UN Security Council demands immediate Gaza ceasefire after US abstains

[Infinite Chaos]

Targeting Hamas is not collective punishment.

Normally, it's not unless you also destroy the homes of 2 million people to do it.

Punishing the collective would have been collective punishment.

Go read up on the convention. You are wrong or lying. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt about lying but destroying the homes of nearly 2 million to kill 200,000 is collective punishment.
https://guide-humanitarian-law.org/content/article/3/collective-punishment/

You know you're an advocate for an evil agenda and thus you try to sugarcoat your positions claiming you care for the civilians, in WWII it'd be German civilians and now it's Hamas' controlled civilians but it's all the same, you support the same methods that many Europeans in the 1930s have supported to reach your wanted solution against the Jewish minority you can't cope with existing and surviving.

You’ve really gone to town on this lie haven’t you?
It’s beneath you to make such stupid accusations yet here you are. I should have seen through you and your hidden bloodlust before but you are the one supporting the collective punishment of 2 million and cheering on every death of an innocent Gazan as it moves you one step closer to ridding yourself from the arabs.

Nonsense, I support targeting Hamas until it's gone, you support ceasefire with Hamas to let it continue to exist, to engage in similar and greater massacres and to get more Arabs killed for your propaganda efforts and Jews killed for your ideological goal.

Ah, you’re back to that moronic claim. You ran away when I challenged your previous claim that “millions of people in Europe were marching so that Hamas could keep their captives.”

It was a stupid lie then, it’s moronic lie now because you are trying it on again. I had to chase you for three pages before you backtracked on your words. I can't be bothered with doing that again.

Antisemites who object to Israel's survival and to the survival of the Jewish people as a whole.

Every victimised people or group in the world can claim their oppressors are ultimately evil. Being Jewish isn't enough unless you have special DNA that nobody else has or you have 12 fingers and are somehow different from everyone else.

You can't preach morality to anyone. You're at the bottom of the list when it comes to your moral values. You support a genocidal organization that is determined to the murder of all people of a certain ethnic/religious background that you hate and wish you could destroy, just like your predecessors have tried. Why did they blame Jews for all their problems? Well the answer to that is the same answer to why you do that as well.

Me? Bottom of the list? I’m not the one cheering on posts that call for wiping out the arabs or moving them out of the land they now live on. You are blathering if you think I hate Jews or "wish to destroy them."

If you were an honest poster, I'd challenge you to find any quote where I state my hatred of Jews or the wish to destroy Israel but I know what a waste of time it is to get you to tell the truth.

 

[Apocalypse]

Normally, it's not unless you also destroy the homes of 2 million people to do it.
Go read up on the convention. You are wrong or lying. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt about lying but destroying the homes of nearly 2 million to kill 200,000 is collective punishment.

I'm aware of what the convention says, it says that a collective needs to be punished for it to be considered collective punishment.
The "Israel has destroyed 2 million houses" is a lie not even Hamas tells but I guess you're more extreme than groups like Hamas and ISIS are at this point.
Israel has every right to target Hamas wherever they are. That Hamas hides behind civilian population while targeting Israel's is a double crime. That you absolve it of all crimes is evidence of your complicity.

You’ve really gone to town on this lie haven’t you?
It’s beneath you to make such stupid accusations yet here you are. I should have seen through you and your hidden bloodlust before but you are the one supporting the collective punishment of 2 million and cheering on every death of an innocent Gazan as it moves you one step closer to ridding yourself from the arabs.

I just don't believe you'll settle for anything less than the complete destruction of the Jewish people at this point.
Your process of radicalization was documented and clear all along, and you've reached to the pit where you are now.
Like watching some ISIS potential recruit from the point of beginning to the point he blows himself up.

Ah, you’re back to that moronic claim. You ran away when I challenged your previous claim that “millions of people in Europe were marching so that Hamas could keep their captives.”

You support a permanent ceasefire without Hamas releasing hostages or surrendering - that makes you as bad as some Nazi supporter who supports a ceasefire with the Nazis when they have Berlin invaded by Allied forces.

Every victimised people or group in the world can claim their oppressors are ultimately evil. Being Jewish isn't enough unless you have special DNA that nobody else has or you have 12 fingers and are somehow different from everyone else.

Being Jewish means having to deal with your predecessors and having to deal with you now.

Me? Bottom of the list?

Evidently.

