Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
[flagged]
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2022/02/israels-...
501–510 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
[flagged]
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2022/02/israels-...
My views on the situation aside, the clearest I saw anyone communicate the issues from a global angle was the former French prime minister Dominique de Villepin Translated here: https://twitter.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1718201487132885246 Viewed from the angle of the West, I think the message it needs to avoid isolating itself from the world is very unusual for Western media and important. Quote: "Westerners must ope…
> The law of retaliation is a never-ending cycle How many wars have the US and Japan fought after WWII? Or France and Germany after WWII? How many wars have the US Government and Native Americans fought after 1900? Sometimes a clear, overwhelming victory ends cycles of violence.
The last example is just... horrific. I don't have more to say on it except that we shouldn't use it as a positive example of anything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Israel must face the reality that is an apartheid state that exists on occupied land. There is no solution until that happens. Just like apartheid South Africa was dismantled, Israel has to face the same fate or forever be locked into warfare and oppressing Palestinians.
[flagged]
Respectfully, would you have made the same comment about 'finding a place in your heart for the humanity of the other' if we lived during the holocaust, where 'one side' was being maimed and killed by the other, more powerful side? Would you have made the same comment if we were talking about apartheid in South Africa? How about if we were talking about how slavery ought to be stopped prior to 1865? Should we _always…
I think you're missing the point. The battle of gaza is not fought on HN. We can only comment on the situation, and we can do this with equanimity and compassion even if we disagree. Shouldn't we all be opposed to Nazism? Shouldn't we all be against slavery? Of course. But in the present discussion, I can be opposed to the atrocities of October 7th, while being sympathetic to the plight of Palestinians, just as I can…
The side that's now being maimed and killed in the tens of thousands with no recourse, had nothing to do with October 7. The sides that are relevant here in the context of this ICJ case are the civilians of the Occupied Palestinian Territories and the Government of Israel.
The ICJ punted. The ruling is a joke, how can you rule against the defendant and yet order the defendant to monitor themselves? The ICJ knew if it found against Israel it would loose all credibility outside the West, but it also had too much political pressure from the West to rule for Israel.
Yes. But this isn’t the final ruling.
South Africa asked for something analogous to a preliminary injunction. The ICJ declined to order a preliminary ceasefire. Instead, the case will be tried as usual.
[flagged]
Did you know that Israel controls a whopping 13% of Gaza's water? Maybe that wasn’t widely reported for some reason.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can assure you Israel will most likely ignore any resolution that does not involve the hostages returning.
Hostages are undesireable for Israel, as earlier they die/be killed the lesser leverage hamas will have. Besides, they will all be dangerous to official narrative, as they seem to have been treated ok by the militants.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Zionists got permission to occupy the land from the British with The Balfour Declaration This is not an accurate representation. Jewish people were given the legal ability to purchase land in Mandatory Palestine. The vast majority of Palestinian Arabs were tenant farmers or landless labourers. Jewish land purchases inevitably led to the displacement of these tenants, but this was the lawful outcome of a lawful land…
So what if that's true (and it's not entirely true - there was forced takeovers of land, and there continues to be land theft in the West Bank today). If I sell you my land, does that make it right for you to form a separate state with it? Perhaps I would rethink that decision with the advance knowledge of your intentions.
What's the ICJ's actual ability to enforce this? "Orders" sounds like they have some sort of weight to throw around if Israel doesn't comply, but I'm not familiar with the ICJ or what possible consequences could arise if Israel simply decided it was going to do what it wanted.
In theory i think they are supposed to ask the security council to step in if the order is ignored. Which would be unlikely to do anything, so nothing. I think its likely israel will comply. The order is pretty weak and mostly stuff israel already claims to be doing. It wouldn't be worth the PR hassle to ignore it.
Comply with "Don't genocide"? At best, they'll argue semantics while they keep doing what they've always done.
Nevermind. I read the article:
> Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the fact that the court was willing to discuss the genocide charges was a “mark of shame that will not be erased for generations.” He vowed to press ahead with the war.