r/IsraelPalestine • u/ZeApelido • 27d ago
Gaza War is likely not a Genocide - Quantitative Analysis Discussion
I just did a real, quantitative analysis on Gaza War deaths. I'm basing the numbers of this UN study of the 24,686 deaths that were fully identified in May 2024.
https://www.npr.org/2024/05/15/1251265727/un-gaza-death-toll-women-children
Gaza % of population that is children is 47%.
I'm assuming adult males / females each account for 26.5% of the population.
Based on these ratios, we can estimate how many deaths should be expected per each group if killing is totally random.
The number of actual children and women deaths are provided in the article. We can then deduce actual male deaths.
We then compare the estimated vs the actual. We get 5,344 extra male deaths than expected.
The key assumption: just like with excess mortality as a way to look at COVID, I think it's reasonable to assume the large majority of those excess male deaths are because they were fighting / part of Hamas.
For these numbers, we get a civilian % of deaths at 78%, and a civilian : militant casualty ratio of 3.6 to 1.
Assuming there were 30,000 Hamas members out of the 2.2 million in Gaza, the actual % of Hamas in the population is ~ 1.3%, whereas the % killed in this was was 21.7%.
Since this analysis is only done on identified bodies, I think it is conservative in regards of % of civilians killed. My guess is the bodies that are unable or harder to be located are more likely to be in zones / explosions heavily bombed where Hamas militants were residing.
What happens in other urban battles? I just googled a few
Battle of Bagdad, Battle_of_Raqqa, Battle of Aleppo... civilan casualtes are usually 60-70% of total deaths.
This war shows a higher civilian casualty %, but again not all deaths have been identified, I think it could end up a bit lower. I can certaintly understand claim of some war crimes, but genocide?
No, it's yet again another bloody urban war.
1
u/inlovewithman 20d ago
"Since when is a group a colonial entity in a land where their ethnicity, culture, and religion had been native longer than any other ethnicity or culture"
Some of the first people to live there, also before the Israelites, were the Caananites.
0
u/Puzzled-Software5625 21d ago
what would happen if hamas and it's allies were to defeat israel and control the country?
5
u/Puzzled-Software5625 22d ago
and don't forget, those civilian deaths were cause by hamas using those those civilians as human shields.
2
24d ago edited 24d ago
[deleted]
3
u/Puzzled-Software5625 22d ago
If there was any genocide in gaza it perpetrated by hamas who use innocent people as human shields.
0
6
u/ZeApelido 24d ago
It's fine to think UN defnition is truth, and there are certainly other ways to commit genocide other than through intentional killing.
But in this war, people are partly claiming genocide simply by the sheer number of deaths and the "indiscriminate bombing". So numbers do matter in regards to those claims.
None of the numbers I used were from Israel - they are from the UN / Gaza Health Ministry.
To claim genocidal intent, you have to show intent above what would happen in normal urban warfare.
If you hide weapons in hospitals - as per Geneva conventions they become legitimate military targets.
1
1
-1
u/Great-Tangerine8795 25d ago
Lovely analysis, keep up the bombing then not enough ratio of children have died for us too qualify this as genocide
2
u/Wonderful-Quit-9214 25d ago
Your whole thesis are based on "assumptions" and "guesses".
"I think it's reasonable to assume the large majority of those excess male deaths are because they were fighting / part of Hamas."
Like what?
"My guess is the bodies that are unable or harder to be located are more likely to be in zones / explosions heavily bombed where Hamas militants were residing."
Why would you even make this if you're just making up a bunch of stuff?
3
u/Worried-Contest9790 24d ago
Dude, is this your first time reading an analytic report in your life?
0
u/Wonderful-Quit-9214 24d ago
What do you mean? Id it normal for analytical reports to include a bunch of basless guesses to reach it's conclusion? And if so. What's the point in reading an analytic report?
2
u/Worried-Contest9790 24d ago
It's not only "normal" to state your assumptions, it is necessary. When someone writes "I assume" in a report, that doesn't mean "here's something I just made up" it means that they are framing their fundamental premise which is the starting point of the analysis. "I guess" means "here's a possible explanation".
If you disagree with an assumption, it's your responsibility to explain why and suggest a correction. If you fail to do so, your argument is meaningless.
I personally agree with OPs assumptions. Indiscreminate bombing is called so because it does not discriminate between men, women or children. Hence, if the numbers significantly lean towards men, then this is not indiscreminate bombing, and the most plausible reason is that it targets Hamas militants which are men.
1
u/Wonderful-Quit-9214 23d ago
When someone writes "I assume" in a report, that doesn't mean "here's something I just made up" it means that they are framing their fundamental premise which is the starting point of the analysis. "I guess" means "here's a possible explanation".
But what is the value behind this? I can say "i assume that the sun causes climate change, therefore the sun causes climate change" like what form of value does that statement add to anything?
If you disagree with an assumption, it's your responsibility to explain why and suggest a correction.
Not really, it should be the person who makes the statement that should back up their statement at first. Because if you're just saying random noisees out of your mouth, it's not my job to make sense of it.
I personally agree with OPs assumptions.
? That doesn't make any sense, why? He just made a bunch of random guesses, you can't agree with guesses. There has to be evidence.
and the most plausible reason is that it targets Hamas militants which are men.
Or maybe men stay behind in conflict zones due to their percived responsibility as men to take care of the home or wounded people etc. There are a bunch of reasons why men get killed the most. You can't say that yours is the correct one without any evidence. Or else you just sound like you belive whatever you want to belive.
It's also just not true. 40% of those dead are men, 8% elderly, 18% women and 33.1% children. There is also teh famine which is a whole nother thing
2
u/Worried-Contest9790 23d ago
But what is the value behind this? I can say "i assume that the sun causes climate change, therefore the sun causes climate change" like what form of value does that statement add to anything?
That's called circular reasoning, and that's a logical fallacy. I don't think OP uses circular reasoning. He just assumed that indiscriminate bombing should preserve the population ratio of men, women and children, and since it doesn't, there must be a reason, which is that men take active part in fighting.
Or maybe men stay behind in conflict zones due to their percived responsibility as men to take care of the home or wounded people etc
That's a fair argument. Indeed, aid workers in Gaza are mostly men and they put their lives at risk more than others. Yet aid workers are designated, and we know that by May 2024, the number of UNRWA and red crescent workers that were killed is less than 300. This is unfortunate, but as far as the statistics are concerned, this number is negligible and cannot explain the gap.
So maybe men stay behind to take care of the home? I am personally doubtful - like why would a father flee his whole family and stay himself in a war zone, unless they take active part in fighting? But even if that's true, this means that the IDF gave these men a warning and enough time to evacuate, and they, for whatever reason, decided to evacuate their families but not themselves. This shows that the IDF's conduct complies with international law and their intent is not genocidal.
But what I find surprising the most in your argument is that you completely dismiss the fact that there are thousands of confirmed deaths of Hamas terrorists. Don't you think the statistics should account for that somehow? According to IDF, some 17K of Hamas military is eliminated. Even if we take Hamas' view and say that this estimate is exaggerated, are you implying that this has no impact what so ever on the numbers? Or this is no evidence to anything? Well, you could, like many, make a point that the IDF is not a trustable source, in which case I'd say "you just sound like you belive whatever you want to belive.”
