Well maybe people believe that Genocide = Bad and the rest is just logic

Genocide:The systematic and widespread extermination or attempted extermination of a national, racial, religious, or ethnic group.

Explain how the country that does roof-knocks[1], phone calls[2], and has literally driven its own people out of Gaza[3] in an attempt for peace is attempting to exterminate Palestinians. Learn what words mean before using them.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roof_knocking [2] https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/16/world/middleeast/gaza-inv... [3] https://www.britannica.com/event/Israels-disengagement-from-...

Thank you for the definition. Isn’t this precisely what’s happening in Gaza?

Even the ICJ ordered Israel to take steps to prevent any acts of genocide in Gaza. Do they also don’t know the definition of the word?

The court did not say that Israel is committing genocide. It didn't even require a ceasefire.

Do you not know what "preventing" or "committing" mean either?

Why do you think it asked Israel to prevent acts of Genocide instead of asking both sides of preventing acts of Genocide?

Do you believe that if there’s no suspicion that acts of Genocide are being committed by the IDF the court could have emitted such ruling?

I’m not trying to fight in here. You don’t need to be condescending this is not reddit my friend.

> Why do you think it asked Israel to prevent acts of Genocide instead of asking both sides of preventing acts of Genocide?

Hamas explicitly calls for the destruction of Israel and Jews. Nobody has any doubts around what they would do if they had military supremacy.

The ICJ won’t order them to not commit acts of genocide because they aren’t the object of South Africa’s complaint. (I also don’t believe they fall under ICJ jurisdiction, being a non-state actor.)

I apologize for my tone, this is something i am passionate about.

Hamas has always been pretty open about their intent for genocide[1]. The ICJ had a specific case brought by a specific country on specific charges against Israel. The ICJ ruled against them.

Israel is in the middle of a bloody war in an urban environment filled with civilians. Of course Israel should follow the rules of war and try to limit civilian casualties, which is what the preventing acts of genocide was about.

[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2023/10/ha...

You’re being unfairly downvoted. The word genocide has been overused in this conflict. Genocide means an intent to erase a people, which is a hard point to argue when Gaza’s population has doubled in the last two decades under this supposed “erasure”.

Regardless of definition of genocide, how population growth in Gaza in the past is related to systematic murdering of civilians we observe now?

> systematic murdering of civilians

If Israel wanted to systematically murder civilians there would be a lot more dead.

What you are seeing is the result of a terrorist organization hiding among civilians (human shields) while waging a war dressed as civilians (a war crime).

Again faulty logic.

Their capability to kill more does not imply that they would use it or there could not be systematic murder if they don’t use the full firepower. What I see is not just Hamas hiding among civilians (this is true and this is a war crime), but also what you conveniently ignore: systematic disregard of human life by Israel and ignorance of the duty to protect innocent lives. Some token actions to show for the press (all those „phone calls“) do not qualify as such.

What Israel should have done but did not: evacuate the entire population of Gaza to its own territory, ensure protection of human rights, guarantee access to food, healthcare and education.

Does disregard of human life qualify as genocide? Did the US disregard the human lives of Japanese people in the Japanese war or the Vietnamese people in the Vietnam war and if so Were those acts genocide?

I do not know and I do not care. Two comments above I explicitly said that.

Which legal term will be used to qualify Israel actions is less important than stopping this nightmare now and approaching the strategic goals differently.

Why not, if “losing that war” means being slaughtered and starved indiscriminately and pushed out of your homeland?

Again, words have meanings even if you don't like them. There is nothing indiscriminate about Israel's actions, which somehow have not been able to match Hamas's one day total of slaughtered and raped civilians. War is awful and I hope that Hamas surrenders soon to end it.

"which somehow have not been able to match Hamas's one day total of slaughtered and raped civilians" — what do you mean by this? Over 1,000 civilians were killed by Hamas, whereas around 30,000 people (including many innocents) have been killed in Gaza — almost two orders of magnitude more. As you say, words have meanings.

Israel, which you claim is indiscriminately bombing civilians, has not been able to match Hamas in killing 1,200 civilians in a single day of this war despite dropping thousands of bombs.

You can use buzzwords to try and distort reality but this is clearly a highly targeted military campaign where Hamas is sacrificing it's own civilians as human shields. That sucks and Hamas should surrender, but Israel should do what it needs to defeat Hamas.

