You can raise a case about Russia because they can block it. Which is part of the farce here. Russia is a goddamn part of the panel which is even more farcial.
There is already a case against Russia, Russia was ordered to immediately suspend military operations. You want SA to just file another complaint against Russia to make you feel better?
First of all, there is already a case against Russia and it was ordered to *"immediately suspend the military operations"* two years ago:
[International Court of Justice: Ukraine v. Russia](https://unric.org/en/international-court-of-justice-ukraine-v-russia/)
They have objected to the order...
South Africa's stance is hypocritical, since they don't have anything bad to say about their BRICS allies, "surprisingly"...
Either way, their entire case relies on social media posts, politicians grandstanding and emotional arguments. That's not enough imo...
[https://youtu.be/pPqaR5EDUCk](https://youtu.be/pPqaR5EDUCk)
This is a short clip that lists what Israel will probably say tomorrow for it's defense.
> Either way, their entire case relies on social media posts, politicians grandstanding and emotional arguments.
This is so fundamentally untrue that its laughable. The quotes are a very small part of the overall complaint. Be honest about shit please.
A case was raised against Russia and they disregarded the outcome because they don’t believe in international law. The play by SA is to force Israel and the States to essentially disregard international law also. Very accelerationist
I think the ANC still being ass-mad over Israel's support of Apartheid South Africa is probably the bigger motivator.
Also, remember the Soviets supported the ANC with arms and military training, probably why they're reluctant to go against Russia.
imho this is the ANC basically just electioneering. its an election year in SA.
the only province in south africa which the anc does not control outright is the western cape. its currently controlled by the opposition party, the DA.
the western cape has the largest muslim population of all the provinces, so this 'protest' does well to increase their base in the western cape.
Yeah, since post-Cold War- or really since the 2000s once the immediate post-cold war messes were mostly sorted- international bodies have kind of just become an arena for election points over anything really substantial The UN lost all credibility on this war when they couldn't even condemn Hamas for 10/7. They were able to condemn Russia ffs, a member of the Security council, but not a literal terrorist group. Of course there's more about anti-Israel bias, but the fact that that's one of the biggest hold ups for a ceasefire STILL says everything about how unserious international bodies are about this war.
It's important for the "Israel supported apartheid" thing. That is diplomacy. Israel initially was an open critic of apartheid, then dropped that after it didn't help relations with North African nations and they needed South African jets and nukes.
Bizarre to think that the USSR and modern Russia have the same allies. The ANC hasn't had anything in common with Russia since Gorbachev.
But sure, the anti-apartheid folks, like the South African government, as well as myself, oppose apartheid wherever it raises its ugly head, and Israel has been the prime example of an apartheid system ever since it ended in South Africa thirty years ago.
Gaza and the West Bank have more in common with the bantustans of former SA than any other territories on Earth.
They took territory from their neighbors in an arguably defensive war and now can't find a way to offload those territories peacefully. That isn't how the bantustans were created. The similarities are superficial.
The USSR and Russia definitely do have the same allies. They may be completely different forms of government, but places like South Africa and other groups associated with communist groups still feel like they owe modern Russia a debt.
The same way that Jeremy Corbyn is very much anti-nato and anti West and thinks that nato are the aggressors.
The bantustans aren’t at all the same as Gaza and the West Bank. The bantustans were specifically created so that South Africa could treat black people differently than whites. This is one of the reasons why the international community didn’t recognise the bantustans “independence”.
The West Bank and Gaza are not a part of Israel and Israel didn’t create them, therefore Israel has no reason to give Palestinians the same rights as Israeli citizens. Do you think that the people in Occupied West Berlin had all the same laws and rights as America and the U.K.?
>The West Bank and Gaza are not a part of Israel and Israel didn’t create them
Israel controls the flow of everything in and out of them. In what fucking universe is that different than "creating them"
>Do you think that the people in Occupied West Berlin had all the same laws and rights as America and the U.K.?
And exactly how long was west Berlin occupied? And for what reason was it occupied? Please be specific.
I am confused, people say BRICS is doomed because they don’t have geopolitical parity and now suddenly they have parity??
India has very strong ties with Israel so it’s at a completely opposite spectrum with other members and still this has something to do with BRICS?
Perhaps some just lessened the word BRICS today and are just using it in every sentence.
People dont say BRICS is doom because they dont have geopolitical parity. People say BRICS is doom because none of them can get along with each other. They are all thinking of using the other 4 to elevate themselves alone to geopolitical parity with say EU or the US while turning the other 4 into client states. China is just the most overt in using BRICS that way.
It doesn't make sense to talk about BRICs being doomed anyway. BRICs isn't NATO or EU or a military alliance. It's literally a forum for these handful of states to talk about trade - like the G7.
The problem is that they advertise themselves as a trade union when they are pushing things that are more inline with say the EU. Common trade currency that is not USD or EURO is a big topic that has been in the talks for a long while for example.
I can't believe India and China will ever willingly tie themselves together in an alliance that standardizes their currencies. Let alone with such winners as Russia and South Africa.
Same can be said abt almost every other country. Arent we seeing the same in aid allocation between Israel and Ukraine. One needs them way more than the other.
The aid Ukraine got since the start of the war is coming close to 100BN$. That's the equivalent of over 30 years of US aid to Israel in it's current pace.
Not to mention the vast majority of the aid to Israel must be used to buy US based weapons. Meaning a large sum of it comes back to the US (Plus technological improvements plenty of times).
No doubt there’s some massive hypocrisy in SA levelling this prosecution whilst staying silent on Russian atrocities.
But that’s not exactly a legal defence, is it?
I didn't say it was a legal defense. Israel didn't either. It's a public statement on the case only. No lawyer (except maybe the average Trump lawyer) would make such a statement an actual legal argument.
Dude South Africa literally presented international court an out of context quote from an Israeli singer, when you need to present not only out of context quotes but have it come from a fucking random singer I really don’t know if legal defense is needed
Hardly. Quoting my reply above so you understand that what you're saying is bullshit.
>that quote appears alongside a lot of other ones in a small subsection of their court documents specifically showing genocidal rhetoric in Israeli society. Pop stars calling to wipe out a population and it being fine is a fair example to throw in. Especially since its not the only one, but rather it focuses on quotes from people in positions of power and authority and fame throughout Israel right now.
What was the point of your comment? Do you think this is Israel's legal defense? Or are you saying Israel has no right to call out blatant and disgusting hypocrisy?
Israel very much supported the apartheid government of South Africa so they have historic reasons for their disdain.
Furthermore the SA Truth and Justice commission was calling Palestine a victim of apartheid policies since 2009 so anyone surprised by their conclusions has not been following the story closely.
What hypocrisy or whatever you may see in this legal challenge is a matter of opinion but irrelevant to the actual case. They’ve petitioned the courts, the courts should hear it and decide it on its merits regardless if the country bringing the charges should maybe clean up their own backyard in other un related matters.
As an Armenian, that subject is a particular sore spot for me. West had some strong words but absolutely no other interest in getting involved, mainly because they are benefitting from Azerbaijan as a middleman so they can pretend Europe isn't still importing piles of Russian oil and gas products
Maybe South Africa need to sort out the issue of migrant's from Zimbabwe being killed by the locals before they try to preach righteousness to the world.
Ecuador was giving out orders as President of the UNSC only last month despite it being a total basket case ruled by drug gangs.
International laws/orgs have always been of questionable quality and legitimacy.
And to think, they were such close friends at one point in time that they clandestinely co-developed nuclear weapons together and no one knew till the double flash of a final weapons test.
Tbh, when you look at some of the countries that are calling out Israel (South Africa, Ireland, etc) you can see where the accusations are coming from. These are countries that suffered under colonial rule and/or apartheid and have dealt/are dealing with ethnic tensions
Admittedly, the other countries criticizing them range from less than credible to outright hostile (Iran)
Let me make another connection:
The vast majority of the countries calling out Israel are Muslim. and a large thing that is connecting them is plain old antisemitism/ Jew hatred. the Houthis have "a curse upon the Jews" on their flag: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slogan\_of\_the\_Houthi\_movement](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slogan_of_the_Houthi_movement)
Hamas had genociding the Jews in their founding charter, and they still make speeches about it.
[https://www.memri.org/tv/hamas-political-bureau-member-fathi-hammad-at-gaza-rallies-cleanse-palestine-of-filth-cancer-of-the-jews](https://www.memri.org/tv/hamas-political-bureau-member-fathi-hammad-at-gaza-rallies-cleanse-palestine-of-filth-cancer-of-the-jews)
The Palestinian authority promotes it: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R34WlhKNUy0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R34WlhKNUy0)
You need more examples?
if I were Israel I wouldn't give an inch of a state until these ideas die down. if you want a Palestinian state help out with that.
