Intent is exhibited by actions.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Iran Launches Missiles Into Israel
- Thread starter Revoltingest
- Start date
amatuerscholar
Member
Not when it comes to genocide. A massacre, by definition, is not a genocide. You have to show clear intention.
When we look at Palestine, the fact that there are many Palestinians in Israel who are not targeted in any manner, shows that the intent is not eradication. Many Palestinians are living freely in Israel, with no threat to their lives. That in itself shows the intent is not eradication.
Do you imagine that Israel would publicly announce...
"We intend to commit genocide against Palestinians!"
Absurd.
They just do it.
A "scholar", even an amateur one, should know better.
amatuerscholar
Member
How did we determine that there was a genocide in Rwanda? Or in Serbia? It's not like they publically stated their intentions. But there was nevertheless evidence of their intent. There were paper trails.
We don't have that in Israel. The very fact that many Palestinians are not be targeted, shows there is no intent. Seeing that the objective here, the intent, is to fight the Hamas in terms of a war, shows there is no intent on genocide against Palestinians.
To show it is genocide, you need to prove intent.
Not my area of interest because only in Israel
do my tax dollars pay for genocide.
Blind denial.
muhammad_isa
Veteran Member
OK .. let's just say, for example, that the war on Gaza goes on for 3 years, and 100,000 people
are killed directly, with the same number or more dying of war-related causes.
..and Hamas are defeated.
What then? What is their plan?
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Indiscriminate destruction and death and wanting to relocate them isn't intent?
amatuerscholar
Member
I'm not denying anything. I'm taking a more nuanced look at this, that is informed by what the UN actually says about genocide. You're ignoring that, and you even admit ignorance when it comes to the idea of genocide as a whole. So maybe don't say I'm denying something when you can't be bothered to even inform yourself.
I have no idea what their plan is, nor is that the topic at hand. What you asked as absolutely no bearing on what is being discussed here.
No, it's not. By definition, relocating does not equate to genocide. In fact, it would suggest the opposite, as the intent isn't to eradicate the people, but to allow them to live somewhere else.
And indiscriminate destruction and death also don't suggest intent as for it to be genocide, you'd need the destruction and death to be targeted, not indiscriminate.
muhammad_isa
Veteran Member
Of course it does! You talk about intent, but in reality you talk about proof.
It's double standards .. Israel and its allies claim that Iran intended to harm its civilians, because
it aimed missiles at Mossad, in a heavily populated area.
What has Israel been doing for the past year, killing masses of women and children??
..but that is claimed to be in self-defence?
Self-defence? I suppose illegal settlers killing Palestinians with the help of IDF is also
self-defence?
Double standards.
That's childish. Where would you suggest? Relocate them all to your country?
People denying things never
believe they're doing it.
I'm the one who's been using the UN definition
of "genocide" since it began. To say I'm ignoring
it is uncromulent. The rest isn't worth addressing.
amatuerscholar
Member
I linked to the UN and discussed their views. You have ignored that. You quoted Article II, and then have ignored the breakdown of it that the UN gives, and I linked to.
And again, what am I denying? I'm saying it's not genocide by definition as you nor anyone else can show intent. Intent as described by the UN.
amatuerscholar
Member
What Israel plans to do after the war is irrelevant to what their intent is now and whether one can show genocide is occurring. Who knows if Israel even has clear ideas on what they will do. So to ask that line of questioning in regards to my comment was irrelevant.Of course it does! You talk about intent, but in reality you talk about proof.
It's double standards .. Israel and its allies claim that Iran intended to harm its civilians, because
it aimed missiles at Mossad, in a heavily populated area.
What has Israel been doing for the past year, killing masses of women and children??
..but that is claimed to be in self-defence?
Self-defence? I suppose illegal settlers killing Palestinians with the help of IDF is also
self-defence?
Double standards.
That's childish. Where would you suggest? Relocate them all to your country?
And no, it's not childish to point out that relocating people is not genocide by definition. The UN makes this very clear. Also, I'm not saying they should relocate anyone, I simply pointed out relocating then is not genocide, and in fact shows the intent is not extermination, thus shows clearly genocide isn't happening.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
It is targeted against the Palestinians, md the indiscriminate destruction is the reality that Israel is collectively punishing all of Gaza and killing anyone and everyone including civilians and NGO aid workers.
Culture is a part of genocide amd such a thing upends that part of Palestinian culture.
amatuerscholar
Member
It's not targeted at Palestinians in general. That's why Palestinians in Israel aren't targeted. And relocating a people, as per the UN, does not equate genocide. It's that simple.
Now, we can call what is happening many different things. But it is not, by definition, a genocide. And the fact is, most commenting on this have no clue as to the history.
ImmortalFlame
Woke gremlin
Technically true. It's called ethnic cleansing.
Ethnic cleansing - Wikipedia
You can say it's definitely an element in a genocide, but it requires broader surrounding context.
