I don't think genocide is the most accurate word for Israel's bloody ethnic cleansing campaign and don't use it myself but when 1 out of a 100 Gazans have been killed in just 2 mos and 90% are on the brink of starvation it seems pretty depraved to scold others for describing it as such. Semantic arguments are a wholly inappropriate distraction from this almost unprecedented and intentionally inflicted humanitarian crisis. #israel #gaza #warcrimes
@JoshuaHolland I think you really put your finger on how easy it is to debunk that sort of claim.
If it was a genocide there wouldn't be 99 out of 100 of the supposed class of victims still alive.
It is BECAUSE only one out of 100 have been killed that we can debunk that whole claim, and we should, because it stands in the way of approaching the conflict in a way that would help to protect the other 99.
The legal definition of genocide still applies. Something can be identified as a genocide while it's occurring, because it's not about whether or not it's perceived as "successful" or "completed."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_Convention#Definition_of_genocide
@mayadev I just don't find it to be a compelling argument that Israel intends on genocide, but they're just really bad at it.
That is an argument I've heard before, but it comes across as a huge stretch.
@JoshuaHolland
Okay, so you didn't want to read the paragraph I linked to you. Here's the section in particular. It is the legal definition of genocide.
Where does it say "you must kill x percent of people before it's a genocide"?
@mayadev the definition requires a showing of the group being targeted, but the stats don't make a compelling case of correlation with group identity since they're so low.
You must kill at least enough to make a compelling showing that the group is targeted.
The record so far just isn't qualitatively compelling to make that showing.
@JoshuaHolland
@mayadev If you can't show the group targeting then you haven't met the definition that you supplied that relies on group targeting.
And when I consider the numbers that you put on the table, that doesn't look like coherent targeting of a group.
That's what I'm pointing out, that's why this is relevant, the record calls to question the basic idea that the group is being targeted, and therefore makes it look like it's not genocide as per that definition.
Wrong. Dismissing genocidal intent because "not enough people have been affected" is not legitimate.
Palestinians in this location are being targeted. There's also targeting in the West Bank as well, but the bulk of the deaths are in Gaza. It's in this area where 20 thousand innocent lives have been taken away by Israel.
And again you state the numbers aren't sufficient enough for you. What's your bare-minimum? How many people need to die in order for you to personally come around to the idea that genocide is occurring?
@mayadev and again, that is not my claim.
You seem to still be missing my stance since what you are repeating back to me is definitely not my position.
Don't be obtuse.
"And when I consider the numbers that you put on the table, that doesn’t look like coherent targeting of a group."
What numbers need to be put on the table in order for it to look like a coherent targeting of a group?
@mayadev Like I said, I'm talking in qualitative terms, not quantitative. I have no particular number in mind.
But that low number dovetails with what we know about Israel actively avoiding targeting members of the group, so taken together, we have the claim, and then we have the data supporting the claim, and that's pretty convincing to me.
Might need to refresh yourself on what qualitative and quantitative mean.
@volkris @JoshuaHolland
"You must kill at least enough to make a compelling showing that the group is targeted."
No, that's not included in the definition of genocide. That's a personal barrier you've erected for yourself for some reason.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genocides
Here, you can find plenty of genocides that have taken place that have less people dead than the 20k Palestinians who have been murdered by Israel.
How many need to be killed before you personally feel comfortable with calling it genocide? Is it a flat amount or is it a percentage of population?