- Jul 12, 2016
- 5,626
- 5,515
- 73
- Country
- Australia
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Israel-Hamas Thread II
- Thread starter wing2000
- Start date
Pommer
CoPacEtiC SkEpTic
- Sep 13, 2008
- 22,580
- 13,948
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Deist
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
- Politics
- US-Democrat
I ain’t going to read unsourced information with the hope that maybe, one day, the source will be revealed if the poster has the time.
As such, I will take your screeds as unfiltered Israeli/IDF propaganda and leave them unread.
Upvote
0
Benaiah468
Well-Known Member
- May 19, 2024
- 695
- 42
- 57
- Country
- Germany
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
Upvote
0
Benaiah468
Well-Known Member
- May 19, 2024
- 695
- 42
- 57
- Country
- Germany
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
The history of the Middle East and other regions around the world is full of examples of resettling refugees to give them a chance at a better life for themselves and future generations.
In 1947, Great Britain ended its 300-year presence in India. As part of its withdrawal, it created two states: a Hindu India and a Muslim Pakistan. Millions of Muslims found themselves in India. Similarly, millions of Hindus and Sikhs found themselves in the newly created Pakistan. Not wanting to live in a hostile land, members of both groups left. Some 12 to 15 million people walked across the new border. The Muslims left India for Pakistan, and the Hindus and Sikhs left Pakistan for India.
The UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) was created after the Second World War to help settle the “stateless” and dispossessed. Today, UNHCR boasts it has 18,879 personnel working in 137 countries. And says it has “helped more than 50 million refugees to successfully restart their lives and continue to protect and provide support for the 89.3 million people who are currently displaced.”
The success of UNHCR can be traced directly to its mission, which is to “safeguard the rights and well-being of refugees. In its efforts to achieve this objective, the office strives to ensure that everyone can exercise the right to seek asylum and find safe refuge in another state, and to return home voluntarily.”
Among the beneficiaries of the agency’s work were Holocaust survivors. Approximately 140,000 Jews came to the United States in the immediate aftermath of the Holocaust. For hundreds of thousands of others, there was no place to go except the newly established modern-day State of Israel, which welcomed them with open arms.
Israel has provided a haven for Jews from all over the world. For instance, when the Jewish state was created in 1948, about a million Jews lived in Iran and surrounding Arab countries. Today, only about 15,000 Jews remain in that part of the Diaspora, a handful left on their own. The majority were forced out as a matter of official government policy. They overwhelmingly fled to Israel. They arrived in such large numbers that Israel is a majority “minority” country. More Israelis can trace their roots to the surrounding Muslim and Arab world than to Europe. That fact alone puts the lie to the myth that Israel is a white, neo-colonial, apartheid, racist state that oppresses its people of color.
It is instructive to compare these examples to how the Arab and Muslim worlds have dealt with Palestinian refugees.
"Algeria, where are your Jews?" — Hillel Neuer silences the U.N.
When the British left the Middle East in 1948, the United Nations established two states in British Mandate Palestine: one Arab and one Jewish. Instead of accepting the UN Partition Plan, the Arabs declared war and attacked Israel. The war they started displaced hundreds of thousands of their Arab brethren and created the refugee problem that persists today.
In the wake of that defeat, Palestinian refugees, rather than being resettled by UNHCR, were placed under the auspices of the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East. UNWRA has long been known as an anti-Israel entity dedicated to the destruction of Israel. Lest there was ever any doubt about this, many UNWRA workers actively participated in the Oct. 7 attacks against Israel. Countless others have aided and abetted terrorism against Israel for years.
When UNRWA began operations in 1950, it was responding to the needs of about 700,000 Palestinian refugees. By 2023, some 5.9 million people were registered as eligible for UNRWA services.
When Israel conquered the Gaza Strip in 1967, approximately 400,000 Palestinians lived there. When Hamas attacked Israel on Oct 7, 2023, Gaza was home to some 2.1 million Palestinians. So much for the allegation of a “genocide” by Israel.
The Palestinian refugee problem continues to this day because it is an integral part of the strategy of Israel’s enemies to delegitimize and destroy the Jewish state. Moreover, it is a problem they do not want to solve because a solution would deprive them of a critical weapon in their war against Israel.
Without the claim of Palestinian victimhood, the war against Israel will be seen for what it truly is, an effort to destroy the one Jewish state in the world and an excuse to kill more Jews.
Trump’s statement about resettlement is achievable if the Palestinians’ fellow Arabs and co-religionists have the will.
There are 21 Arab countries with a total population of about 475 million. There are 49 countries where Muslims constitute more than 50% of the population. Those are the same countries whose governments have for decades claimed to champion the Palestinian cause. Now is the time for them to save the lives of innocent Palestinians and offer them refuge.
Israel will eventually win this war. Hamas will eventually be destroyed. But what about Palestinian civilians? That is the question the Arab and Muslim worlds should ask themselves. Do the Arab and Muslim worlds want a solution to the Palestinian problem? Or do they just want to cling to an ideology with which they can bludgeon Israel?
