Almost 90 bombs were dropped in one region in just 24 hours.
Russia unleashed an unprecedented bombardment in southern Ukraine overnight in what local officials described as a “massive attack” in the conflict which has continued to rage even as the international community’s attention has moved to the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza.
The Ukrainian Internal Affairs Ministry on Monday morning said Russia dropped at least “87 aerial bombs on populated areas of the Kherson region - the largest number for all time.” At least eight people were also injured in other Russian strikes carried out in the Odessa region further to the west on Sunday night.
If you’re going to argue the international definition of genocide…
You might want to go talk to the UN and all the signatories of the Geneva Convention.
https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml
The United Nations use of the word was translated incorrectly to English and is wrong.
If that was true, then I’m sure there’s lots of statements from human rights organizations world wide clarifying how it’s wrong.
Do you mind linking one?
Quick edit:
Also, that doesn’t mean Israel isn’t breaking the Geneva Convention…
In fact, it seems to be admission that they are…
It will take a bit to pull it from the 1948 archive but Raphael Lemkin used it because it was a loaded word to mean killing millions of people.
The actual UN definition added any transfer of children from one ethnic group to another in the last week of negotiations in 1948. Even by that definition it doesn’t meet the UN term with what is happening in Gaza.
So to clarify, you agree that Israel is violating the Geneva Convention?
Your issue is just that the Genocide section is called that?
If all this is really that pedantic and you understand that human rights abuses are bad, and Israel is committing human rights abuses, I guess I’ll take what I can get.
But it seems like you’re defending the acts Israel are committing on the basis that the section of the genocide section of the Geneva Convention is more in depth than just saying “don’t exterminate every single person in a group”.
Because by that logic, there wasn’t a genocide in North America for over a century against the indigenous people…
Your still ignoring the majority of what the Geneva Convention says…
I’ve linked it multiple times, and even quoted it once so you don’t have to click the link…
https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml
Specifically
And
But the link really goes into specifics that you should know, just read the link.
I don’t agree there was a genocide against the waring tribes of the Southeastern United States. The results of the Indian Removal Act wasn’t a genocide but a forced migration after the War of 1812 due to to the local tribes joining the British and slaughtering civilians. If you read the Act you will see it was a direct response to the actions the tribes took against civilians.
The Souix Nation on the otherhand saw their children taken from them and placed in religious boarding schools, that would qualify.
Dude… Ummm no. Just stop. There are less than 1% of the Native Americans left. We genocided those people. We killed them and took their land repeatedly. We forced them onto “worthless” land, and destroyed and outlawed their cultures. WE HANDED THEM POLIO AND CHOLERA INFECTED BLANKETS. Stop trying to whitewash fucking everything.
Also I don’t give a fuck what a language that is DEAD has to say about a modern definition of an English word. You don’t understand how language works.
There are 9.7 million Native Americans making up 2.9% of the total American population today. That is up from 313,000 prior to the Indian Wars. (105,000 lived east of the Mississippi, 128,000 west of the Mississippi to the Rockies, and 80,000 on the west coast.)
The Indian Removal Act migrated about 50,000 of the 105,000 to lands west of the Mississippi. The problem was this occurred during a yellow fever outbreak from 1822 to 1880 along the Mississippi and the South leading to a quarter of migrants to die along the route (150,000 white Americans in the same area also died).
I know it is big with progressive types to expose all the injustice in the world, but actually look at the context. Things are not as black and white as you want them to be.
Down from 60,000,000 in 1492
That was a single incident by the British in the French and Indian War and resulted in zero cases of smallpox.
https://www.history.com/news/colonists-native-americans-smallpox-blankets
It happened several times in the southwest as well. It wasn’t just one time. You’re being willfully ignorant.
Wow…
Can you give a single example of a genocide you acknowledged happened?
Not as a “gotcha” I’m legitimately still trying to help you understand this, you mod some serious subs and unfortunately genocide is something you should understand in 2023.
Current events in Rohingya I’d classify as genocide. Uyghur falls within the definition of genocide as does Darfur in 2003, Congo in 2002, Zaire in 96 and absolutely Rwanda in 94.
In the modern day United States the largest genocide is never talked about, the California Genocide against the Chumash. The population of 4,500 was completely enslaved and killed. By 1900 only 200 Chumash were alive (today the population has increased to 5,000).
We’ll go with the first.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-41566561
So, Myanmar claimed they were targeting terrorists, but there was lots of civilians deaths which caused noncombatants to flee their homes or risk being killed… Which meets the Geneva Conventions definition of genocide as it’s ethnic cleansing.
To me, that sounds like what’s going on in Gaza.
Can we talk about how you feel these are different?
I legitimately want to work through this, but I might not be replying as fast as this morning.
I don’t see anything Israel is doing that is a crime at this time. Governments get a lot of leeway when dealing with terrorism and Israel is dealing with the aftermath of a wide scale terrorist attack against civilians.
https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2023/10/israeloccupied-palestinian-territory-un-experts-deplore-attacks-civilians
The UN disagrees with you on that too…
To avoid any confusion:
Is this another point you disagree with the UN on?
This is a good example of bias. Thanks for the example. A good rule we used in the military is that the first report is always wrong.