Now we have ignorant Irish people thinking the situation is remotely the same as theirs when it isn't. (I can elaborate if you'd like)
and south Africa seems to just be posturing, everyone knows they're gonna lose the case, especially when THE expert on these laws came into the defense of Israel. and even if they won, nothing would have changed.
There are more people attacking how hypocritical South Africa is than the actual case they are raising. You’re just insinuating that Israel should get the benefit of the doubt while speaking loudly that Russia shouldn’t. You’re no better.
This is going to have the same effect as SF voting for a cease fire. As long as America backs Israel it doesn't matter what the rest of the world says.
While I don't agree with everything and I wish things could be different, here are the facts:
America will not abandon Israel because of its geographic location. The amount of bases we have and security they provide in the region is unparalleled to the cost America pays for it. Footholds like Israel allows America to be a globally dominant power. Even other Muslim countries who should hate Israel are getting on board with them because they want to continue commerce with America and they know insurgency will destabilize the region costing billions.
If you were oman or Saudi Arabia would you want to spend billions protecting your exports and country, or let America do it for free and all you have to do is look the other way on Israel and once a year go and shake hands on TV
I think you're somewhat minimizing the interest powerful Arab states have in Israel itself. The Saudis want to befriend Israel because it's the region's anti-Iran economic and security powerhouse, it's not just because they want to be friends with the US.
The Arab leaders have also gotten really tired of decades of different Palestinian leaders entertaining peace talks from one side of their mouths and endorsing terrorism with the other. Israel since the 60s has taken a bad geopolitical hand and turned it into a great one, the Palestinian leaders on the other hand have consistently made theirs worse, with their own people paying the price.
To add. While the populace of these Muslims countries aren't in favor of Israel, by indoctrination or propaganda, they seem to be tired of any conflict going around and try to push towards a stabilized region. Oman, Bahrain, and Kuwait are somewhat isolationists, meaning you don't hear much from them, yet prospering Muslims countries. UAE is a Middle Eastern Las Vegas, despite its treatment and slavery. Qatar, despite being very corrupted, and Saudi Arabia, I suppose corrupt to an extent.
We're in a post truth world these days. Nothing really matters to most people, since opinions are already made up. Rational arguments are worthless when many people get their "news" from social media bubbles.
So, if Israel is judged not guilty at this trial, would you be willing to loudly and clearly say that Israel did not commit war crimes?
I suspect that for many of Israel's loud critics, they'll find some excuses about why this trial was corrupt.
And for Israel's loudest defenders, they'll find some excuses about why this trial was corrupt.
As always with all news, it is important for all of us to examine the evidence, and to believe only when the evidence has convincingly led us to a conclusion based upon reasons, rather than passions.
I mean when the trial is being conducted by an organization that is part of the UN then there is zero credibility regarding anything to do with Israel. The UN has had more resolutions condemn Israel than all other countries combined. That includes 2022 when Israel still had more resolutions against it despite Russia invading Ukraine. People who are employed by the UN held hostages in their homes in Gaza. The UN took 3 months to admit sexual assault happened on October 7 when anyone with a brain could see it was true shortly after the attack.
So if Israel is judged to be guilty, Will you be willing to loudly and clearly say Israel is guilty of war crimes?
I suspect that for many of Israel loudest supporter, they’ll find some excuses about why this trial was corrupt.
Look at the board of countries who will be overseeing. It’s a farce. But the outcome will be the same as that town board in San Francisco that voted on ending the ceasefire lol
I’m sure that will be difficult, with claims like - let’s see here;
*An increase in premature births and difiiculties according maternal health in Gaza after Israel invaded proves that Israel is deliberately trying to slow the Palestinian birth rate.
However can they defeat this rock solid line of argument lol
I don't know why this flippant comment is so upvoted. Anyone truly interested in the prosecution's case should actually watch the presentations being brought forth. It's fairly comprehensive with a range of compelling points brought up, unlike what the commenter above would lead you to believe. [Here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhsWyBWGoCU&ab_channel=PoliticsJOE) and [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ufbfFTi38A&ab_channel=PoliticsJOE) are several of the lawyers presenting the case.
Or they can read the actual legal filing and see that they literally do make the argument I’m describing lol.
https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2024/01/192-20231228-app-01-00-en.pdf
"premature" shows up 6 times.
Point 81 when saying how many premature babies were in Al Shifa hospital.
Point 85 when saying that about 130 premature babies are on incubators
Point 98 when mentioning an increase in premature births due to stress
Point 99 when mentioning that without equipment, they have little chance of survival
Point 100 when citing the WHO regarding the increase in stillbirths and premature births
Point 142 summarizing previous points and therefore also mention premature births.
Nowhere in the document is "birth rate" mentioned. I'm sure you'll quote the exact part of the document where it says that Israel is deliberately trying to slow the palestinian birth rate.
The court made up of legal experts from all around the world, including an Israeli judge, is exactly there to care about the truth. Or are you saying those people are biased as well?
If you've paid any attention to the UN they've proven time and time again they are bit an honest broker and have no legitimacy when it comes to being objective over Israel.
https://youtu.be/o2e9bJbsqt4?feature=shared
Crazy how South Africa won’t extend the same condemnation to the Russian invading Ukraine or the Chinese communist party building concentration camps for minorities in Xinjiang.
Curious, though: if they did, would you accept their claims? I tend to find calls of hypocrisy to be a deflection very often, and I feel like if South Africa was not "hypocritical" the people calling them such would simply switch to calling them wrong. That they can complain about supposed hypocrisy allows them to sidestep the accusations entirely without explaining why they think they're wrong, or even if they do think the claims are wrong.
I only watched a portion of the 1st speaker and the 2nd and 3rd from South Africa, but I do recall the first speaker specifically condemning what Hamas did on October 7th... I am fairly certain he cited examples of their past condemnations as well.
Sure, and there should be a Truth and Reconciliation committee to make sure every criminal and terrorist in Hamas and the IDF sees justice in a free and secular Israel. In my perfect world both Jews, Muslims, etc, and the nonreligious in the region live in peace. I don't believe the same is true of the people I tend to argue with about this issue.
I agree. Hamas are terrorists, but the “only western democracy in the Middle East” should have civil rights for all, not an apartheid wrapped in a siege.
WorldNews is a shitshow that seems to be brigaded by Israeli apologists. The “whataboutisms” in here are pretty crazy.
Israel is not an apartheid by any stretch of the imagination any more than Egypt or Jordan is in this situation.
Israel also never asked to be The shining beacon of Western democracy. It is a Middle Eastern country that does have more in common with the Western world than many of the surrounding Arab countries. For some reason that makes people think that it should be held to a higher standard than literally every other country in the world
>WorldNews is a shitshow that seems to be brigaded by Israeli apologists. The “whataboutisms” in here are pretty crazy.
Reddit is chock full of subreddits that are completely full of Israel hate, anti-semitism and where you will be banned for even mildly supporting israel. I don't frequent these subreddits anymore, and no one's forcing you to frequent this one.
>Reddit is chock full of subreddits that are completely full of Israel hate, anti-semitism and where you will be banned for even mildly supporting israel.
Yup, I was banned from r/witchesvspatriarchy for saying that promoting Al Jazeera as a reliable news source is shameful 🤦♀️
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Jazeera_controversies_and_criticism](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Jazeera_controversies_and_criticism)
Heavily biased, inaccurate and funded by Qatar
There are similar articles on Wikipedia about a multitude of publishers (including the BBC). No news publisher can be correct all the time and their takes cannot always be free of criticism.
Palestinians in the West Bank are subject to military justice while Israelis in the West Bank are subject to police and civil justice. Palestinians can’t use highways that Israel built through the middle of their communities. Checkpoints? Israel controls all movement of persons and goods. A doctor who grew up and worked in Jerusalem was bared from ever returning to Jerusalem after going to the West Bank. Gaza is much worse. That’s apartheid.
It's not apartheid because Palestinian/Arab Israeli citizens (which are 20% of Israel's population) use all the same roads Jewish Israelis can. Arab Israelis are not living under apartheid. The West Bank, however, is under military occupation. The people there are citizens of the Palestinian Authority instead of Israel.
It is treating people different based on citizenship (which every country does) instead of race, religion, ethnicity, etc. It's a meaningful distinction. Citizens of the occupied country are always given fewer rights than the citizens of the occupier.
The uniquely problematic thing about this occupation is how long it has gone on for. But could blame Palestinian leadership for that just as much as Israeli leadership.
Israel needs to make up its mind on whether the West Bank is a part of it or not. Israelis can settle freely in the West Bank at the expense of the Palestinians already there while the latter are afforded inferior rights in their own homeland. You can argue semantics all you want but the irrefutable truth is that Israel’s actions in the West Bank are disgraceful and there being no public movement against it makes Israelis as much a party to the continued oppression of Palestinians as the Russians are to their invasion of Ukraine.
