"Judge Donoghue says the court has decided that Israel must “take all measures within its its power” to prevent all acts within the scope of the genocide convention.
She adds that Israel must ensure “with immediate effect” that its forces do not commit any of the act in the genocide convention."
Since Israel is the only force attacking Palestinians, the order to prevent all acts under the genocide convention “with immediate effect” means that the court IS in fact recognizing Israel is committing genocidal acts against the Palestinian people and that they, and they alone, have the obligation to stop it.
If a court ordered you to “ensure you must with immediate effect dispose of any and all illegal drugs in your possession”. This doesn’t mean you have them, only that if you do you have to get rid of them.
The same applies here, they must make sure genocide isn’t happening, not stop their ongoing genocide.
Palestine is really winning hearts but not so much minds in the information side of this war.
When a court orders you to reverse an action, it’s a recognition that you are currently engaging in that action.
So when this court ruled “that its (Israels) forces do not commit any of the act in the genocide convention.”
They are stating that Israeli forces are, in fact, committing acts covered under the genocide convention.
If they weren’t, there would be no need for the court order.
Now, Israel’s defense could be that any genocidal action is the act of individual soldiers or units and is not official Israeli policy… I don’t BUY that, but it’s plausible deniability.
In this case, now, the court is saying Israel has an obligation to stop it regardless of who ordered it.
"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, as such:
a. Killing members of the group;
b. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
c. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
d. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
e. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."
Israel is already engaging in A, B, and C. So it’s not a matter of telling them to not do something they are currently not doing.
The trial supports the opposite of what this comment is indicating. The role of the ICJ is to determine whether Israel’s alleged actions are capable of being covered by the Genocide Convention. Today they decided that this is indeed the case and the measures they announced, as meager as they are, are legally binding. A final decision will be probably only made in a couple of years.
from defending itself against Hamas before Israel achieves meaningful security goals
Please explain to me, in what world “defending against Hamas” (which are islamist terrorists) and “achieving meaningful security goals” includes bombing a Greek Orthodox Christian church?
Removed by mod
That is absolutely NOT the ruling of this court.
"Judge Donoghue says the court has decided that Israel must “take all measures within its its power” to prevent all acts within the scope of the genocide convention.
She adds that Israel must ensure “with immediate effect” that its forces do not commit any of the act in the genocide convention."
Since Israel is the only force attacking Palestinians, the order to prevent all acts under the genocide convention “with immediate effect” means that the court IS in fact recognizing Israel is committing genocidal acts against the Palestinian people and that they, and they alone, have the obligation to stop it.
If a court ordered you to “ensure you must with immediate effect dispose of any and all illegal drugs in your possession”. This doesn’t mean you have them, only that if you do you have to get rid of them.
The same applies here, they must make sure genocide isn’t happening, not stop their ongoing genocide.
Palestine is really winning hearts but not so much minds in the information side of this war.
It’s a genocide.
When a court orders you to reverse an action, it’s a recognition that you are currently engaging in that action.
So when this court ruled “that its (Israels) forces do not commit any of the act in the genocide convention.”
They are stating that Israeli forces are, in fact, committing acts covered under the genocide convention.
If they weren’t, there would be no need for the court order.
Now, Israel’s defense could be that any genocidal action is the act of individual soldiers or units and is not official Israeli policy… I don’t BUY that, but it’s plausible deniability.
In this case, now, the court is saying Israel has an obligation to stop it regardless of who ordered it.
I don’t read it the same way you do.
I read it as in your way to school tomorrow make sure you don’t play in the road.
During your invasion of Palestine ensure you don’t commit any of the acts outlined here
The problem with that reading is we already know Israel is on the wrong side of the genocide convention (bolding mine):
https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml
"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, as such:
a. Killing members of the group;
b. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
c. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
d. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
e. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."
Israel is already engaging in A, B, and C. So it’s not a matter of telling them to not do something they are currently not doing.
The trial supports the opposite of what this comment is indicating. The role of the ICJ is to determine whether Israel’s alleged actions are capable of being covered by the Genocide Convention. Today they decided that this is indeed the case and the measures they announced, as meager as they are, are legally binding. A final decision will be probably only made in a couple of years.
Also do you really, truly believe they would stop if Hamas released all of the hostages today?
Honestly?
That was the deal Hamas offered them days ago - Netanyahu refused it.
Can we just have a little of that old South America shit we used to do, just a little one?
We don’t expect Hamas to do anything good because they are terrorists.
We used to expect Israel to do good things because they used to not be terrorists.
They were always dicks tho
Please explain to me, in what world “defending against Hamas” (which are islamist terrorists) and “achieving meaningful security goals” includes bombing a Greek Orthodox Christian church?
They always answer the same. It had Hamas in it. Or under it. Behind every dead child and woman is a member of Hamas. All 26,000 of them.