• HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    I would argue the Israeli/Palestine one.

    Hamas wants to genocide Israel (literally in their founding document) but failing miserably. Absolutely guilty of a war crime or two.

    Israel is very likely guilty of a number of war crimes due to proportionality, failure to minimize civilian casualties, and reasonable cause for infrastructure damage and blockades. The fact they have only killed off something like 3% of the population with this much damage and overwhelming force means they aren’t committing genocide, or they are doing a pretty poor job of it. Individuals and small groups are likely killing off civilians and should be held to account (public hanging is a good way to do it) but question the broader Israeli goal.

    Hamas absolutely guilty of war crime (clear cut), could add genocide if they were winning, Israel unsure as much less clear cut. Could they be - absolutely.

    • Slotos@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      God damn it, why are there people that think that genocide is competition in effectiveness on every damn side?

      Primary genocide requirement is intent. And out of five definitions, only one involves outright killing.

      Read the convention before arguing about genocide. (1) (2)

      In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group