Context https://lemmy.world/comment/14641595
Anyone, who doesn’t tread the „destroy Israel“ party line gets banned from !politics@lemmy.world
Edit: although people here hate Israel and different opinions with a passion, nobody could cite the actual rule I broke.
YDI. Rule 4. Misinformation and probably also being viewed as trolling. You being overly pedantic and unable to understand it (going off comments here) doesn’t change that.
YDI
Going all “aaaaachsually…” about an ongoing genocide of which dozens of genocide experts have labeled as genocide, deserves what’s coming to you.
Dozens of genocide experts have also denied it being a genocide.
Denying genocide is rule breaking but I still don’t think censoring you is proper here.
You should be able to express yourself and people should be able to have a discussion with you. Your arguments rely on assumptions about international order that don’t actually exist.
Now that’s can’t happen which is lose lose.
Show me the rule. My whole argument is that, it’s not legally or scholarly settled if the war in Gaza is a genocide or not.
YDI, try not denying genocide
It’s still an ongoing debate among experts if the war in Gaza can be considered a genocide or not. The ICJ hasn’t ruled on the case either.
If one considers the war a genocide or not is still a political and legal argument at the moment. I am making such an argument in my OP. Suppressing political debate that doesn’t violate the rules is blatant powertripping to enforce a political agenda.
Especially in the Israel/Palestine conflict, accusations of (slow motion) genocide have been leveled against Israel decades before the current Gaza war. I think in this case, it’s only used as a phrase to demonize Israel, not actually understand and describe the situation. The whole debate is part of the conflict in the information space.
Don’t start making your case here or you’ll cop a ban here as well for going off-topic
What rule am I violating? Why should arguing a case be off topic? Isn’t this what this community is supposedly about?
From the sidebar
Sometimes one just wants to be able to challenge the arguments some mod made and this could be the place for that.
The mod didn’t even make an argument that refers to a rule, that was supposedly broken.
YDI.
It’s genocide by any other definition. You can split hairs all you want and call it “crimes against humanity” or whatever, but it’s a distinction without much difference when we’re talking about targeted missile strikes upon schools, hospitals, and apartment buildings. Pedantry isn’t going to convey some nuance that people are missing, and the mods were right to put a stop to it.
If making targeted strikes against specific structures is grounds for calling it a genocide then what does launching 10,000 unguided rockets randomly into who-knows-what in a single day count as?
I hold the incredibly unpopular opinion that both sides have been absolutely terrible for a long time so don’t come at me for picking a side. I am genuinely curious if you consider both of those acts of aggression as a genocide or not based on your own listed definition.
There were no targeted strikes. Biden told Israel to stop carpet bombing Gaza and Netanyahu’s defense was that he was doing a Dresden.
What does launching 10,000 unguided rockets randomly into who-knows-what in a single day count as?
There were no 10.000 rockets in a single day. It was like 2200 and most of them were simple distraction rockets.
My apologies. It was ~10,000 rockets including October 7th and up until now.
However on October 7th specifically there are several reports putting the number around ~5,000 in a single day. All fired indiscriminately into primarily civilian areas.
Yes they were “distraction” rockets to overwhelm the iron dome, but most of those continued into strike again civilians primarily.
So if it’s a genocide when Israel is firing rockets into Gaza then why is it not a genocide when you reverse the roles?
Logically they would either both considered attempted genocide or neither of them would be considered genocide.
a distinction without much difference
To you his might not matter. Words, especially legal terms under international law have actual definitions.
If it doesn’t make a difference why ban people?
Because you’re playing pedant with people’s lives to stroke your own ego and/or prove that you’re the smartest one in the room. Meanwhile, people make those same arguments to try to discredit anyone who says the IDF and Netanyahu are killing civilians on purpose, that they’re killing women and children with abandon, that they’re committing war crimes like they’re going for the high score.
Perhaps you don’t have malicious intent, but you should at least recognize that you sound like someone with an agenda and haven’t conveyed a take that they haven’t all made themselves before.
In short, you sound like a shill for war crimes, whether you mean to or not, and you should reflect on why you feel it’s important to quibble about the difference between “crimes against humanity” and “genocide.” This is not an international courtroom.
YDI.