• Olgratin_Magmatoe
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    but large scale forced sterilizations is a specific program designed to prevent births and is obviously genocidal.

    So what about this shows intention for genocide? How does that count as genocide (intention included) but the bombing of civilian areas comprising ~50% children does not? One is the act of preventing an ethnic group from breeding, the second is much the same just delayed a number of years after conception. You can’t breed if the state sterilized you, and you can’t breed if your children don’t make it past childhood because the state killed them. This is only made worse by the fact that bombing children is far more violent than forced sterilizations.

    Does the large scale “program” as you put it, to force Palestinians from their homes not factor into this? What about Israel shutting off water and food for millions of people?

    Russia vs Ukraine is a top-down high-level program to kidnap children, burn Ukrainian books, deny Ukrainian culture, and explicitly filter Ukrainian identity and disperse it.

    https://time.com/6548068/palestinian-children-israeli-prison-arrested/

    https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/time/

    https://www.npr.org/2023/12/03/1216200754/gaza-heritage-sites-destroyed-israel

    https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/npr/

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/11/30/gaza-library-palestinian-culture/

    https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/washington-post/

    The scale is not the same here at least in part due to the difference in size between Ukraine and Palestine. But the similarity is clear.

    • dragontamer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      How does that count as genocide (intention included) but the bombing of civilian areas comprising ~50% children does not?

      Because historically speaking, mass bombing campaigns has never been considered a genocide.

      but shutting off food and water to millions of civilians does not?

      The issue at play here is that Hamas was incredibly shitty with the planning of their food security. There’s no requirement for two warring parties to be forced to feed their enemy. The issue at hand is that Hamas set up Gaza to become reliant upon Israel for both food and water (instead of say, Egypt, or other such potential partners in the region). When Hamas attacks Israel, Israel is in the right to shut off the food and water and fuel and electricity, because there’s no requirement to feed the enemy (excluding POWs or such situations you know what I mean).

      In this case, its ambiguous because Israel continues to keep the aid deliveries open. Israel isn’t in charge of food anymore (and they shouldn’t be, and they never should have been to begin with). Its not like Siege of Lenningrad where all food aid was cut off entirely and the food aid was explicitly choked off / prevented from entering Leningrad.

      Egypt and other parties are 100% allowed (and protected by Israel) to ship food to the south. That’s not what a genocide looks like. Historically, you can look at actual events of history (ex: Siege of Leningrad) if you want to see what a starvation tactic actually looks like.