Been at this long enough. You are stretching intl conventions beyond their meaning, and I fear you will discover, as did the League of Nations in 1935, that there’s no intl law framework there when you need it.
Replies
That's kind of my point. If you go by the letter of the law this is genocide in black and white. But the actual application of the law is in the hands of states who have their own interests.
aug 22, 2025, 8:51 pm • 0 0 • view
So I think this is more a tactical disagreement than a disagreement over whether Israel’s actions are proper - it’s just a question in my mind of how improper.
aug 22, 2025, 8:57 pm • 1 0 • view
I think if you want to talk in pure legal terms this is unambiguous. But exactly how the law will be applied remains to be seen. Based on jurisprudence it's hard to see this being anything besides a slam dunk.
aug 22, 2025, 9:00 pm • 0 0 • view
I actually don’t think it’s genocide by the letter yet. I think the Israelis are feeling their oats and will talk themselves over the line soon. But in the meantime I would focus on provable war crimes - disproportionate force, failure to exercise care or intentional infliction of harm on civilians.
aug 22, 2025, 8:56 pm • 0 0 • view