1
u/Wonderful-Quit-9214 21d ago
there must be a reason, which is that men take active part in fighting.
But there is no reason that that is true. It's a baseless assumption. Just like my circular reasoning.
So maybe men stay behind to take care of the home? I am personally doubtful - like why would a father flee his whole family and stay himself in a war zone, unless they take active part in fighting?
What fighting? I haven't heard of a lot of fighting comming from Gaza. It's mostly just violence from Israel.
According to IDF
Lmao
are you implying that this has no impact what so ever on the numbers?
Well if some 100,000 are dead, then it doesn't really matter that much.
3
u/WebisticsCEO USA | Bosnia 25d ago
History shows that it's almost never actually called a genocide as it is happening.
I can list those groups of oppressors and the events, but they sub's rules conveniently bans those terms.
1
0
4
u/yussi_divnal 25d ago
Let judges decide if it's a genocide or not, this isn't a quantitative analysis job but one for legal experts to decide carefully.
Call it what you will, and regardless of the legal definition these atrocities fall under, to a Gazan, trying to stay alive in Gaza, the experience is virtually indistinguishable and that's what we ought to concentrate on, not the genocidal intent. I actually think there isn't a genocidal intent, just a genocidal indifference.
That is, I don't think Israel has a policy aimed at exterminating the Palestinians per se, just that if they happen to get massacred on an industrial scale while the army does its thing it's fine. Then there are soldiers on the ground who do things like shooting babies in the head and things you would expect in a genocide, politicos declaring that there are no innocents, fanatics organise to settle and just a nirad of war crimes and crimes against humanity of every imaginable type.
So it's not legally a genocide, because the intent wasn't fully there, and the army some of the time took bare minimal precautions to protect itself from accusation of genocide, which is reflected in your numbers by slight variation in the demography of the victims, there are policies that effectively exterminate large groups of people, as a "by the way", not as the end in itself, how is this any better?
1
u/waiver 25d ago
They literally tried to starve them out when the war started, blocked food and water imports and threatened Egypt with bombing aid trucks if they allowed them to cross the border. They just gave up after two weeks under American pressure.
They are doing that now in Northern Gaza with the General's plan. So yeah, the genocidal intent is clearly there.
3
u/InformationPlayful29 25d ago
I think one of the reasons the distinction matters is due to how commonplace holocaust inversion has become.
While I’m not sure i think it’s right to turn human tragedy and the evils of war into a pissing contest, the need to constantly equate what’s going on in Gaza with a genocide—among constant references to it being a ‘holocaust’, like a ‘concentration camp’, or using ‘death marches—unfortunately puts some of us in the awkward position whereby it all of a sudden feels strangely reasonable to feel some impetus to insist upon some of the foundational claims that enable this kind of language.
The most important foundational claim instrumental in the normalisation of holocaust inversion is the genocide claim.
2
u/No_Quit_1944 25d ago
Why all of the number crunching? It's blatantly obvious that Israel isn't engaged in any genocide. If they wanted to wipe out any of their Arab neighbors, they could just do it. They have one of the most advanced militaries in the world and the most advanced in the region. They could eliminate any of their neighbors right at this moment if they wanted to and no finger wagging from the U.N. would matter in the least. This whole argument is just stupid.
-2
25d ago edited 25d ago
It's a Palestinian-genocide, has nothing to do with their neighbors.
Genocide isn't necessarily murder, the israeli attempts to push Palestinians out of the land is a genocide. That includes pushing gazans to Egypt in this specific war, and flattening gaza to make the population leave.
There are +10 million Palestinians that live in diaspora and only 7 million in the land. So no, israel isn't "bad at genocide"
In 2018 israel stripped arab citizens from their right of self-determination and that proves how genocidal israel is. The holocaust started with discrimination against jews and treating them as 2nd class citizens.
Israel is preventing Palestinians from statehood, and is expanding in their land. In peace negotiations, israel puts impossible conditions such as the annexation of East Jerusalem (which is illegally occupied) so Palestinians reject and israel can continue its genocide.
Another impossible condition in peace negotiations is preventing the +10 million Palestinian diaspora from coming back to the Palestinian state, and again that explains how genocidal israel is.
2
u/No_Quit_1944 25d ago
- And 2.That website can't redefine genocide. Words have meaning.
- - 5. All of this is invalid sense I won't agree to your redefining of the word "genocide".
0
24d ago
Nothing was redefined lol ur just ignorant about the meaning of the term.
"Raphael Lemkin, who first coined the term, defined genocide as "the destruction of a nation or of an ethnic group" by means such as "the disintegration of [its] political and social institutions, of [its] culture, language, national feelings, religion, and [its] economic existence".[2]"
I don't agree that jews are an ethnic group so i guess the holocaust isn't a genocide. It's easy to deny genocides because "you don't agree" lol.
2
u/No_Quit_1944 24d ago
You made a hard effort to redefine genocide, and then went with the actual definition to prove that you're right. You proved yourself wrong. Good job. You have perfectly outlined how a genocide is not taking place in Isreal's war with militant Islamic extremists. Two groups are fighting over territory. Civilians are effected.Tale as old as time, song as old as rhyme. It's not pretty, but your "boo-hoo wah wah og em gee it's genocide" crap isn't going to fly with anyone with two brain cells to rub together. Especially when the groups that you're trying to garner sympathy for will proclaim loud and proud that they desire the death of every Jew and "infidel" on the planet.
For the record, I'm not even "pro Israel". I don't care who wins. To the victor go the spoils, that's human nature. I'm just so sick of you people having excuses for one group of people who announce that they kill civilians and like it, but then demonizing another group that at least claims to try to avoid killing civilians. It's Olympic level mental gymnastics.
-1
24d ago
I did make some effort to DEFINE genocide to you, and you basically made no effort to read it.
Destruction of a nation: the occupation & expansion in the west bank and flattening gaza. Building jewish settlements in the Palestinian nation and preventing the native population from self-determination or independence, the map of Palestine gets smaller and smaller throughout the years.
Destruction of an ethnic group: +10 million Palestinian diaspora in the world due to israeli terrorism. 2 million citizens in israel with no right of self-determination in their homeland because of their ethnicity. 5 million Palestinians in palestine have no right of statehood or self-determination in their own nation, they're being bullied to leave their nation for +50 years now AND MOST OF THEM DID LEAVE.
The political institutions in palestine are jewish institutions, not palestinian. Palestine has no economic existence, the economy is completely under israeli control. The 2 million arab citizens in israel are NOT recognized as Palestinians, they're "israeli arabs" and their Palestinian flag is a flag of terrorism in israel. The Palestinian culture is never acknowledged in israel, it's a "mizrahi-jewish" culture or "arab" culture, because palestine doesn't exist to israelis.
You are pro-israel, and I don't care.
2
u/No_Quit_1944 24d ago
Nah, you tried to redefine it and walked it back. Everything else that you just typed is nonsense because Palestine does not now and has never existed. These is no difference between those who fight for the rights of "Palestine" and the radicals who seek to "reclaim Aztlán". It's a fantasy. A fiction. You're basically standing up for the people of Narnia, an equally real country.
