Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ICC issues warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas officials

icc-cpi.int

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 1001 posts

Re: ICC issues warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas officials

#571

Post by culi »

yread wrote: post #520
pagade wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Antisemitic. Every time I hear this word, I can’t help but think of its irony—a term used exclusively for describing discrimination against one community, as if prejudice against them carries more weight than against any other. Perhaps, though, it serves as the best reflection of our hypocrisy.

Not to mention there are more semitic people than Jews. And Holocaust targeted more people, too. And there were pogroms against other poeple, too.

The Romani people for example (derogatorily called "gypsies". The term "gyp"—to scam—derives from stereotypes of Romani people) faced some of the most gruesome programs in history before facing the Romani Genocide in WW2. Yet we rarely talk about antiziganism the way we talk about antisemitism and people still casually throw around terms like "gyp"

Re: ICC issues warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas officials

#572

Post by bawolff »

gspencley wrote: post #542
pazimzadeh wrote: post #537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what do you mean by 'invite to the table'? it's a criminal court, so it's going to deal with criminals you're also assuming that israel is a good faith actor in all of this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court#I...

> what do you mean by 'invite to the table'? it's a criminal court, so it's going to deal with criminals "Criminals" in this context is meaningless. Please hear me out. We're dealing with the concept of "International Law", which is largely understood as agreements / treaties amongst different countries. This means that those agreements are no more valid or better or righteous than the countries that enter into them.…

> We're dealing with the concept of "International Law", which is largely understood as agreements / treaties amongst different countries.

Well this is true of a lot of international law, it doesn't apply here. The ICC largely deals with things that are preemptory norms which apply regardless of if you sign the treaty.

Re: ICC issues warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas officials

#573

Post by jll29 »

gspencley wrote: post #542
pazimzadeh wrote: post #537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what do you mean by 'invite to the table'? it's a criminal court, so it's going to deal with criminals you're also assuming that israel is a good faith actor in all of this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court#I...

> what do you mean by 'invite to the table'? it's a criminal court, so it's going to deal with criminals "Criminals" in this context is meaningless. Please hear me out. We're dealing with the concept of "International Law", which is largely understood as agreements / treaties amongst different countries. This means that those agreements are no more valid or better or righteous than the countries that enter into them.…

> a free, rights-protecting nation has no basis for an agreement [between any two or more states] with a dictatorship that routinely violates peoples' rights.

Wikipedia quote: "States and non-state actors may choose to not abide by international law, and even to breach a treaty but such violations, particularly of peremptory norms, can be met with disapproval by others and in some cases coercive action ranging from diplomatic and economic sanctions to war."

I think isolating bad actors can be a limited solution to the absence of physical power/not wanting to start a way, which ultimately as you rightly state corresponds to a situation of absence/breakdown of law that is best avoided.

Re: ICC issues warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas officials

#574

Post by culi »

newspaper1 wrote: post #271
1024core wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they should cooperate with the ICC. Have your day in court and show how absurd the accusations are There's a reason why the US does not recognize the ICC.

Yes, because they want to operate outside the rule of international law.

Imagine the US having to face consequences for Iraq. One of the most fucked up collection of war crimes and violations of laws of war in the 21st century. The average American now thinks "we shouldn't have gone into Iraq" but has no idea the reputation the US has in the rest of the world because of this act

Re: ICC issues warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas officials

#575

Post by glassounds »

pagade wrote: post #463
0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #82

>In his first response to the ICC issuing a warrant for his arrest on allegations of war crimes, Benjamin Netanyahu’s office has described the ruling as “absurd and false lies” and said the decision is “antisemitic.” https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2024/nov/21/internati... If Netanyahu and Gallant really think they are innocent, and the allegations are absurd and false, they should cooperate with the ICC. Have…

Antisemitic. Every time I hear this word, I can’t help but think of its irony—a term used exclusively for describing discrimination against one community, as if prejudice against them carries more weight than against any other. Perhaps, though, it serves as the best reflection of our hypocrisy.

