• sandbox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Uh, sorry, I didn’t realise we could just come up with our own “considerations” of words with meanings which are widely acknowledged under international law.

    Here’s the basic criteria: State killing, maiming, attempted reduction of the birth rate, forcibly transferring children, or inflicting conditions calculated to bring about the destruction of, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, in whole or in part.

    For the October 7 attacks to be acknowledged as a genocide, firstly, the State of Palestine would need to be acknowledged as a bona-fide state and Hamas recognised as the government of that country. Then we could discuss what the potential intent of the attacks were, but I don’t think that it would be a stretch to consider Hamas a genocidal organisation, or to consider the October 7 attacks genocidal in that case. These attacks, no matter how deplorable, do not justify genocide as a response.

    Are you willing to acknowledge Israel as genocidal under the same framework?

    • xhrit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      the State of Palestine would need to be acknowledged as a bona-fide state and Hamas recognised as the government of that country.

      The State of Palestine is acknowledged as a bona-fide state and Hamas recognised as the government of that country, by 145 states - more nations recognize Palestine then Taiwan.

      If October 7 was indeed a genocidal attack (as it clearly was under international law) then the israel’s actions are not genocide, they are a response to genocide, as the intent of the Israel-Hamas war is not the destruction of palestine but the destruction of the genocidal organisation Hamas.