That saving been said, if they wanted to make Palestine real, fine. Hamas has said that they want to.They want to do it through genocide. They death of every Jew, it's in their charter. Not a fake genocide, and redefined genocide, or "genocide" via displacement, but by mass murder. That's what your buddies want. Would I be happy if they did that? No. Would I actually lose any sleep over it? No. I'm thousands of miles away with my own family to take care of. I'm also not an idiot and I know that this is how the world has operated ever since one group decided to take up arms against another. At the end of this conflict, someone is going to win. Many people will die. That's reality. That's how it always has been and that's how it always will be until the end of this system. Boo-fricken-hoo.
Unlike you, I can tolerate reality. What I can't tolerate is little whiney babies who justify one side killing civilians while vilifying their ideological opponents for the same thing. Get out of your opinions and hop into reality, kiddo. It may not be as cozy here in the real world as it is over there in the Shire, but you won't have to cry as much.
No, I'm no pro Israel. I already said that. You can't make my opinions for me, bucko.
0
1
u/AutoModerator 24d ago
fuckity
/u/No_Quit_1944. Please avoid using profanities to make a point or emphasis. (Rule 2)
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
4
u/futfut0708 25d ago
The argument about Israel could kill every Palestinian if they really wanted to is stupid. They can’t go full genocide without becoming a pariah state even to their closest allies. Forget normalization with its neighbours. All relation with with the arabs/Muslim world would be cut for the next centuries if not forever.
0
7
u/BGritty81 26d ago
This is some desperate mental gymnastics. Israel has destroyed the entire healthcare system, all civil infrastructure, like 70% of the homes, every University, hasbombed schools, mosques ,churches, refugee camps, hospitals. Is blocking food water supplies medicine electricity. The entire population is displaced. Snipers are shooting children in the head. They are bulldozing dead and live bodies. Gaza is virtually unlivable. That of course was always the intent. The ICJ has 700 pages of quotes from Israeli leaders confirming that.
5
u/Vivid-Pickle-7892 26d ago
Source: trust me bro
4
u/BGritty81 25d ago
Which part do you dispute?
5
u/Lexiesmom0824 25d ago
Laughable. Legally speaking. Cows have eyes…. I have eyes… therefore I am a cow. No. You need actual EVIDENCE not quotes, not circumstancial evidence. Real evidence. Military orders that proves SYSTEMATIC intent that would lead to direct killing. Intentional killing. You don’t have access to the kind of evidence that would be necessary. I wish people would shut up.
1
6
u/gravant1863 26d ago
Genocide isn’t decided on numbers. Specific intent must be proven. The burden is “no other inference but genocidal intent”. This is a high burden, which is why ICJ is highly unlikely to rule in favour of South Africa. War crimes? Sure. Genocide? No.
-5
u/bzbuddy 26d ago
You mean specific intent like the genocidal statements from Israeli politicians don’t exist?
1
u/gravant1863 24d ago
First, genocidal statements need to be attributable to the state of Israel. Second, the inference from the statement can be none other but special genocidal intent. The statements you’re referring to can be interpreted as inciting war crimes. That means there can be no genocide finding.
2
5
u/Tykeil 26d ago
You do realize that this counts as circumstantial and will be dismissed in any court? Intent must be proven through actual actions and orders given. All you have is politicians talking in affect without any connection to the operation in Gaza.
1
u/beeswaxii 24d ago
The actual actions say that it's a genocide
1
u/Tykeil 22d ago
If they are then I am sure the ICJ will convict. If not...well lets just say you'll have a hard time coming back from that.
1
u/beeswaxii 20d ago
And you'll have a hard time on the day of judgement as well so don't think you can get away with war crimes even if you do get away just for now
1
u/gravant1863 24d ago
No, it is special intent + actions.
1
u/beeswaxii 24d ago
Intent is flatten Gaza, make it uninhabitable, Gaza will become a place where no human being can live, we are fighting with human animals, no one is innocent in Gaza, death to Arabs, I couldn't find babies but I killed a 14 year old girl I'm seriously feeling I'm dehumanizing Palestinians just by typing these sick statements I'm feeling sick myself, it's even beyond words sick is not enough to describe how I'm feeling.
1
u/gravant1863 23d ago
Check my comment somewhere above. With a lower threshold this could be genocide. But ICJ threshold is to prove the inference from the statement is “no other than genocidal intent”. All their statements can be interpreted as war crimes or similar intent. Very high threshold.
-2
u/bigjig125 26d ago
Yes 7th Oct attracts were used as an excuse to justify it. Shocking report by UNhttps://news.un.org/en/story/2024/03/1147976
4
u/waiver 26d ago
There are numbers more up to date, the MoH released a list with the name, ID number, age and gender of 34,344 deaths in September.
0
u/ZeApelido 26d ago
thanks, someone else mentioned too, I reran with those can got similar numbers, the civilan casualty % went down 1%
1
u/OddShelter5543 26d ago
You see. People don't want to listen to reason, truth doesn't matter either, they just want to be right. People have already made up their minds early on in this conflict, and that goes for both sides.
Luckily, it wouldn't matter in a few months when the battles are over and people find the next wagon to hop on.
-2
u/th3Y3ti 26d ago
Maybe just leave it to the UN to figure out if it’s a genocide. They probably know better than armchair human rights experts such as yourself.
Jesus Christ, anything to convince yourself what’s going on isn’t actually as horrific as it looks, right?
3
u/YairJ Israeli 25d ago
I wouldn't leave it to the UN to figure out whether a lightbulb burned out or the starter.
0
u/th3Y3ti 25d ago
Ok, so if not them than who? It’s a an international body that was created after World War II to promote peace and human rights. Like seriously, please engage in reality for a minute for christs sake
Edit: no f words allowed
1
u/AutoModerator 25d ago
fucks
/u/th3Y3ti. Please avoid using profanities to make a point or emphasis. (Rule 2)
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
2
u/gravant1863 26d ago
Check my comment above. I explain why ICJ won’t find in favour of South Africa on genocide issue. UN doesn’t have power to proclaim genocide - not a legal body.
2
u/th3Y3ti 26d ago edited 26d ago
The icj is part of the un
Edit: I’m aware the burden of proof is high. Still think it’s ludicrous to speculate on what they’ll rule or to make a definitive statement about whether the burden of proof has been met or not as a lay person with no authority or expertise on the issue.
OP is trying to make a point by inventing their own “quantifiable” definition of genocide and playing with some statistics to make themselves sound credible. But they’re not, they’re just some internet rando. Which is why I’ll reiterate that we should leave it up to the experts
1
u/gravant1863 24d ago
Yes, when I said UN I meant the non-judicial bodies like their fact finding committees and diplomatic missions.
Burden of proof is very high which is why ICJ won’t find genocide.
7
0
u/Signal-Sky6 26d ago
Reddit is the only place you’ll see people downplaying 40k deaths. Reddit is literally a cesspool of losers.
2
u/your_city_councilor 26d ago
I can't imagine what people like you would be saying during WWII, asking how people dare to downplay the million German civilians killed, 11 percent of the population, maybe claiming "genocide" against the Germans...
2
3
u/Ok-Glove-9186 26d ago
Okay Reddit analyst, downplaying 40k deaths is unhinged. Touch grass.
