Israeli Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant declared it in no uncertain terms on October 9th: “We are imposing a complete siege on Gaza. No electricity, no food, no water, no fuel. Everything is closed. We are fighting human animals, and we will act accordingly.”
You’re acting like you don’t know how the world works and it’s silly, why would anyone expect you to have a sensible opinion when every response involves you willfully ignoring the most basic facets of life.
Yes people use emotive language for political and personal reasons, yes people make dramatic claims about world events for a variety of reasons on both sides.
I don’t know if you’re aware but October 9th 2023 was a while ago, it’s getting close to February 2024 - this means we can use a magic tool called retrospect to evaluate statements. We do this by looking at the statement and seeing if the thing said happened, in this case the thing said did not happen - in fact the rafah crossing was opened for humanitarian aid only nine days later so we didn’t need to wait so long, or we could have looked December 17 when the Kerem shalom crossing was opened for aid, or whenever maritime aid corridor was opened which is how British and EU aid is entering gaza…
The UK has delivered aid into gaza and the west Bank via UN agencies with a £87 million commitment, USA $100 million, EU €100 million plus extra as individual donations from member nations…
So the reality very strongly disproves the statement made and therefore we can in retrospect discount it from being useful in your argument.
Yes and as the article actually says all they actually said is
“take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article II of the Genocide convention.”
Which is an obvious non statement, of course Israel is going to continue to abide by the various conventions which it’s signed upto and which according to them they’ve been obeying, something they expect to be proven in the case that’s going ahead.
This is a court agreeing to hear a case, it’s like when they agree to hear a libel case and the person is told not to make defaming comments in the lead to the trial - it says nothing about their actual guilt or intent, it says we’re going to start trying to find out.
Even a Jewish Holocaust and genocide scholar calls it a “textbook case of genocide.” Has he been caught up in emotive memes probably largely pushed by Russia et all and using headlines he doesn’t understand but like the sound of?
You’re acting like you don’t know how the world works and it’s silly, why would anyone expect you to have a sensible opinion when every response involves you willfully ignoring the most basic facets of life.
Yes people use emotive language for political and personal reasons, yes people make dramatic claims about world events for a variety of reasons on both sides.
I don’t know if you’re aware but October 9th 2023 was a while ago, it’s getting close to February 2024 - this means we can use a magic tool called retrospect to evaluate statements. We do this by looking at the statement and seeing if the thing said happened, in this case the thing said did not happen - in fact the rafah crossing was opened for humanitarian aid only nine days later so we didn’t need to wait so long, or we could have looked December 17 when the Kerem shalom crossing was opened for aid, or whenever maritime aid corridor was opened which is how British and EU aid is entering gaza…
The UK has delivered aid into gaza and the west Bank via UN agencies with a £87 million commitment, USA $100 million, EU €100 million plus extra as individual donations from member nations…
So the reality very strongly disproves the statement made and therefore we can in retrospect discount it from being useful in your argument.
Ya’ll out in force, because you’re losing.
Yes and as the article actually says all they actually said is
Which is an obvious non statement, of course Israel is going to continue to abide by the various conventions which it’s signed upto and which according to them they’ve been obeying, something they expect to be proven in the case that’s going ahead.
This is a court agreeing to hear a case, it’s like when they agree to hear a libel case and the person is told not to make defaming comments in the lead to the trial - it says nothing about their actual guilt or intent, it says we’re going to start trying to find out.
Then Israel will be in the clear in a month. Because they’re definitely not doing a genocide. /s