[Beren]

Yet if Israel did so, it would end its peace treaty with Egypt at worst, destabilize a key ally at best. Hence, it does not.

Ending the peace treaty wouldn't really be an option, "serious military escalation" is the most serious consequence the Egyptians have allegedly put to view.

[wat0n]

That means ending the treaty, @Beren

[starman2003]

It'd be more prosaic than that.

I dunno…things may reach a point of no return. Depending on how Israel goes, it may undo the last 50 years of peacemaking. Yesterday a news article stated that a "growing number" of Israeli lawmakers favor expulsion of gazans--West Bank arabs too no doubt. An expert said this should be taken seriously. The Jordanians do.

They may have even asked Hamas for it.

In a sense yes. Just a few months ago Bibi boasted in effect that he had marginalized the palestinians. While talking to a gulf official "the subject of the palestinians came up only once and just for a few seconds." Nobody gave a damn about the palestinians anymore; they were passe, one could safely ignore them. Hamas felt it had no choice but to prove the palestinians were still a significant factor...

[Beren]

That means ending the treaty, @Beren

Or it means the Sinai would get more militarised and the refugees would be pushed back into Gaza or Israel, which would be logical.

Not exactly a precise wording. Why don't they say it'd jeopardise the peace treaty? It'd be clear and diplomatic.

[Pants-of-dog]

The counter argument (that Gazans are not fleeing en masse) has already been refuted several times.

If that and the fact that Egypt would get mad are the only counter arguments for ethnic cleansing, the argument for wthnic cleansing us very strong indeed.

[wat0n]

That argument hasn't been refuted at all. Gazans are still in Gaza, being internally displaced by the war yet not fleeing outside.

[ingliz]

@wat0n

In a statement published last Friday, the media office of Gaza’s government said about 40,000 housing units in the besieged enclave had been destroyed by the Israeli army and over 50% of housing stock damaged. There is a link between genocide and domicide: genocide refers to the killing of people and domicide to the erasure of their presence and their material culture.

In 2022, a UN expert on housing argued that domicide should be recognised as an international crime.

[wat0n]

By this logic, the battle to retake Mosul from ISIS was genocide

Safwan’s frustration is common in Mosul. Though the city was liberated from ISIS in 2017, millions of tons of rubble are yet to be cleared; 40% of old Mosul remains disconnected from any water network; electricity is erratic; in certain neighborhoods, corpses and IEDs remain on the roadside. Sixty-five percent of the city’s housing stock was damaged or destroyed; in the less damaged quarters, spiking rents drive families into debt, while a lack of jobs leaves young men idle in tea shops. The surviving hospitals and schools cannot support the population of 1.5 million; in the street, children orphaned in the battle beg for change, then curse those who refuse them.

Not that it's unsurprising to find those who justify the October 7th massacre are claiming this type of nonsense.

[ingliz]

@wat0n

Nonsense?

30TH & 31ST MEETINGS (AM & PM)
GA/SHC/4388
20 Oct. 2023

The United Nations General Assembly Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian & Cultural Issues) has urged states to classify domicide as a war crime.

[wat0n]

Yes, nonsense

The irony is that your own source from the UNGA committee (which is even less relevant than the plenum) implies it's not a war crime.

[ingliz]

@wat0n

What's the difference?

Hamas: 137 hostages

Israel: 7,000 Palestinians in Israeli prisons, many detained without charge

Answer ...

6,863

[wat0n]

And now something that literally has nothing to do with ethnic cleansing or genocide, and drawing equivalences between convicted terrorists and 10-month old babies, heh @ingliz?

Sounds desperate.

[Pants-of-dog]

If the counter argument is that the mere ongoing presence of the targeted ethnic group refutes the claims of genocide and ethnic cleansing, then the persistent presence of Jews in Europe from antiquity to the present day refutes the claim that Europeans ever practiced genocide or ethnic cleansing against Jews.

Since this is an incorrect conclusion, the counter argument fails.

[wat0n]

No, it's not simply the mere presence of Gazans in Gaza that disproves your claims of ethnic cleansing. It's that there has been no large scale expulsion or emigration from Gaza during this war.

Nice straw man there, @Pants-of-dog. It seems you're running desperate to push for post-hoc justifications for mass murder.

[QatzelOk]

...The only ones treating Palestinians like lab rats are those using them as human shields - that is, Hamas and its sponsors Iran, Turkey and Qatar...

Many teenagers blame other people for their violent or immoral behavior. This is because they have not reached an adult level of morality and social development, so this is part of their emotional journey in becoming adults.

Imagine if a nation of adults used the same immature tactic as many teenagers do:
("It's her sexy clothing that caused the rape." "They forced us to genocide them." "I hit Carl because he got a better grade than I did. I blame this violence on the public display of grades!")

Becoming a real adult means taking responsibility for your own actions, and not constantly thinking you have the right to hurt others because you are still "Mommy's little precious" and other people are just "people who Mommy protects me from."

[wat0n]

You mean like how you and others supporters of Palestinian terrorism justify those attacks on something Israel did (like existing, for example), @QatzelOk?

[QatzelOk]

You mean like how you and others supporters of Palestinian terrorism ...?

Terror is what created Israel, along with bribes, blackmail and genocide.

The use of the words "Palestinian" and "terrorist" in the same sentence, is used to build a racism against Arabs so that Euro-jews can kill them with no consequences.

(Notice that the WaPo article is careful to use the words "Jewish resistance groups" instead of "Jewish terror organizations?" The difference in vocabulary was obviously paid for.)