The early responses of Egypt and Jordan are not encouraging; they are refusing to accept any Palestinian refugees. While disappointing, the responses are enlightening. After failing to destroy Israel in 1948, Egypt captured and illegally annexed Gaza, while Jordan captured and illegally annexed the West Bank. They remained in control of those territories until June 1967 when Israel conquered them in the Six-Day War.
At no time during their nearly 20-year respective occupations did the international community demand that either Egypt or Jordan withdraw from those territories and create a Palestinian state. They waited for the Jews to conquer them before making the demand.
S.: Israeltoday
In 1947, Great Britain ended its 300-year presence in India. As part of its withdrawal, it created two states: a Hindu India and a Muslim Pakistan. Millions of Muslims found themselves in India. Similarly, millions of Hindus and Sikhs found themselves in the newly created Pakistan. Not wanting to live in a hostile land, members of both groups left. Some 12 to 15 million people walked across the new border. The Muslims left India for Pakistan, and the Hindus and Sikhs left Pakistan for India.
The UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) was created after the Second World War to help settle the “stateless” and dispossessed. Today, UNHCR boasts it has 18,879 personnel working in 137 countries. And says it has “helped more than 50 million refugees to successfully restart their lives and continue to protect and provide support for the 89.3 million people who are currently displaced.”
The success of UNHCR can be traced directly to its mission, which is to “safeguard the rights and well-being of refugees. In its efforts to achieve this objective, the office strives to ensure that everyone can exercise the right to seek asylum and find safe refuge in another state, and to return home voluntarily.”
Among the beneficiaries of the agency’s work were Holocaust survivors. Approximately 140,000 Jews came to the United States in the immediate aftermath of the Holocaust. For hundreds of thousands of others, there was no place to go except the newly established modern-day State of Israel, which welcomed them with open arms.
Israel has provided a haven for Jews from all over the world. For instance, when the Jewish state was created in 1948, about a million Jews lived in Iran and surrounding Arab countries. Today, only about 15,000 Jews remain in that part of the Diaspora, a handful left on their own. The majority were forced out as a matter of official government policy. They overwhelmingly fled to Israel. They arrived in such large numbers that Israel is a majority “minority” country. More Israelis can trace their roots to the surrounding Muslim and Arab world than to Europe. That fact alone puts the lie to the myth that Israel is a white, neo-colonial, apartheid, racist state that oppresses its people of color.
It is instructive to compare these examples to how the Arab and Muslim worlds have dealt with Palestinian refugees.
"Algeria, where are your Jews?" — Hillel Neuer silences the U.N.
When the British left the Middle East in 1948, the United Nations established two states in British Mandate Palestine: one Arab and one Jewish. Instead of accepting the UN Partition Plan, the Arabs declared war and attacked Israel. The war they started displaced hundreds of thousands of their Arab brethren and created the refugee problem that persists today.
In the wake of that defeat, Palestinian refugees, rather than being resettled by UNHCR, were placed under the auspices of the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East. UNWRA has long been known as an anti-Israel entity dedicated to the destruction of Israel. Lest there was ever any doubt about this, many UNWRA workers actively participated in the Oct. 7 attacks against Israel. Countless others have aided and abetted terrorism against Israel for years.
When UNRWA began operations in 1950, it was responding to the needs of about 700,000 Palestinian refugees. By 2023, some 5.9 million people were registered as eligible for UNRWA services.
When Israel conquered the Gaza Strip in 1967, approximately 400,000 Palestinians lived there. When Hamas attacked Israel on Oct 7, 2023, Gaza was home to some 2.1 million Palestinians. So much for the allegation of a “genocide” by Israel.
The Palestinian refugee problem continues to this day because it is an integral part of the strategy of Israel’s enemies to delegitimize and destroy the Jewish state. Moreover, it is a problem they do not want to solve because a solution would deprive them of a critical weapon in their war against Israel.
Without the claim of Palestinian victimhood, the war against Israel will be seen for what it truly is, an effort to destroy the one Jewish state in the world and an excuse to kill more Jews.
Trump’s statement about resettlement is achievable if the Palestinians’ fellow Arabs and co-religionists have the will.
There are 21 Arab countries with a total population of about 475 million. There are 49 countries where Muslims constitute more than 50% of the population. Those are the same countries whose governments have for decades claimed to champion the Palestinian cause. Now is the time for them to save the lives of innocent Palestinians and offer them refuge.
Israel will eventually win this war. Hamas will eventually be destroyed. But what about Palestinian civilians? That is the question the Arab and Muslim worlds should ask themselves. Do the Arab and Muslim worlds want a solution to the Palestinian problem? Or do they just want to cling to an ideology with which they can bludgeon Israel?
The early responses of Egypt and Jordan are not encouraging; they are refusing to accept any Palestinian refugees. While disappointing, the responses are enlightening. After failing to destroy Israel in 1948, Egypt captured and illegally annexed Gaza, while Jordan captured and illegally annexed the West Bank. They remained in control of those territories until June 1967 when Israel conquered them in the Six-Day War.
