008?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/07/ten-years-first-war-gaza-operation-cast-lead-israel-brute-force

what about the peaceful Palestinian protestors killed it injured in 2018?
190 killed and 28,000 injured in a year of bloodshed
www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2019/mar/29/a-year-of-bloodshed-at-gaza-border-protests

Differing views and as always the Israeli side is dismissed in favour of a terrorist organisation…….

www.idf.il/en/mini-sites/wars-and-operations/operation-cast-lead/

https://www.adl.org/resources/report/gaza-march-return-what-you-need-know

Gaza was far from a peaceful neighbour but who cares about a few rockets, mortars, molotov cocktails, and peaceful attempts to breach a border to commit terrorist activities with explosives, in the great scheme of things?

TulipLavender · 03/09/2025 04:44

CaramelPecan · 03/09/2025 01:17

I wasn’t trying to spin anything. The facts speak for themselves and what my posts were addressing was whether Israel were illegal occupiers.

In 1967 it would have been stupidly suicidal for Israel to absorb a large hostile Arab population, although you could argue the Palestinians may well have had a better outcome today if they had.

Israel would obviously have had to give them full citizenship rights, as they did to the existing Arab Israeli population, with all the terrorism that would have enabled.

Israel was left to administer Gaza and the West Bank under military rule due to obvious security concerns because Egypt and Jordan refused to take them back under land for peace deals because of Palestinian violence and uprisings while under their control, the Palestinians have rejected all peaceful solutions and even having been given their own autonomous State in Gaza, they immediately elected a terrorist organisation with a mandate to annihilate Israel!

If you want to spin it as ‘Israel want all the land for Greater Israel’, perhaps you should look at factual history?

Israel could have ethnically cleansed Arabs from the West Bank and Egypt in 1967 and absorbed the land into Israel (in the same way 1 million Jews were ethically cleansed from surrounding Arab countries). There was an Arab population of 1 million then in Jordan and the West Bank then, (no Jews) although how many moved into the area from Jordan and Egypt during the 19 years of Jordanian and Egyptian illegal occupation is anyone’s guess. It is said that a large proportion of today’s Palestinians originated from Egypt in Gaza and from Lebanon and Jordan in the West Bank.

Israel have consistently tried to make land for peace deals in the face of horrific terrorist attacks while still having to counter valid security concerns, hence Area C of the West Bank and the blockade of Gaza.

I mean you’d have to completely delusional to deny that.

It is false that Palestinians in Gaza and the west bank originate from Egypt or Jordan, that claim is not supported by academic or genetic evidence. They aren't just Arabs but Palestinians.

If Israel are not illegally occupying Gaza and West Bank due to the principle of uti possidetis juris - then Israel is an apartheid state.

An impartial observer could cite multiple elements which dispute your assertion that Israel has consistently tried to make land for peace deals despite the terror attacks and security threats. The first peace negotiation involving Palestinians didn't happen until 1990s, continued settlements expansion as the peace negotiations took place, Israel have refused to agree to elements such as Palestinian right of return despite Israel having similar. Even the 1967 un resolution 252 land for peace failed to lead to Israel withdrawing from all of the areas it gained territory in to secure peace.

Daniel Levy, Israeli former peace negotiator offers some substantive critiques of Israels role in the Oslo accords and subsequent approach which fails to offer a just peace for Palestinians. He says Israel prioritise continued occupational and Israeli military control over peace.

Moglet4 · 03/09/2025 05:25

Particularly considering her background lol, about as biased as you can get

SharonEllis · 03/09/2025 06:13

Moglet4 · 03/09/2025 05:25

Particularly considering her background lol, about as biased as you can get

Because she has Israeli heritage she is biased? What is it she actually said that you think is wrong?

PrawnAgain · 03/09/2025 09:17

CaramelPecan · 02/09/2025 00:56

What should Israel have done then to defy Hamas’ expectations?

Immediately remove the security blockade so they could do it again as they promised and ask Egypt nicely to remove theirs?

The whole point of Oct 7th was apparently because Israel was keeping Gazans in an open air prison (a pretty nice one in some parts), remember?

In the real world it's not a binary choice between that and genocide. However, of the two options I think what you typed out would probably be preferable.

Moglet4 · 03/09/2025 09:44

SharonEllis · 03/09/2025 06:13

Because she has Israeli heritage she is biased? What is it she actually said that you think is wrong?

The Israeli army has conducted itself with more respect for international law than any other army in history.
Zionism is not an ideology.
Israel has sovereignty over the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
Israel owns the land from the river to the sea.
The UK government’s policy is to appease Hamas.
There is no starvation in Gaza.

Being half Israeli is going to make her being biased more likely, of course, However, I was referring more to the pro bono work she does and her whole agenda. She doesn’t get ‘so much hate’ because she speaks ‘concisely and factually’.

CaramelPecan · 03/09/2025 09:59

Moglet4 · 03/09/2025 09:44

The Israeli army has conducted itself with more respect for international law than any other army in history.
Zionism is not an ideology.
Israel has sovereignty over the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
Israel owns the land from the river to the sea.
The UK government’s policy is to appease Hamas.
There is no starvation in Gaza.

Being half Israeli is going to make her being biased more likely, of course, However, I was referring more to the pro bono work she does and her whole agenda. She doesn’t get ‘so much hate’ because she speaks ‘concisely and factually’.

Edited

None of what she’s said in your list is wrong.

Swipe left for the next trending thread