Well, that depends on where those people are being located, under what circumstances, and what the broader surrounding context and intent is. Alone, it is undeniably at the very least an example of ethnic cleansing if it is drawn along national, religious or racial lines. I mean, I don't suppose you would say that, say, relocating people to an area of land that is completely unlivable couldn't constitute or contribute to genocide, or be indicative of genocidal intent, no?
Last edited:
muhammad_isa
Veteran Member
Not really .. do they want to live in peace with their neighbours or not?
Clearly not .. they feel they have the full support of the US, and intend to carry on
slaughtering them.
We all know .. they intend to defy the international community, as they feel invincible,
due to support from the US and its allies.
That means more of the same for an indefinite period.
Right .. but you are saying they should carry on indefinitely, showing how powerful
they are by slaughtering masses of women and children.
..and step up their oppression of their neighbours and their allies.
Colt
Well-Known Member
Time for Iranian Leadership to purchase all new beepers from Tiwan! Can never be too carful!
I didn't ignore it.
I dismissed your argument as specious.
amatuerscholar
Member
Technically true. It's called ethnic cleansing.
Ethnic cleansing - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
You can say it's definitely an element in a genocide, but it requires broader surrounding context.
Well, that depends on where those people are being located, under what circumstances, and what the broader surrounding context and intent is. Alone, it is undeniably at the very least an example of ethnic cleansing if it is drawn along national, religious or racial lines. I mean, I don't suppose you would say that, say, relocating people to an area of land that is completely unlivable couldn't constitute or contribute to genocide, or be indicative of genocidal intent, no?
I agree. We have the potential here for ethnic cleansing and that could possibly lead to genocide depending on the circumstances. It really depends on what Israel would be thinking here. If, as per the link Revoltingest posted, Israel does plan on relocating some Palestinians, there are questions that must be asked. Is this truly a voluntary thing, as is being reported, or would be be forced. If it's truly voluntary, then it's not really ethnic cleansing. If it is actually forced, we then have other questions.
Are those being relocated all Palestinians? Or are they just a subset? What is that subset? A forced relocation does not necessarily rise to ethnic cleansing, even though it can still be an atrocity.
And yes, if a forced relocation would occur to an area that is completely unlivable, we probably would be looking at a genocide, or at least something the rises almost to that level.
So there is a possibility of ethnic cleansing or genocide occurring in the future. And if it rises to the level, we definitely should label it as such.
Israel has attempted to live in peace with their neighbors. They have backed a two-state plan. The Arab world, going all the way back to the 30s, has flat out rejected this idea. Time and time again, we have record of Arab leaders say no, there will be no peace until Israel is gone. That the only solution is a Palestinian state for Palestinian Arabs. And we've seen Arab states attempt to destroy Israel in multiple wars.
When those wars didn't succeed, what did the Arab world do? They abandoned the Palestinians. During the War of 1948, Arab leaders encouraged Palestinians to leave their homes and land, promising that they would win the war and all of Palestine would be theirs. And after they lost, leaving these Palestinians as refugees, did the Arab world help? Did they take them in? No, they blamed Israel.
After it became clear to the Arab world that they were not going to be able to wipe Israel off the planet, they abandoned the Palestinians almost completely. And this led to the rise of terrorist organization seizing political control over Palestinian Arabs. You want to talk about Israel not wanting to live in peace with their neighbors, but yet the Hamas, the governing body of Palestine, has made it clear that their intent is to wipe Israel off the map. Yet you say nothing about that.
I'm not saying Israel should carry on indefinitely, and if history tells us anything, they won't. Time and time again they have succumbed to international pressure as they are labeled the aggressors, while everyone forgets what began this. Palestine wouldn't be in this situation if the Hamas hadn't launched an attack on October 7th, that not only killed people indiscriminately just because they were in Israel, but also sent out people to rape, kill, and kidnap women and children, in order to instill more fear. The attacks on civilian populations wouldn't be occurring if the Hamas weren't a bunch of cowards who hid behind those civilian populations, and used them as human shields.
Is Israel innocent? No. But they aren't just some murderous regime that is acting willy nilly. To deny the history that led up to this is ridiculous.
I believe you dismissed my argument more because you have no real response, as it's been shown multiple times that you've been factually incorrect. Claiming Israel started the violence with the Nakba is a clear example of you being wrong. As the Nakba was a product of the 1948 War, where the Arab World struck Israel with the intent to eliminating them. And part of the reason for the Nakba was that Arab leaders encouraged Palestinian Arabs to leave their homes and land with the promise that they would get it back and more. Yet, you ignored all of that.
You've also ignored the actual definition and explanation of what a Genocide is that was given by the UN. You ignored it because it shows that your argument is wrong.
So I think the issue here is that you have no real rebuttal, so you have to make another false claim about my argument as a whole.
Of course you do.
You don't accept the UN definition of "genocide",
& Israel's acts that comport with it.
So I dismiss your support for Israel, & screed
against Palestinians.