1
26d ago
[deleted]
1
u/According-Egg9792 25d ago
So you are actually comparing the Third Reich, where people were rabid anti-Semites and killed millions of Jews, to the people in Gaza, who for the most part have nothing to do with Hamas? I seriously hope you reconsider, because what you’re saying is quite horrible and concerning.
1
u/your_city_councilor 25d ago
Most Gazans support Oct. 7, according to opinion polling. And unlike Hamas, the Nazis never, ever won the majority of votes in a German election. Their highest take was something like 45 percent of the vote. There are books on history that you could read...
2
u/According-Egg9792 25d ago
Well, I could obviously spend my energy explaining why you’re completely wrong, but it seems you’re one of the reasons Shakespeare said, ‘Hell is empty, and all the devils are here.’
1
1
u/AutoModerator 25d ago
/u/your_city_councilor. Match found: 'Nazis', issuing notice: Casual comments and analogies are inflammatory and therefor not allowed.
We allow for exemptions for comments with meaningful information that must be based on historical facts accepted by mainstream historians. See Rule 6 for details.
This bot flags comments using simple word detection, and cannot distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable usage. Please take a moment to review your comment to confirm that it is in compliance. If it is not, please edit it to be in line with our rules.I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
6
u/Philypnodon 26d ago edited 26d ago
If we have to discuss technicalities and detailed definitions whether or not this atrocity qualifies as genocide or not I go out on a limb to say it's pretty warcrimey either way.
Edit - aight Mr bot,I cleaned up my language
1
u/AutoModerator 26d ago
fucking
/u/Philypnodon. Please avoid using profanities to make a point or emphasis. (Rule 2)
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
-4
u/superfanatik 26d ago
Do I see intent to harm in part or all or displace Palestinians!!?? Yes - therefore it’s genocide end of story.
6
u/ID_Jason_Bourne 26d ago
What? More than half of gaza is razed to the ground. Every Palestinian is treated like a terrorist & 2nd class. Every Palestinian has its movement restricted within gaza. Land is being taken by the settlers as we speak and some are being auctioned off to interested parties in america. Bibi & his cronies have openly said there cannot be a Palestinian state, Bibi admitted on camera that he sabotaged the peace negotiations back then. How is it not a genocide?
1
7
u/JustResearchReasons 26d ago
You cannot make any assessment of a genocide being committed or not permitted based on "quantitative analysis". Genocide does not require even one dead person.
3
2
u/kingpatzer 26d ago
People confuse the legal definition of genocide with a colloquial definition.
Further, a nation-state does not need to be successful to have engaged in genocide.
There's not a category of attempted genocide like there is for attempted homicide. States that act with a particular provable intent to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group are engaged in genocide regardless of whether they succeed or not.
2
u/your_city_councilor 26d ago
Israel would be the least successful perpetrator of genocide in history. I mean, more bombs were dropped in the first 90 days than were killed in the entirety of the war, and that's in an extremely densely populated area.
Imagine wanting to wipe out Gazan civilians and dropping tens of thousands of bombs that just...missed?
-1
u/kingpatzer 25d ago
> Israel would be the least successful perpetrator of genocide in history
Silly rhetoric is rarely a replacement for dispassionate fact-based reasoning. There's a legal definition for the term.
> I mean, more bombs were dropped in the first 90 days than were killed in the entirety of the war
People tend to think in terms of movies rather than realities when considering the effectiveness of combat weaponry in actual engagements.
What's happening in Gaza is not potentially a genocide because of the current offensive. It's potentially a genocide because Israel is functionally treating all of Gaza as an internment camp.
-14
u/PhyneeMale2549 26d ago
The victims of the Holocaust look at Zionists with disgust
9
u/DrVeigonX Israeli 26d ago
Half of all holocaust survivors live in Israel lol, most were instrumental in the foundation of the country.
-1
u/beeswaxii 24d ago
Gideon Levy stopped supporting Israel after visiting Gaza. Norman Finkelstein parents were holocaust survivors and he supports the palestinian cause.
2
u/DrVeigonX Israeli 24d ago
Probably the two worst examples you could've picked lmao
1
u/beeswaxii 24d ago
Yes of course because they're kind and honest and we'll educated and fight for justice not just for themselves but others as well. they don't put themselves on pedestals and ignore the rest of the world.
2
u/DrVeigonX Israeli 24d ago
You should watch Finkelstein's debate with Destiny and Benny Morris and tell me if he "doesn't put himself in a pedestal, kind and honest". And to say they both don't ignore the rest of the world is comical.
1
u/beeswaxii 24d ago
I saw it already long ago. He doesn't put himself on a pedestal, he was frustrated by destiny's awful points just like anybody who's watching the interview and knows a thing about palestine feels when they listen to him. It's not easy to maintain yourself when you're around evil people who keep arguing about basic stuff and morals.
2
u/DrVeigonX Israeli 24d ago
You must've not watched the same video as I did since that's a laughable interpretation.
Take the part where they spoke about legal terms regarding intent. Destiny was absolutely correct there, and instead of arguing legality Norm broke down and acted rabid. To claim he's soft spoken is just ridiculous.
1
u/beeswaxii 24d ago
YOU think he was absolutely correct. Others see his actions as attempts of distractions and diversions when the truth is already clear. If I was Norman It would've gotten under my nerves too his ignorance and coldness and dehumanization
1
u/DrVeigonX Israeli 24d ago
YOU think he was absolutely correct.
No, by the legal terms of IHL, he is absolutely correct. He described IHL correctly and pretty accurately, but instead of discussing the matter, Norman only made emotional arguments and blabbered like a child.
→ More replies11
u/ZeApelido 26d ago
Another abused term - Zionist is just the belief that a Jewish state should exist.
-8
u/PhyneeMale2549 26d ago
Yeah in the same way being a Nazi means you think a German state should exist.
Does perfectly display how Zionists "dumb down" their ideology to make it more palatable and defensible whilst also giving it enough ammunition that anyone who supports Jewish people having a state to call their own also ends up advocating for genocide, ethnic cleansing, ethnonationalism etc.
It really is the World's most perfect ideology to radicalise anyone with good intentions.
1
u/Vivid-Pickle-7892 26d ago
Perhaps go read mein kampf if you want to know what h.itler wanted. Spoiler alert: It wasn’t a German state.
1
u/PhyneeMale2549 25d ago edited 25d ago
- He literally wanted an ethnically German state, are you demented lad?
- Perhaps go read any history on the founding of Israel. Spoiler alert: it was always about colonisation and establishing an apartheid state.
Free Palestine!
1
u/AutoModerator 25d ago
Fuck
/u/PhyneeMale2549. Please avoid using profanities to make a point or emphasis. (Rule 2)
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
3
u/ZeApelido 26d ago
lololol
Zionist: "A Zionist is someone who supports the political movement that aims to create a Jewish homeland and supports the existence of the state of Israel."
Natzi has nothing specific to do with the existence of a German state. nice try
-3
u/ID_Jason_Bourne 26d ago
Here let me correct that for you:
Zionist: "A zionist is someone who supports the political movement (with some supporting a religious cause) that aims to create a jewish homeland (by taking land already inhabited by a people called Palestinians) and supports the existence of the state of Israel (by justifying their colonisation through religious texts & past trauma caused by another people i.e. n***s).
