So, let’s look at the definition of genocide and see where Israel lands here.
Definition
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide
Article II
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
Killing members of the group;
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
(1) Over 11,000 deaths, majority of civilians. And I’m just talking about deaths since Oct 7, I did not include any numbers from before that. Check.
(2) Illegal occupation and cutting off food, water, electricity and free movement. Check.
(3) Unknown to me.
(4) Unknown to me.
The head of the UN, Craig Mokhiber, just retired and called it unequivocally a genocide, here’s a source for that, but if you don’t like this source, you can just Google this and find plenty of other sources.
So, please tell me. How does Israel not fit as a genocidal regime?
with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group
Civilian deaths and cutting off resource supplies to your enemy happens in every war. It’s when the intent is the destruction of a people that it becomes a genocide, and you have yet to provide any proof of that.
If you read the charter, you can see that if any of these things apply, it can be labelled a genocide. And you pick one and say “you need to provide proof”, glossing over the glaring fact that even without, it already counts as a genocide.
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group […]
any of these as long as there’s intent to destroy. Without intent to destroy, it’s not a genocide. Quite simple, really, if you read the charter.
None of the links prove or even hint at intent to destroy the Palestinian population. They hint at fears that Israel might occupy Gaza partiallly or fully and even displace Palestinian civilians permanently. While absolutely terrible, that isn’t genocide according to the Geneva Conventions you quoted above.
Again, where’s your proof for intent to destroy the Palestinian people?
So, let’s look at the definition of genocide and see where Israel lands here.
Definition
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide
Article II
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
Killing members of the group;
Source: the UN
So; let’s have a quick look at these points:
(1) Over 11,000 deaths, majority of civilians. And I’m just talking about deaths since Oct 7, I did not include any numbers from before that. Check.
(2) Illegal occupation and cutting off food, water, electricity and free movement. Check.
(3) Unknown to me.
(4) Unknown to me.
The head of the UN, Craig Mokhiber, just retired and called it unequivocally a genocide, here’s a source for that, but if you don’t like this source, you can just Google this and find plenty of other sources.
So, please tell me. How does Israel not fit as a genocidal regime?
Civilian deaths and cutting off resource supplies to your enemy happens in every war. It’s when the intent is the destruction of a people that it becomes a genocide, and you have yet to provide any proof of that.
If you read the charter, you can see that if any of these things apply, it can be labelled a genocide. And you pick one and say “you need to provide proof”, glossing over the glaring fact that even without, it already counts as a genocide.
But sure, if you insist;
CBC
NPR
USA Today
People’s World
UN
Foreign Policy
ABC News
any of these as long as there’s intent to destroy. Without intent to destroy, it’s not a genocide. Quite simple, really, if you read the charter.
None of the links prove or even hint at intent to destroy the Palestinian population. They hint at fears that Israel might occupy Gaza partiallly or fully and even displace Palestinian civilians permanently. While absolutely terrible, that isn’t genocide according to the Geneva Conventions you quoted above.
Again, where’s your proof for intent to destroy the Palestinian people?
It seems you haven’t read any of the linked articles, so there is no need to talk about this any further until you do.