[wat0n]

What is the argument?

Stop being lazy.

Accept the stats for what they are.

The reports from OCHA, UNRWA, OXFAM, the WFP and other aid organizations have all been quoted and all have explicitly stated that the IDF and Israeli government policies are responsible for the famine

It is Israeli soldiers who don't let them go into a war zone for their security.

Human Rights Watch is even more explicit:

HRW is the only one making those allegations.

The experts agree that famine is now happening:

https://www.ipcinfo.org/ipcinfo-website ... sue-97/en/

No famine has been declared.

This is also old information and the assessments are based on model results and not on the situation on the ground.

It is directly exacerbating an ongoing famine by shutting down one of the few land crossings for humanitarian aid, which also happens to be the main conduit for food aid now

Israel isn't shutting the crossing down.

This is incorrect.

It is not.

It's not my fault you disregard sources when they disagree with you.

You even lied about the source of OCHA's import data.

Since you refuse to clarify how it is Egypt's fault the crossing is closed, or explain why the crossing closed exactly when the IDF invaded, the logical conclusion is that the IDF is responsible for the closing of the crossing.

Egypt isn't letting cargo cross. In fact, it decided to reroute aid through Israel's Kerem Shalom crossing.

It does.disprove the claim that an IDF presence is needed for the crossing to be open.

The question is not if IDF presence is needed to keep the border crossing open. The question is if the ICJ ordered Israel to ensure the crossing remains open or not and if Israel would be in compliance with the order if the crossing remained closed even after the IDF withdrew.

[Pants-of-dog]

....
HRW is the only one making those allegations.

https://reliefweb.int/report/occupied-p ... lians-enhe

Israel has been intentionally starving the residents of the Gaza Strip for the last five months, while continuing to punish civilians through its 16-year-long blockade. Starving the civilian population as a method of warfare is a violation of international law and is recognized as a war crime.

In the last five months, Israel’s unparalleled attack and siege on Gaza have resulted in a dire humanitarian catastrophe, with over 75% of the population displaced and forcibly relocated to southern Gaza. Gaza’s residents are experiencing the highest levels of hunger, with parents scavenging through garbage heaps to nourish their children, skipping meals, and even resorting to eating animal feed to stay alive.

....

Physicians for Human Rights Israel is also calling it a war crime.

No famine has been declared.

.....
[

Exactly..

No famine has been declared despite the fact that there is one happening now.

Israel isn't shutting the crossing down.

It is not.

...

Egypt isn't letting cargo cross. In fact, it decided to reroute aid through Israel's Kerem Shalom crossing.
[

Egypt told the Israeli government that a military incursion at the crossing would be a violation of the peace treaty and would result in the closing of the crossing.

The IDF then proceeded to occupy the crossing with military forces.

The Keren Shalom crossing is already backed up. Adding more load to a bottleneck changes nothing.

The question is not if IDF presence is needed to keep the border crossing open. The question is if the ICJ ordered Israel to ensure the crossing remains open or not and if Israel would be in compliance with the order if the crossing remained closed even after the IDF withdrew.

The ICJ ordered Israel to ensure the crossing remains open to humanitarian aid.

This can be ascertained by a quick Google search and s therefore not a useful question.

Since the crossing is closed because of the presence of the IDF, it is logical to conclude that the absence of the IDF would open the crossing.

[QatzelOk]

...Since the crossing is closed because of the presence of the IDF, it is logical to conclude that the absence of the IDF would open the crossing.

Are you threatening to eradicate or expell the IDF?

Or is praxis impossible, and these are just abstract notions of what could have been... that you speak of?

[wat0n]

https://reliefweb.int/report/occupied-palestinian-territory/israel-deliberately-starving-gaza-civilians-enhe



Physicians for Human Rights Israel is also calling it a war crime.

Another NGO unqualified to make this type of call.

Exactly..

No famine has been declared despite the fact that there is one happening now.