At no time during their nearly 20-year respective occupations did the international community demand that either Egypt or Jordan withdraw from those territories and create a Palestinian state. They waited for the Jews to conquer them before making the demand.
S.: Israeltoday
Upvote
0
Benaiah468
Well-Known Member
- May 19, 2024
- 695
- 42
- 57
- Country
- Germany
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
The United Nations (UN) has a wide range of operational areas, their largest operational area is migration. Even if only in the refugee sector (UNHCR and UNRWA).
How successful has UNRWA been in this?
Nowhere has the integration of refugees worked out worse than under the direction of UNRWA. Although the Palestinians had fled to neighboring Arab states, they remained refugees even after more than 60 years and for generations, while Germans, Hungarians, Czechs, Poles and ex-Yugoslavs became part of their host society after just a few years without any UN assistance.
UNRWA has been looking after Palestinian refugees in Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Palestine for 70 years. Naturally, the costs for this were mainly borne by the USA and European countries. Under the care of the UN, around 750,000 displaced Palestinians have become 5 million.
Integration into the host countries has not taken place, although, like the 12 million East and Sudeten Germans expelled to Germany and Austria in 1945, they were people with the same language, religion and culture. The Palestinians live with their children and grandchildren in camps provided by the UN. Even in Palestine, the Palestinians retain refugee status forever.
If Germany and Austria had acted as successfully as the UN, we would now have 50 million Silesians and Sudeteners. They would still be living with their children and grandchildren in UN camps financed by third parties and could therefore concentrate entirely on their ideology and the holy war to reclaim the lost territories.
How successful has UNRWA been in this?
Nowhere has the integration of refugees worked out worse than under the direction of UNRWA. Although the Palestinians had fled to neighboring Arab states, they remained refugees even after more than 60 years and for generations, while Germans, Hungarians, Czechs, Poles and ex-Yugoslavs became part of their host society after just a few years without any UN assistance.
UNRWA has been looking after Palestinian refugees in Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Palestine for 70 years. Naturally, the costs for this were mainly borne by the USA and European countries. Under the care of the UN, around 750,000 displaced Palestinians have become 5 million.
Integration into the host countries has not taken place, although, like the 12 million East and Sudeten Germans expelled to Germany and Austria in 1945, they were people with the same language, religion and culture. The Palestinians live with their children and grandchildren in camps provided by the UN. Even in Palestine, the Palestinians retain refugee status forever.
If Germany and Austria had acted as successfully as the UN, we would now have 50 million Silesians and Sudeteners. They would still be living with their children and grandchildren in UN camps financed by third parties and could therefore concentrate entirely on their ideology and the holy war to reclaim the lost territories.
Upvote
0
Benaiah468
Well-Known Member
- May 19, 2024
- 695
- 42
- 57
- Country
- Germany
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
Upvote
0
essentialsaltes
Fact-Based Lifeform
- Oct 17, 2011
- 42,380
- 45,514
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Legal Union (Other)
With respect to what Israel has already done in the recent past, the International Court of Justice has determined that the charge of genocide is plausible, and has issued a preliminary ruling that Israel must take certain steps to prevent genocide and allow delivery of humanitarian aid.
We'll see what the final determination is, but Israel's lack of compliance with the court is not a good look.
Upvote
0
Benaiah468
Well-Known Member
- May 19, 2024
- 695
- 42
- 57
- Country
- Germany
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
With respect to what Hamas has already done in the recent past and announced in its Charter in relation to the Jews and Israel in particular, the International Court of Justice has determined what? That the charge of genocide is plausible?
Has the Court issued a preliminary ruling that Hamas must take certain steps to prevent genocide and allow delivery of humanitarian aid?
Upvote
0
essentialsaltes
Fact-Based Lifeform
- Oct 17, 2011
- 42,380
- 45,514
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Legal Union (Other)
I don't believe anyone has brought such a case to the court. However, the ICJ did call for the immediate release of hostages held in Gaza.
Separately, the International Criminal Court is pursuing cases and issued arrest warrants against Hamas leaders for war crimes and crimes against humanity. The ICC has done the same for Israeli leaders.
Hamas, obviously, is widely recognized as a terrorist organization.
Upvote
0
Benaiah468
Well-Known Member
- May 19, 2024
- 695
- 42
- 57
- Country
- Germany
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
This war of accusations doesn’t help anyone, not the people in Gaza, not the people in Israel, not the border communities, and not the hostages.
Genocide requires a clear, demonstrable intent to destroy a people through sustained, deliberate acts.
Israel's military actions are directed against terrorists. The death of civilians is tragic, but in the Gaza Strip it is part of Hamas' strategy and not that of the Israeli armed forces.
If anyone is guilty of genocide here, it is the internationally recognized terrorist group Hamas. Not only does Hamas openly state that the destruction of Israel is its ultimate goal, as evidenced in its Charter, it acted out on those intentions on Oct 7, when Hamas massacred over 1,200 Israelis, including raping, burning, mutilating and executing women and children.