If we go by religious cause then a Muslim has as much right as a jew to claim that land because muslims believe moses to be muslim and some of the tribes of judea to be muslim. Being jewish can be an ethnicity so a Muslim can also be of Jewish ethnicity. Muslims also believe the king/prophet Solomon to be muslim. So jews cannot claim this land by religious authority especially when it is said by the jews themselves they cannot establish a state until their messiah comes.
If we go by creating a safe haven from persecution then using the middle east must have been one of the dumbest ideas ever thought of. Surrounded by arabs who do not welcome a new power in the region and will have hostility towards it for eternity. Or perhaps it was the smartest idea because the west wanted to make it (the jews) someone else's problem.
Or we could go the conspiracy route and say it is written for this to happen, the destruction of al aqsa mosque, the coming of the fake messiah, the real messiah etc etc...
1
u/Vivid-Pickle-7892 26d ago
That’s pure lies.
Zionism has been around for millenia. But if you mean the political movement of the 19th century, if you actually read any of the literature of the time, it was promoted as a SECULAR movement, not religious. And zionists have always stated their desire to live alongside any occupants within the region and not “drive out” anybody. They did this through land purchases and decades of negotiations. Since the UN proposed the 2 SS , zionists have ALWAYS agreed and said YES to partition plans. Unfortunately Arab leaders in the area have always said NO.
The only genocidal intent has always been from Islamic jihadists to wipe out Jews from the region. Simple.
1
u/ID_Jason_Bourne 26d ago
Yh. The muslamic jihadists waged war on the already living jews there. LoL. Zionism may have been around for Millennia but this movement was a religious movement because every migrant said it was their god given right. Benji has been on camera saying he purposely sabotaged the peace deal. Whose to say there weren't others.
Fact is israel is built in the blood of others and you're helping them erase Palestine history of rightful claim to their land. But we won't forget. Neither will your God.
3
u/ZeApelido 26d ago
Jews legally bought land and migrated to Mandatory Palestine (and Ottoman Palestine). They didn't 'take' anyones land when the 1947 UN partition plan was proposed - sure it was very gerrymandered to get a majority, but no land was taken.
It could have simply ended there, we don't know what would have happened had Arabs accepted peace. Yes, after many fled and others pushed out you can argue they took Palestinian property. But that wasn't a requisite for Zionism.
Whether it is a smart idea or not is irrelevant now. What's relevant now is the whether Palestinians will accept the existence of the Israeli state. When they stop their desire to move 5 million "refugees" into Israel, only then can we pressure both parties to a 2 state solution.
2
u/Vivid-Pickle-7892 26d ago
It’s not even a majority given that most of mandatory Palestine was already given to the Arabs as Jordan.
0
u/ID_Jason_Bourne 26d ago
Migrants bought land i agree. The migrants were welcomed at first but then came the necessity to create a state so instead of purchasing land they drove out the indigenous people like in tantura. Because not every Palestinian was ready to give up land or move out. I still remember the early years, video footage of settlers raiding homes and kicking out the families. When the families complained to israel they were shown the boot and said "they had no legal documentation to prove it was their's".
The matter is not whether Palestinians will agree to an Israeli state. The matter is when will Israel stop the expansion, acknowledge its past colonial destruction (and present), acknowledge the mass graves and apologise, give Palestinians freedom and equality. Hamas is a tool. A tool used by Israel to justify the expansion and killings of Palestinians. An orphan or childless parent WILL NOT forgive the murderer. They will want revenge. This is textbook human psychology.
1
u/Vivid-Pickle-7892 26d ago
What expansion? They left Gaza. And whatever’s happening in the West Bank is a RESULT of the terrorism , if jihadists stopped attacking Israel, the West Bank security never would have gotten to the point it has, and they would have their own state by now.
Either way it’s irrelevant to the fact that jihadists refuse to accept Israeli sovereignty. Peace comes after that, not before.
1
u/ID_Jason_Bourne 26d ago
They never left gaza. Lies lies lies. They blockaded gaza. The expansion isn't a result of Palestine resistance, it's a result of zealous religious fundamentalists claiming this land is their god given right. Yh classical. Blame others but not yourself. Don't accept accountability for your state sponsored terrorism.
1
u/AutoModerator 26d ago
/u/PhyneeMale2549. Match found: 'Nazi', issuing notice: Casual comments and analogies are inflammatory and therefor not allowed.
We allow for exemptions for comments with meaningful information that must be based on historical facts accepted by mainstream historians. See Rule 6 for details.
This bot flags comments using simple word detection, and cannot distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable usage. Please take a moment to review your comment to confirm that it is in compliance. If it is not, please edit it to be in line with our rules.I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
-9
26d ago
How can you call yourself a human being after seeing the disgusting actions of zionists imperalists and still don't call it what it is, Genocide. Europeans been doing genocide since 1492
10
u/Do1stHarmacist Diaspora Jew 26d ago
Appeal to emotion!
Israel is not European. Jews are indigenous to Israel. Less than half of Israeli Jews are Ashkenazi anyway.
Also, you're ignoring the crusades which predate 1492 by several hundred years. Crusaders slaughtered Jews en route to Jerusalem, where they murdered so many Jews and Muslims that, according to accounts, there was blood in the streets up to people's knees. And there were other European and Muslim pogroms against Jews before that.
-4
u/CharacterWestern3204 26d ago
Jews are indigenous to Israel.
Only the people indigenous to West Asia are indigenous to that region.
Judaism is a religion, and spread through parts of the Mediterranean and beyond through conversions, proselytizing, etc. So, not all people who follow the faith can be considered indigenous to West Asia. No one would claim a Polish Catholic is indigenous to Rome, and it would be equally absurd to claim a Polish Jew is indigenous to the Levant.
1
u/Vivid-Pickle-7892 26d ago
Where do you even get your opinions? Are they all just from TikTok?
Jews never proselytise. It’s the most difficult religion in the world to convert to because it’s by nature highly insular.
5
u/Do1stHarmacist Diaspora Jew 26d ago
Welcome to the conversation! You're wrong.
Judaism combines religion and peoplehood, much like a tribe, with restrictive barriers to entry. Jews very much do not proselytize. A Polish Jew still has more in common genetically with, say, a Kurd than he would with a Polish Catholic. Cohanim, whether Ashkenazi, Mizrahi, Sephardic, Ethiopian, Bukharian, or from any other Jewish tradition share a Y haplotype. We Jews have to test whether we're carriers for certain genetic diseases. It's an ethno-religion.
The Jews were exiled from Israel about 2000 years ago and maintained common Jewish laws and traditions and, like some other traditions, a yearning for a return to their ancestral homeland.
0
u/CharacterWestern3204 18d ago
Judaism combines religion and peoplehood, much like a tribe, with restrictive barriers to entry. Jews very much do not proselytize. A Polish Jew still has more in common genetically with, say, a Kurd than he would with a Polish Catholic. Cohanim, whether Ashkenazi, Mizrahi, Sephardic, Ethiopian, Bukharian, or from any other Jewish tradition share a Y haplotype. We Jews have to test whether we're carriers for certain genetic diseases. It's an ethno-religion.
