Genocide in Gaza

[Icanthinkformyselfthanks]

it’s intimidating posting here even though I don’t know you people.
Isreal has offered the Arabs a peace deal but they can’t accept it. Hamas, the Arabs in general can’t accept any peace deal offered to them because the only solution acceptable to them is the total annihilation of all Jews. Let’s be clear they seek a genocide of all Jews. The Jews however seek to continue living peacefully.
Im pretty sure any antisemites won’t watch this video and if they do they’ll be saying it’s fake…
https://www.facebook.com/reel/28610864781871076/?fs=e&fs=e

What facts have you used to come to the conclusion that most Palestinians are moderate Muslims and Christians?

The vast majority of Palestinians reject armed struggle, do not support political Islam, and do not support Hamas. Polling shows most Palestinians favour a two-state solution on 1967 borders, and diplomacy as the route to get there.

The Palestinian struggle has always been grounded in nationalism, not religious fundamentalism.

There are so many sources that support this, it’s really not an out there or wacky claim. If you are interested, take look at the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research’s poll from August 2026 as a starter…

https://www.pcpsr.org/en/node/1014

And yet both of my grandparents did the same one of which was a prisoner of war.

I'm still wondering if @dwordle can provide evidence for the extremely incendiary claims they made about me.

That will be decided by the international court case, not by people on social media. Factually speaking it hasn't been determined yet and won't be for ages.

Even if these numbers are accurate 2 in every 100 people dying is insane. Can you imagine a class of British children and saying in a year group 2 will die and more will be maimed because our neighbours are breaking international law. It’s callous to think women and children being murdered is somehow not a big deal.

• That survey shows that Hamas has lost a lot of political support in Gaza, but that could just be because when Palestinians look around, they have to conclude that Hamas lost the war they started.

• Before it was obvious the attack on Israel was a mistake that Palestinians would pay horribly for, Hamas had a lot more support.

• The same public opinion poll you used but an earlier one dated 13th December 23 (less than 2 months after Hamas attacked Israel) found that support for Hamas had more than tripled in the West Bank compared to 3 months ago.

• In the Gaza Strip, support for Hamas had increased but not significantly.

• Support for armed struggle rose ten percentage points compared to three months earlier, with more than 60% saying it was the best means of ending the Israeli occupation; in the West Bank, the percentage rose further to close to 70%.

https://pcpsr.org/en/node/961

@Dancingonlies ”It’s callous to think women and children being murdered is somehow not a big deal.”

Murdered? These are civilian casualties in a war. A war the Palestinians started.
The people that died during the blitz, during the siege of Stalingrad, in Nagasaki, don’t get referred to as being murdered.
They also don’t get referred to as genocide, despite 600,000+ people dying in Stalingrad, 40,000 in the blitz and 70,000 in Nagasaki.

Thanks for posting this, really interesting.

I'm curious as to how you read this and came to the conclusion that the majority of Palestinians are Christians and moderate Muslims.

The summary below states 75% do not favour Hamas disarmament, the Iran axis inc Iran, Hezbollah, Houthis have 50% satisfaction ratings- what are these groups other than the apotheosis of political Islam?

Support for armed struggle has fallen from 4/10 to less than 3/10, which is still pretty high for society as a whole and was only very recently much higher- with almost half of those polled favoring armed struggle. Thats not a moderate society, although you could make a fairly weak argument it is a more moderate society than it was...
Less than half of those people think negotiations are the best way forward.

In direct contradiction to what you've written above, polling shows that 6/10 believe the 2SS is no longer practical.

The report further goes on to talk about how Marwan Baghouti is the most popular political figure- a confirmed terrorist who killed Israeli civilians. Doesn't sound very moderate to me. Plus the recent report about the terrible conditions faced by women and children in Gaza in particular, and the known oppression of gay people... not really what I would call moderate either.

In all, nothing in your post has led me to the conclusion that Palestinian society is moderate.

I'll ask again, why do you think the vast majority of Palestinians are Christians and moderate Muslims?

That’s not really how it works though.

Calling someone a “civilian casualty” doesn’t automatically make their death lawful just because there’s a war on. Civilians are still protected under the laws of war, and deliberately targeting them is unlawful.

And genocide isn’t about hitting a certain death toll. The legal question is about intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a protected group. So saying “more people died at Stalingrad or Nagasaki and we don’t call that genocide” doesn’t really prove anything either way. You can argue about whether Gaza meets that legal definition, but comparing raw numbers doesn’t settle it.

The reason the two state solution becomes less and less practical every year is because Israel continues to build illegal settlements on Palestinian land and transfer its population into the West Bank, displacing Palestinians from their rightfully held land. That’s just realpolitik not an indication they are a bunch of suicide bombers about to blow themselves up on the London Underground as you suggested.