If you were an honest poster, I'd challenge you to find any quote where I state my hatred of Jews or the wish to destroy Israel but I know what a waste of time it is to get you to tell the truth.

I'm an honest poster, I call things what they are. I can see why some would prefer I wasn't.

 

[Craig234]

And you are objectively wrong.

That goes both ways, too.

It is your minimization and justification that destroys your argument and credibility. What was their purpose but to kill Israelis, period?

I've already said what their stated purpose was. Here, read their statement what it was. Some of the description of it follows. They even admit to mistakes being made. You sure can't deny that Israel (Worse than Hamas) told a lot of lies about what Hamas did.

It underscored that Operation Al-Aqsa Flood represented a strategic move to alleviate the blockade in the Gaza Strip, break free from Israeli occupation, restore national rights, attain independence, shape the Palestinian destiny and establish a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital.

During the operation, "some faults" may have arisen in its implementation due to the swift breakdown of the Israeli security and military system, leading to chaos along the border areas with Gaza, it noted.

"As attested by many, the Hamas Movement dealt in a positive and kind manner with all civilians who have been held in Gaza, and sought from the earliest days of the aggression to release them, and that’s what happened during the week-long humanitarian truce where those civilians were released in exchange of releasing Palestinian women and children from Israeli jails," it said.

Addressing accusations of targeting Israeli civilians during Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, the report highlighted that avoiding the targeting of civilians, especially women, children and the elderly, was a moral and religious obligation for Hamas members.

Regarding allegations that the Al-Qassam Brigades, Hamas’ armed wing, targeted civilians on Oct. 7, the report said: “What the Israeli occupation promoted of allegations that the Al-Qassam Brigades on Oct. 7 were targeting Israeli civilians are nothing but complete lies and fabrications. The source of these allegations is the Israeli official narrative, and no independent source proved any of them."

"Video clips taken on that day – Oct. 7 – along with the testimonies by Israelis themselves that were released later showed that the Al-Qassam Brigades’ fighters didn’t target civilians, and many Israelis were killed by the Israeli army and police due to their confusion," it said.

"The Palestinian fighters only targeted the occupation soldiers and those who carried weapons against our people," it said.

Hamas releases report clarifying Operation Al-Aqsa Flood

16-page report titled 'Our Narrative…Operation Al-Aqsa Flood,' challenges Israel's claims, asserting that operation was necessary response to Israeli plans - Anadolu Ajansı

www.aa.com.tr

Did they target Israelis in Palestine? Did they discriminate? Genocide: "the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group." That, my friend is definition. Nothing in that attack does not meet that definition. You and Apocalypse are merely the opposite sides of the same extremist apologism coin

Your statement is very offensive. More offensive than if I said you and Apocalypse were the same, which I'm not saying.

The 10/7 attack couldn't *remotely* hope to 'commit genocide', to kill a significant portion of the people of Israel (Worse than Hamas). I was far more effective than they expected because the border was almost deserted of protection, yet even with the OTHER uninvited groups and civilians who joined in, and the 'Hannibal Directive' killings by the IDF, and an unexpected music festival, still only about 695 total civilians were killed.

Your comments are wrong and irrational, IMO, and unintentionally offensive. You tried to argue your case, in my opinion, you didn't succeed even a little. If you can't argue more decently and rationally about it, there's no point to continue it.

I don't agree with a good amount of Scott Ritter's comments about it, but soon after the attack he said that he thought it was a very disciplined attack, and he had only one criticism, that they hadn't secured the border openings from others joining in and crossing and committing their own actions. He called it the most effective military operation this century...

Regardless, calling it 'genocide' is absurd. Even Israel (Worse than Hamas) who would make exactly absurd claims like that and made many, hasn't made that claim that I know of, perhaps because they have reason not to want 'genocide' thrown around, and the comparison. What point HAVE you made?

You seem to be having difficulty considering you might be wrong, responding with attacks. If that can't change, we'll leave it there.

 

[Craig234]

I'm just aware there are arguments that the palestinians are simply arabs and I've also read the opposite.

It's interesting that an Eastern European or American who moved to Israel (Worse than Hamas) is the person fully entitled to all of Palestine as a citizen there, but the Palestinian whose family has lived there for perhaps centuries is 'just an Arab' with no claim to the land.

You love a straw man don't you? There are limits to how much punishment any innocent people should take to remove a cancer from within but you want all arabs to suffer don't you?