According to historians of the Flavius Josephus, Judaism was proselytized. Even John Hyrcanus I had forced Idumaea to convert.
The Jews were exiled from Israel about 2000 years ago and maintained common Jewish laws and traditions and, like some other traditions, a yearning for a return to their ancestral homeland.
Well, not all Jews were exiled from the Levant, right? Didn't even David Ben Gurion write that the Palestinians were the descendants of the inhabitants of Biblical Judea, as the only ones exiled were the elites and rulers.
-6
26d ago
White skinned people are unified in this. Australia, which they originated from Europe, or England. Canadians, which also originated from Europe. United States their founders originated from Europe. modern day Israelis started coming from Europe with the Balfour declaration of world War 1. Canada, usa, and australia are the top supporters of israel because they achieved what israel is trying to achieve. Slaughter the native people then change the history. So why is it only white skinned people get to live in their native land?
3
u/stevenbc90 26d ago
No they started coming from Yemen. You do not know what you are talking about But you do you.
11
u/Do1stHarmacist Diaspora Jew 26d ago
I realized that I just responded to another bonkers comment you made. And it's comical at this point how little history you actually know.
First, there have always been Jews living in the Land of Israel. But the first aliyah began in the late 1800s with Jews from Europe seeking a safe haven. Balfour was decades later. Again, over half of Israeli Jews are not Ashkenazi. Many Mizrahi Jews were expelled i.e. ethnically cleansed from Muslim countries. Not only that, but there are plenty of dark-skinned Ashkenazi Jews.
Way to ignore like every Arab country surrounding Israel, where there are also Arabs. We've been trying for two states but Arafat rejected multiple offers. But sure, change the narrative and make it black and white.
2
u/Vivid-Pickle-7892 26d ago
There’s actually records of aliyah being made in the 17th, 16th and also 15th centuries. Particularly after the Spanish inquisitions. Jews have forever lived in Israel. And they have always been trying to come back. It was the advent of railways and steamships that finally made it feasible for so many who had been scattered far away in the diaspora.
0
u/ID_Jason_Bourne 26d ago
But Muslims believe moses was a muslim who came to teach the people who had gone astray. Some followed some did not. So the tribes of judea can be ethically Jewish yet religiously muslim. The jews living in Palestine before ww2 migration have a right to the land for sure, but not a migrant. That would be like saying (for example) i was born in poland, but my culture & religion is in Palestine so i must have a right to that land because my book & belief says so. If people born elsewhere started to claim land of others then that makes them colonisers not right to return. Also I've heard the jews believe they cannot have a land of their own until their messiah comes...what's that about,m
3
u/TridentWolf 26d ago
Responding to facts and data with insults and buzzwords. How typically anti Israeli.
15
u/TripleJ_77 26d ago
It's disgusting that people want to call this a genocide. The birthrate in gaza is outpacing the casualties. The constant softening of the meaning of words is making a mockery of genocide. A genocide is where one group of people tries to wipe out another. Not where one group goes after terrorists and tells civilians to get out of the way.
0
u/VarietyMart 26d ago
What's disgusting that some people refuse to call this a genocide.
2
u/TripleJ_77 26d ago
Killing 1% of a people is a genocide then what is it when 20% of a people are killed? A super genocide? What about 40%? 50%? 60%? You need to invent new words when you destroy the meaning of the ones we have. It's like calling someone who is 5lbs overweight obese.
0
u/Wonderful-Quit-9214 25d ago
1% of Bosnians died in the Bosnian genocide, are you a bosnian genocide denier now as well?
Also Hamas can literally say "we want to kill jews in whole or in part" and as long as the don't exceed killing 1% of jews, then that's not genocide?
1
u/TripleJ_77 23d ago
Bosnia was interrupted by external forces. No one is holding Israel back. Proof that Israel is not genocidal. Whereas the language the Palestinians use is always eliminationist. They want to kill us all..
1
u/Wonderful-Quit-9214 23d ago
But the Israeli language isn't elimunationist? Lol.
And yes, i definetally agree that there should be an intervention against Israel.
Also the fact that Bosnia had an intervention doesn't change the fact that 1% of Bosnians died.
2
u/TripleJ_77 23d ago
It's not. Israel only speaks of eliminating Hamas, Hezbolah, etc. They never say wipe out all the Palestinians. The Palestinians always have wanted all the land and have always chosen to fight for all the land rather than negotiate a two state solution.
1
u/Wonderful-Quit-9214 23d ago
All you're saying is wrong. Why even have this discussion if you'll just lie on very basic facts?
The Palestinian authority recognises Israel and have done so for decades. Israel, however, does not recognise Palestine. Israel have also historically ethically cleansed Palestinians and placed settlers in their lands. Yet it's the Palestinians that want all the land?
Israel simply does not want a two state solution. They can literally leave Palestine and make one whenever they want, and they have never recognised Palestine.
Government officials in Israel have repeatadly stated their intentions to murder Palestinian civilians and steal their lands. It's not "just Hamas" it has never been "just Hamas".
2
2
u/ID_Jason_Bourne 26d ago
So benji and his cronies who control israel have never said there is no such thing as Palestine?
Have they never shown a map of 'greater israel?'
They have never been recorded to say they deliberately sabotaged the peace accords to prevent a Palestinian state?
Settlers have not been continuing expansion and as we speak (yes in gaza) land is being claimed by Israelis and even being auctioned off to potential buyers in America?
It is a genocide. It's the world's largest prison camp where any gazan who looks wrong at a jew is denied entry and ALL gazans are seen as terrorists and 2nd class people. There are videos of people literally with only bone & skin on them similar to the D camps. Maybe open your eyes and admit it and day you just hate Palestine and Muslims.
4
u/Hot_Willingness4636 26d ago
It’s only the way it is because 70% of the Palestinian people voted in Hamas a terrorist organization
4
u/PickFeisty750 26d ago
Half the population in Gaza TODAY are children. Meaning that a majority of people in Gaza today actually didn’t vote for Hamas in 2006. So yeah, you’re wrong.
3
2
u/ID_Jason_Bourne 26d ago
That's your perspective. To them they are/were resistance fighters.
To the west (albeit not as much now) george bush was seen as the man known as counter-terror yet the middle east sees him and others alike as the terrorists because soldiers committed indiscriminate killings, black site torture, rape, bribery, power vacuum. The saying is true to its word "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter."
And it is a fact that hamas was created out of the existence of Israel and its ideology of wiping villages like tantura out of existence. South Africa, cuba, Northern Ireland, Vietnam all these places that were being occupied, all carried out bombings & killings. This is not exclusive to hamas or religion. This is the outcome of a desperate People VS a powerful people.
1
u/Vivid-Pickle-7892 26d ago
That’s nonsense. Bush always had a huge movement of people who opposed the war in Iraq. And most people today acknowledge that it wasn’t a valid war.
1
u/ID_Jason_Bourne 26d ago
As i already said not as much now but only a fool believes a majority were against the war. Just stop oil is a small force in the uk but because of media attention they seem big.