For no cost to you at all, let me offer you this: "Palestinian Resistance Groups" have all of my support against the racists who are trying to steal their stuff and destroy their culture and reputation. I would have the same opinion of First Nations Resistance groups while they were resisting the Euro-racists who eventually genocided them.

***

...During last month’s seven-day pause in fighting when Israel and Hamas swapped hostages, the National Post ran JNS content that repeatedly referred to the freed Palestinians — the majority of whom were children and/or prisoners who had not been charged with any crime — as “terrorists.”

At the same time as it was forcing pro-Israel opinion onto the pages of its local newspapers, CanWest’s Winnipeg office suppressed critical voices.

In January 2002, head office quashed a column by Indigenous StarPhoenix and Leader Post columnist Doug Cuthand, who likened the plight of the Palestinians to Indigenous Peoples in Canada.

[ingliz]

@wat0n

"terrorists"

They are not convicted terrorists as many have not even been charged. And the military courts are not courts, but summary justice factories.

A façade of propriety masks one of the most injurious apparatuses of the occupation. The military orders are all written by Israeli soldiers and reflect what they consider to be harmful to Israeli interests. Palestinians have no way of influencing the content of the military orders that rule their lives. The military judges and prosecutors are always Israeli soldiers in uniform. The Palestinians are always viewed as either suspects or defendants and are almost always convicted. For all these reasons, military courts are not an impartial, neutral arbitrator – nor can they be. They are firmly entrenched on one side of this unequal balance and serve as one of the central systems maintaining Israel’s control over the Palestinian people.

In the early 1980s, the Attorney General decided that Israeli citizens would be tried in the Israeli civilian court system according to Israeli penal laws, even if they lived in the Occupied Territories and the offense was committed there, against residents of the Occupied Territories. That policy remains in effect to this day.

This means people are tried in different courts, under different laws, for the same offense committed in the same place: Palestinian defendants are tried in military courts, their guilt or innocence determined according to the evidence laws followed in this court system, and their sentences according to the provisions of military orders. Israeli defendants are tried in a civilian court in Israel, exonerated or convicted under Israeli evidence laws, and sentenced under Israeli law.

[Pants-of-dog]

The lack of large scale emigration also does not refute the claims of ethnic cleansing and genocide. There were also periods in European history when Europeans were attempting to kill or remove Jews en masse and there were no large scale emigrations.

And as explained earlier, Egypt is refusing passage to refugees because they think the IDF is conducting a program of ethnic cleansing.

And the idea that getting to Europe is easy has also been refuted.

Consequently, the counter argument of no large scale emigration also does not refute the claims.

[wat0n]

Terror is what created Israel, along with bribes, blackmail and genocide.

The use of the words "Palestinian" and "terrorist" in the same sentence, is used to build a racism against Arabs so that Euro-jews can kill them with no consequences.

(Notice that the WaPo article is careful to use the words "Jewish resistance groups" instead of "Jewish terror organizations?" The difference in vocabulary was obviously paid for.)

For no cost to you at all, let me offer you this: "Palestinian Resistance Groups" have all of my support against the racists who are trying to steal their stuff and destroy their culture and reputation. I would have the same opinion of First Nations Resistance groups while they were resisting the Euro-racists who eventually genocided them.

***

If you want to call the Irgun and Lehi Jewish terrorists I'm just fine with it. Irgun itself was eventually crushed by the Israeli state itself because it insisted on its terrorism, something similar happened to Lehi as it did not stop its terrorist activities in Israel itself in the 1950s. If that's your argument, it's a shitty one.

@wat0n

"terrorists"

They are not convicted terrorists as many have not even been charged. And the military courts are not courts, but summary justice factories.

A façade of propriety masks one of the most injurious apparatuses of the occupation. The military orders are all written by Israeli soldiers and reflect what they consider to be harmful to Israeli interests. Palestinians have no way of influencing the content of the military orders that rule their lives. The military judges and prosecutors are always Israeli soldiers in uniform. The Palestinians are always viewed as either suspects or defendants and are almost always convicted. For all these reasons, military courts are not an impartial, neutral arbitrator – nor can they be. They are firmly entrenched on one side of this unequal balance and serve as one of the central systems maintaining Israel’s control over the Palestinian people.

In the early 1980s, the Attorney General decided that Israeli citizens would be tried in the Israeli civilian court system according to Israeli penal laws, even if they lived in the Occupied Territories and the offense was committed there, against residents of the Occupied Territories. That policy remains in effect to this day.

This means people are tried in different courts, under different laws, for the same offense committed in the same place: Palestinian defendants are tried in military courts, their guilt or innocence determined according to the evidence laws followed in this court system, and their sentences according to the provisions of military orders. Israeli defendants are tried in a civilian court in Israel, exonerated or convicted under Israeli evidence laws, and sentenced under Israeli law.

Too bad many of the terrorists were taped on video carrying out the type of attacks you wish you could do but lack the guts to.

The lack of large scale emigration also does not refute the claims of ethnic cleansing and genocide. There were also periods in European history when Europeans were attempting to kill or remove Jews en masse and there were no large scale emigrations.

You mean because they just murdered them en masse?

And as explained earlier, Egypt is refusing passage to refugees because they think the IDF is conducting a program of ethnic cleansing.

And the idea that getting to Europe is easy has also been refuted.

Consequently, the counter argument of no large scale emigration also does not refute the claims.

It does refute the claim that Israel is ethnically cleansing Gaza if you can't prove there has been mass expulsion or even emigration from there.

If it's about trying, nothing stops Israel from sending ships to Gaza's shores to let Gazans go elsewhere. You know, like that old Arab propaganda about throwing the Jews to the sea.

Getting into Europe by sea isn't that hard, given there have been millions who have succeeded in doing just that this last decade.