[Opinion] Why is the west defending Israel after the ICC's request for Netanyahu’s arrest warrant? | Kenneth Roth
[Opinion] Why is the west defending Israel after the ICC's request for Netanyahu’s arrest warrant? | Kenneth Roth
It is disappointing, if not surprising, that the west’s response to the ICC accusations was to defend Israel despite its war crimes
It is disappointing, if not surprising, that the west’s response to the ICC accusations was to defend Israel despite its war crimes
Archived version: https://archive.ph/Br7gq
You're viewing a single thread.
If your country was suddenly invaded and had 1200 mostly civilian, including women and children gunned down in one of your cities, including shooting up a concert, and your country had the means to stop it from happening again, would they? Even if it meant other likely innocent people would die in the process as well? Would your country be willing to wipe another country off the map in order to make sure that your people were never attacked and killed again?
So that's the reason. Isreal was attacked with no regard by a country that ran by a group of people after the goal of completely eliminating Isreals existence.
Now the entire middle easts history is convoluted as hell and many sides have fought with many others. The "blame game" puck could be passed around 100 times. But what would you feel your country would be justified to do if they were invaded by surprise like that? Would they make sure it couldn't happen again? Would you feel it was justified? It may not be a clear yes or no answer, or where a line should be drawn.
<...> your country had the means to stop it from happening again, would they?
By killing more civilians? Oh yes, that will definitely make sure it will never happen again. That might work in fiction, but in real life, it just guarantees more violence in the future.
Even if it meant other likely innocent people would die in the process as well?
That's a war crime. If the country is willing to do that, they should be willing to accept the punishment for it.
Would your country be willing to wipe another country off the map in order to make sure that your people were never attacked and killed again?
Has the history not taught you anything? Peaceful Palestinians who had nothing to do with Hamas, who had their entire families slathered, are NOW more likely to blame Israel for their crimes and join the Hamas (or someone new) in retaliation. Israel is the obstacle to peace, not the other way around. Ignorant people like you who justify civilian killings are the reason monsters like Netanyahu are in power in the first place. His own people don't like him and want him to step down, since when he was offered to bring the hostages in December, February, and April he refused. He needs this war to go forever, since the minute it ends he's done himself.
Would you have a problem with dropping a bomb on a school in your city if people there were taken hostage by some terrorists? By Israel's actions, that would be justified killing.
So that's the reason. Isreal was attacked with no regard by a country that ran by a group of people after the goal of completely eliminating Isreals existence.
Most people don't an issue with targeting people responsible for civilian deaths. Hamas and IDF are militants, and Israel has absolute right to attack them in the name of "self-defense" or even simple vengeance. On the other hand, dropping bombs on schools, hospitals, religious buildings or residential buildings where civilians are is a war crime.
It will only continue if all of Hamasi and Palestine isn't eliminated. If not it will just continue to be another 70 years of war, like the 0ast 70 years. This will continue until one of the sides is gone.
Your comment in "[Opinion] Why is the west defending Israel after the ICC's request for Netanyahu’s arrest warrant? | Kenneth Roth" posted in !globalnews@lemmy.zip was removed.
Reason: Rule 4.Please read the community rules.
Without justice, there cannot be peace.
End Israeli apartheid.
Except Palestine isn't a country, and Israel had already killed more Palestinians over the course of the year before Oct 7 happened. Gaza is an occupied territory, and you shouldn't be surprised if an occupied people decided to kill occupiers (most of which were actually active IDF personnel).
And then there's the question of the response. With the benefit of hindsight, how would you rate the US response to 9/11? Did the actual response make the US safer? Was killing and maiming millions of completely uninvolved people in 20 years of war worth it?
You mean to tell me that Israel, with all those billions of dollars, couldn't see with their own eyes people flying in to their territory with guns? There is no convoluted middle east history, at least not any more than anywhere else on this planet. There is no excuse to kill anyone in violation of international law, especially when the politicians guiding that policy see the enemy as less than human and makes reference to genocidial intent in doing so. If you want to talk about history, the history that is so convoluted and confusing to you, just start in 1947-1948. That should make it a lot easier for you to understand.
Every event in 'Israeli' history can be checked. They never acted in genuine self-defense. They always had ulterior motives, to drive their force as an imperialist proxy with a massive budget, extremist ideology, and settler-colonialism. There is no blame game. Palestinians have fought against occupation. Israel is the one occupying. Now this rougue state is claiming, implicitly, that they lay claim to a Greater Israel project that threatened the entire Middle East and North Africa region. Rather than occupying territory in war, they occupy territory in aims of extermination of the native population. If they were an occupying force in war, they would be required to ensure every citizen has access to food, water, security, and other necessities of life. Instead, they occupy territories and kill or displace the population there. Either it's not a war or this rogue entity is incapable of conducting itself without constantly committing war crimes.