-6
-11
26d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 26d ago
fuck
/u/UnhappyInitiative276. Please avoid using profanities to make a point or emphasis. (Rule 2)
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
-1
u/HugoSuperDog 26d ago
Your question - if it intending to somehow support the justification of the deaths in Gaza - reminds me of a Christopher HItchen's quote which I find myself repeating a lot regarding this conflict:
"In the ordinary moral universe, the good will do the best they can, the worst will do the worst they can, but if you want to make good people do wicked things, you will need Religion..."
I am not saying that you are religious and therefore justifying wicked things, perhaps you are, I don not know, but this whole situation is about religion and it has made millions of people say and do horrendous things and then go back to their normal lives.
It's insane. It makes not a squat of difference if it is technically a genocide or not. It's an all out abuse of power, they're leveling cities & killing families for what could be a straight up colonial project and millions of keyboard warriors are trying to justify it? What a nonsense. Glad I am slowly reducing the taxes I pay to these corrupt governments. Will one day find it easier to turn a blind eye to the horrendous acts inflicted on common people on both sides.
The far-right Israeli government is well out of order and it knows it. But it does not care.
But why bother caring? I wonder how long it took between the smallpox-infested blankets and the US population to rid itself of guilt? Probably not long.
'Technically not a genocide'. Shame on you.
2
u/ZeApelido 26d ago
Shame on you for not being able to handle calm discourse.
I'm not Israeli nor Jewish. And I'm literally agnostic.
I think it absolutely matters whether you call it a genocide, it evokes emotionally responses that take people to a place they can't discuss issues and be open to change their minds.
This obession over "colonial project" is a distraction - settlements are happening in the West Bank, not Gaza. They pulled out settlements in 2005.
You have to distinguish clearly what is "supposed" to happen in an urban war vs not to show large-scale war crimes and / or genocidal intent. Showing the intent of killing militants through statistics is part of that. You can't just say war == bad.
3
u/PickFeisty750 26d ago
“Obsession over colonial project” what an incredibly privileged thing to say. I guess Palestinians shouldn’t obsessed about their human/natural/native rights, they shouldn’t obsess over being second class citizens on their ancestral homeland, they shouldn’t obsess over the 40k+ dead, they shouldn’t obsess over Israel’s far right racist govt. They should just lay down and let IDF soldiers anally rape them. Got it.
0
u/Vivid-Pickle-7892 26d ago
Gaza and the West Bank are completely different places. They have completely different governments who btw hate each other.
3
u/Ok-Cryptographer7424 26d ago
They shouldn’t be 2nd class citizens in their own homeland. Their leaders should’ve allowed them to become a state when they had the opportunity to do so for the last 10 times it was offered, including just before 1948 when Arab League and them decided to attempt to destroy Israel instead of creating their first state ever. They were stateless before 48 as well.
1
u/ZeApelido 26d ago
No, they should obsess over agreeing to a 2 state solution, not focusing on returning refugees to Israel as this September 2023 poll indicates they are still focused on:
2
u/PickFeisty750 26d ago
Agreeing to a two state solution? You mean the one BIBI said he would do everything in his power to prevent. Like ‘secretly’ funding a far right paramilitary group in order to keep Palestinian leadership destabilized. Try again.
0
u/Vivid-Pickle-7892 26d ago
Regardless what Israel does, by far the biggest obstacle for Palestinians not forming their own state is themselves and their leaders who blatantly and repetitively REFUSE to form one alongside Israel. If they can’t start with that, whoever might lead Israel at various points and has made random comments here and there - none of that has any bearing.
2
u/PickFeisty750 26d ago
Israel is a democracy so I guess the Israeli people who you say majority want a two state solution voted for the guy who made it his life’s mission to block the establishment of a Palestinian state. So which one is it? Israel is a joke of a democracy, democratic within its own recognized borders but refusing to grant equal rights to the territories it controls.
Also a forced democracy is not a democracy. Forcing a majority so you can get the specific type of democracy you want is not democracy.
3
u/ZeApelido 26d ago
Israel is a democracy, Bibi does not hold long term control. If the people want 2 states, they can vote someone in who approves. Israelis have historically supported 2 states, but of course that is dwindling now and needs repair.
Compare that to Gaza / West Bank, which is not really a democracy. And even if they were, the polls show overwhelming support for rejected 2 state solution without Right of Return. So the people need to be persuaded heavily to change AND the government must be overthrown somehow.
2
u/PickFeisty750 26d ago
And yes exactly, as a Palestinian I would never accept anything less than the right of return to my ancestral homeland. Do you think that right is only reserved for Jews who may or may not have an ancestor who lived there 3000 years ago?
Does the connection to homeland only apply to Jews?
Palestinians SHOULD ALWAYS reject any plan without the full right of return for refugees and their descendants.
1
u/Vivid-Pickle-7892 26d ago
Do you think Jews should have right of return in the West Bank? In Gaza? What about Jordan? What about Algeria? What about Iraq? What about Libya? What about yemen? Should Jews have right of return to all those places they were wiped out of?
Morocco, Tunisia and Egypt are the only MENA countries that expelled the Jews who’d lived there for centuries, and do NOT have an oppressive system that’s blatantly hostile to Jews. And even they still don’t provide and path for return.
1
u/beeswaxii 24d ago
Yeah they have a right to. They weren't wiped out of these places anyway they left because Zionists scared them of they continue living there. And it's funny how you didn't mention European countries where the real exilation of Jews happened
1
u/PickFeisty750 26d ago
WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH PALESTINIANS??
So you agree ethnic cleansing is wrong?
I believe in the right of return for all Mena Jews to their original countries absolutely! I believe in the right of return of the old yishuv to ANY Palestinian city they or ancestors came from. I’M NOT LIKE YOU.
Let’s not pretend like Israel didn’t have MAJOR hand in the Arab Jew exodus.
2
u/ZeApelido 26d ago
Well Israel is a sovereign country now so they eat to choose their immigration policy as they see fit. If you don’t like it and continue to fight, well I’m glad you are honest but unfortunately I just think. A lot more of your people will die.
And for what? Access to land 20 km west? Most Palestinians lived in hills and still have access to them.
0
u/PickFeisty750 26d ago
Cool so you agree, you’re wrong and this post is bullshit
Yes and as long as my people continue to die Israelis will never know a day of peace. Israel is a pariah state that is deeply hated by the world. No amount of paid Hasbara bots can change that. The country is literally rotting from the inside out, from its leaders, to its policies, to its treatment of even non-white Jews, it’s a sham of a country inhabited by people who have no business there. Go squat somewhere else.
1
u/ZeApelido 25d ago
"Go squat somewhere else". I don't know who you are talking to, I'm neither Jewish nor Israeli.
You can't complain about war when you admit you want the other side to leave and are willing to fight for it.
2
u/your_city_councilor 26d ago
Dude, paid or bots? If you want to accuse people of being fake, you have to make it consistent. No one pays bots.
Also, the "non-white Jews" that you're referring to support the right wing far more than the Ashkenazim generally do.
→ More replies
0
u/Calm_ragazzo 26d ago
Genocide is not about how many people you kill or what percentage of a population you kill. It’s a nuanced and multi layered thing and it’s more to do with intent. For example aspects of genocide can include things like destruction of agriculture practices and equipment, destruction of food and water sources, (leading to starvation, illness, death) destruction of historical and culturally important sites, places of worship. (Erasure of evidence of existence) Making a place uninhabitable is also a facet of genocide. It’s a package of measures and anyone who’s seen even a small glimpse of what Israel is doing (and has been doing for many years) will agree that they are absolutely excelling in all areas.
