61 countries have supported South Africa’s lawsuit against Israel alleging genocide, Al Jazeera reports . The first hearing on the case in the UN International Court of Justice will be held on Thursday, 11 January. The suit was supported by the Organisation of Islamic Countries, which consists of 57 states, including Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan...
I guess people killed under bombs in the last few months deserved it then? Or what’s your point?
USSR sometimes took pretty valid positions too.
The only thing worse than a Cold War mindset is an uncritical Cold War mindset, where we just accept that one side was making trouble and the other side was galactic good. Pinochet doesn’t seem that for me, for example.
It is valid to call out motivation and engage in discussion around it. It doesn’t invalidate the case being brought but too often people and the media like to frame the situation in terms of morality.
South Africa and the other countries that support the case are likely not (only?) taking a moral stance.
I, like OP and others, see these articles and wonder why this genocide but not that one. I think that’s the difference between a human view and a political one.
It’s highly unlikely that one side happens to be entirely on the side of genocide in one issue and entirely on the side of the victims in another issue. Either the Palestinian genocide or the Uyghur genocide are happening, but not both.
It’s highly unlikely that one side happens to be entirely on the side of genocide in one issue and entirely on the side of the victims in another issue.
Could you please provide some actual arguments? Because this is horse shit.
Of course it’s likely and it often happens.
Actually IRL it’s more often that not like this. Israel supporting Azerbaijan against Armenians, for example.
Either the Palestinian genocide or the Uyghur genocide are happening, but not both.
I guess people killed under bombs in the last few months deserved it then? Or what’s your point?
USSR sometimes took pretty valid positions too.
The only thing worse than a Cold War mindset is an uncritical Cold War mindset, where we just accept that one side was making trouble and the other side was galactic good. Pinochet doesn’t seem that for me, for example.
It is valid to call out motivation and engage in discussion around it. It doesn’t invalidate the case being brought but too often people and the media like to frame the situation in terms of morality.
South Africa and the other countries that support the case are likely not (only?) taking a moral stance.
I, like OP and others, see these articles and wonder why this genocide but not that one. I think that’s the difference between a human view and a political one.
It’s highly unlikely that one side happens to be entirely on the side of genocide in one issue and entirely on the side of the victims in another issue. Either the Palestinian genocide or the Uyghur genocide are happening, but not both.
Yes, I can’t see any reason why countries would acknowledge or ignore genocides depending on their strategic interests /s
Could you please provide some actual arguments? Because this is horse shit.
Of course it’s likely and it often happens.
Actually IRL it’s more often that not like this. Israel supporting Azerbaijan against Armenians, for example.
Oh, you are simply a troll.
Israel supports ethnic cleansing in Azerbaijan and in Gaza. Sounds consistent to me.
Well, they are entirely on the side of the victims in one other small event.