O/T:- Palestine / Israel

Och Pie what has left wing supporters coming down the lane got ro do with any of this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by andy6025

Ah ok, so you’ve taken a softer version of the line that I mentioned last time - that an organization that consistently and in good faith prosecutes it’s own war crimes retains the right to legitimate violence, whereas those that don’t lose the right to legitimate violence. The former may have their war crimes condemned but they, as an organization are not condemned. The latter, we demand the condemnation of the organization as well as the crimes.

And yet you readily admit that Israel has a poor record of prosecuting its own war crimes. And thus you accept a softer version of this. You say, “Too many [war crimes] by the IDF go unpunished by Israel… Could Israel do more? Sure… I'd prefer they did a lot more.”

I think you might be quite surprised to learn how little Israel has investigated or prosecuted its own war crimes. In fact, it’s very difficult to find any IDF soldier sentences for murder that are longer than 2 years imprisonment, and that’s for the very few cases where they do investigate and prosecute. I challenge you to find some. Nor does this take into account long standing *systemic* human rights violations and war crimes.

Just in the recent genocide of Palestinians, there are well founded allegation of these very serious crimes: Collective punishment (article 3 of the Geneva convention), blockade of fuel, water and medicine, forcible transfer of 100s of thousands of people, ethnic cleansing, genocide, incitement to genocide, the use of white phosphorus ammunitions in prohibited circumstances, indiscriminate attacks including but not limited to air strikes against refugee camps, places of worship, camp markets, schools and hospitals, the deliberate targeting and murder of journalists, the murder by execution of surrendered prisoners of war, and the abuse and ***ual humiliation of detainees.

And yet we are to reasonably expect Israel to investigate and prosecute these alleged crimes in good faith? I don’t know anyone that can take such an expectation seriously.

Sorry, but I’m not finding the claim that ‘Israeli sort of sometimes kinda prosecutes its own war crimes but could do better’ to be a consistent position to explain why we ought to demand the wholesale condemnation of Hamas and the removal of its right to legitimate violence, but not apply it likewise to the Israeli government. So far I think the original author is right - such demands are simply an ideological loyalty test designed to manufacture consent for Israel’s genocide of the Palestinian people.

---

Always funny to see a Putin apologist weighing in on possible war crimes being committed.

You might benefit from reading this article from a very left-wing Israeli human rights campaigner:

https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/2023...f-b7a75d450000

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OchPie

More to the point, a fair few younger Notts fans look like the children of the dudes on the left. I'm more than happy to welcome them down the Lane.

---

Wonder what the dudes on the left look like?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nw6pie

Always funny to see a Putin apologist weighing in on possible war crimes being committed.

You might benefit from reading this article from a very left-wing Israeli human rights campaigner:

https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/2023...f-b7a75d450000

---

I read it. The article uses as its ‘evidence’ against calling this a genocide is an perceived (by your author) lack of declared or obvious [/B]intent to destroy in whole or in part[/b] the Palestinian people.

I disagree. Here’s a letter signed by 880 scholars of international law and genocide, that shows specifically how Israel has demonstrated in deed as well as declared in words its intent to destroy the Palestinian peoples:

https://www.commondreams.org/news/le...srael-genocide

Here is also the letter of resignation submitted yesterday by Craig Mokhiber, Director in the UN’s New York Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) in which he states, “this is a textbook case of genocide”. You can read his full letter here:

https://www.documentcloud.org/docume...gnation-letter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SmiffyPie

Wonder what the dudes on the left look like?

---

Was it post #225 he was referring to? Just a guess like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by countygump

Was it post #225 he was referring to? Just a guess like.

---

Yep, the dudes on the left of the picture. Not the political left.

Sorry, hoped it would be obvious but I didn't want to quote the pic for obvious reasons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by andy6025

Sorry, but I’m not finding the claim that ‘Israeli sort of sometimes kinda prosecutes its own war crimes but could do better’ to be a consistent position to explain why we ought to demand the wholesale condemnation of Hamas and the removal of its right to legitimate violence, but not apply it likewise to the Israeli government. So far I think the original author is right - such demands are simply an ideological loyalty test designed to manufacture consent for Israel’s genocide of the Palestinian people.

---

I understand that you are not, but international law explicitly requires these kinds of structures to exist, and in Hamas they do not.

Any analysis of Hamas does not have to depend on analysis of Israel (and the same is true in the other direction, for that matter). Everyone on all sides has agency, and can decide what they do, and we can then decide what we think about that. Again, so what if someone is making some kind of ideological test? Why should that mean backing down from a view of whether what Hamas did is in any way acceptable?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OchPie

I understand that you are not, but international law explicitly requires these kinds of structures to exist, and in Hamas they do not.