If someone wants to argue Hamas must be removed, why doesn't that start with accountability for the people who put them in power and kept them in power? That is the Likud government. Of course, the far more harmful group to remove is that government. Both they and Hamas - and they have long been allied in goals - should be replaced.

 

[Craig234]

Go read up on the convention. You are wrong or lying. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt about lying but destroying the homes of nearly 2 million to kill 200,000 is collective punishment.

What 200,000? Hamas reportedly has 40,000 militants but since when has killing everyone been a legitimate war aim? Did the US insist on killing everyone in the German army in WWII? Every confederate soldier in the civil war? In what wars has the goal been to kill every member of a force? We didn't say 'every member of Al Queda needs to be killed' that I recall.

supporting the collective punishment of 2 million and cheering on every death of an innocent Gazan as it moves you one step closer to ridding yourself from the arabs.

The actual goal.

 

[NWRatCon]

That goes both ways, too.

No, it doesn't.

Your statement is very offensive. More offensive than if I said you and Apocalypse were the same, which I'm not saying.

There are some subjects, and this is one of those, where certain posters simply are incapable of carrying on a reasoned discussion. Sadly, this is such a topic for you, my friend. If you are offended, that is not because my statement is offensive, but your realization that it is accurate. You are taking an extremist position. You are defending barbarity, and excusing it because of identity the victims. That is unacceptable. Don't bother to respond, I'm done trying to reason with you on this topic.

The 10/7 attack couldn't *remotely* hope to 'commit genocide',

You can only make such a statement because you refuse to accept the definition - which is the one used by the ICC - as "applicable". Of course it is. This is exactly why there is such a definition. You would accept it for Russia in Ukraine, for Israel in Gaza, and innumerable other circumstances, but refuse to accept it in this circumstance. That is simply not rational or even comprehensible.

I don't understand it, frankly, but then the machinations of the human mind aren't always decipherable.

Be well. I'm out.

 

[Craig234]

No, it doesn't.

Yes, it does. It's just part of your blindness on this issue you think it's not.

There are some subjects, and this is one of those, where certain posters simply are incapable of carrying on a reasoned discussion. Sadly, this is such a topic for you, my friend. If you are offended, that is not because my statement is offensive, but your realization that it is accurate.

Sorry, but you are approaching MAGA-like nonsense, and I'm cutting it off. Didn't read further. There is no value to it. You are blinded - another ironic statement above - and so as I said before, we will leave the discussion at that.

 

[Hamish Howl]

The UN demanded something?

How terrifying.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

I'm an honest poster,

That is the beginning and end of your lies about anyone who criticises the Israeli Govt.

Accuse me of whatever you want, it's water off a duck's back to me. I've been called worse by people just as bad as you and I walk away and lived.

 

[Apocalypse]

That is the beginning and end of your lies about anyone who criticises the Israeli Govt.

Accuse me of whatever you want, it's water off a duck's back to me. I've been called worse by people just as bad as you and I walk away and lived.

Just like the Jewish people will continue living no matter what you do I guess.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

It's interesting that an Eastern European or American who moved to Israel (Worse than Hamas) is the person fully entitled to all of Palestine as a citizen there, but the Palestinian whose family has lived there for perhaps centuries is 'just an Arab' with no claim to the land.

Erring on the side of caution.
I've read many a thread arguing that there was no country called "Palestine" and that has been used to deny any claim to right to live in that area of the world.

It6's not my position - I'm fully aware a version of the word "Palestine" seems to have been a Roman term and even the name "Syria Palaestina" describes one province so named by the Romans.
My position is both nations belong there and ideally would live side by side in peace. Moreso because the DNA of their predecessors continues to run through both religious groups. (Jew and Palestinian)

Anyhow, for all my caution with words, I still get the label from a banshee that I am an "antisemite" "wishing the destruction of Israel."

****ing pathetic that I kowtowed to moronic claims for so long.

If someone wants to argue Hamas must be removed, why doesn't that start with accountability for the people who put them in power and kept them in power? That is the Likud government. Of course, the far more harmful group to remove is that government. Both they and Hamas - and they have long been allied in goals - should be replaced.

That's been my position when I challenge people calling for the removal of Hamas - not a single one accepts that the Israeli Govt has been complicit, strengthening Hamas in whatever way it could in the previous 10 years so as to weaken the call for a Palestinian homeland.

What 200,000?