In an interview Oct 2023, senior Hamas official Ghazi Hamad gleefully stated that the terror group would repeat the Oct 7 massacre “again and again” until Israel was “annihilated,” openly admitting the group’s genocidal intentions.
x-com
That there have been civilian casualties in Gaza is tragic, but it is also the inevitable consequence of Hamas using its own people as human shields and embedding its military operations in schools, hospitals, kindergartens and homes. Notwithstanding this challenge, the IDF have gone to extraordinary lengths to avoid casualties and abide by principles of international humanitarian law.
Israel has delivered more humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip than any army in history has ever provided to an enemy population in wartime. More than 94,000 trucks carrying over 1.8 million tons of aid have entered the territory. Israel has supported hospitals, repaired water pipes, improved access to clean water and enabled more than 36,000 patients to leave for treatment abroad.
The IDF has coordinated the distribution of millions of vaccine doses, provided fuel to hospitals and infrastructure, and facilitated the flow of food and medicine through the United Nations, aid organizations and private partners. The American-Israeli Gaza Humanitarian Foundation alone has delivered more than 82 million meals, one to two million a day, while weakening Hamas' control over relief supplies. This is not genocide. It is a responsible and historic humanitarian policy in the midst of war.
No military operation is judged solely by the number of casualties or destruction. Otherwise, every major war would have to be described as genocide. In the Korean War, a total of two million civilians died, an average of 54,000 per month. Hundreds of thousands were killed in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In the fight against the Islamic State, several cities were razed to the ground and tens of thousands of people were killed. None of these wars were considered genocide. War is judged by the actions of commanders, the objectives set by leaders and the military's compliance with the laws of war, not by statistics taken out of context.
Israel prepared evacuations in Rafah for weeks this summer. It set up new security zones and waited until the civilians had been evacuated before attacking Hamas targets. In this operation, the top Hamas commander was killed, hostages were freed and civilian casualties were kept to a minimum. It was a clear example of Israel's exceptional intentions and action to protect civilians while only attacking Hamas. This is the part of the story that is ignored by those who reduce war to headlines and numbers.
Those who speak of an alleged genocide in Gaza probably do not realize that they are making themselves useful idiots of terrorist regimes.
War Expert John Spencer: No Genocide in Gaza
Genocide requires a clear, demonstrable intent to destroy a people through sustained, deliberate acts.
Israel's military actions are directed against terrorists. The death of civilians is tragic, but in the Gaza Strip it is part of Hamas' strategy and not that of the Israeli armed forces.
If anyone is guilty of genocide here, it is the internationally recognized terrorist group Hamas. Not only does Hamas openly state that the destruction of Israel is its ultimate goal, as evidenced in its Charter, it acted out on those intentions on Oct 7, when Hamas massacred over 1,200 Israelis, including raping, burning, mutilating and executing women and children.
In an interview Oct 2023, senior Hamas official Ghazi Hamad gleefully stated that the terror group would repeat the Oct 7 massacre “again and again” until Israel was “annihilated,” openly admitting the group’s genocidal intentions.
x-com
That there have been civilian casualties in Gaza is tragic, but it is also the inevitable consequence of Hamas using its own people as human shields and embedding its military operations in schools, hospitals, kindergartens and homes. Notwithstanding this challenge, the IDF have gone to extraordinary lengths to avoid casualties and abide by principles of international humanitarian law.
Israel has delivered more humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip than any army in history has ever provided to an enemy population in wartime. More than 94,000 trucks carrying over 1.8 million tons of aid have entered the territory. Israel has supported hospitals, repaired water pipes, improved access to clean water and enabled more than 36,000 patients to leave for treatment abroad.
The IDF has coordinated the distribution of millions of vaccine doses, provided fuel to hospitals and infrastructure, and facilitated the flow of food and medicine through the United Nations, aid organizations and private partners. The American-Israeli Gaza Humanitarian Foundation alone has delivered more than 82 million meals, one to two million a day, while weakening Hamas' control over relief supplies. This is not genocide. It is a responsible and historic humanitarian policy in the midst of war.
No military operation is judged solely by the number of casualties or destruction. Otherwise, every major war would have to be described as genocide. In the Korean War, a total of two million civilians died, an average of 54,000 per month. Hundreds of thousands were killed in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In the fight against the Islamic State, several cities were razed to the ground and tens of thousands of people were killed. None of these wars were considered genocide. War is judged by the actions of commanders, the objectives set by leaders and the military's compliance with the laws of war, not by statistics taken out of context.
Israel prepared evacuations in Rafah for weeks this summer. It set up new security zones and waited until the civilians had been evacuated before attacking Hamas targets. In this operation, the top Hamas commander was killed, hostages were freed and civilian casualties were kept to a minimum. It was a clear example of Israel's exceptional intentions and action to protect civilians while only attacking Hamas. This is the part of the story that is ignored by those who reduce war to headlines and numbers.
