Sure, openly written documents can help with evaluation of intent, but how can we ever define someone's intent (something that is only in people's hearts)? We know of many legal cases where the intent is obvious but not easily provable.

Well, if they widely publicize a document that their intent is to erase X off the map, like Hamas did [1], like Russia did [2], then we know.

Israel ALSO publicizes their intent in Gaza, and ... it's not eliminating en entire population, it's "Israel's campaign has four stated goals: to destroy Hamas, to free the hostages, to ensure Gaza no longer poses a threat to Israel, and to return displaced residents of Northern Israel." [3]

So, again, the conclusion is that Hamas commits genocide, including against Palestinians (and Israeli, and Jews, and Lebanese, and Jordanians, and ... as evidenced in other documents, and Israel does not.

It's even worse than that, because READ the documents ... Hamas explicitly states that committing genocide in Palestine and Israel against Jews and "Palestinian traitors" ... is the start. They clearly state their intent to do so worldwide, on essentially everyone, as that will bring the islamic second coming. Yes, really, that's what it says.

But of course the only explanation can be that Palestinians have been lying about their intent when they're killing people and Israel has been lying about their intent too. That's the only possible explanation.

[1] https://avalon.law.yale.edu/21st_century/hamas.asp

[2] http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/66181

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_invasion_of_the_Gaza_S...

Isn't intent usually decided by a jury/court, taking the actions of the alleged perp into account? Most law breakers won't just admit their guilt, and most legal systems don't let defendants unilaterally declare themselves innocent.

> Hamas explicitly states that committing genocide in Palestine and Israel against Jews and "Palestinian traitors" ... is the start. They clearly state their intent to do so worldwide, on essentially everyone, as that will bring the islamic second coming. Yes, really, that's what it says.

Nice, it's like the "preventive" strikes of Trump on Iran. Israel is basically committing genocide on Palestinians so ...Palestinians don't do genocide on them AND the world? Thank you Israel, for saving the world, by committing untold atrocities, a genocide and ethntic cleasing (in the name of good, of course).

Again, I will reiterate: Israel currently does to Palestinians what answers ALL criterias of a genocide. Is it a genocide? Yes. Can we call it a genocide? Yes. Would we continue calling it a genocide and compare it to what Nazis did to the Jewish population? Yes.

So preventing khamenei "virgins shouldn't be executed, so gangrape women and minor girls before executing them" having nuclear weapons somehow makes these religious massacrers the victim? Attacking hamas when they torture and kill babies as hostages makes hamas the victim? Ok ...

I think you've said enough now.

That's rich coming from a defender of Israel, the apartheid state that indiscriminately kills children and does a genocide on a whole population. What's even richer is that Israel is the one known for doing so:

https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/03/more-human-c...

Besides, two wrongs don't make a right. And it's Israel occupying another country, not the other way around. It's also Israel who killed 20x more innocents in the last years.

https://israelpalestinetimeline.org/charts/

Israel also attacked 4 countries: Syria, Iran, Palestine and Lebanon in just the last 2 years, yet somehow those genocidal warmongers are allowed to have nukes?

Nah, the ICC has issued an arrest for Netanyahu because of his war crimes, and there IS genocide in Gaza. Go cry somewhere else, you won't take the world's eyes away from this Nazi style genocide.

What Israel is doing checks the first and third items in your list. They kill members of the group, and not just in Gaza; in the Westbank, it's common for illegal settlers to attack Palestinian towns, including killing people. The IDF does nothing to stop them, but if Palestinians try to defend themselves against this aggression, IDF shows up to stop that.

The wall separates farmers from their land, and has made it nearly impossible for Palestinians to live their life, to go to work, etc. And Gaza is a ghetto; an open-air prison, with way too many people, and no way for them to build a normal life. Israel has also kicked Palestinians out of their homes in order to give them to Jews.

I'm not denying that Hamas is also genocidal; they clearly and openly are. And probably more so in intent, but a lot less so in capability. Israel has been killing and disrupting a lot more Palestinian lives than the other way around.

Can you read? Intent is required. Otherwise, the list does not matter. The police kidnaps people in pursuit of traffic violations too. Intent matters. Hamas declares their intent to be genocidal, Israel also declares their intent, and it's not genocide.

Second these are the basics, not the entire treaty. ANY object used by any adversary for military purposes, attacks or coordinating attacks, including hospitals and schools, is a valid target.

And that is ALSO not the entire story. For example, most targets can be attacked as soon as any commander thinks they're used by the enemy for attacks, without any warning. This applies to houses for example. But not hospitals. For hospitals, a warning must be given first, then, I believe minimum 2 hours after the warning, an attack against a hospital is legal.

There is NOTHING that has absolute immunity. To give another example: if a faction fires from within a protest of otherwise innocent people, returning fire is not a warcrime. Not even when innocents get hit.

Do you think these are all accidents? Read what I wrote. The intent is clearly there.

If Hitler said "I'm not going to kill any Jews" while murdering a million Jews, would you believe he didn't have the intent to kill them? And there's plenty of people in Israel who do talk openly about destroying Palestine, destroying Gaza, killing or deporting all Palestinians, and even arguing that Palestinians aren't a real people (like Putin does with Ukrainians). All of that shows intent.

> if a faction fires from within a protest of otherwise innocent people, returning fire is not a warcrime. Not even when innocents get hit.

Cope harder. Genocide apologists like you remind me of this article from The Onion: https://theonion.com/historians-quibbling-over-exact-definit...

> Israel also declares their intent, and it's not genocide.

But their actions are a genocide

The genocide in Gaza that Israel is doing has even its own wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_genocide. A lot of international organizations that are experts in recognizing genocide are calling it for what it is.

You know what also has its own wikipedia page? The Holocaust: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust.

> ANY object used by any adversary for military purposes, attacks or coordinating attacks, including hospitals and schools, is a valid target.

Said the genocider.

Did you read your own list?

Based on news reporting, what Israel is doing in Gaza checks multiple items.

I don't think I've ever seen such spectacular mental gymnastics. Absolutely incredible.

You've posted several comments in this thread that are inflammatory and outside the guidelines. We have to ban accounts that continue to post like this. Please read the guidelines and observe them in future, particularly these ones:

Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.

Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.

Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html