It’s “the VAST majority of deaths are innocent civilians”. It’s like if Texas kidnapped 5 random citizens to kill every time someone was given the death sentence. Would you say that’s acceptable because it’s just “collateral damage”?
This is by design on the part of Hamas though. It doesn’t excuse the situation, but it does make it more complicated especially with regard to intent, which has to matter when considering charges of genocide.
I think their point is that: of course it’s not the intention to wipe them out, because if it was, it would already have been done on Oct 8th. Which isn’t a terrible argument.
Hamas has stated it wants to genocide Israel, and their actions match that. Indiscriminate rocket fire, suicide bombing, invading etc. essentially everything they can do.
By contrast Israel has not (officially) said they want to genocide Palestine, and they aren’t using even a fraction of the weapons at their disposal. Personally, I see their actions more as angry and sloppy. What’s the alternative, that they’re going to kill hundreds of people a day for the next years? That’s ridiculous.
of course it’s not the intention to wipe them out, because if it was, it would already have been done on Oct 8th.
…
Unless they wanted to commit a genocide while maintaining just enough plausible deniability to have people like you and I debating their intentions while it happens.
In which case it would look… exactly how it looks. Crazy, that.
Mate if they orchestrated a complete mass murder in an instant, absolutely no one would be able to defend it. This way, people get to just say “well, it’s war”.
Right. Because if their goal was to wipe out all Palestinians, they would of course put all of their efforts and resources towards that without letting international politics affect what they do and how they do it… /s
Removed by mod
It’s not “large numbers of civilian casualties”
It’s “the VAST majority of deaths are innocent civilians”. It’s like if Texas kidnapped 5 random citizens to kill every time someone was given the death sentence. Would you say that’s acceptable because it’s just “collateral damage”?
This is by design on the part of Hamas though. It doesn’t excuse the situation, but it does make it more complicated especially with regard to intent, which has to matter when considering charges of genocide.
It’s a genocide. Your point is they could probably be more efficient and obvious about the civilian murder. Therefore, it’s not a genocide.
Your point is moronic.
I think their point is that: of course it’s not the intention to wipe them out, because if it was, it would already have been done on Oct 8th. Which isn’t a terrible argument.
Hamas has stated it wants to genocide Israel, and their actions match that. Indiscriminate rocket fire, suicide bombing, invading etc. essentially everything they can do.
By contrast Israel has not (officially) said they want to genocide Palestine, and they aren’t using even a fraction of the weapons at their disposal. Personally, I see their actions more as angry and sloppy. What’s the alternative, that they’re going to kill hundreds of people a day for the next years? That’s ridiculous.
…
Unless they wanted to commit a genocide while maintaining just enough plausible deniability to have people like you and I debating their intentions while it happens.
In which case it would look… exactly how it looks. Crazy, that.
You could say that about literally every war
Mate if they orchestrated a complete mass murder in an instant, absolutely no one would be able to defend it. This way, people get to just say “well, it’s war”.
Right. Because if their goal was to wipe out all Palestinians, they would of course put all of their efforts and resources towards that without letting international politics affect what they do and how they do it… /s
“Everyone warcrimes actually” is a pretty weak take.