If your country was suddenly invaded and had 1200 mostly civilian, including women and children gunned down in one of your cities, including shooting up a concert, and your country had the means to stop it from happening again, would they?
Ignoring that your country is a settler-colony built upon the land of the displaced people resisting, and that this concert was right next to the fence of a concentration camp housing the repressed native population, that Hamas exists because of Israel, and that Israel's own helicopters shot up the crowds and their own forces blew up houses killing many of the total, and everything else, I hate this framing.
So that's the reason. Isreal was attacked with no regard by a country that ran by a group of people after the goal of completely eliminating Isreals existence.
“It is not a war against terror, and not a war against extremists, and not even a war against the Palestinian Authority. These too are forms of avoiding reality. This is a war between two people. Who is the enemy? The Palestinian people.
Why do we have to make up a new name for the war every other week, just to avoid calling it by its name. What’s so horrifying about understanding that the entire Palestinian people is the enemy? …the morality of war (yes, there is such a thing) is founded on the assumption that there are wars in this world, and that war is not the normal state of things, and that in wars the enemy is usually an entire people, including its elderly and its women, its cities and its villages, its property and its infrastructure.
They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there”
— Uri Elitzur, former chief of staff and advisor to PM Benjamin Netanyahu; shared by Ayelet Shaked, Israel’s Minister of Justice (2015-2019) and Minister of Interior (2021-2022), in 2015
Read up on the open admissions of Israeli leaders and Zionists. Israel itself exists as a country by eradicating the native population and it will continue to do so to its ability.
But what would you feel your country would be justified to do if they were invaded by surprise like that? Would they make sure it couldn't happen again? Would you feel it was justified? It may not be a clear yes or no answer, or where a line should be drawn.
If my country were a brutal genocidal state built on the repression of the native population? I'm not denying the Zionist entity is doing everything to keep their state afloat and expand it; their motives are not unknown. But to put me in their shoes as if that justifies anything is ridiculous nonsense that could be applied to numerous scenarios you wouldn't like.
genocide lover detected
die nazi
Your question without all the rhetoric is: Does self defence justify elimination of an entire nation, country, ethnicity or people? The simple answer is no. Elimination of a nation, country, people or ethnicity is the textbook definition of genocide. If you read the article, you would know that ICC is charging hamas for war crimes as well as the Israeli regime, because war crimes by one party do not justify war crimes by the other party. So you do not need to think where the line should be drawn. The line already exists and Israeli regime has crossed it.
Holy strawman gish gallop, Batman!
The author of the article effectively refutes all of your novel of deflection with one sentence:
The proposed charges are not about whether Israel can defend itself but how, that is, not by committing war crimes.
Later on, he encapsulates the very thing that all of civilized society is based on:
regardless of the perceived justness of one’s cause, it never justifies war crimes.
Never. Under any circumstances. Ever.
By kicking the bucket down the road? Leaving 2/3 of them left behind to rebuild so they can get revenge in 20 years? As long as both sides exist, they will fight each other.
Just straight up arguing for ethnic clensing and the complete expulsion/murder of an entire people, eh?
Not committing a laundry list of absolutely heinous crimes against humanity under false pretenses ≠ "kicking the bucket down the road"
Om the contrary, the more Israel slaughters, starves and otherwise oppresses Palestinians, the more people are likely to be radicalized, leading to more terrorist attacks and perpetuating the endless cycle of violence.
Ethnically cleansing Palestine of every single Palestinian (which is of course an indefensible war crime and would be even if it worked) like you suggest would not change that dynamic.
..
My country was invaded by terrorists on September 11th, 2001, killing nearly 3,000 people. We waged war on the entire region the terrorists came from, eventually killing the leader of the group, and nothing changed. All our bombing did nothing, all our sacrifices of innocent people were for naught.
Amazingly, killing a bunch of people who had nothing to do with the terrorists that attacked your country is a bad move, and only serves to create more terrorists as people watch their loved ones die by your hand and grow to hate you.
If your takeaway from America's terrible actions post-9/11 is that we should've been even more brutal and wiped out the entire mostly-innocent population of the middle east, you've got the wrong takeaway.
Disgusting genocide apologist spotted!
Most Israelis killed in October 7th were killed by the IOF.
Oops.