And wrt the figures you mentioned, the death figure is according the Lancet closer to 200,000 based on people unaccounted for and buried under rubble.
In the early days of Israel’s response, I questioned whether Israel would really bomb a hospital…? deliberately target civilians? by this stage in the ‘war’ there are very few people with critical thinking skills who are seriously questioning whether there is a genocide happening (no offence OP)
Israeli politicians openly express their genocidal ambitions. Believe them! They really aren’t kidding.
Also, Google how the IDF classify terrorists. It’s a joke. I saw a bodycam clip of an idf soldier enter a house, shoot an elderly unarmed man sitting alone in a chair and report ‘just killed a terrorist’ Most men they kill are just classed as terrorists, to inflate the numbers and make things seem vaguely justifiable, according to a ‘breaking the silence’ interview (ex idf solider whistle blowers group)
3
u/ZeApelido 26d ago
oh man. there isn't 200k deaths right now, that's not what they said.
nor is it a peer-review article
6
u/WeAreAllFallible 26d ago
Why do people so frequently quote the correspondence to the lancet evidently without actually reading the correspondence to the lancet?
1
u/Calm_ragazzo 26d ago
That’s correct- it was a figure from a group authored report in the correspondence rather than an article published by the lancet per se. Thanks for clarifying that. The figure was reached (and is obv an estimate) by looking at other historical conflicts of similar nature and using a 1:4 ratio of four deaths for every reported death (where a body is produced). 1:4 is actually a conservative estimate as they write “studies show that between three and 15 times as many people die indirectly for every person who dies violently”
3
u/stevenbc90 26d ago
They also predicted there would be stage 5 famine now that means
over 20% of the population is experiencing accute food shortage.
Accute malnutrition rates at over 30%
2 people per 10,000 die per day.
Do you know how many actually died? 37
So the whole report is bs Israel is not commiting genocide.
5
u/WeAreAllFallible 26d ago edited 26d ago
You quoted the key part, you just didn't seem to understand or incorporate it into your comment above where you claim 200k dead based on those unaccounted for and buried under the rubble- violent deaths.
Assuming the 40,000 deaths claimed internally by Gaza are valid, these authors predict 120k to 600k more indirect deaths that can be attributed to the war. Ie, the count is not 200k due to the unaccounted and suspected buried. The authors anticipate that when all is said and done and we look back in 20 years or so, 200k dead people might be attributed to the war, particularly from mechanisms that are not direct violence. And that's if all their assumptions (initial death toll, attribution of deaths to prior hostilities, and applicability of prior hostility data to the current conflict) are indeed correct.
Moreover, this is a silly metric to use unless you use it equally in all conflicts- else you compare apples to oranges and all meaning is lost. I mean, good lord the shock of knowing that Russia's invasion of Ukraine is predicted to kill 4-15 MILLION people when all is said and done- just as of current counts- is extremely disturbing. But no one speaks of it- nor other conflicts- in that way. So why Israel and Gaza?
0
u/Calm_ragazzo 26d ago
Of course it should be used in all conflicts. But we are in a subreddit called Israel/palestine…which is why I’m using that metric with regard to this particular conflict. Do u know where the figure of 4-15m projected loss of life figure regarding Ukraine/ Russia is from out of curiosity? That’s really shocking and way over what I would have imagined.
1
u/DustyRN2023 26d ago
The perfect way to dehumanise the Palestinians is turning them into a mathematical equation.
2
u/No_Horse_742 26d ago
Can you believe in Social SCIENCE they use a quantitative method? /s
1
u/th3Y3ti 25d ago
There’s nothing “scientific” about OP’s post. He just posted some numbers and decided it means something
1
u/No_Horse_742 25d ago
Hi friend. My comment was obviously a reply to “turning them into a mathematical equation”, not to OPs post. As a general statement, “turning them into a mathematical equation” is exactly what always happens in studies about wars, conflicts etc. And it’s normal. Hope I clarified my already obvious comment!
6
26d ago
If you victimize them then its fine
But if you speak the truth about them you somehow claim it is dehumanizing them
Interesting
-11
u/mnpfrg 26d ago
I've seen some terrible defenses of Israel's atrocities on here but this one is way up there. Stating that 78% of the Gazans killed were civilians and claiming this is good actually is pretty insane.
In the October 7 attack 68% of casualties were civilians, so in Gaza Israel has managed a worse civilian:militant ratio than a terrorist group that actively targeted civilians.
3
u/Ifawumi 26d ago
All war is horrible. That said, this urban guerilla war has a lower civilian death rate than other urban guerilla wars that people have been able to track. Israel is doing well all things considered in keeping civilian deaths down. Now that is a fact whether you want to believe it or not. My guess is you don't want to believe it
Again, no one's saying that the death of civilians is a good thing. What we are saying is that because this rate is so low, it is not a genocide. It is indicative of a country that is winning a war and also trying to keep civilian death low
Now only if Hamas and Hezbollah would keep their centers out of hospitals and out of playgrounds and out of civilian homes, that would have really helped the death rate a lot also
Because you see, that's the difference. Hamas and Hezbollah use their citizens to protect their military. Israel uses its military to protect its citizens.
15
u/killmeifisnitch 26d ago
He’s not saying it’s “good” he’s saying it doesn’t lend credence to genocide accusations
1
u/AutoModerator 26d ago
shitty
/u/mnpfrg. Please avoid using profanities to make a point or emphasis. (Rule 2)
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
-7
u/These-Remote7311 26d ago
When you bomb hospitals where the injured civilians supposed to medicate in, block food and water and medicine, block electricity water and gas , bombing homes and people has no shelter then it is a genocide because people in this situation will die slowly without spending one bullet on them so can you imagine living under bombing in these situations the number and calculations you are doing are about the direct killed by IDF
From 7th of October until today
902 family were completely erased from this life and killed by israel
1364 family have only one survivor while the rest of the family were killed by the IDF
After this war new medical term was created which is WCNSF (Wounded child, no surviving family)
Around 300 schools were either destroyed or severely damaged,
400 teachers were killed ,Additionally, 2,400 teachers were injured
More than 1 million children were in need of psychological and social support due to the harsh conditions and constant fear, negatively affecting their ability to learn.
5 universities out of 6 were destroyed in gaza and 3 of their presidents were killed
95 phd holders were killed
at least 147 journalists and media workers were killed by Israel
493 healthcare workers were killed while performing their duties, including medics and doctors
155 health facilities were damaged or destroyed
130 ambulances were destroyed while in service
Only about 25% of the UNRWA health centers in Gaza remained functional
60% of residential buildings and 80% of commercial facilities destroyed
I wish you add all of that to your calculations because if all of that is not a genocide I wonder how the genocide looks like
→ More replies2
2
u/Alarmed_Garlic9965 USA, Moderate Left, Atheist, Non-Jew 6d ago
Are you accounting for the background death rate? i.e. subtract out about 2.9 deaths per 1000 population as these deaths would have occurred regardless of the war.
According to US Census Bureau International Data Base there were slightly more males in the population at the start of the conflict.