Any analysis of Hamas does not have to depend on analysis of Israel (and the same is true in the other direction, for that matter). Everyone on all sides has agency, and can decide what they do, and we can then decide what we think about that. Again, so what if someone is making some kind of ideological test? Why should that mean backing down from a view of whether what Hamas did is in any way acceptable?

---

I think you’ve forgotten the point, and thus the logic of the article. It’s saying that the principles that are employed to demand that we condemn Hamas wholesale rather than just their war crimes, and thus remove their right to legitimate violence, likewise applies to Israel (and the US, UK, and every other army in the world, etc). If we don’t do so, then not only are we hypocrites, but it shows that the demand for the condemnation of Hamas isn’t actually based on principles, but ideological conditioning - it’s a “loyalty test”. Since, in the author’s view, it’s unlikely world governments would condemn themselves disband all their armies, the logical position then is to likewise not demand the condemnation of Hamas and their disbanding. They retain the right to legitimate violence.

Your first counter argument was that Israel sometimes sort of prosecutes its war crimes. I said they do not in any serious capacity, and challenged you to show me that they do. Now you’re saying that even if they don’t really do it, at least they have the mechanisms in place to do so if they wish. This is like the fat guy who’s been paying for a gym membership for 20 years but never steps foot in the gym - it won’t prevent his heart attack. Alternatively your argument is that we can and should demand the condemnation Hamas wholesale in isolation while ignoring their opponents, regardless of our position being inconsistent. Well sure, you can continue to make that demand if you wish but once again, it shows that your argument for doing so isn’t based on logical principles, but rather ideological conditioning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by andy6025

I think you’ve forgotten the point, and thus the logic of the article. It’s saying that the principles that are employed to demand that we condemn Hamas wholesale rather than just their war crimes, and thus remove their right to legitimate violence, likewise applies to Israel (and the US, UK, and every other army in the world, etc).

---

I haven't forgotten, I'm explaining why I disagree based on two key points.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by andy6025

Your first counter argument was that Israel sometimes sort of prosecutes its war crimes. I said they do not in any serious capacity, and challenged you to show me that they do. Now you’re saying that even if they don’t really do it, at least they have the mechanisms in place to do so if they wish.

---

"Don't really do it" is your language. I don't think they do it sufficiently. But they do do it. Hamas never does.

And you've forgotten the other part: "For all the actions Israel does take, there are others it does not for humanitarian reasons. Often I detest its answers, but it asks the questions. Hamas doesn't."

Breaking the Silence has detailed many failures on the Israeli side. But there is plenty of documentation of Israel deciding not to take action based on humanitarian reasons, too. They don't just have a system to punish war crimes, they have a clear approach based on rules of engagement that try to protect civilians. That clearly fails sometimes. Too much. But it still exists, and reduces civilian deaths. If Hamas cannot show it is trying to do the same, and cannot show it takes seriously investigating and punishing war crimes, it cannot be regarded as legitimate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OchPie

I haven't forgotten, I'm explaining why I disagree based on two key points.



"Don't really do it" is your language. I don't think they do it sufficiently. But they do do it. Hamas never does.

And you've forgotten the other part: "For all the actions Israel does take, there are others it does not for humanitarian reasons. Often I detest its answers, but it asks the questions. Hamas doesn't."

Breaking the Silence has detailed many failures on the Israeli side. But there is plenty of documentation of Israel deciding not to take action based on humanitarian reasons, too. They don't just have a system to punish war crimes, they have a clear approach based on rules of engagement that try to protect civilians. That clearly fails sometimes. Too much. But it still exists, and reduces civilian deaths. If Hamas cannot show it is trying to do the same, and cannot show it takes seriously investigating and punishing war crimes, it cannot be regarded as legitimate.

---

Show me how Israel has taken seriously the prosecution of its own war crimes. There’s only ever been a handful of arrests of IDF soldiers for the murder of Palestinian civilians , and even then they typically don’t get more than 2 year’s imprisonment. Very rarely is it ever more.

And saying that Israel could do more war crimes but they don’t is the equivalent of saying Hamas could commit more war crimes, but they also don’t. For example, Hamas could kill hostages, but they even released some who said they were well treated. Of course kidnapping civilians is a war crime, but by your logic I suppose they could do worse with them? 🤷

What’s going on in Gaza right now is a whole slew of war crimes. Nobody expects Israel to either stop or investigate themselves and punish themselves. As such, by the author’s logic - Israel must be wholesale condemned and lose the right to legitimate violence, or we likewise stop demanding the wholesale condemnation of Hamas.