I'm erring on the side of caution. It's clear from the moronic claims against me that whatever number I give labels me an antisemite to the extremists on the forum. If I said there are 20,000 / 30,000 / 50,000 - someone will still come along and say I got the number wrong so I went to the maximum.

The actual goal.

That's clear. I've been lied to that settlers would face the same punishments for destroying arab homes as when arabs do it to Jews but when those settlers often wear IDF uniform or are even protected and guarded by IDF soldiers, the slow creeping campaign becomes clearer and clearer. Whatever the banshee screams at me.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Just like the Jewish people will continue living no matter what you do I guess.

See post 87.
I'm done with the screeching and lies thrown at me.

 

[Craig234]

My position is both nations belong there and ideally would live side by side in peace. Moreso because the DNA of their predecessors continues to run through both religious groups. (Jew and Palestinian)

This is a topic that in ways is simple, and in ways not simple at all. I find few people able to discuss it sensibly, and I don't mean you as unable to.

A big problem is for people to separate 'power' and 'morals'. A second problem is the high level of indoctrination pretty much everyone has had.

A humbling experience is to try to take some principles, which the world has purportedly adopted, which would say that powerful country going to where people live, and killing/expelling/enslaving/oppressing them, is wrong.

When you get comfortable with that - try to apply it to the US. It had millions of native people living here. What right did Europeans have to come and take their land, killing nearly all of them, leaving a few on bits of the worst land, very poor? Yet, can you imaging Europeans saying 'ya, that's wrong' and leaving it to the natives?

What's being done to the Palestinians is horrific, yes something we strongly support for us having done. The 'right' answer is that all of Palestine is for all the people who live there, the 'one state solution', with Jews able to emigrate and live in Palestine like they can in other countries. But the 'right' solution would say that for Native Americans to have North America, too. So, we get the compromise you mention. But THIS is genocide.

 

[Craig234]

Anyhow, for all my caution with words, I still get the label from a banshee that I am an "antisemite" "wishing the destruction of Israel."

*They're* the anti-Semites. *They're* the ones abusing the real issue to try to use it for slander to win arguments the same way Godwin's law describes calling your opponent a Nazi. They lose the argument, and they hurt Jewish people by misusing the real issue of anti-Semitism to defend fascism. Remember that Einstein dismissed that same group as fascists.

That's clear. I've been lied to that settlers would face the same punishments for destroying arab homes as when arabs do it to Jews but when those settlers often wear IDF uniform or are even protected and guarded by IDF soldiers, the slow creeping campaign becomes clearer and clearer. Whatever the banshee screams at me.

Over the last year, we've seen a Nazi-like radicalism increase. The most fascist government in their history, led by settlers, abandoning nearly any pretense of the 'fairness' you describe, making settlers into 'military reservists', handing them military assault weapons, and encouraging a massive increase in violence against Palestinians and land grabs, the biggest land grab since 1993 just approved. And that's the West Bank. 450 killed since 10/7.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

I can agree everything you say except this part:

The 'right' answer is that all of Palestine is for all the people who live there, the 'one state solution', with Jews able to emigrate and live in Palestine like they can in other countries.

That would be the end of the State of Israel.

Who knows though, right now the men of murder have the megaphone and slander anyone who disagrees with lies and falsehoods as I have been. I often use Northern Ireland as an example though - there was a form of solution found that found peace and through natural demographic change as well as economic prospects - Northern Ireland now has a growing Catholic population that could vote peaceable for a United Ireland and because of better economic prospects within the EU, the Protestant population that feared the Catholic minority may be able to live with that peacefully.

I'm not saying Israel /Palestine is the same - but right now, people on both sides calling (however openly) for the murder of the other side or their removal off the land does not give much hope of even the two state solution. Israel now controls so much of what could be Palestinian land anyway that a viable Palestinian state is decades away.
We are lied to that all the Palestinians need to do is accept Israel and promise to live in peace but the current Government comprises a large settler based group (never mind Likud's history and aims) that clearly wants to cleanse Israel of all Palestinians / arabs.

They can create a greater Israel militarily with ease - Israel has nukes / tanks / aircraft to impose this but then that would force it to swallow those Palestinians as citizens or at least conquered second class citizens. What I am finally seeing is that the slow way has been Israel's action since the 1990's - poke the hornet's nest every so often and then react militarily; each time taking a bit more of the old greater Israel.