Or maybe the technical bodies who actually can make these declarations disagree.

Egypt told the Israeli government that a military incursion at the crossing would be a violation of the peace treaty and would result in the closing of the crossing.

The IDF then proceeded to occupy the crossing with military forces.

Are you saying perceived military necessity can justify shutting border crossings even if it leads to restrictions in the flow of humanitarian aid?

Also, that interpretation of the 1979 Peace Treaty is certainly false since Israel controlled the Gazan side of the border crossing until 2005.

At last, it's good you stopped lying and admit Egypt decided to close the border crossing.

The Keren Shalom crossing is already backed up. Adding more load to a bottleneck changes nothing.

Tell that to Egypt.

The ICJ ordered Israel to ensure the crossing remains open to humanitarian aid.

This can be ascertained by a quick Google search and s therefore not a useful question.

Since the crossing is closed because of the presence of the IDF, it is logical to conclude that the absence of the IDF would open the crossing.

The border crossing is closed because, as you said, Egypt decided to close it.

If the IDF was withdrawn and Egypt kept the border crossing closed, would Israel be in compliance with the provisional order?

[Pants-of-dog]

Another NGO unqualified to make this type of call.

You forgot your argument again.

You had just claimed that HRW is the only group accusing the IDF and the Israeli government of using starvation as a weapon.

Now we see that human rights groups within Israel are also making the accusation, so the claim that only one group is making this accusation is incorrect.

Or maybe the technical bodies who actually can make these declarations disagree.

It is not technical bodies who declare famines. It is governments. Technical bodies simply provide the information needed to determine if famine is occurring.

In this case, they have provided the information that Gaza is undergoing famine.

Whether or not a political body then takes this information and declares it a famine is beyond the scope of these technical bodies.

Are you saying perceived military necessity can justify shutting border crossings even if it leads to restrictions in the flow of humanitarian aid?

No.

Also, that interpretation of the 1979 Peace Treaty is certainly false since Israel controlled the Gazan side of the border crossing until 2005.

At last, it's good you stopped lying and admit Egypt decided to close the border crossing.

Again, the border closing is due to the IDF, and its military invasion of the crossing. You do not seem to disagree.

Tell that to Egypt.

So we agree that Egypt’s decision to send trucks there (or not) is irrelevant.

The border crossing is closed because, as you said, Egypt decided to close it.

If the IDF was withdrawn and Egypt kept the border crossing closed, would Israel be in compliance with the provisional order?

Who cares about imaginary situations?

The IDF forced the closure with its military presence. It can open it by removing said military presence.

If you ignore this point again, I will assume you agree.

[wat0n]

You forgot your argument again.

You had just claimed that HRW is the only group accusing the IDF and the Israeli government of using starvation as a weapon.

...From your sources. I'm not going to do your homework.

Now we see that human rights groups within Israel are also making the accusation, so the claim that only one group is making this accusation is incorrect.

And yet you believe killing their staff would be just a form of legitimate resistance.

It is not technical bodies who declare famines. It is governments. Technical bodies simply provide the information needed to determine if famine is occurring.

In this case, they have provided the information that Gaza is undergoing famine.

Whether or not a political body then takes this information and declares it a famine is beyond the scope of these technical bodies.

Governments would only declare famines upon the assessment by these bodies. None have assessed a famine is ongoing.

No.

Egypt is closing the Rafah border crossing using this argument.

Again, the border closing is due to the IDF, and its military invasion of the crossing. You do not seem to disagree.

The one actually closing the border crossing is Egypt, and you just said its reason for doing so is illegitimate.

So we agree that Egypt’s decision to send trucks there (or not) is irrelevant.

It is relevant. If you believe Kerem Shalom is inadequate, then Egypt is just shirking its responsibilities.

Who cares about imaginary situations?

The IDF forced the closure with its military presence. It can open it by removing said military presence.

If you ignore this point again, I will assume you agree.