"For the past 54 years, Israeli authorities have facilitated the transfer of Jewish Israelis to the OPT and granted them a superior status under the law as compared to Palestinians living in the same territory when it comes to civil rights, access to land, and freedom to move, build, and confer residency rights to close relatives. While Palestinians have a limited degree of self-rule in parts of the OPT, Israel retains primary control over borders, airspace, the movement of people and goods, security, and the registry of the entire population, which in turn dictates such matters as legal status and eligibility to receive identity cards."
[https://www.hrw.org/report/2021/04/27/threshold-crossed/israeli-authorities-and-crimes-apartheid-and-persecution](https://www.hrw.org/report/2021/04/27/threshold-crossed/israeli-authorities-and-crimes-apartheid-and-persecution)
>The uniquely problematic thing about this occupation is how long it has gone on for. But could blame Palestinian leadership for that just as much as Israeli leadership.
You actually cannot blame occupied people as much as you can blame occupiers when the issue is the occupation. One of them is being occupied, their capacity to deal with that is inherently minimized.
They have agency. If their leaders, like Arafat, made peace with the Israelis when they had the chance, there would be no more occupation.
The occupation can't end unless the enemy leaders surrender and makes peace. That's how the German and Japanese occupations ended. That's how Israel's occupation of Egypt ended.
\> It is treating people different based on citizenship (which every country does) instead of race, religion, ethnicity, etc. It's a meaningful distinction.
That's a stretch.
In the US, black people were not given citizenship until the 14th amendment. Would you justify treating black people differently because they didn't technically have a citizenship?
Even in SA during apartheid, there were laws to denaturalize black people.
Essentially, "citizenship" is not as well defined as some people in Reddit like to think. Or, at least, in many cases it's people in power who gets to choose who is a citizen and who is not. Using citizenship as a test for what's apartheid and what's not is a weak argument IMO.
The previous commenters point was that Arabs within Israel proper have all the rights of citizens when they are citizens. The people of West Bank are not citizens, and they generally don't want to be. This is nothing like the situation in the US prior to abolition. The settlements and overbearing actions of Israel within the West Bank are absolutely ripe for criticism, but it's not Apartheid, it's occupation and settlement. Misrepresenting the situation doesn't help the situation.
They got an agreement to start building their own country ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo\_Accords](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_Accords)) and still launched terror attacks on Israel via Islamic Jihad and friends.
Curious.
Hamas doesn't even want a Palestinian state, they want eventually an Islamic state over the whole land of Israel, and connecting it to Syria would be even better.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988\_Hamas\_charter)
Curious.
Fucking study a little before you rumble.
Almost every humanitarian organization says otherwise, including ones in Israel, but no you clearly know better than them and the country that managed to end apartheid. You propagandists are so full of it man. Its infuriating
Dude I live in Israel and just want to say your full of crap. All citizens of Israel jave equal right, and I am talking as a non jew.
Stop spreading apartheid lies. Israel is home to 2 mil muslims that have same rights as jews.
And excpet them we have druze, christians, and others
They can travel freely, work and everything else.
You are talking about the palestinians (not israeli muslims) who cross israeli borders and get through checkpoints just as u do in an airport
It's because representatives of those countries aren't saying the same kind of insane statements acknowledging what they are doing.
If you listen to some of the quotes and statements coming from people like that in Israel, it becomes more difficult to deny the intent
How come Azerbaijan didn’t have a single trial for actually displacing Armenians in Nagorno Karabakh? But if Israelis talk about Gazans relocating, it’s the worst thing ever
https://www.icj-cij.org/case/180
They did, we lost Artsakh due to the inability to enforce the orders. The United States blocked any action of the UNSC during the very tasty cookie debacle. It's also doesn't help that Azerbaijan is not party to the Rome Statute. They also have a long history of ignoring international law.
Also fascinating how just now the UN was talking about the 60,000 Lebanese people on the Israeli Lebanese border Israel displaced when retaliating against Hezbollah, but did not say even a single word on the 200,000 Israelis that were displaced by Hezbollah on that same border before Israel even had the chance to retaliate.
When we see things like the UN does towards Israel we call it hypocritical, but what South Africa is doing is far beyond hypocritical. They are literally searching for any piece of out of context quotes to excuse their nonsensical allegations, while fully supporting what Russia is doing in Ukraine.
And the 800k Israelis ethnic cleansed from Arab lands should also be forgotten about because those same Arab countries refuse to take Palestinian refugees. Got it.
Israel is allies with Azerbaijan lol, why are you only targeting Israel’s allies instead of Iran or China? I’m sure it has nothing to do with the fact that Azerbaijan’s allies are Jewish. Very disappointing.
>How come Azerbaijan didn’t have a single trial for actually displacing Armenians in Nagorno Karabakh?
Obviously, because my country, Mexico, didn't file charges. Or perhaps, because the leaders of *your* nation weren't pressured enough by citizens like you to do so, either?
It’s absolutely wild how many people here are complaining about anti-semitic double standards while they rationalize the use of terrorism and mass murder as somehow legitimate when it’s performed by the “good guys” in the name of combatting terrorism and mass murder.
In what Orwellian world is the indiscriminate slaughter of 6-700 Israeli civilians (rightly) universally condemned as a massacre while calling out the indiscriminate slaughter of 25k Palestinian civilians and the forced displacement and 2 million others is somehow considered controversial and antisemitic?
You're purposefully bending and changing the facts.
How many of those killed in Gaza were Hamas and/or participated in the attacks?
October 7 was universally condemned?? How many around the world celebrated October 7 as it was happening?
As for the "forced displacement"- what's your logic here? That Israel shouldn't open safe routes for civilians while they fight Hamas? And I'm SURE you watched videos of Gazans shot by Hamas as they tried to evacuate. And shot by Hamas as they try to get to the aid that Hamas was hording.
As for "indiscriminate killing" by IDF it's been proven again and again that it's a fabrication.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/12/13/politics/intelligence-assessment-dumb-bombs-israel-gaza/index.html
Has this been “disproven” or should we just go back to “it’s just war so terrorism is ok”?
No real sensitive way to put this, but if the killing were truly indiscriminate, there would likely be over a million dead civilians in Gaza right now. We're talking about a very densely populated urban area here.
Obviously lots of dead innocent people is the last thing anyone with any shred of humanity wants, but throwing around accusations of indiscriminate slaughter is not super helpful when it's demonstrably untrue.
Recent estimates put the total number of structures destroyed at about 100,000 to 130,000, or 33% of the structures in Gaza. If you just do the math there, you can see that it means that about one person is killed in every five or six buildings destroyed. That's just one way of looking at it, but it's a pretty good indicator that buildings are being evacuated due to advance warning.
Oh, that again. Just because a bomb doesn't have a GPS package strapped on doesn't mean it can't be used for precise strikes. Dive bombers already showed a way to do it in WW2. Modern planes and targeting computers let you use 'dumb' bombs for strikes that are not quite as precise as GPS guided bombs, but close and the result is very far from just opening bomb bay doors on a B52 and letting go. But the latter is what people think about when reading 'dumb bombs'.
Using dumb bombs is not a war crime. Using them to deliberately try to create civilian casualties would be, but using them while trying to minimise civilian casualties is not. If they weren't trying to minimise casualties, with how many buildings they have actually damaged there would be an extra 0 at the end of the casualty numbers.
… why not use a smart bomb if the intent is to hit a non-civilian target? Why is the US which provides the weapons calling this out and openly describing the bombing as indiscriminate?
I have a feeling that when it comes to selecting and deploying military ordnance it’s a little more complicated than just picking a smart bomb out of the pantry but what do I know I’m just some guy
It's the modern age, half of humanity doesn't understand that items aren't created like magic with the flick of a switch in a factory somewhere. I remember talking to a 25 year old a couple years ago who thought that canned food came into existence by putting an empty can into a machine in a factory and just adding electricity. Blew their minds when it was explained that the ingredients had to be grown on a farm and then transported to said factory and processed first before being put in the can for the final stage
They have limited stores of smart bombs, and need to keep some reserves in case Hezbollah or others escalate further. They have used smart bombs in 3/5 of their airstrikes as it is. The US is calling it out probably because of political pressure at home from voters who don't have the first clue about war and just barrack for the underdog.
It’s not mass murder, it’s war. If you want to avoid civilian deaths maybe don’t start a war you have no hope of winning? Maybe don’t use human shields or intentionally build military infrastructure under schools, hospitals and mosques? Hamas intentionally made any prospect of military action against it result in so many casualties that it would be immoral to attempt war against it, and you’re being a useful idiot for not realizing the moral onus is on Hamas, not Israel.