Those who speak of an alleged genocide in Gaza probably do not realize that they are making themselves useful idiots of terrorist regimes.
War Expert John Spencer: No Genocide in Gaza
Upvote
0
Benaiah468
Well-Known Member
- May 19, 2024
- 695
- 42
- 57
- Country
- Germany
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
According to the unanimous reports and statements, the matter is clear: the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague has issued a legally binding order to Israel to immediately cease its military offensive against Hamas. At any rate, this is how the ICJ's order is being reported across the board. However, as with the ICJ's first order for immediate measures in the case brought by South Africa against Israel for alleged violations of the so-called Genocide Convention at the end of January, the court actually decided something different from what everyone is claiming.
There is indeed talk of a halt, but, as some of the judges emphasized in their declarations or dissenting opinions attached to the order, it is a conditional demand.
According to Aharon Barak, one of the two judges who voted against the order, it demands that the military operations in Rafah be halted
Conversely, this means that Israel can continue its operations in Rafah
While the wording chosen in the order is ambiguous, to read from it a blanket call for a halt to the offensive in Rafah (as is virtually universally done in the media and politics) is a misreading that limits Israel's ability to pursue its legitimate military objectives while leaving its enemies, including Hamas, free to attack without Israel being able to respond.
The bottom line is that the ICJ has called on Israel to comply with its obligations under the Genocide Convention and not to undertake any military operations that would violate these obligations. Of course, the Jewish state must and does do this without anyone having to point this out to it. The fact that the ICJ believed it had to emphasize this self-evident point is probably due to the enormous international pressure the judges are under, but is somewhat superfluous from a legal point of view.
Four times in five months, South Africa has demanded a complete end to Israel's military action in Gaza and to withdraw the Israeli army immediately, completely and unconditionally from the entire Gaza Strip'on the grounds that Israel were committing genocide. And for the fourth time, South Africa has been rebuffed for a reason that is as simple as it is important: South Africa could not plausibly substantiate its claim that Israel's military operation was motivated by genocidal intentions. But that would be the only reason for the court to deal with Israel's actions at all.
Because whatever else Israel does or does not do in its operations against Hamas is simply none of the ICJ's business. By continuing to issue orders despite the fact that South Africa has been unable to provide any evidence of Israeli genocidal intent, the court is embarking on a dangerous path: it is weakening the Genocide Convention by using (or abusing) it to arbitrate an armed conflict.
The court relies primarily on statements made by United Nations representatives on social media and on press releases from relevant organizations. But it relies on these statements and press releases without even examining what kind of evidence they are based on. This behavior of the Court is in stark contrast to its previous jurisprudence, in which it has held that United Nations reports are reliable evidence only if they have probative value and are corroborated by other credible sources, if any. In the present case, the statements and press releases have simply not been corroborated.
The ICJ thus relies substantially on unconfirmed and/or unverified United Nations assertions to arrive at its assessments, in striking contrast to its usual procedures. One should add: With his careless and irresponsible handling of claims from the ranks of the United Nations, which is notoriously one-sided and biased when it comes to Israel, he unfortunately hardly differs from the majority of the media, which constantly bases its reporting on press releases from the United Nations and other, clearly partisan actors, as if they were serious and reliable sources.
Judge Sebutinde's dissenting opinion on the ICJ's order is highly readable for several reasons. On the one hand, it explains the context of Israel's military action, which South Africa always consistently ignores in its denunciations of the Jewish state: Hamas' massacre on Oct 7, 2023, the hostages still being abducted by Hamas, the ongoing rocket fire into Israel from the Gaza Strip, and the multi-front war Israel has been engaged in since last year, stretching from Lebanon in the north to Yemen in the south:
On the other hand, Judge Sebutinde took the trouble to respond in detail to accusations against Israel over the humanitarian situation in Gaza, emphasizing that
By opening additional land routes and constructing a floating pier, the volume of aid deliveries has increased continuously in recent months. In addition, Israel has also made efforts to improve medical care, including the construction of eight field hospitals and the evacuation of thousands of Palestinians for medical treatment outside the Gaza Strip.
The judge summarized,
Finally, she pointed out a fact that is almost always ignored when Israel is blamed for the poor humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip or the Jewish state is even accused, as the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court did last week, of deliberately starving the people in the Gaza Strip: Not only does Hamas play a not insignificant role in the situation, but also Egypt, which controls its side of the Rafah border crossing - and has not allowed aid shipments to enter the Gaza Strip since the checkpoint was brought under control by Israel as part of its advance into Rafah.
Demanding that Israel secure the movement of goods through the Rafah crossing, as ICJ order does, without also considering Egypt's responsibility, would result in demands that are simply unfeasible.
Judge Barak has spoken a simple truth that South Africa and so many others who pillory Israel and exult in judicial prosecution of the Jewish state consistently ignore:
There is indeed talk of a halt, but, as some of the judges emphasized in their declarations or dissenting opinions attached to the order, it is a conditional demand.