The old saying "slowly, slowly catchee monkey" is exactly what Israel is doing. Sure they will sacrifice a few Jewish lives along the way to achieve greater Israel but the greater good of all Israel is why people like Netanyahu are doing exactly what they are doing.

 

[Craig234]

I can agree everything you say except this part:

That would be the end of the State of Israel.

What about the Jewish states of Blurgh in what used to be Oregon, the state of Plumt in what used to be an area of Russia, or the state of Trrot in what used to be part of China?

Oh, wait, those states don't exist, because *they don't get to just go where other people live and expel them to make a country for themselves*. You may not "agree", but you don't make any argument to support your position, because what I said is the moral position. I then explained why it's less than the practical one. *They don't have the moral right to do what they did.*

As I said, that's starting with what's right. But when other factors are considered you end up with that 'two state solution', which *everyone* but them accepts as far as I know, even Hamas in their 'they won't say it's ok but they will acknowledge it's accepted' manner.

Yes, it would be the end of that state - while they could still live there. So what? Yet, again, that's just the moral position - not the actual one on the table. Power changes that, just as the issue of Native Americans ruling North America isn't about to get changed, even if 'moral'.

I'm not saying Israel /Palestine is the same - but right now, people on both sides calling (however openly) for the murder of the other side or their removal off the land does not give much hope of even the two state solution. Israel now controls so much of what could be Palestinian land anyway that a viable Palestinian state is decades away.

They're similar, which is why Ireland is PASSIONATELY on the side of Palestinians. Have you seen the speeches I've posted? On two state - if South and North Korea were able to do it, they can, but it needs the US to force it. Palestinians now control less than 20% of the West Bank (and shrinking), and the settlers would need to leave or become Palestinian citizens.

We are lied to that all the Palestinians need to do is accept Israel and promise to live in peace but the current Government comprises a large settler based group (never mind Likud's history and aims) that clearly wants to cleanse Israel of all Palestinians / arabs.

That is a lie, the West Bank has given all that and more, recognizing them and much more, and in return, they get decades of ongoing oppression, killing, and increased illegal settlements taking more of their land.

They can create a greater Israel militarily with ease - Israel has nukes / tanks / aircraft to impose this but then that would force it to swallow those Palestinians as citizens or at least conquered second class citizens. What I am finally seeing is that the slow way has been Israel's action since the 1990's - poke the hornet's nest every so often and then react militarily; each time taking a bit more of the old greater Israel.

They call it "mowing the grass", the periodic slaughters they do. What's going on now is attempting to drive huge numbers/most/all out of Gaza with the cutting off of food and water, trying to find somewhere like Sinai to force them to.

The old saying "slowly, slowly catchee monkey" is exactly what Israel is doing. Sure they will sacrifice a few Jewish lives along the way to achieve greater Israel but the greater good of all Israel is why people like Netanyahu are doing exactly what they are doing.

Exactly, the story since their founding, but not many in the US realize it.

 

[Apocalypse]

See post 87.
I'm done with the screeching and lies thrown at me.

You can always pull a Craig and put everyone else on ignore.

 

[reinaert]

Israel, an ethnostate, was a bad idea. It's implementation was tragic, with expected consequences. But it exists. This is non-negotiable, the way South Africa, New Zealand, Belgium, Nederland and the US (all states with notoriously racist and colonialist crimes of scale in their recent history) non-negotiably exist. No doctrine that demands their abolition as states has practical merit, because it just isn't actionable.

What is actionable is cutting off Israel from arms and money until it can step a little further down the path that states like Belgium, Nederland, the US and South Africa have paved before it. None of these are perfect countries; none have made enough amends, or righted the wrongs of their creation or overtly segregationist/racist eras. Each has atavists and reactionaries who threaten hard-won progress, but they are signs that progress was made. What they are reacting against is the official abandonment of settler/racist ideologies, and halting steps to right past injustice.

Until Israel, as a whole and on its parts, begins this process, it is a pariah out of step with the 'Western' world, and should be treated as such. That doesn't mean it shouldn't exist. It just must be cut off from the outside means by which it continues down its current eastern despotic path, one trailblazed by the likes of Russia, Saudi Arabia, and the Ayatollahs of Iran.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

You can always pull a Craig and put everyone else on ignore.

See post 87.
I'll leave you as the only person posting extremist lies I won't bother talking to anymore.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

What about the Jewish states of Blurgh in what used to be Oregon, the state of Plumt in what used to be an area of Russia, or the state of Trrot in what used to be part of China?

