Hamas strike on Israel

There's this erroneous idea among regime supporters that a genocide can only be a genocide if it involves people being lined up in large numbers and shot dead or the use of gas chambers. But past genocides have involved all sorts of methods to try and eliminate a population or part of a population : shootings, aerial bombardment, shelling, ethnic cleansing, forced displacement, deliberate starvation of a people, deliberate destruction of their homes and civilian infrastructure, detention camps, active discrimination against them as a people etc…..no two genocides look alike.

Watching the coordinated zionist attack on the New York Times over their front page picture of a starving child who also happened to have a muscular defect is so reminiscent of the IDF strike on the hospital at the start of the Gaza invasion. It's a clear attempt to silence the press and stymie even the miniscule bit of coverage the poor Gazan's receive. It's hard to hate them enough.

I don't know how you can believe that first paragraph above.

The scale of civilian deaths, the destruction of essential infrastructure (hospitals, schools, religious buildings, farms, even cemeteries), the displacement and starvation of ALL Gazans clearly indicates an intent to destroy that group in part or in whole - the very definition of genocide.

Once the starvation started (which was based on a lie), this is nothing else. All of these metics have been hit. Almost all fresh water wells in Gaza have been destroyed - what possible military reason is there for this? It is disgusting.

Also one of the key determinations for genocide are public statements from officials that indicate genocidal intent - there are so so many of these, which you pass off as bluster. They aren't bluster to a desperate mother watching her baby die from malnutrition due to those same people's actions.

Israelis themselves are telling us this is happening (the ones that haven't been taken in by this extremist ideology), soldiers even, and you ignore them.

I don't know if you cant bring yourself to see it, or you are pretending for some horrible reason that it isn't going on.

Judging by your frankly low and very transparent tactic of trying to shut down people making reasonable points as antisemites or supporters of jihadis - I'm leaning on the latter.

It actually beggars belief at this stage. That the discussion centres around whether the poor child has a muscular defect or not. Again, arguing semantics and dragging the discussion down the lowest detail and bogging down in that. Is it not shocking that a child with a muscular defect is most likely being denied the medical care he needs due to… you know, hospitals and doctors being wiped out on a daily basis? How can you ignore that very fact, and move past it as if it is not there and into the minutest detail that may have been incorrect.

Maybe because the "anti semitic NYT" told this big "lie", then it justifies the murder of 60,000 people and turning Gaza into an uninhabitable wasteland? It beggars belief really.

Israel on one hand bars journalists from entering Gaza, and on the other hand criticises media coverage? I guess its clear, they want to shut down all discussion on the topic. Lucky we have our clowns here to clutch at straws and keep us all right.

Your second paragraph applies to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, as well as the bombings of Dresden. Though these were horrific acts, they weren't considered genocide but as events that happen in wars. 25,000 people were killed in Dresden in three days. Hiroshima and Nagasaki resulted in a quarter of a million deaths.

You keep bringing up Dresden and Hiroshima. If events from 80 years ago concern you that much, feel free to start a separate thread. We're here to discuss an ongoing genocide, something you repeatedly try to deny. The fact that you rely on tenuous references to past wars only highlights how desperate you and the other genocide apologists have become.

You probably should have requested a simple yes or no answer, as I am sure we are about to hear how terrible we are for not discussing Sudan or Syria or lack of women drivers in Iran, rather than admitting whats clear as day…

I am not suggesting that they are genocidal acts at all, I am pointing to the fact that they are not considered genocidal acts as an indicator that the threshold for considering something to be genocidal is extremely high.

You claim that the scale of civilian deaths and the destruction of infrastructure is indicative of genocide. I am pointing out that history shows differently that greater civilian deaths and greater destruction of infrastructure did not result in findings of genocide.

To be clear for the umpteenth time, I am not defending what has been done in Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden, Gaza or anywhere else, just discussing the threshold and criteria for determining what is genocide.

Yes, I would love for the war to continue. Nothing pleases me more than the wanton destruction of Gaza, the displacement of 2 million people, and the deaths of at least 60,000 people. The lengths you go to—it would be laughable if it weren’t so serious.

Can you point to anywhere in this thread where I’ve said that? Even remotely? No, you can’t. I never said it. In fact, I’ve never said anything that could even be construed as that.

There is absolutely no guarantee that the war will end if the hostages are released. None at all. In fact, the past actions of the war criminals in the Israeli government suggest the opposite. You were even directed to Rory Stewart’s comments on last week’s TRIP podcast, which came from an Israeli government insider.

As for your last point: I’ve said it many times—Hamas holding hostages is a war crime. Hamas are terrorist scum. You know that’s my position. It’s also the position of most posters here. So this is just another attempt at deflection. It underlines the strawman nature of your argument. You bounce from “You’re an antisemite!” to “You support Hamas!” to “You’re excusing hostage-taking!”

At least there’s some new material lately in your bizarre obsession with Iranian women drivers. So… there’s that.

In my world, the killing and collective punishment of innocent civilians is a war crime. The taking of hostages is a war crime. The difference is: my standards and morals are consistent. Being against one doesn’t mean I can’t also be against the other.

Time and time again, you’ve been asked clear, categorical questions—and you’ve danced around them, thrown all kinds of acrobatics to avoid any straight answers. Sad, really.

You can talk about Nagasaki all you want. Or the emperor of Japan. Whatever helps you sleep at night.

What I am saying applies to Gaza. You are admitting it is happening in Gaza. They are the definitions of genocide.

Do you support Hamas? Or Russia?

Blanch claims never to have supported Israel or the IDF, he just refuses to condemn any of the many atroicities they've carried out

He's the exact same as those who say the same thing about the IRA. An irony I'm sure that's completely lost on him.