According to Aharon Barak, one of the two judges who voted against the order, it demands that the military operations in Rafah be halted
Conversely, this means that Israel can continue its operations in Rafah
While the wording chosen in the order is ambiguous, to read from it a blanket call for a halt to the offensive in Rafah (as is virtually universally done in the media and politics) is a misreading that limits Israel's ability to pursue its legitimate military objectives while leaving its enemies, including Hamas, free to attack without Israel being able to respond.
The bottom line is that the ICJ has called on Israel to comply with its obligations under the Genocide Convention and not to undertake any military operations that would violate these obligations. Of course, the Jewish state must and does do this without anyone having to point this out to it. The fact that the ICJ believed it had to emphasize this self-evident point is probably due to the enormous international pressure the judges are under, but is somewhat superfluous from a legal point of view.
Four times in five months, South Africa has demanded a complete end to Israel's military action in Gaza and to withdraw the Israeli army immediately, completely and unconditionally from the entire Gaza Strip'on the grounds that Israel were committing genocide. And for the fourth time, South Africa has been rebuffed for a reason that is as simple as it is important: South Africa could not plausibly substantiate its claim that Israel's military operation was motivated by genocidal intentions. But that would be the only reason for the court to deal with Israel's actions at all.
Because whatever else Israel does or does not do in its operations against Hamas is simply none of the ICJ's business. By continuing to issue orders despite the fact that South Africa has been unable to provide any evidence of Israeli genocidal intent, the court is embarking on a dangerous path: it is weakening the Genocide Convention by using (or abusing) it to arbitrate an armed conflict.
The court relies primarily on statements made by United Nations representatives on social media and on press releases from relevant organizations. But it relies on these statements and press releases without even examining what kind of evidence they are based on. This behavior of the Court is in stark contrast to its previous jurisprudence, in which it has held that United Nations reports are reliable evidence only if they have probative value and are corroborated by other credible sources, if any. In the present case, the statements and press releases have simply not been corroborated.
The ICJ thus relies substantially on unconfirmed and/or unverified United Nations assertions to arrive at its assessments, in striking contrast to its usual procedures. One should add: With his careless and irresponsible handling of claims from the ranks of the United Nations, which is notoriously one-sided and biased when it comes to Israel, he unfortunately hardly differs from the majority of the media, which constantly bases its reporting on press releases from the United Nations and other, clearly partisan actors, as if they were serious and reliable sources.
Judge Sebutinde's dissenting opinion on the ICJ's order is highly readable for several reasons. On the one hand, it explains the context of Israel's military action, which South Africa always consistently ignores in its denunciations of the Jewish state: Hamas' massacre on Oct 7, 2023, the hostages still being abducted by Hamas, the ongoing rocket fire into Israel from the Gaza Strip, and the multi-front war Israel has been engaged in since last year, stretching from Lebanon in the north to Yemen in the south:
On the other hand, Judge Sebutinde took the trouble to respond in detail to accusations against Israel over the humanitarian situation in Gaza, emphasizing that
By opening additional land routes and constructing a floating pier, the volume of aid deliveries has increased continuously in recent months. In addition, Israel has also made efforts to improve medical care, including the construction of eight field hospitals and the evacuation of thousands of Palestinians for medical treatment outside the Gaza Strip.
The judge summarized,
Finally, she pointed out a fact that is almost always ignored when Israel is blamed for the poor humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip or the Jewish state is even accused, as the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court did last week, of deliberately starving the people in the Gaza Strip: Not only does Hamas play a not insignificant role in the situation, but also Egypt, which controls its side of the Rafah border crossing - and has not allowed aid shipments to enter the Gaza Strip since the checkpoint was brought under control by Israel as part of its advance into Rafah.
Demanding that Israel secure the movement of goods through the Rafah crossing, as ICJ order does, without also considering Egypt's responsibility, would result in demands that are simply unfeasible.
Judge Barak has spoken a simple truth that South Africa and so many others who pillory Israel and exult in judicial prosecution of the Jewish state consistently ignore:
S.: mena-watch
Last edited:
Upvote
0
essentialsaltes
Fact-Based Lifeform
- Oct 17, 2011
- 42,380
- 45,514
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Legal Union (Other)
Who is being quoted? A dissenting judge? The majority declared that South Africa's allegations were indeed plausible, and therefore the court does have a reason to act.
Upvote
0
Benaiah468
Well-Known Member
- May 19, 2024
- 695
- 42
- 57
- Country
- Germany
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
The ICJ has not found evidence to support the claim of genocidal intent. It did acknowledge that Palestinians have a plausible right to be protected from genocide and ordered Israel to prevent and punish incitement to genocide. However, the court did not rule that Israel was committing genocide, nor did it order a halt to military operations.
A mere plausibility is not sufficient to justify a conviction. Rather, proof of the defendant's guilt is required that goes beyond mere probability.
A final judgment, if any, is unlikely to be made until the end of 2027 at the earliest. However, various factors could delay the case until 2028, including calls from other countries for intervention.