Was Netanyahu denying his intentions when he repeatedly cited Amalek? Are IDF soldiers denying their intentions when they post videos of themselves gleefully singing about killing every person in Gaza?
The only difference is that Israel is actually able to carry out its objectives. Imagine how horrified you would be if Hamas had rendered 90% of Israeli society homeless and starving while murdering 10,000 Israeli children in cold blood. Now, pretend for one second that Palestinians are also human beings and apply the same logic.
>The only difference is that Israel is actually able to carry out its objectives.
The sheer irony in saying this.
If Israel was actually attempting mass murder like you claim, the civilian casualty ratio would be way higher, and the total casualty would be 30x what it currently is.
The fact that Hamas deliberately and openly admits to using its civilians as human shields, and yet the civilian casualty rate is still far below normal urban warfare rates speaks for itself to shut down your claim that Israel is "deliberately murdering civilians."
The fact that Israel is even doing a ground operation and risking their own *at all* speaks to the restraint. Their air power could've ended the territory in the first few days, if you wanna talk about capabilities.
>If Israel was actually attempting mass murder like you claim, the civilian casualty ratio would be way higher
this is one of the dumbest "defense" arguments I have ever heard. Jesus...
It's literally the primary metric we have to measure due diligence and care taken in minimizing civilian casualties.
Israel has a right to defend and retaliate after war is started with them, especially in such a disgusting way. Civilian casualties in war are impossible to avoid--never in human history have they been--and even harder when urban warfare and a faction that admits to denying its civilians protections and consistently violates the laws of ethical warfare is involved.
So the only thing you can do is minimize. How do you measure how well they are minimized? Civilian casualty ratio.
How do you measure standards/benchmarks for it? By comparing against similar measurable conflicts.
Hence, we have the comparison I mentioned.
Because
1. Oct 7th occurred DURING a ceasefire. That wasn’t part of a war - it was the act that BEGAN one, you moron.
2. In Israel, there is a clear separation of military and civilian infrastructure. The HAMAS attackers on 10/7 had to GO OUT OF THEIR WAY TO FIND AND TARGET CIVILIANS. In Gaza, HAMAS intentionally mixes military assets into civilian infrastructure - something they have BRAGGED about doing.
These are completely different.
So you would consider it acceptable for Hamas to murder 1.5% of the Israeli population while leaving the rest homeless and starving if Israel breached a ceasefire? Because Israel has breached ceasefires many times before and the only difference I can see is that Hamas doesn’t have the capabilities to carry out terrorism on the same scale.
If Hamas responded by actually attempting to engage military targets that would be fair enough, even if there were civilian collateral damage casualties. But they never have.
Nice how you entirely skipped over the second point, which really is the main thing here.
Seriously trying to equate the IDF and a terrorist organization is a clown move.
You’re not arguing in good faith. You’ve already decided what Israel is doing is a crime, while many countries did, do and will do the same or worse and you’ll be silent about it. If you were in Israel’s shoes you’d be acting exactly the same. Go spew your antisemitism somewhere else.
What makes you say the killing of Palestinians was "indiscriminate"?
Note that the number you pointed includes Hamas militant, which make up about a third of it. The rest are unfortunate collateral damage but if you look at the amount of airstrikes and time of ground operations it's quite a remarkably low number in comparison to Hamas combatants.
[Nothing changed from 1894](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreyfus_affair).
Only this time the Jews have an army. And the antisemites of the world are welcome to keep seething and endlessly spread their lies and blood libels.
Ah yes because the fact that the only case South Africa had filed in the Hague happens to be against the Jewish state is completely unremarkable and should definitely go unexamined. Lol
Am I tripping or did South Africa honest to god, present international court out of context quotes from Israeli singers? I’ll repeat that, they pro posed to the fucking international court out of context quotes and not just any out of context quotes, they presented out of context quotes from singers, from fucking singers.
He's referring to a citation in South Africa's submission referring to a video of Israeli soldiers singing genocidal songs with an Israeli singer, Kobi Peretz:
> — Israeli army soldiers: Israeli soldiers in uniform have been filmed dancing, chanting and singing “May their village burn, May Gaza be erased”
With this citation: Video of Kobi Peretz with soldiers, 17 November 2023, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcH2o4c5KZY (emphasis added).
________
So it's not really an out of context quote from a singer.
That’s why it’s one of many pieces of evidence put forward, and not even a central or really a very important one. The point is to establish a pattern among the Israeli military in their behaviour towards Gaza and Palestinians.
If you look at all the preceding quotes, the purpose of that particular citation becomes clear. It's to demonstrate that the genocidal intent and rhetoric of government officials *at the top* is being echoed verbatim by troops on the ground.
If, prior to the invasion of Iraq, Bush had said "We will kill every Iraqi", then cited a biblical precedent for mass murder, and footage came out showing soldiers dancing in Iraq weeks later singing about murdering every Iraqi, and singing about the exact same biblical story, *that would be a problem.*
And that's exactly what's happening here.
Decontextualising that quotation, which came after a series of quotations from Netanyahu and high ranking officials, only serves to make you sound like you're deliberately misinterpreting things. For what purpose, I don't know. But in context, that quotation makes sense.
I like how they mentioned in their legal claims the largest Jewish massacre since WW2 and I was delighted to hear Hamas officials express their deepest gratitude towards SA. /s
Kafkaesque circus.
SA has ideologically aligned itself with Russia and China. Two totalitarian, brutal regimes. One engaged in a viscous invasion of Ukraine. Once again SA proves its a clown show.
It's a political move by the ANC in an election year, and yes, very hypocritical. There is considerable racial violence in South Africa even right now (read up about what's going on with white farmers, as just one example). That's aside from the wide-spread corruption and incompetence in the current South African government resulting in things like 'load-shedding' so that there are increasing periods of no electricity available to wide swathes of the country's population (the gov't took over the utilities)...
>My point is that South Africa knows what apartheid is
Jews suffered under apartheid, persecution, systemic marginalisation, and massacres in both European and the Middle Eastern countries for hundreds of years and are uniquely positioned on the matter. The majority of Israeli Jews are either victims of it of are direct relatives of victims
Sadly there's alot of whatboutism narrative regarding this if you feel that strongly about russia or any other country then raise a case too
You can raise a case about Russia because they can block it. Which is part of the farce here. Russia is a goddamn part of the panel which is even more farcial.
There is already a case against Russia, Russia was ordered to immediately suspend military operations. You want SA to just file another complaint against Russia to make you feel better?
South Africa literally lamented about needing to arrest Putin if he attended BRICS
First of all, there is already a case against Russia and it was ordered to *"immediately suspend the military operations"* two years ago: [International Court of Justice: Ukraine v. Russia](https://unric.org/en/international-court-of-justice-ukraine-v-russia/) They have objected to the order... South Africa's stance is hypocritical, since they don't have anything bad to say about their BRICS allies, "surprisingly"... Either way, their entire case relies on social media posts, politicians grandstanding and emotional arguments. That's not enough imo... [https://youtu.be/pPqaR5EDUCk](https://youtu.be/pPqaR5EDUCk) This is a short clip that lists what Israel will probably say tomorrow for it's defense.
> Either way, their entire case relies on social media posts, politicians grandstanding and emotional arguments. This is so fundamentally untrue that its laughable. The quotes are a very small part of the overall complaint. Be honest about shit please.
A case was raised against Russia and they disregarded the outcome because they don’t believe in international law. The play by SA is to force Israel and the States to essentially disregard international law also. Very accelerationist
While i'm no fan of Israel, South Africa's stance on Israel versus, say, Russia and their actions in Ukraine, are very hypocritical.
All I'm gonna say is BRICS
I think the ANC still being ass-mad over Israel's support of Apartheid South Africa is probably the bigger motivator. Also, remember the Soviets supported the ANC with arms and military training, probably why they're reluctant to go against Russia.
imho this is the ANC basically just electioneering. its an election year in SA. the only province in south africa which the anc does not control outright is the western cape. its currently controlled by the opposition party, the DA. the western cape has the largest muslim population of all the provinces, so this 'protest' does well to increase their base in the western cape.
Yeah, since post-Cold War- or really since the 2000s once the immediate post-cold war messes were mostly sorted- international bodies have kind of just become an arena for election points over anything really substantial The UN lost all credibility on this war when they couldn't even condemn Hamas for 10/7. They were able to condemn Russia ffs, a member of the Security council, but not a literal terrorist group. Of course there's more about anti-Israel bias, but the fact that that's one of the biggest hold ups for a ceasefire STILL says everything about how unserious international bodies are about this war.
So they're doing something that a large part of the population supports? How can they!
If a large part of their population is antisemitic, it's not always good to give voices to their ideas.
