Using future population estimates that assume no conflict as a source for an "increasing population" is very sloppy genocide denialism.

> During the 1994 Rwandan genocide

During the 1994 Rwandan genocide, Israel continued their decades long support of the Hutu government, and "Israel continued sending weapons — including guns, ammunition, and grenades — to the Hutus as the genocide was taking place." https://www.972mag.com/rwanda-genocide-hutu-israel/

> AI responses may include mistakes.

Oh I see, I'm arguing with an Israeli genocide denialism bot. Great.

I literally wrote "AI summary" at the top because I copy and pasted it from google. If there was a genocide there would be many more palestinians dead, full stop. There would not be evacuation zones, humanitarian corridors, leaflets, announced bombings, etc. It would be trivial to simply kill everyone in Gaza, it is very obviously within their power.

Israel is fully dependent on the support it receives from western governments, and it knows that support will vanish if it wages a loud open genocide and brags about it. So no, it's not trivially in their power to kill everyone in Gaza, as Israel would cease to exist if they did that.

...Hence why it is very obviously not waging a genocide.

What stat are you using for current Palestinian population during this conflict? Any good estimate of the deaths to hunger over the next few years?

I don't believe that the charges in the report require success either way, but it would help with your statistics.

Even according to Hamas own numbers, 60,000 Palestinians died, 200 from starvation. That's very low compared to real genocides. That's very low considering Israel killed an estimated 10,000 of Hamas soldiers. That's pretty good accuracy in all modern standards of war.

A 1:6 ratio for civilian deaths is not a good civilian casualty ratio by the standards of modern warfare. Russia in Ukraine is currently achieving a rate of about 1:3, and that's a country that's currently considered rather brutal as far as civilian casualty rates go. The US in the Iraq War managed urban operations with kill ratios better than 1:1.

Have you seen how small and remote the villages are where Russia and Ukraine are fighting? Gaza is one of the most densely populated areas on earth and the fighters are not wearing uniforms and are directly embedded in civilian population centers.

What is the number in Mariupol ? A hell of a lot higher than 1:3.

According to Wikipedia between 25 and 33 thousand Bosnians and Croats were killed in the Bosnian genocide. Thus your argument doesn't hold, unless you contend that there was no genocide in Bosnia either.

Are you arguing that whether something does or doesn't genocide can the boiled down to a percentage. As it turns out, a lot of people disagree with that view.

Yep, it’s odd to call it a genocide when their population has been growing continuously, and significantly. Israel can’t both be a highly effective genocidal force and also failing to actually succeed at the outcomes of a genocide.