In its interpretation of the Convention, the ICJ requires wholly conclusive evidence that an accused state had the intent to commit genocide when committing the mass killings and that there were no other conceivable competing motives such as counterinsurgency or territorial acquisition. The Court has yet to convict a country of genocide under this standard.
Further decisions in this case, whatever its outcome, are not legally binding. The Israeli government has long accused the UN of unfair bias, ignoring a 2004 International Court of Justice opinion that declared the security fence in Judea Samaria illegal. It also ignores a decision calling on Israel to end its settlement activities in Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Jul 12, 2016
- 5,626
- 5,515
- 73
- Country
- Australia
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
So does Israel have the right to repeal the sixth commandment?
Upvote
0
Benaiah468
Well-Known Member
- May 19, 2024
- 695
- 42
- 57
- Country
- Germany
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
More than 100 aid organizations accuse Israel of blocking humanitarian aid to Gaza. Israel's military coordination COGAT firmly rejects this and asks uncomfortable questions about the connections of some NGOs.
The accusation is quickly formulated in social networks and international headlines: Israel is allegedly deliberately blocking humanitarian aid for the people of Gaza. More than 100 international aid organizations, including Oxfam, Anera and the Norwegian Refugee Council, have jointly signed a letter in which they speak of a weaponization of aid.
x-com
The picture is clear: a powerful state allegedly using hunger as a political instrument. But Israel's response leaves no doubt and makes it clear that the reality is far more complex than some would like to portray.
COGAT, the Israeli Coordination Office for Government Activities in the Territories, published a clear statement on Thursday.
it said.
x-com
Israel is not preventing aid deliveries on the contrary: mechanisms have been put in place to bring around 300 trucks of food, medical supplies and other humanitarian goods into the Gaza Strip every day. The decisive addition: only 20 of the organizations involved have so far met the necessary security requirements.
Since March, a new procedure has been in place, which was introduced on the instructions of the political leadership. Every organization that wants to work in Gaza must officially register with the Israeli Diaspora Ministry, including a complete list of employees working there. This data is subjected to a security check in advance. The aim is to prevent Hamas, which has ruled Gaza with an iron hand for years and has repeatedly misused aid deliveries for its terrorist structures, from gaining access to aid supplies.
For Israel, this precautionary measure is imperative.
says COGAT.
The NGOs, on the other hand, see this as political harassment. In their letter, they claim that the new rules are vaguely formulated and politicized. The accusation: Israel can reject applications on the grounds that the organization delegitimizes the state. They cite plenty of examples: Over 60 applications for aid deliveries were rejected in July, the signatories claim. Anera puts the allegedly blocked value of its goods at over seven million US dollars, including 744 tons of rice that have been stored in Ashdod for weeks.
COGAT disagrees. The delays only occur where organizations refuse to comply with safety regulations. Those who work transparently can help and do, as the 20 registered NGOs prove. The subtext: help yes, but not at the expense of security.
The conflict surrounding the "aid blockade" is therefore more than just a logistical problem. It is a reflection of a deeper dispute: is Israel allowed to control access to Gaza in the name of its own security, even if this does not suit aid organizations?
For Israel, the answer is clear. In an area where a terrorist organization controls not only the military but also the civilian infrastructure, there are no naive partners. Anyone who delivers aid without excluding Hamas risks becoming part of the problem.
The fact that some NGOs do not want to, or cannot, see this reality is not only negligent from Israel's point of view, but dangerous. COGAT's demand is therefore as simple as it is unequivocal: less public finger-pointing, more transparency, more responsibility. This is the only way to ensure that the aid reaches the people who really need it and not in the camps of those who have Israel's destruction on their agenda.
The accusation is quickly formulated in social networks and international headlines: Israel is allegedly deliberately blocking humanitarian aid for the people of Gaza. More than 100 international aid organizations, including Oxfam, Anera and the Norwegian Refugee Council, have jointly signed a letter in which they speak of a weaponization of aid.
x-com
The picture is clear: a powerful state allegedly using hunger as a political instrument. But Israel's response leaves no doubt and makes it clear that the reality is far more complex than some would like to portray.
COGAT, the Israeli Coordination Office for Government Activities in the Territories, published a clear statement on Thursday.
it said.
x-com
Israel is not preventing aid deliveries on the contrary: mechanisms have been put in place to bring around 300 trucks of food, medical supplies and other humanitarian goods into the Gaza Strip every day. The decisive addition: only 20 of the organizations involved have so far met the necessary security requirements.
Since March, a new procedure has been in place, which was introduced on the instructions of the political leadership. Every organization that wants to work in Gaza must officially register with the Israeli Diaspora Ministry, including a complete list of employees working there. This data is subjected to a security check in advance. The aim is to prevent Hamas, which has ruled Gaza with an iron hand for years and has repeatedly misused aid deliveries for its terrorist structures, from gaining access to aid supplies.
For Israel, this precautionary measure is imperative.
says COGAT.