The Palestinians have been had their land stolen, their houses demolished, their crops destroyed, and their children murdered by enemy action. They are being genocided, and yet only 27% support armed struggle against their persecutors. I would call that moderate yes.

Maybe think on why you are so ready to buy into Israel’s propaganda which is intended to de-humanise and legitimise their slaughter.

Pretty light on facts here, and heavy on the opinion...

I said nothing about suicide bombers or the London Underground. I didn't mention any Israel "propoganda" I merely referred back to the article you linked. I wonder why you jumped to those conclusions? You either think those things yourself or have assumed with no evidence I do.

I'm not wasting my time knocking down your strawman.

A moderate society does not condone violence against civilians for political ends, marry off its girl children to their rapists, oppress their gays, support terrorists as leading politicians, and approve of the way Iran is run.

@HandPulledNoodles ”And genocide isn’t about hitting a certain death toll. The legal question is about intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a protected group.”

The only people Israel is trying inflict genocide upon is Hamas.

Light on facts… says the person making hysterical claims that Palestinians are prosecuting bombing campaigns in Western cities…

So being conservative on LGBT is now worse than blowing up hospitals and dismembering kids?

It’s not ok to genocide people because they’re not on your tolerant progressive bandwagon.

Another strawman.

All I've done is thank you for the interesting link you posted and refer back to it to make a few points.

All you've done is make wild jumps and assumptions then make strawman arguments. What a waste of my time.

Anyway I'll get on with my day now 🙄

I see your edit. Where did I make a claim that Palestinians are prosecuting bombing campaigns in western cities? I think you've got me mixed up with someone else and I'd appreciate the correction.

It’s not ok op to come online saying that Palestinians are terrorists who pose a threat to the lives of Western people. That’s the central claim that is used to legitimise the genocide, and innocent people who have done nothing but just try to life a benighted life in their ancestral lands are losing their lives in vast numbers because of it.

Oh gosh I am sorry @dairydebris I have checked back and it was @Notmycircusnotmyotter who made that comment. A terrible thing to say which I shouldn’t have attributed to you.

Intimidating? The right wing Israel supporters were threatening posters with police action at the beginning of this latest conflict.

But that’s the point. Hamas isn’t the group covered by the genocide allegation. Palestinians are.

Saying “Israel is only trying to destroy Hamas” just sidesteps the actual question. You can say your target is Hamas, the issue is whether the actions towards Palestinians, and the evidence around intent, amount to trying to destroy part of that protected group.

So no, “but Hamas” doesn't work as easy as it might be to say and as much as you might want it to.

It doesn't side step it. It goes to the heart of it. The case against Israel accuses them of intent to destroy the Palestinians as a group, in whole or in part.

Israel will argue their intent was to destroy Hamas, and the innocent Palestinians killed were not the intended targets, only the 'collateral damage'- I know its a horrible phrase.

In Israels favour- their attempts to evacute civilian areas they intended to target, the fact that Hamas don't separate themselves from their civilians etc

Not in Israels favour- withholding of aid and some decidedly genocidal rhetoric from some parts of their government.

We shall see.

I don’t care about your opinion.
A bunch of ‘scholars’ (the likes of Jason Arday no doubt) is not the ICC or ICJ.

Your argument is void.

I find it useful to try to think of how Israel could possibly have gone about a full scale war against Hamas without huge civilian casualties occurring... given the population density, the lack of countries willing to accept refugees, the known tactics of Hamas, I don't see how there couldn't have been a lot of innocent loss of life. And I believe that was by Hamas design, to let civilians die while they hid in tunnels.
I also find the idf testimony in Naza to be proof that there wasn't intent to destroy Palestinians, but that there was a disregard generally for civilian life. And certainly war crimes. All of which are terrible enough, but not a genocide...

But then Ben Gvir, Smotrich at al? Then I start doubting myself a little bit...

Overall though I'd say I'm fairly confident its not a genocide.

I get the argument fighting Hamas in Gaza was always going to cause horrific civilian casualties. The density, tunnels and Hamas operating among civilians obviously matter. That doesn’t settle the genocide question. The issue is whether the wider pattern mass killing, displacement, destruction of civilian infrastructure, restricting aid, and statements from senior ministers points to an intent beyond simply defeating Hamas.

And Ben-Gvir, Smotrich etc aren’t just embarrassing nutters on the sidelines. When senior government figures are talking about removing Palestinians while all of that is happening, their words become relevant evidence of intent.
You can still think the evidence ultimately falls short of genocide. But “Hamas made civilian deaths inevitable” explains part of the death toll; it doesn’t explain away everything else.