[flagged]

Re: ICC issues warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas officials

#576

Post by jll29 »

grecy wrote: post #544
0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #82

>In his first response to the ICC issuing a warrant for his arrest on allegations of war crimes, Benjamin Netanyahu’s office has described the ruling as “absurd and false lies” and said the decision is “antisemitic.” https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2024/nov/21/internati... If Netanyahu and Gallant really think they are innocent, and the allegations are absurd and false, they should cooperate with the ICC. Have…

[flagged]

Yes, if there is any moral norm that anyone, especially any parent would accept - as closely to universal as possible, perhaps - it is that killing children is evil.

Re: ICC issues warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas officials

#577

Post by culi »

xenospn wrote: post #372
ComputerGuru wrote: post #346

For context, this is only possible because the state of Palestine pushed hard and persisted for years to become an ICC member and thus give the ICC jurisdiction over crimes committed on Palestinian territory, whether by Israel or by Palestinian factions. The USA is still mad at them for doing it. The full account is worth reading, it includes considerations by the various resistance factions that they’d also be subje…

[flagged]

Yes, the PA has stated that they would comply with the ICC

Re: ICC issues warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas officials

#578

Post by xg15 »

bawolff wrote: post #166
peppers-ghost wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"confirmed" data from Gaza at the moment is unreliable. The people who were doing the counting have either been killed or cleansed from the area. The official death toll is still around 40k despite the reality being closer to 100-200k.

Regardless, total deaths don't matter, only deaths that were the result of crimes matter, in this context. Some of those deaths are going to be legal targets killed during combat, which is not evidence of a war crime. You have to split things out for the numbers to mean anything.

But the problem is that Israel's style of warfare is (intentionally or not) blurring the distinction between those numbers, by using methods of combat that have exceptionally high rates of collateral damage.

The most extreme instances of this are the deliberate withholding of aid, both in the "total siege" in the beginning of the war, as well as operations like now in the north.

You might hit a lot of legitimate targets with this, but it's also guaranteed you will impact all the civilians in the area.

Generally, in this entire war (and also long before), Israel is far too quick with the "Human shields"/"collateral damage" argument to my liking, and using it as an excuse to basically disregard considerations for civilians at all.

(It's also instructive to see how different the hostages and palestinian civilians are treated in IDF considerations, despite both groups technically being "human shields")

Re: ICC issues warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas officials

#579

Post by glassounds »

yread wrote: post #520
pagade wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Antisemitic. Every time I hear this word, I can’t help but think of its irony—a term used exclusively for describing discrimination against one community, as if prejudice against them carries more weight than against any other. Perhaps, though, it serves as the best reflection of our hypocrisy.

Not to mention there are more semitic people than Jews. And Holocaust targeted more people, too. And there were pogroms against other poeple, too.

The word has never, in its history, been used for anything other than racism against Jews. There are Semitic languages, not people.

> Due to the root word Semite, the term is prone to being invoked as a misnomer by those who incorrectly assert (in an etymological fallacy) that it refers to racist hatred directed at "Semitic people" in spite of the fact that this grouping is an obsolete historical race concept. Likewise, such usage is erroneous; the compound word antisemitismus was first used in print in Germany in 1879 as a "scientific-sounding term" for Judenhass (lit. 'Jew-hatred'), and it has since been used to refer to anti-Jewish sentiment alone

Re: ICC issues warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas officials

#580

Post by glassounds »

ada1981 wrote: post #525
pagade wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Antisemitic. Every time I hear this word, I can’t help but think of its irony—a term used exclusively for describing discrimination against one community, as if prejudice against them carries more weight than against any other. Perhaps, though, it serves as the best reflection of our hypocrisy.

Especially when you consider "semites" are a member of an ancient or modern people from southwestern Asia, such as the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, or Arabs. It can also refer to a descendant of these peoples. So, many Palestinians are Semites as well. And one may conclude when Ovadia Yosef, a former Chief Rabbi of Israel, says: “It is forbidden to be merciful to them. You must send missiles to them and annihilat…

[flagged]
Post reply on HN