The NGOs, on the other hand, see this as political harassment. In their letter, they claim that the new rules are vaguely formulated and politicized. The accusation: Israel can reject applications on the grounds that the organization delegitimizes the state. They cite plenty of examples: Over 60 applications for aid deliveries were rejected in July, the signatories claim. Anera puts the allegedly blocked value of its goods at over seven million US dollars, including 744 tons of rice that have been stored in Ashdod for weeks.
COGAT disagrees. The delays only occur where organizations refuse to comply with safety regulations. Those who work transparently can help and do, as the 20 registered NGOs prove. The subtext: help yes, but not at the expense of security.
The conflict surrounding the "aid blockade" is therefore more than just a logistical problem. It is a reflection of a deeper dispute: is Israel allowed to control access to Gaza in the name of its own security, even if this does not suit aid organizations?
For Israel, the answer is clear. In an area where a terrorist organization controls not only the military but also the civilian infrastructure, there are no naive partners. Anyone who delivers aid without excluding Hamas risks becoming part of the problem.
The fact that some NGOs do not want to, or cannot, see this reality is not only negligent from Israel's point of view, but dangerous. COGAT's demand is therefore as simple as it is unequivocal: less public finger-pointing, more transparency, more responsibility. This is the only way to ensure that the aid reaches the people who really need it and not in the camps of those who have Israel's destruction on their agenda.
Upvote
0
JosephZ
Well-Known Member
- Mar 25, 2017
- 4,590
- 4,519
- Country
- Philippines
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Others
If more than 100 people in your neighborhood claimed that one of your neighbors was a thief and identified the house where this person lived, and you went to that house to ask the occupant if they were a thief and they replied with "no," would you take their word for it?
Upvote
0
- Jul 12, 2016
- 5,626
- 5,515
- 73
- Country
- Australia
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
I strongly suspect that you also must harbour some suspicions that you do not allow to rise to the surface. I strongly suspect that the issues are more complex than either side is pretending.
Upvote
0
Benaiah468
Well-Known Member
- May 19, 2024
- 695
- 42
- 57
- Country
- Germany
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
You shall not murder. Ex 20:13
The prohibition of murder is one of the social prohibitions and relates to living together. This prohibition does not apply to wars, nor does it apply to self-defense. Different rules apply here in ethics (whether secular or Christian). Even the prophet John the Baptist saw it this way when he called on soldiers to protect the civilian population and to refrain from looting, but not to give up their profession (Lk 3:14). Incidentally, this corresponds very closely to the course that the Israeli army is taking today.
Nothing can justify the atrocities committed by Hamas. No history of conflict can justify babies' heads being torn off and pregnant women being slashed open. Incidentally, the atrocities go far beyond a normal armed conflict, beyond a battle of soldier against soldier. The systematic and deliberately cruel murder of Jews, as practiced by Hamas, is aimed at exterminating the Jewish people, spreading fear and terror, triggering a conflagration and ultimately bringing down the state of Israel.
Behind these atrocities is a satanically inspired hostility towards Israel, which has a religious background and is aimed at genocide, a new “final solution” (second Holocaust). This is made clear not least by the name Hamas has given its attack: Al-Aksa Flood. The name implies that the goal is Jerusalem and thus the complete destruction of Israel. In this respect, Israel is right to see itself not only in the fight against Hamas, but also in the fight against evil.
The question is how should Israel respond to the bestial murders committed by hordes of terrorist Hamas fighters. This is not an easy question and is definitely a matter of prayer. The problem of terrorism itself must be solved. Israel has set itself the goal of destroying Hamas, which is the source of the terror. This is not possible by peaceful means.
Israel faces the challenge of fighting Hamas with all its might, but at the same time wants to protect the civilian population as much as possible; an enormous balancing act. Israel has always done its best in this respect. The people in Gaza are informed in advance of what the army is going to do. Houses that are to be bombed are marked in advance; the population is asked to move to safety in good time. Unfortunately, it will not go off without civilian opera. That, too, is one of the bitter truths of these days.
A large proportion of Gaza's inhabitants support Hamas or sympathize with it. It is not for nothing that Hamas was democratically elected in 2006 and would still have a majority today according to polls. It will therefore not be enough to destroy Hamas. Concepts are needed to show the population alternatives to hatred and violence. This is a long-term task.
We can pray that G-d will bless the Israeli government's struggle to make good decisions. We can pray that He will lead those in charge to the best possible plans and then give them the best possible success. That is our contribution.
#287
Israel holds out its hand to all those who want to live peacefully with Israel. Those who want peace with Israel will get it.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Benaiah468
Well-Known Member
- May 19, 2024
- 695
- 42
- 57
- Country
- Germany
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
On Aug 11 alone, 270 truckloads of relief supplies arrived in Gaza. That is a per capita supply that is unparalleled in any other crisis area in the world. The problem is not the amount of food imported, but the fact that Hamas and other terrorist organizations are stealing and withholding the relief supplies and giving preference to their own supporters. A large proportion of the food is sold to the suffering population in the areas under their control at inflated prices. This fact is hardly mentioned in most international media.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
