Most active commenters
  • breppp(3)
  • tome(3)

←back to thread

1332 points Qem | 13 comments | | HN request time: 0.695s | source | bottom
1. mfru ◴[] No.45261125[source]
Conclusion:

" 251. The Commission’s analysis in this report relates solely to the determination of genocide under the Genocide Convention as it relates to the responsibility of the State of Israel both for the failure to prevent genocide, for committing genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza since October 2023 and for the failure to punish genocide. The Commission also notes that, while its analysis is limited to the Palestinians specifically in Gaza during the period since 7 October 2023, it nevertheless raises the serious concern that the specific intent to destroy the Palestinians as a whole has extended to the rest of the occupied Palestinian territory, that is, the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, based on Israeli authorities’ and Israeli security forces’ actions therein, and to the period before 7 October 2023. The events in Gaza since 7 October 2023 have not occurred in isolation, as the Commission has noted. They were preceded by decades of unlawful occupation and repression under an ideology requiring the removal of the Palestinian population from their lands and its replacement.

252. The Commission concludes on reasonable grounds that the Israeli authorities and Israeli security forces have committed and are continuing to commit the following actus reus of genocide against the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, namely (i) killing members of the group; (ii) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (iii) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; and (iv) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.

253. On incitement to genocide, the Commission concludes that Israeli President Isaac Herzog, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, have incited the commission of genocide and that Israeli authorities have failed to take action against them to punish this incitement. The Commission has not fully assessed statements by other Israeli political and military leaders, including Minister for National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir and Minister for Finance Bezalel Smotrich, and considers that they too should be assessed to determine whether they constitute incitement to commit genocide.

254. On the mens rea of genocide, the Commission concludes that statements made by Israeli authorities are direct evidence of genocidal intent. In addition, the Commission concludes that the pattern of conduct is circumstantial evidence of genocidal intent and that genocidal intent was the only reasonable inference that could be drawn from the totality of the evidence. Thus, the Commission concludes that the Israeli authorities and Israeli security forces have had and continue to have the genocidal intent to destroy, in whole or in part, the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.

255. The Commission concludes that the State of Israel bears responsibility for the failure to prevent genocide, the commission of genocide and the failure to punish genocide against the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip."

replies(1): >>45267695 #
2. ncallaway ◴[] No.45267819[source]
That's why the mens rea element is also an element of the crime. You've completely skipped over that part of the report and the conclusion.
replies(1): >>45267909 #
3. breppp ◴[] No.45267909{3}[source]
Which is completely based on trying to analyze the reactions of politicians to an attack that included mass killings of civilians, intense brutality and mass rape. surprise surprise these are filled with anger and do not read like a swedish minister reaction to migrant birds. These are not different than the USA post 9/11.

Even if you take these statements, and add everything that happened on the ground for the last two years, comparing it to the Armenian, Rawandian or Jewish genocides is a joke of epic proportions. It's a very minor war even in Middle Eastern terms, compared to the recent Syrian or Yemen civil wars or the American involvement in Iraq

replies(1): >>45268205 #
4. kergonath ◴[] No.45268166[source]
> And let's find a war where clauses I, II, and III do not apply

When these clauses apply against civilian populations, they are war crimes or crimes against Humanity, or both.

replies(2): >>45268222 #>>45268610 #
5. ◴[] No.45268205{4}[source]
6. tome ◴[] No.45268222{3}[source]
Can you name a war in which members of a group weren't killed, or serious bodily or mental harm wasn't caused to a members of a group?
replies(1): >>45273116 #
7. 0_gravitas ◴[] No.45268889{4}[source]
I don't see the corollary here.
replies(1): >>45272465 #
8. breppp ◴[] No.45272465{5}[source]
The definition used here is so broad, any killing of any member of a group, without any relation to number ("part") or tactics can qualify as a genocide.
9. kergonath ◴[] No.45273116{4}[source]
That is a straw man. The criterion is deliberate targeting of civilian populations. The US is known for having occasionally bombed a wedding party, but in Gaza, 80% of the victims were civilians. That’s a war crime and closer to WWII extermination campaigns than any modern military conflict involving western militaries. We are not talking about collateral damage from a drone strike, that’s systematic levelling of entire cities. You have to go back to things like Dresden and the Tokyo firebombings to find western equivalents.

Hospitals and journalists were deliberately bombed. That’s a war crime and the closest example of a western military doing it is Russia in Ukraine.

Emergency shelters and food distribution centres were deliberately targeted. That’s a war crime and again, there is no western equivalent.

Then there’s the pogroms on the West Bank.

When your argument is that a country’s behaviour is not as bad as ethnically cleansing in some African countries or WWII, your argument is really desperate.

replies(2): >>45274547 #>>45280350 #
10. tome ◴[] No.45274547{5}[source]
It's not a straw man, and you are incorrect on a number of factual points. For example, there are circumstances under which targeting hospitals is not a war crime. I think that "not as bad as WWII" is the opposite of desperate! WWII is a war that all decent people acknowledge that the allies absolutely had to win, and the human toll, whilst tragic, was necessary.
11. breppp ◴[] No.45280350{5}[source]
> 80% of the victims were civilians

That's incorrect, at best you may have been quoting an organization that had abducted babies for political advantage and you assume won't lie for a political advantage, even though it was caught lying before. However, I don't believe even they are claiming that, as they are intentionally not publishing militant death statistics to inflate the notion of civilian deaths

replies(1): >>45280426 #
12. bdangubic ◴[] No.45280426{6}[source]
watch if you can: https://youtu.be/cR24yDub8Ps?si=Bm2RgOQrluzsqTUj
replies(1): >>45286393 #
13. tome ◴[] No.45286393{7}[source]
That disproves the 80% figure, right?