If Hamas refuses to surrender until the bitter end — which is likely given their extremism — then what should Israel do? If Gaza gets squeezed until 90% of the population is blown up or starved, would you care?

This is why the world (and people like yourself) should pressure Egypt to take in civilian refugees.

Here's the thing - Israel is totally justified in utterly destroying Hamas and returning the hostages they hold. If Hamas wants to add their own civilians to the hostages they're holding, then the world should team up to destroy them, just like we did with ISIS, which like Hamas is a jihadist Islamic supremacist group. They don't get to rape and murder and then hide behind civilians to prevent people from stopping them from simply repeating this.

Israel left Gaza in 2005

Yeah, I forgot Zionism started last October. Thanks for the reminder

You're correct, Jewish national self-determination started several thousand years ago and Israel is currently the most successful indigenous people's movement in the world.

Killing Journalists is bad.

.. Then bombing their innocent families homes is bad.

We should talk about bad things paid for by our taxes and supported by us indirectly.

Discussion on Reddit shutdown by organized Zionist groups. Also bad.

That doesn't answer my question? A lot of things are bad, most don't make it to the HackerNews front page...

It seems your trying to build a false narrative to equate HN = too many posts about Israel. To justify some of your other questions in this thread.

Israel is commiting genocidal acts that are illegal according to International law. They are starving a population of almost 2 million, collective punishment and indiscriminately killing families.

Sorry it bothers you when you see fellow HN Humans act on compassion for other Humans and spread awareness about this. By your post history I get the feeling you'd rather see it swept under the rug and discussion silenced. Israel has a professional well funded misinformation arm. PSA.

A telephone recording of the IDF murdering a family while they were in a car: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXKcsAJDDBs

> It seems your trying to build a false narrative to equate HN = too many posts about Israel.

False? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39435324

Either HN is politics free or it is not. As heavily moderated as it is, it is either neutral or it is not.

> Israel is commiting genocidal acts that are illegal according to International law.

If you read my other comments, you know words have meaning. Genocide is very specific. There are multiple countries delivering aid into Gaza, which is wild since Israel is apparently trying to starve them. I wonder if Israel knows about the 100s of tons of food going through the Rafa border every day. Weird that Israel would miss that.

> collective punishment and indiscriminately killing families

Indiscriminately killing families looks like shooting rockets you can't control at a civilian cities, which is a war crime. This is what Hamas has been doing since the start of the war.

Living in a war zone generally means people die. War is bad. Having an army fighting without uniforms (a war crime) among a densely populated civilian city is really bad. Any collateral damage is the fault of the terrorist group that started the war and is still holding civilian hostages (also a war crime).

I wanted to point out that I think the HN community collectively believe that journalism as a whole is very important for society. But that only explains why this story has been upvoted. Do you notice any other themes in the stories that you see being upvoted?

What other main themes do you see in the other upvoted stories that worry you.

Is it possible that there are fewer stories about the Hamas atrocities because there are fewer and there isn't much to discuss? I think they are unquestionably evil and should be imprisoned or killed. And that is an absolute belief that doesn't waver even if I also think Israel are doing a bad job of

But

> That doesn't answer my question? A lot of things are bad, most don't make it to the HackerNews front page...

Most likely because of the current events and the indiscriminate and out of proportion reaction by Israel towards Gazans. Was just reading some news today that Israel approved more Israeli settlements in West Bank. It seems that this conflict will only end when Israel will have killed/deported all Palestinians. Now how come only bad news are coming from Israel? Is there anything else interesting happening in Israel to take steam away from this conflict? They do have a tech scene with startups and all that. I've read some stuff like that on HN but nothing interesting or out of the ordinary is happening in that area at the moment...

I think it is something like "the wisdom of the crowd is the collective opinion of a diverse independent group of individuals rather than that of a single expert." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisdom_of_the_crowd

That would apply if HN was not actively moderated...

It's not that actively moderated. dang uses a pretty light hand here.

That's not true at all. Try posting an overtly political article and it will be blocked.

But maybe i'm wrong? I posted this[1], let's see what happens.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39622270

Edit: as expected, it was flagged, which I am not complaining about. I don't want divisive political stories on HN.

My point is that when the occasional political story makes it through to the front page, it almost always has a specific political bent.

Overtly political articles are off-topic, as the site guidelines clearly say.

Also, "flagged" is users, not moderators. Maybe you were just imprecise in what you said?

Because the Palestinian people have been at the mercy of Israel for 76 years and Israel has shown nothing but cruelty to them.