This situation is important if we want to understand what was ordered.

The IDF didn't force the closure of the border crossing. Indeed, it has said it would not obstruct the passage of inspected trucks.

[Pants-of-dog]

...From your sources. I'm not going to do your homework.

And yet you believe killing their staff would be just a form of legitimate resistance.

Here is the UN saying the IDF and Israeli government are using starvation as a weapon of war.

So now we have three independent groups saying it.

Governments would only declare famines upon the assessment by these bodies. None have assessed a famine is ongoing.

No. I literally just quoted an assessment saying famine is happening in many parts of Gaza.

Egypt is closing the Rafah border crossing using this argument.

The one actually closing the border crossing is Egypt, and you just said its reason for doing so is illegitimate.

So we agree that the closing is a direct result of the IDF and its military incursion into the crossing, thereby violating the peace treaty.

It is relevant. If you believe Kerem Shalom is inadequate, then Egypt is just shirking its responsibilities.

This situation is important if we want to understand what was ordered.

The IDF didn't force the closure of the border crossing. Indeed, it has said it would not obstruct the passage of inspected trucks.

The IDF forced the closure of the border crossing.

You do not disagree, You merely blame Egypt for not ignoring the fact that the IDF invaded the crossing and violated the peace treaty.

It is pointless to ask you why you think Egypt should ignore peace treaty violations.

It is obstructing the passage of trucks through onerous inspections, as shown repeatedly by quoted evidence in this thread from various respected international humanitarian aid organizations.

[wat0n]

Here is the UN saying the IDF and Israeli government are using starvation as a weapon of war.

So now we have three independent groups saying it.

Where?

No. I literally just quoted an assessment saying famine is happening in many parts of Gaza.

Saying a famine is "imminent" isn't the same as saying it's happening.

So we agree that the closing is a direct result of the IDF and its military incursion into the crossing, thereby violating the peace treaty.

Actually, if we go by your own reasoning, it's the direct result of Egypt choosing to close the border for no legitimate reason.

You said it yourself, military necessity is not a legitimate reason for closing a border crossing even if that means limiting humanitarian aid.

The IDF forced the closure of the border crossing.

No, not by your own reasoning again.

You said it yourself, you disagree military necessity justifies closing a border crossing even if that means limiting aid.

You do not disagree, You merely blame Egypt for not ignoring the fact that the IDF invaded the crossing and violated the peace treaty.

It is pointless to ask you why you think Egypt should ignore peace treaty violations.

You said military necessity does not justify shutting down a border crossing even if that means limiting aid deliveries, certainly a perceived (and unproven) breach of the peace treaty with Israel doesn't either.

I will note that you never tolerate any collateral damage to civilians when Israel launches any sorts of attacks, even when the target of such attacks is itself attacking Israeli civilians by e.g. launching rockets towards Israeli cities.

The fact you are now holding Egypt to a different standard, a much more lax one at that since there is no discernible urgent military necessity for Egypt to close the border, suggests you have a beef with Israel itself and not its actions or policies. As usual, for leftists it's about "who" and not about "what". And in this case, since Egypt is an US ally just like Israel is, this is also not just about opposing the US.

It is obstructing the passage of trucks through onerous inspections, as shown repeatedly by quoted evidence in this thread from various respected international humanitarian aid organizations.

No, as of today it is Egypt which obstructs the passing of any trucks by shutting down the border crossing.

[Pants-of-dog]

Where?

Saying a famine is "imminent" isn't the same as saying it's happening.

Actually, if we go by your own reasoning, it's the direct result of Egypt choosing to close the border for no legitimate reason.

You said it yourself, military necessity is not a legitimate reason for closing a border crossing even if that means limiting humanitarian aid.

No, not by your own reasoning again.

You said it yourself, you disagree military necessity justifies closing a border crossing even if that means limiting aid.

You said military necessity does not justify shutting down a border crossing even if that means limiting aid deliveries, certainly a perceived (and unproven) breach of the peace treaty with Israel doesn't either.

