Evidence of Israel's genocidal intentions toward Gaza?

Post Reply New Topic

Israel was not "compelled," even given what Hamas did. Israel had options as to how it could have responded to the attack. Again, see my posts here and here. As I've also discussed elsewhere, the Israeli government would have had even more options if it had listened to the warnings from its own spies over the previous year.

On the other hand, it's true that if the Hamas attack had NOT happened, Israel's response would not have happened either -- at least not THEN.

But, unfortunately, even without the 10/7 Hamas attack, it is likely that Israel would have eventually seized upon some other, lesser excuse to do in Gaza what it has been doing since late last year, because the extreme religious Zionist faction -- with its "Amalek" rhetoric -- has been growing and is likely to continue to grow, simply because the ultra-Orthodox have the most babies.

Like slap them on the hand and tell them not to do it again?

100% intelligence was not necessary. Had the Israeli government just taken more seriously the reports they were already getting from their own lookouts for nearly a year, they could have been better prepared, e.g. by stationing more troops near the Gaza border.

Had they done this, they could have defended against the attack much more quickly, preventing many Israelis from getting killed, raped, or kidnapped. Had they done this, the IDF could easily have killed or captured most if not all of the attackers.


Just be better prepared and respond more quickly whenever an attack began.

No. Please read what I actually wrote in the posts I linked to. Please stop making Straw man arguments.

What have you actually suggested other than "They could have done something"?

The Hamas invasion was very low-tech. Had the Israelis been even minimally prepared(like not having an unguarded festival next door to Gaza) there would have been a fraction of the casualties, damage, and few if any hostages. Deterrence would not have been lost meaning Hezbollah, the Houties etc probably would not have jumped in.

Israel's leaders would not have felt obliged to react in such a devastating manner. We have had options suggested about ways Israel could have reacted in a less devastating manner. After October 7th woe to any Israeli leader who reacted in a less devasting manner.

No matter what Israel still would have been condemned and there would have been protests but Israel would not have been potentially on their way to becoming a pariah state.

Israel would have continued merrily along their way to becoming a country most want to do business with. Do you think the Abraham Accords with Saudi Arabia preparing to join in happened because they suddenly loved Jews?

I am tired of repeating myself. If you want to continue this discussion, go back to the linked posts yourself, then quote them and reply to the specifics of what I actually wrote.

I feel like the strongest evidence against any sort of genocidal intent is simply that they haven't done it, and have in fact fought a limited war using sophisticated weapons to attack a foe that hides among civilians.

This seems to be yet another case of the progressive language game, attempting to attach a word with deep resonance to a situation it doesn't apply to, in order to create a response without actually doing the work of convincing people. All that's really being accomplished is the debasement of the word "genocide", soon to join "fascist" on the pile of words that don't actually mean anything anymore.

NGO Amnesty International said that its investigation into the ongoing Gaza War found enough evidence to conclude that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians, the group said.
Titled “‘You Feel Like You Are Subhuman:’ Israel’s Genocide Against Palestinians in Gaza,” the report is said to have documented military operations, imposed conditions, and statements by soldiers and political leaders that indicated that Israel was engaged in genocide.

Amnesty secretary-general Agnès Callamard said in a press release that “Month after month, Israel has treated Palestinians in Gaza as a subhuman group unworthy of human rights and dignity, demonstrating its intent to physically destroy them.”

The NGO said that the allegedly “unprecedented” level of destruction and death in Gaza, when viewed as part of broader policy and military action, indicated that “genocidal intent is the only reasonable conclusion.”

The activist group claimed that 42,000 Palestinians, including 13,300 children, had been killed by the Israeli military from October 7, 2023, until October 7, 2024. Amnesty said that over 97,000 Palestinians had been injured during the war.

Amnesty claimed that many of the civilian casualties were the result of a widespread pattern of direct or deliberately indiscriminate attacks. Amnesty said that it reviewed 15 airstrikes from October to April that killed 334 civilians and found no evidence that the strikes were directed at a military objective.

Responding to the IDF's claim it targets Hamas, armed groups in Gaza
“Before reaching its conclusion, Amnesty International examined Israel’s claims that its military lawfully targeted Hamas and other armed groups throughout Gaza and that the resulting unprecedented destruction and denial of aid were the outcome of unlawful conduct by Hamas and other armed groups, such as locating fighters among the civilian population,” said Amnesty.