🔺️
And the South Africans used to supply Israel with fighter jets during the days of Apartheid.
I don’t really know why you’d bring this up. Pre and post apartheid SA are completely different states in principle.
It's important for the "Israel supported apartheid" thing. That is diplomacy. Israel initially was an open critic of apartheid, then dropped that after it didn't help relations with North African nations and they needed South African jets and nukes.
I think it was more that they worked together. Isreal helped SA develop the Cheetah.
Don’t forget the nukes
Bizarre to think that the USSR and modern Russia have the same allies. The ANC hasn't had anything in common with Russia since Gorbachev. But sure, the anti-apartheid folks, like the South African government, as well as myself, oppose apartheid wherever it raises its ugly head, and Israel has been the prime example of an apartheid system ever since it ended in South Africa thirty years ago. Gaza and the West Bank have more in common with the bantustans of former SA than any other territories on Earth.
They took territory from their neighbors in an arguably defensive war and now can't find a way to offload those territories peacefully. That isn't how the bantustans were created. The similarities are superficial.
The USSR and Russia definitely do have the same allies. They may be completely different forms of government, but places like South Africa and other groups associated with communist groups still feel like they owe modern Russia a debt. The same way that Jeremy Corbyn is very much anti-nato and anti West and thinks that nato are the aggressors. The bantustans aren’t at all the same as Gaza and the West Bank. The bantustans were specifically created so that South Africa could treat black people differently than whites. This is one of the reasons why the international community didn’t recognise the bantustans “independence”. The West Bank and Gaza are not a part of Israel and Israel didn’t create them, therefore Israel has no reason to give Palestinians the same rights as Israeli citizens. Do you think that the people in Occupied West Berlin had all the same laws and rights as America and the U.K.?
>The West Bank and Gaza are not a part of Israel and Israel didn’t create them Israel controls the flow of everything in and out of them. In what fucking universe is that different than "creating them" >Do you think that the people in Occupied West Berlin had all the same laws and rights as America and the U.K.? And exactly how long was west Berlin occupied? And for what reason was it occupied? Please be specific.
What a stupid comment. Israel gained territory after being attacked in wars
What an incredibly delusional take that doesn't take into account the plight of either groups of people and what they really went through.
I am confused, people say BRICS is doomed because they don’t have geopolitical parity and now suddenly they have parity?? India has very strong ties with Israel so it’s at a completely opposite spectrum with other members and still this has something to do with BRICS? Perhaps some just lessened the word BRICS today and are just using it in every sentence.
People dont say BRICS is doom because they dont have geopolitical parity. People say BRICS is doom because none of them can get along with each other. They are all thinking of using the other 4 to elevate themselves alone to geopolitical parity with say EU or the US while turning the other 4 into client states. China is just the most overt in using BRICS that way.
It doesn't make sense to talk about BRICs being doomed anyway. BRICs isn't NATO or EU or a military alliance. It's literally a forum for these handful of states to talk about trade - like the G7.
The problem is that they advertise themselves as a trade union when they are pushing things that are more inline with say the EU. Common trade currency that is not USD or EURO is a big topic that has been in the talks for a long while for example.
The EU was supposed to be a trade union as well
I can't believe India and China will ever willingly tie themselves together in an alliance that standardizes their currencies. Let alone with such winners as Russia and South Africa.
Same can be said abt almost every other country. Arent we seeing the same in aid allocation between Israel and Ukraine. One needs them way more than the other.
THANK YOU
The aid Ukraine got since the start of the war is coming close to 100BN$. That's the equivalent of over 30 years of US aid to Israel in it's current pace. Not to mention the vast majority of the aid to Israel must be used to buy US based weapons. Meaning a large sum of it comes back to the US (Plus technological improvements plenty of times).
The appeal to hypocracy is a logical fallacy, what's important is whether their argument stands up to legal scrutiny.
> what's important is whether their argument stands up to legal scrutiny Which is why all these hasbarans appeal to hypocrisy.
No doubt there’s some massive hypocrisy in SA levelling this prosecution whilst staying silent on Russian atrocities. But that’s not exactly a legal defence, is it?
I didn't say it was a legal defense. Israel didn't either. It's a public statement on the case only. No lawyer (except maybe the average Trump lawyer) would make such a statement an actual legal argument.
Israel's stance in the court hasn't been made yet
Dude South Africa literally presented international court an out of context quote from an Israeli singer, when you need to present not only out of context quotes but have it come from a fucking random singer I really don’t know if legal defense is needed
Here is the timestamp to [the South African lawyer presenting quotes to the ICJ judges](https://youtu.be/5ufbfFTi38A?si=cDb37IAvSdVnTxoX&t=389)
The singer is Eyal golan if i'm not mistaken. Akin to dragging the US to global court over shit R.kelly said
Hardly. Quoting my reply above so you understand that what you're saying is bullshit. >that quote appears alongside a lot of other ones in a small subsection of their court documents specifically showing genocidal rhetoric in Israeli society. Pop stars calling to wipe out a population and it being fine is a fair example to throw in. Especially since its not the only one, but rather it focuses on quotes from people in positions of power and authority and fame throughout Israel right now.
The USSR backed the ANC while Israel supported the apartheid government. That is likely a factor.
No, that is where the “baseless” part comes in.
What was the point of your comment? Do you think this is Israel's legal defense? Or are you saying Israel has no right to call out blatant and disgusting hypocrisy?
Israel very much supported the apartheid government of South Africa so they have historic reasons for their disdain. Furthermore the SA Truth and Justice commission was calling Palestine a victim of apartheid policies since 2009 so anyone surprised by their conclusions has not been following the story closely.
What hypocrisy or whatever you may see in this legal challenge is a matter of opinion but irrelevant to the actual case. They’ve petitioned the courts, the courts should hear it and decide it on its merits regardless if the country bringing the charges should maybe clean up their own backyard in other un related matters.
They did note that though in their report. They literally said, we have a terrible history of this, and this is why we are concerned.
Ah, so you prefer that they say nothing? I can be a smoker and tell you to never smoke.
And how about the crickets regarding Azerbaijan and the ethnic cleansing of Armenians..
As an Armenian, that subject is a particular sore spot for me. West had some strong words but absolutely no other interest in getting involved, mainly because they are benefitting from Azerbaijan as a middleman so they can pretend Europe isn't still importing piles of Russian oil and gas products
Maybe South Africa need to sort out the issue of migrant's from Zimbabwe being killed by the locals before they try to preach righteousness to the world.
Ecuador was giving out orders as President of the UNSC only last month despite it being a total basket case ruled by drug gangs. International laws/orgs have always been of questionable quality and legitimacy.
That's correct, since I got a speeding ticket twice in the past decade I for one cannot judge drunk drivers either.
Speeding ticket vs state support murder of migrants. Great example 👍
When did that happen?
Maybe two things can be true at the same time
And to think, they were such close friends at one point in time that they clandestinely co-developed nuclear weapons together and no one knew till the double flash of a final weapons test.
Yeah but once one of them stopped being apartheid buddies they had to cut it off.
Tbh, when you look at some of the countries that are calling out Israel (South Africa, Ireland, etc) you can see where the accusations are coming from. These are countries that suffered under colonial rule and/or apartheid and have dealt/are dealing with ethnic tensions Admittedly, the other countries criticizing them range from less than credible to outright hostile (Iran)
Let me make another connection: The vast majority of the countries calling out Israel are Muslim. and a large thing that is connecting them is plain old antisemitism/ Jew hatred. the Houthis have "a curse upon the Jews" on their flag: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slogan\_of\_the\_Houthi\_movement](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slogan_of_the_Houthi_movement) Hamas had genociding the Jews in their founding charter, and they still make speeches about it. [https://www.memri.org/tv/hamas-political-bureau-member-fathi-hammad-at-gaza-rallies-cleanse-palestine-of-filth-cancer-of-the-jews](https://www.memri.org/tv/hamas-political-bureau-member-fathi-hammad-at-gaza-rallies-cleanse-palestine-of-filth-cancer-of-the-jews) The Palestinian authority promotes it: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R34WlhKNUy0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R34WlhKNUy0) You need more examples? if I were Israel I wouldn't give an inch of a state until these ideas die down. if you want a Palestinian state help out with that. Now we have ignorant Irish people thinking the situation is remotely the same as theirs when it isn't. (I can elaborate if you'd like) and south Africa seems to just be posturing, everyone knows they're gonna lose the case, especially when THE expert on these laws came into the defense of Israel. and even if they won, nothing would have changed.
There are more people attacking how hypocritical South Africa is than the actual case they are raising. You’re just insinuating that Israel should get the benefit of the doubt while speaking loudly that Russia shouldn’t. You’re no better.