I have no idea how you misunderstood so badly.

The IDF, by invading the Rafah crossing, violated a peace treaty.

Because of this, Egypt can no longer keep that border crossing open.

This shutdown of the border crossing is causing famine.

Do you have a disagreement with any of these facts?

[wat0n]

I have no idea how you misunderstood so badly.

The IDF, by invading the Rafah crossing, violated a peace treaty.

Because of this, Egypt can no longer keep that border crossing open.

This shutdown of the border crossing is causing famine.

Do you have a disagreement with any of these facts?

I didn't misunderstand anything

The peace treaty does allow Israel to control the Rafah side of the border

Your double standards still show, given you believe any collateral damage on civilians is unacceptable from any action done by Israel but you don't have the same standard when Egypt's actions are what's harming civilians right now, and Egypt can't argue military necessity either

These double standards show why the IHRA definition is good and necessary

[Pants-of-dog]

The peace treaty does allow Israel to control the Rafah side of the border

Are you arguing that the IDF did not violate the peace treaty?

If so, why does Egypt think the IDF violated the peace treaty?

[wat0n]

Are you arguing that the IDF did not violate the peace treaty?

If so, why does Egypt think the IDF violated the peace treaty?

Ask them?

When will you call on Egypt to open the border crossing?

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

You mentioned that the peace treaty allows Israel to control the Rafah side of the border.

Are you arguing that this then means that the IDF did not violate the peace treaty?

[wat0n]

@Pants-of-dog does this justify Egypt shutting down the border crossing?

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

I assume you think that the cutting off of food and causing the famine is justified because it is Egypt’s decision to close the border. and so it is their fault, and the Zionists are off the hook and no more needs to be discussed.

——————

Now, Egypt has several concerns: it does not want to go to war with the IDF and Israeli government. It also does not want a huge influx of refugees, which requires coordination with the Israeli government and IDF.

A quick and easy solution for Egypt is for Palestinians to regain control of the Philadelphi corridor. This is why they have made IDF withdrawal from the region the main condition for reopening the border crossing.

[wat0n]

@wat0n

I assume you think that the cutting off of food and causing the famine is justified because it is Egypt’s decision to close the border. and so it is their fault, and the Zionists are off the hook and no more needs to be discussed.

——————

Now, Egypt has several concerns: it does not want to go to war with the IDF and Israeli government. It also does not want a huge influx of refugees, which requires coordination with the Israeli government and IDF.

A quick and easy solution for Egypt is for Palestinians to regain control of the Philadelphi corridor. This is why they have made IDF withdrawal from the region the main condition for reopening the border crossing.

You did not answer the question.

Does this justify Egypt crossing the border crossing? Yes or no?

[Pants-of-dog]

My honest answer is that I have no idea if the IDF incursion into Rafah justifies Egypt closing the border crossing.

Nor do I care.

Should I care? If so, why?

[wat0n]

@Pants-of-dog still not a response.

And why wouldn't you care? After all, according to you that means Egypt is starving Gazans.

[QatzelOk]

...

When will you call on Egypt to open the border crossing?

Yeah, Pants. Call for an open border with Egypt so Israel can accomplish an Trail of Tears instead of a total genocide of every man, women and child.

Otherwise, you are showing "double standards."

And you may be anti-semitic.

And you have plagiaraized stuff, and ... and... and...

**burying children in rubble because they are of a different race**

[wat0n]

Yeah, Pants. Call for an open border with Egypt so Israel can accomplish an Trail of Tears instead of a total genocide of every man, women and child.

Otherwise, you are showing "double standards."

And you may be anti-semitic.

And you have plagiaraized stuff, and ... and... and...

**burying children in rubble because they are of a different race**

Or maybe just to allow humanitarian aid in.

It's not like Egypt would ever allow Palestinians in (for free at least) and nobody expects it to.