They were enclaves and not recognised states that aimed fit in the International order. Post 93 by Reineart covers this pretty well.

the settlers would need to leave or become Palestinian citizens

They are never leaving. I've looked back at older literature and even though I have marked out Netanyahu as being singularly opposed to a Palestinian state, his predecessors were also just as opposed. This paper of '94 also documents the position of both Labour and Likud in opposing an independent Palestinian state.

Oslo seems to have trapped the a temporary status quo in place which Israel has singularly broken with increased settler movement which is one of the "poking the hornet's nest" examples I see as it riles up the Palestinians who are then shot and killed for opposing further loss of land.

That is a lie, the West Bank has given all that and more, recognizing them and much more, and in return, they get decades of ongoing oppression, killing, and increased illegal settlements taking more of their land.

A point I have made repeatedly to others with regard to how Netanyahu enabled Hamas so that he could undermine what the West Bank has done. In return, the arabs of the West Bank are largely betrayed because it's really clear - everything is simply about (re)creating greater Israel.

 

[Craig234]

They were enclaves and not recognised states that aimed fit in the International order. Post 93 by Reineart covers this pretty well.

First, they weren't "enclaves", they were fictitious states comparable to "Israel" (Worse than Hamas) I made up for the point. Second, he basically restated my point differently. I began with what the morality of the issue is, and then discussed why it's not practical and the compromise.

They are never leaving. I've looked back at older literature and even though I have marked out Netanyahu as being singularly opposed to a Palestinian state, his predecessors were also just as opposed. This paper of '94 also documents the position of both Labour and Likud in opposing an independent Palestinian state.

Yes, Likud has often lied that it supports a Palestinian state, to placate the US, but while they were dragged to sign the Oslo accords and something might have been possible before Netanyahu got Rabin assassinated, they've pretty much always sabotaged the Palestinian state since their founding.

Oslo seems to have trapped the a temporary status quo in place which Israel has singularly broken with increased settler movement which is one of the "poking the hornet's nest" examples I see as it riles up the Palestinians who are then shot and killed for opposing further loss of land.

Correct.

A point I have made repeatedly to others with regard to how Netanyahu enabled Hamas so that he could undermine what the West Bank has done. In return, the arabs of the West Bank are largely betrayed because it's really clear - everything is simply about (re)creating greater Israel.

Correct again, and now they're committing genocide to escalate the removal of Palestinians. It's remarkable the analogy between Hitler who first was trying to force the Jews to leave, but when countries refused to accept them, shifted to a 'final solution', and Netanyahu trying to find ways to force Palestinians to leave, and unable to find countries to take them, has moved to 'making Gaza unlivable' to try to force it.

 

[Apocalypse]

See post 87.
I'll leave you as the only person posting extremist lies I won't bother talking to anymore.

Cry me a river. Radicals often can't take any form of opposition and end up blocking people that obliterate their claims.
You find yourself in perfect company with Craig who supports Nazis and that reinart guy who denies Jews existed - this is exactly where you belong.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Cry me a river. Radicals often can't take any form of opposition and end up blocking people that obliterate their claims.
You find yourself in perfect company with Craig who supports Nazis and that reinart guy who denies Jews existed - this is exactly where you belong.

See post 97.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Likud has often lied that it supports a Palestinian state, to placate the US,

The US didn't need placating. When it came to Apartheid South Africa, it needed shaming. It's too early for shaming the US into a change of heart and Trump is coming - that's who Netanyahu is waiting for because things will get worse.

now they're committing genocide to escalate the removal of Palestinians

We've had this conversation before, it's not genocide yet. There's a slow ethnic cleanse happening but it not "ethnic cleansing" either.

I say the same when people claim 10/7 was genocide or ethnic cleansing against Jews too.

 

[Craig234]

The US didn't need placating.

It did, when Clinton pushed for it. Clinton had a pro-Israel (worse than Hamas) bias, but he pushed Rabin to accept movement toward a Palestinian state. Presidents have generally claimed to support a two state solution, and at times Likud has pretended to agree.

We've had this conversation before, it's not genocide yet. There's a slow ethnic cleanse happening but it not "ethnic cleansing" either.

Yes, we - and you and the ICJ and the UN - disagree about genocide. But I don't see a point to you repeating the same thing on it. It's important that they are committing genocide, but you would do better to instead stick to the areas you agree which appear to be atrocities of mass murder.