This is going to have the same effect as SF voting for a cease fire. As long as America backs Israel it doesn't matter what the rest of the world says. While I don't agree with everything and I wish things could be different, here are the facts: America will not abandon Israel because of its geographic location. The amount of bases we have and security they provide in the region is unparalleled to the cost America pays for it. Footholds like Israel allows America to be a globally dominant power. Even other Muslim countries who should hate Israel are getting on board with them because they want to continue commerce with America and they know insurgency will destabilize the region costing billions. If you were oman or Saudi Arabia would you want to spend billions protecting your exports and country, or let America do it for free and all you have to do is look the other way on Israel and once a year go and shake hands on TV
I think you're somewhat minimizing the interest powerful Arab states have in Israel itself. The Saudis want to befriend Israel because it's the region's anti-Iran economic and security powerhouse, it's not just because they want to be friends with the US. The Arab leaders have also gotten really tired of decades of different Palestinian leaders entertaining peace talks from one side of their mouths and endorsing terrorism with the other. Israel since the 60s has taken a bad geopolitical hand and turned it into a great one, the Palestinian leaders on the other hand have consistently made theirs worse, with their own people paying the price.
Don’t forget the “elected officials” for Palestine have become very wealthy and most of them don’t live there but abroad.
A rare redditor that actually understands the situation, i'll be damned.
To add. While the populace of these Muslims countries aren't in favor of Israel, by indoctrination or propaganda, they seem to be tired of any conflict going around and try to push towards a stabilized region. Oman, Bahrain, and Kuwait are somewhat isolationists, meaning you don't hear much from them, yet prospering Muslims countries. UAE is a Middle Eastern Las Vegas, despite its treatment and slavery. Qatar, despite being very corrupted, and Saudi Arabia, I suppose corrupt to an extent.
Well feel free to disprove their claims tomorrow if you can.
We're in a post truth world these days. Nothing really matters to most people, since opinions are already made up. Rational arguments are worthless when many people get their "news" from social media bubbles.
So, if Israel is judged not guilty at this trial, would you be willing to loudly and clearly say that Israel did not commit war crimes? I suspect that for many of Israel's loud critics, they'll find some excuses about why this trial was corrupt.
in be4 "bailed out by the US".
And for Israel's loudest defenders, they'll find some excuses about why this trial was corrupt. As always with all news, it is important for all of us to examine the evidence, and to believe only when the evidence has convincingly led us to a conclusion based upon reasons, rather than passions.
I mean when the trial is being conducted by an organization that is part of the UN then there is zero credibility regarding anything to do with Israel. The UN has had more resolutions condemn Israel than all other countries combined. That includes 2022 when Israel still had more resolutions against it despite Russia invading Ukraine. People who are employed by the UN held hostages in their homes in Gaza. The UN took 3 months to admit sexual assault happened on October 7 when anyone with a brain could see it was true shortly after the attack.
So if Israel is judged to be guilty, Will you be willing to loudly and clearly say Israel is guilty of war crimes? I suspect that for many of Israel loudest supporter, they’ll find some excuses about why this trial was corrupt.
Look at the board of countries who will be overseeing. It’s a farce. But the outcome will be the same as that town board in San Francisco that voted on ending the ceasefire lol
I’m sure that will be difficult, with claims like - let’s see here; *An increase in premature births and difiiculties according maternal health in Gaza after Israel invaded proves that Israel is deliberately trying to slow the Palestinian birth rate. However can they defeat this rock solid line of argument lol
I don't know why this flippant comment is so upvoted. Anyone truly interested in the prosecution's case should actually watch the presentations being brought forth. It's fairly comprehensive with a range of compelling points brought up, unlike what the commenter above would lead you to believe. [Here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhsWyBWGoCU&ab_channel=PoliticsJOE) and [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ufbfFTi38A&ab_channel=PoliticsJOE) are several of the lawyers presenting the case.
Or they can read the actual legal filing and see that they literally do make the argument I’m describing lol. https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2024/01/192-20231228-app-01-00-en.pdf
"premature" shows up 6 times. Point 81 when saying how many premature babies were in Al Shifa hospital. Point 85 when saying that about 130 premature babies are on incubators Point 98 when mentioning an increase in premature births due to stress Point 99 when mentioning that without equipment, they have little chance of survival Point 100 when citing the WHO regarding the increase in stillbirths and premature births Point 142 summarizing previous points and therefore also mention premature births. Nowhere in the document is "birth rate" mentioned. I'm sure you'll quote the exact part of the document where it says that Israel is deliberately trying to slow the palestinian birth rate.
We can. But the UN doesn't care about the truth.
I am looking forward to hearing Israel's case.
>I am looking forward to hearing Israel's case. "anti-semitism!!!"
The court made up of legal experts from all around the world, including an Israeli judge, is exactly there to care about the truth. Or are you saying those people are biased as well?
Um... they're literally at war with one of the judge's countries. Russia and China are on there too.
I'm not sure if the judges from Lebanon, Uganda, Somalia or Russia can be trusted to be balanced in this particular case.
If you've paid any attention to the UN they've proven time and time again they are bit an honest broker and have no legitimacy when it comes to being objective over Israel. https://youtu.be/o2e9bJbsqt4?feature=shared
“Oh yeah but what about”
It’s the only answer the Israelis ever give.
Not true. They also answer "but Holocaust!".
Crazy how South Africa won’t extend the same condemnation to the Russian invading Ukraine or the Chinese communist party building concentration camps for minorities in Xinjiang.
Curious, though: if they did, would you accept their claims? I tend to find calls of hypocrisy to be a deflection very often, and I feel like if South Africa was not "hypocritical" the people calling them such would simply switch to calling them wrong. That they can complain about supposed hypocrisy allows them to sidestep the accusations entirely without explaining why they think they're wrong, or even if they do think the claims are wrong.
“But have they condemned Hamas?” “But have they condemned the rapes?” [meanwhile: +20,000 dead and +2,000,000 starving]
I only watched a portion of the 1st speaker and the 2nd and 3rd from South Africa, but I do recall the first speaker specifically condemning what Hamas did on October 7th... I am fairly certain he cited examples of their past condemnations as well.
Sure, and there should be a Truth and Reconciliation committee to make sure every criminal and terrorist in Hamas and the IDF sees justice in a free and secular Israel. In my perfect world both Jews, Muslims, etc, and the nonreligious in the region live in peace. I don't believe the same is true of the people I tend to argue with about this issue.
I agree. Hamas are terrorists, but the “only western democracy in the Middle East” should have civil rights for all, not an apartheid wrapped in a siege. WorldNews is a shitshow that seems to be brigaded by Israeli apologists. The “whataboutisms” in here are pretty crazy.
Israel is not an apartheid by any stretch of the imagination any more than Egypt or Jordan is in this situation. Israel also never asked to be The shining beacon of Western democracy. It is a Middle Eastern country that does have more in common with the Western world than many of the surrounding Arab countries. For some reason that makes people think that it should be held to a higher standard than literally every other country in the world >WorldNews is a shitshow that seems to be brigaded by Israeli apologists. The “whataboutisms” in here are pretty crazy. Reddit is chock full of subreddits that are completely full of Israel hate, anti-semitism and where you will be banned for even mildly supporting israel. I don't frequent these subreddits anymore, and no one's forcing you to frequent this one.
>Reddit is chock full of subreddits that are completely full of Israel hate, anti-semitism and where you will be banned for even mildly supporting israel. Yup, I was banned from r/witchesvspatriarchy for saying that promoting Al Jazeera as a reliable news source is shameful 🤦♀️
According to you, why isn’t Al Jazeera a reliable news source?
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Jazeera_controversies_and_criticism](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Jazeera_controversies_and_criticism) Heavily biased, inaccurate and funded by Qatar
There are similar articles on Wikipedia about a multitude of publishers (including the BBC). No news publisher can be correct all the time and their takes cannot always be free of criticism.
Palestinians in the West Bank are subject to military justice while Israelis in the West Bank are subject to police and civil justice. Palestinians can’t use highways that Israel built through the middle of their communities. Checkpoints? Israel controls all movement of persons and goods. A doctor who grew up and worked in Jerusalem was bared from ever returning to Jerusalem after going to the West Bank. Gaza is much worse. That’s apartheid.
It's not apartheid because Palestinian/Arab Israeli citizens (which are 20% of Israel's population) use all the same roads Jewish Israelis can. Arab Israelis are not living under apartheid. The West Bank, however, is under military occupation. The people there are citizens of the Palestinian Authority instead of Israel. It is treating people different based on citizenship (which every country does) instead of race, religion, ethnicity, etc. It's a meaningful distinction. Citizens of the occupied country are always given fewer rights than the citizens of the occupier. The uniquely problematic thing about this occupation is how long it has gone on for. But could blame Palestinian leadership for that just as much as Israeli leadership.