“The organization concluded that these claims are not credible. The presence of Hamas fighters near or within a densely populated area does not absolve Israel from its obligations to take all feasible precautions to spare civilians and avoid indiscriminate or disproportionate attacks. Its research found Israel repeatedly failed to do so, committing multiple crimes under international law for which there can be no justification based on Hamas’s actions.”

Amnesty added that even if Israel was just acting recklessly, treating Palestinians as “disposable” was also evidence of genocidal intent.

In addition to direct action, Israel allegedly inflicted conditions on the lives of Palestinians that were intended to lead over time to their destruction. Life-threatening conditions were caused by widespread life-sustaining infrastructure, the displacement of Gaza’s population through evacuation orders, and the denial of humanitarian aid and services.

Total siege
Amnesty said that after the October 7 massacre, Israel imposed a total siege on Gaza, cutting off electricity, water, and fuel. These conditions allegedly led to widespread humanitarian crises, which Israel declined to improve with sufficient steps.

The intent to commit genocide – by the government and army – was not just revealed by the character of military operations but by “dehumanizing and genocidal” statements by officials and soldiers. Amnesty said that it had reviewed 102 statements of political and military officials and identified that 22 statements appeared to call for or justify genocidal intent. Soldiers replicated the rhetoric when making calls to “erase” Gaza or in the celebration of destroying civilian objects, said the press release.

NGO Monitor said in advance of the publication of the report that the announcement used selective evidence to come to its conclusions. The group highlighted how casting the humanitarian effort of evacuation orders as genocidal contradicted demands that Israel take precautions to avoid civilian deaths in combat.

NGO Monitor also noted that the IDF said that it had facilitated the transfer of 1.1 million tons of aid into Gaza, established humanitarian corridors, imposed tactical pauses, and vaccinated Gazans to avoid civilian deaths from the conditions of war.

NGO Monitor slammed Amnesty for figures such as the death of 42,000 Palestinians, which it said were obtained from the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry and did not distinguish between civilians and combatants.

The activist group “has devoted many years to the delegitimization of Israel regardless of policies, [and] is simply continuing its decades-long lawfare campaign,” said NGO Monitor.
The International Legal Forum said that the Amnesty report was written under the “guise” of international law and human rights but was “utterly baseless and replete with malicious lies, gross distortions of truth, and fabrications of law.”

“To accuse Israel of ‘genocide’ in Gaza is a gross and egregious subversion and weaponization of the very term itself, made even more unconscionable given the October 7 attacks were the largest mass slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust,” said ILF.

Amnesty called for the cessation of arms trade with Israel and said that states must respect the International Criminal Court’s arrest warrants and detain Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defense minister Yoav Gallant. Callamard urged the ICC to consider adding the crime of genocide to the investigations into Israeli leaders and for sanctions to be leveled by the UN Security Council against Israeli and Hamas officials.

The ILF said that in response to the report, the incoming American administration should declare Amnesty a “hate group” and adopt sanctions against them, “including withdrawing financial support and any cooperation with government agencies.”

A lopsided war, provoked by the side on the losing end, is not a genocide. There is no intent, and the Israelis certainly have the capability, which they've had for a long time and could have exercised at any point if they'd had the desire to. After all the terrorism and wars, I'm surprised they've been as patient as they have been.

NGO Monitor also noted that the IDF said that it had facilitated the transfer of 1.1 million tons of aid into Gaza, established humanitarian corridors, imposed tactical pauses, and vaccinated Gazans to avoid civilian deaths from the conditions of war.

Whenever you read reports from Amnesty International, you should always keep in mind that they are pushing an agenda and everything they write will be slanted toward supporting that agenda.

Note that much the article in the link is pointing out parts of Amnesty International's report that are completely unreliable and parts that are intentional misinformation from them.

For example, from the link:

So they are trying to commit genocide by providing humanitarian aid to the Gazans and vaccinating them against diseases?

If that's genocide, it isn't going to work.

It is absolutely untrue that Amnesty International has an agenda or that they are unreliable.

No agenda? Now that is completely hilarious. It has to be one of the funniest things that I have read in a very long time.