It's the objective truth. Yes, the IDF could probably do more to protect civilians but at the absolute worst what they're doing is comparable to the conduct of the Western Allies against Germany in WW2.
Israel dropping unguided bombs from 10k feet from prop airplanes is certainly an "entertaining" thought but so far removed from the reality of precision guided missiles hitting hospitals and snipers shooting unarmed civilians and journalists in the back that it loops back around to being funny in a very morbid way.
Yeah. Unfortunately. All we can do is voice opposition to whichever one is achieving its goals at any given moment - Hamas in the immediate aftermath of October 7th, and Israel now.
Maybe someday they'll sit the fuck down and figure out that this conflict can't continue forever. Well, Hamas and Bibi never will, but whatever representatives of the Palestinian and Israeli people emerge from the other side of this phase of our everlasting Israel-Palestine conflict.
The fault is on both of them, really. Israel had plenty of warnings from Jordan, Egypt, the US, the EU and their own security agency about an attack in October.
Of course, there is always an attack, and Israel is also not allowed to stop an attack before it happens, instead only after it happens.
Well they were actually attacked from more than just Hamas, but it is Hamas that perpetrated the massacres. It doesn't help that Hamas took hostages. If there were no hostage-taking, none of this would be as messy as it is.
In my personal armchair opinion, I think Israel should've waited before immediately going for the hostages to get some international support. But then again, that's giving Hamas power.
I don't know what else you get from Israel's actions and stated concerns. In a year, they've killed a greater percentage of Gazans than Coalition forces killed Iraqis in all ~10 years of the Iraq War. And Coalition forces in Iraq were (rightfully) accused of being metaphorically trigger-happy.
Please don't use Al Jazeera, they are owned by the Qatari government, which is the same government that actively holds Hamas leadership. They are extraordinarily biased and not to be taken seriously.
Majority. As long as they can present convincing evidence (i.e. evidence that doesn't rely on trusting the word of Hamas and/or their friends in Doha and Tehran).
Edit: I'll also say that I trust some Western governments more than others. I'll take the word of the current German government over that of the current Italian one, for example.
Okay, so you're just making shit up as you go along.
One attack cannot be a genocide.
An ongoing campaign to deprive an entire population of food, water, medicine, electricity, and any route to escape is pretty fucking obviously within the UN definition of genocide.
Maybe you missed the news of how Israel have spent millions of dollars on killing more than 200 aid workers.
You claim intention is needed. What do you call intentionally shelling the "civilian corridors" they themselves tell people to use?
They trap them inside, and shell them continuously. More than a 150'000 people have died as just an indirect cause, being denied clean water, food, shelter and medical supplies.
I'll give you a quick tldr; because I know to won't.
20 out of Gaza's 22 hospitals were damaged or destroyed during the first 2 months, 14 of which suffered direct attacks from Israel.
What do you think the intent is behind taking out hospitals? I think the intent is to deny medical aid to the hundreds of thousands civilian casualties.
By everything you yourself have stated. What they're doing is a genocide. Their intention is to exterminate the Palestinian people. Gaza will be reduced to rubble. Along with everyone in it. And after there's nothing left and no one can live there. Israel will sieze it.
This little port you think you can use as proof otherwise is nothing but bare minimum to try and make it seem like that's not what they're doing. Like a child pretending to cough so they can stay home from school.
Please be aware that Hamas is a terrorist organisation, meaning that they don't have a strict militia, and they often disguise themselves as civilians. So long as Hamas continues to hide in civilian infrastructure, legally, the IDF can continue these attacks.
The UN has told Hamas to stop this for decades, but it's fallen on deaf ears and is likely to continue.
Likewise, where is your evidence of the 150k figure? Isn't the figure 38-40k?
Correspondence:
Our readers’ reflections on content published in the Lancet journals or on other topics of general interest to our readers. These letters are not normally externally peer reviewed.
Don't use anything non-peer-reviewed as evidence. It's disingenuous.
Yes. They do. If you actually read them you would know. For example. In the second link. It's explicitly stated in the first paragraph.
A convoy of vehicles carrying fleeing civilians in Gaza that was hit by a deadly airstrike was travelling on one of the two roads identified by the Israeli army as “safe routes” to the southern half of the strip, according to analysis.
You must have "missed" that.
It's funny because any criticism you will drape it as antisemitism. The proof is so overwhelming. Bombing of safe routes, taking out hospitals as a first priority, little by little they are already reducing the strip to rubble. That's not me thinking they will. That's them currently doing it.
"At least some of the acts and omissions alleged by South Africa to have been committed by Israel in Gaza appear to be capable of falling within the provisions of the (Genocide) Convention," the judges said.
...
A majority of at least 15 out of 17 judges voted in favour of imposing the so-called provisional measures, including the court's president, Joan Donoghue of the United States.
From your source. 15 out of 17 judges agreed to tell Israel to stop committing acts that "[fall] within the provisions of the (Genocide) Convention." You realize that phrasing is the diplomatic way of saying "stop committing genocide," right?
Great, so we agree. White people committed a genocide against the Indians when they conquered the Americas, just like Muslims committed a genocide against the Jews when they conquered the Middle East.
Accepting that premise for the sake of the argument, since the history of the region's disruption of the Jewish population predates Islam, so does that genocide justify another genocide some hundreds of years later?