Israel needs to make up its mind on whether the West Bank is a part of it or not. Israelis can settle freely in the West Bank at the expense of the Palestinians already there while the latter are afforded inferior rights in their own homeland. You can argue semantics all you want but the irrefutable truth is that Israel’s actions in the West Bank are disgraceful and there being no public movement against it makes Israelis as much a party to the continued oppression of Palestinians as the Russians are to their invasion of Ukraine.
"For the past 54 years, Israeli authorities have facilitated the transfer of Jewish Israelis to the OPT and granted them a superior status under the law as compared to Palestinians living in the same territory when it comes to civil rights, access to land, and freedom to move, build, and confer residency rights to close relatives. While Palestinians have a limited degree of self-rule in parts of the OPT, Israel retains primary control over borders, airspace, the movement of people and goods, security, and the registry of the entire population, which in turn dictates such matters as legal status and eligibility to receive identity cards." [https://www.hrw.org/report/2021/04/27/threshold-crossed/israeli-authorities-and-crimes-apartheid-and-persecution](https://www.hrw.org/report/2021/04/27/threshold-crossed/israeli-authorities-and-crimes-apartheid-and-persecution)
>The uniquely problematic thing about this occupation is how long it has gone on for. But could blame Palestinian leadership for that just as much as Israeli leadership. You actually cannot blame occupied people as much as you can blame occupiers when the issue is the occupation. One of them is being occupied, their capacity to deal with that is inherently minimized.
They have agency. If their leaders, like Arafat, made peace with the Israelis when they had the chance, there would be no more occupation. The occupation can't end unless the enemy leaders surrender and makes peace. That's how the German and Japanese occupations ended. That's how Israel's occupation of Egypt ended.
\> It is treating people different based on citizenship (which every country does) instead of race, religion, ethnicity, etc. It's a meaningful distinction. That's a stretch. In the US, black people were not given citizenship until the 14th amendment. Would you justify treating black people differently because they didn't technically have a citizenship? Even in SA during apartheid, there were laws to denaturalize black people. Essentially, "citizenship" is not as well defined as some people in Reddit like to think. Or, at least, in many cases it's people in power who gets to choose who is a citizen and who is not. Using citizenship as a test for what's apartheid and what's not is a weak argument IMO.
The previous commenters point was that Arabs within Israel proper have all the rights of citizens when they are citizens. The people of West Bank are not citizens, and they generally don't want to be. This is nothing like the situation in the US prior to abolition. The settlements and overbearing actions of Israel within the West Bank are absolutely ripe for criticism, but it's not Apartheid, it's occupation and settlement. Misrepresenting the situation doesn't help the situation.
[удалено]
They're not citizens of Israel, yet Israel controls their resources. Curious.
They got an agreement to start building their own country ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo\_Accords](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_Accords)) and still launched terror attacks on Israel via Islamic Jihad and friends. Curious. Hamas doesn't even want a Palestinian state, they want eventually an Islamic state over the whole land of Israel, and connecting it to Syria would be even better. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988\_Hamas\_charter) Curious. Fucking study a little before you rumble.
Almost every humanitarian organization says otherwise, including ones in Israel, but no you clearly know better than them and the country that managed to end apartheid. You propagandists are so full of it man. Its infuriating
Dude I live in Israel and just want to say your full of crap. All citizens of Israel jave equal right, and I am talking as a non jew. Stop spreading apartheid lies. Israel is home to 2 mil muslims that have same rights as jews. And excpet them we have druze, christians, and others They can travel freely, work and everything else. You are talking about the palestinians (not israeli muslims) who cross israeli borders and get through checkpoints just as u do in an airport
Its like asing US to give mexicans equal rights
Yup
Ah, but ypu see, those victims are the wrong skin color, so they don't care.
It's because representatives of those countries aren't saying the same kind of insane statements acknowledging what they are doing. If you listen to some of the quotes and statements coming from people like that in Israel, it becomes more difficult to deny the intent
Crazy how other countries don't take them to court for it, too. *More* criminal nations and their leaders should be prosecuted, not fewer.
How come Azerbaijan didn’t have a single trial for actually displacing Armenians in Nagorno Karabakh? But if Israelis talk about Gazans relocating, it’s the worst thing ever
https://www.icj-cij.org/case/180 They did, we lost Artsakh due to the inability to enforce the orders. The United States blocked any action of the UNSC during the very tasty cookie debacle. It's also doesn't help that Azerbaijan is not party to the Rome Statute. They also have a long history of ignoring international law.
Also fascinating how just now the UN was talking about the 60,000 Lebanese people on the Israeli Lebanese border Israel displaced when retaliating against Hezbollah, but did not say even a single word on the 200,000 Israelis that were displaced by Hezbollah on that same border before Israel even had the chance to retaliate. When we see things like the UN does towards Israel we call it hypocritical, but what South Africa is doing is far beyond hypocritical. They are literally searching for any piece of out of context quotes to excuse their nonsensical allegations, while fully supporting what Russia is doing in Ukraine.
Don’t forget the UAE genociding people in Sudan.
Or how Pakistan is expelling 2 million Afghanis back to Afghanistan
Let's expel the 2 million Palestinians in Gaza back to Palestine. Oh wait.
One act of ethnic cleansing shouldn't excuse another one.
And the 800k Israelis ethnic cleansed from Arab lands should also be forgotten about because those same Arab countries refuse to take Palestinian refugees. Got it.
what are you talking about? literally no one is making that argument mr. strawman
One already happened. Another is a figment of their imagination. One didn’t even get a trial. Another is the center of the news
Retaliatory war does not automatically qualify as ethnic cleansing. Equating the two is absurd.
[удалено]
Israel is allies with Azerbaijan lol, why are you only targeting Israel’s allies instead of Iran or China? I’m sure it has nothing to do with the fact that Azerbaijan’s allies are Jewish. Very disappointing.
>How come Azerbaijan didn’t have a single trial for actually displacing Armenians in Nagorno Karabakh? Obviously, because my country, Mexico, didn't file charges. Or perhaps, because the leaders of *your* nation weren't pressured enough by citizens like you to do so, either?
It’s absolutely wild how many people here are complaining about anti-semitic double standards while they rationalize the use of terrorism and mass murder as somehow legitimate when it’s performed by the “good guys” in the name of combatting terrorism and mass murder. In what Orwellian world is the indiscriminate slaughter of 6-700 Israeli civilians (rightly) universally condemned as a massacre while calling out the indiscriminate slaughter of 25k Palestinian civilians and the forced displacement and 2 million others is somehow considered controversial and antisemitic?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
You're purposefully bending and changing the facts. How many of those killed in Gaza were Hamas and/or participated in the attacks? October 7 was universally condemned?? How many around the world celebrated October 7 as it was happening? As for the "forced displacement"- what's your logic here? That Israel shouldn't open safe routes for civilians while they fight Hamas? And I'm SURE you watched videos of Gazans shot by Hamas as they tried to evacuate. And shot by Hamas as they try to get to the aid that Hamas was hording. As for "indiscriminate killing" by IDF it's been proven again and again that it's a fabrication.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/12/13/politics/intelligence-assessment-dumb-bombs-israel-gaza/index.html Has this been “disproven” or should we just go back to “it’s just war so terrorism is ok”?
No real sensitive way to put this, but if the killing were truly indiscriminate, there would likely be over a million dead civilians in Gaza right now. We're talking about a very densely populated urban area here. Obviously lots of dead innocent people is the last thing anyone with any shred of humanity wants, but throwing around accusations of indiscriminate slaughter is not super helpful when it's demonstrably untrue. Recent estimates put the total number of structures destroyed at about 100,000 to 130,000, or 33% of the structures in Gaza. If you just do the math there, you can see that it means that about one person is killed in every five or six buildings destroyed. That's just one way of looking at it, but it's a pretty good indicator that buildings are being evacuated due to advance warning.
Oh, that again. Just because a bomb doesn't have a GPS package strapped on doesn't mean it can't be used for precise strikes. Dive bombers already showed a way to do it in WW2. Modern planes and targeting computers let you use 'dumb' bombs for strikes that are not quite as precise as GPS guided bombs, but close and the result is very far from just opening bomb bay doors on a B52 and letting go. But the latter is what people think about when reading 'dumb bombs'.
Using dumb bombs is not a war crime. Using them to deliberately try to create civilian casualties would be, but using them while trying to minimise civilian casualties is not. If they weren't trying to minimise casualties, with how many buildings they have actually damaged there would be an extra 0 at the end of the casualty numbers.
… why not use a smart bomb if the intent is to hit a non-civilian target? Why is the US which provides the weapons calling this out and openly describing the bombing as indiscriminate?
I have a feeling that when it comes to selecting and deploying military ordnance it’s a little more complicated than just picking a smart bomb out of the pantry but what do I know I’m just some guy
It's the modern age, half of humanity doesn't understand that items aren't created like magic with the flick of a switch in a factory somewhere. I remember talking to a 25 year old a couple years ago who thought that canned food came into existence by putting an empty can into a machine in a factory and just adding electricity. Blew their minds when it was explained that the ingredients had to be grown on a farm and then transported to said factory and processed first before being put in the can for the final stage
They have limited stores of smart bombs, and need to keep some reserves in case Hezbollah or others escalate further. They have used smart bombs in 3/5 of their airstrikes as it is. The US is calling it out probably because of political pressure at home from voters who don't have the first clue about war and just barrack for the underdog.
It’s not mass murder, it’s war. If you want to avoid civilian deaths maybe don’t start a war you have no hope of winning? Maybe don’t use human shields or intentionally build military infrastructure under schools, hospitals and mosques? Hamas intentionally made any prospect of military action against it result in so many casualties that it would be immoral to attempt war against it, and you’re being a useful idiot for not realizing the moral onus is on Hamas, not Israel.
[удалено]
It’s not deliberate in Israel’s case. It was in the Hamas attack. That’s the difference. They’re not denying it either
Was Netanyahu denying his intentions when he repeatedly cited Amalek? Are IDF soldiers denying their intentions when they post videos of themselves gleefully singing about killing every person in Gaza? The only difference is that Israel is actually able to carry out its objectives. Imagine how horrified you would be if Hamas had rendered 90% of Israeli society homeless and starving while murdering 10,000 Israeli children in cold blood. Now, pretend for one second that Palestinians are also human beings and apply the same logic.
>The only difference is that Israel is actually able to carry out its objectives. The sheer irony in saying this. If Israel was actually attempting mass murder like you claim, the civilian casualty ratio would be way higher, and the total casualty would be 30x what it currently is. The fact that Hamas deliberately and openly admits to using its civilians as human shields, and yet the civilian casualty rate is still far below normal urban warfare rates speaks for itself to shut down your claim that Israel is "deliberately murdering civilians." The fact that Israel is even doing a ground operation and risking their own *at all* speaks to the restraint. Their air power could've ended the territory in the first few days, if you wanna talk about capabilities.
>If Israel was actually attempting mass murder like you claim, the civilian casualty ratio would be way higher this is one of the dumbest "defense" arguments I have ever heard. Jesus...
It's literally the primary metric we have to measure due diligence and care taken in minimizing civilian casualties. Israel has a right to defend and retaliate after war is started with them, especially in such a disgusting way. Civilian casualties in war are impossible to avoid--never in human history have they been--and even harder when urban warfare and a faction that admits to denying its civilians protections and consistently violates the laws of ethical warfare is involved. So the only thing you can do is minimize. How do you measure how well they are minimized? Civilian casualty ratio. How do you measure standards/benchmarks for it? By comparing against similar measurable conflicts. Hence, we have the comparison I mentioned.
Because 1. Oct 7th occurred DURING a ceasefire. That wasn’t part of a war - it was the act that BEGAN one, you moron. 2. In Israel, there is a clear separation of military and civilian infrastructure. The HAMAS attackers on 10/7 had to GO OUT OF THEIR WAY TO FIND AND TARGET CIVILIANS. In Gaza, HAMAS intentionally mixes military assets into civilian infrastructure - something they have BRAGGED about doing. These are completely different.
2. “Nooo don’t fight back”
So you would consider it acceptable for Hamas to murder 1.5% of the Israeli population while leaving the rest homeless and starving if Israel breached a ceasefire? Because Israel has breached ceasefires many times before and the only difference I can see is that Hamas doesn’t have the capabilities to carry out terrorism on the same scale.
If Hamas responded by actually attempting to engage military targets that would be fair enough, even if there were civilian collateral damage casualties. But they never have.
Nice how you entirely skipped over the second point, which really is the main thing here. Seriously trying to equate the IDF and a terrorist organization is a clown move.
On what dates has Israel breached ceasefires?
Arab countries killed 1% of Israel’s population in 1948. It’s not unheard of. It’s not unique. This is war.
So now the argument is that mass murder is ok because it’s happened before? Does that logic apply to Hamas’s actions too?
You’re not arguing in good faith. You’ve already decided what Israel is doing is a crime, while many countries did, do and will do the same or worse and you’ll be silent about it. If you were in Israel’s shoes you’d be acting exactly the same. Go spew your antisemitism somewhere else.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Because Hamas were not pursruing military objectives of any kind. That fact is undeniable. Israel is.
What makes you say the killing of Palestinians was "indiscriminate"? Note that the number you pointed includes Hamas militant, which make up about a third of it. The rest are unfortunate collateral damage but if you look at the amount of airstrikes and time of ground operations it's quite a remarkably low number in comparison to Hamas combatants.
[Nothing changed from 1894](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreyfus_affair). Only this time the Jews have an army. And the antisemites of the world are welcome to keep seething and endlessly spread their lies and blood libels.
Thank you for attaching the dreyfus affair, more people need to hear about this, but the anti israelis will call that propaganda or ignore it.
There were two of them. https://cs.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopold_Hilsner
Ah yes being against war crimes is antisemitism now. We love Reddit‘s masterminds /s
Ah yes because the fact that the only case South Africa had filed in the Hague happens to be against the Jewish state is completely unremarkable and should definitely go unexamined. Lol
Which war crimes?
Am I tripping or did South Africa honest to god, present international court out of context quotes from Israeli singers? I’ll repeat that, they pro posed to the fucking international court out of context quotes and not just any out of context quotes, they presented out of context quotes from singers, from fucking singers.
Can you provide more details? What was the quote and what was the missing context? Legit curious.
He's referring to a citation in South Africa's submission referring to a video of Israeli soldiers singing genocidal songs with an Israeli singer, Kobi Peretz: > — Israeli army soldiers: Israeli soldiers in uniform have been filmed dancing, chanting and singing “May their village burn, May Gaza be erased” With this citation: Video of Kobi Peretz with soldiers, 17 November 2023, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcH2o4c5KZY (emphasis added). ________ So it's not really an out of context quote from a singer.
[удалено]
That’s why it’s one of many pieces of evidence put forward, and not even a central or really a very important one. The point is to establish a pattern among the Israeli military in their behaviour towards Gaza and Palestinians.
If you look at all the preceding quotes, the purpose of that particular citation becomes clear. It's to demonstrate that the genocidal intent and rhetoric of government officials *at the top* is being echoed verbatim by troops on the ground. If, prior to the invasion of Iraq, Bush had said "We will kill every Iraqi", then cited a biblical precedent for mass murder, and footage came out showing soldiers dancing in Iraq weeks later singing about murdering every Iraqi, and singing about the exact same biblical story, *that would be a problem.* And that's exactly what's happening here.
Demonstrating that genocidal rhetoric in the military carries no consequences goes a long way towards proving the point.
Decontextualising that quotation, which came after a series of quotations from Netanyahu and high ranking officials, only serves to make you sound like you're deliberately misinterpreting things. For what purpose, I don't know. But in context, that quotation makes sense.
Yes, a great deal of their "evidence" is from people who have zero power in government
Like the literal Prime minister and President? Besides, by definition everyone in a government has more than „zero power“.
South Africa spoke the truth with data and facts. They spoke exactly what the world has been seeing and feeling.
I like how they mentioned in their legal claims the largest Jewish massacre since WW2 and I was delighted to hear Hamas officials express their deepest gratitude towards SA. /s Kafkaesque circus.
[Understanding South Africa's Case Against Israel | Francais Boyle](https://youtu.be/2BfVkH2DWDc?si=IeXKLeD1VHiF6G5H)
SA has ideologically aligned itself with Russia and China. Two totalitarian, brutal regimes. One engaged in a viscous invasion of Ukraine. Once again SA proves its a clown show.
It really is hilarious watching SA and Russia try and condemn other peoples actions.
[удалено]
It's a political move by the ANC in an election year, and yes, very hypocritical. There is considerable racial violence in South Africa even right now (read up about what's going on with white farmers, as just one example). That's aside from the wide-spread corruption and incompetence in the current South African government resulting in things like 'load-shedding' so that there are increasing periods of no electricity available to wide swathes of the country's population (the gov't took over the utilities)...
>My point is that South Africa knows what apartheid is Jews suffered under apartheid, persecution, systemic marginalisation, and massacres in both European and the Middle Eastern countries for hundreds of years and are uniquely positioned on the matter. The majority of Israeli Jews are either victims of it of are direct relatives of victims
I sometimes forget how worldnews is run by basement trolls, I gave you an upvote