In response to today’s post of an interview with the Israeli Ambassador to Canada, Iddo Moed, Canadaland journalists Cherise Seucharan and Noor Azrieh present the following analysis.
…and a fact check of the statements made in the interview.
Yeah this isn’t a conversation we can have. If you’re going to sit there and deny the international criminal court and somehow accept the killing of tens of thousands of children, many by sniper fire like it’s comparable to bad tax policy then there’s no hope for you.
Typical. “This person doesn’t agree with my opinion so we can’t have a conversation.”
The ICJ has not ruled on the genocide accusation. Which, by the way, was brought by a country with a strong anti-Israel bias a month after entertaining Hamas leaders as visiting diplomats. And to pre-empt your response, no the ICJ did not say that genocide is plausible. The former head of the ICJ clarified herself that what they actually ruled was that it is plausible that Palestinian rights to be protected from genocide have been engaged, which is a fancy way of saying that the ICJ has jurisdiction to hear the case.
Did you know that children are the largest victim population in literally every major war in history? Do you know how many children died in WWII? If you don’t want children to die in war, don’t start wars.
I’m not the person you were replying to but thought I’d weigh in.
Canada attempted/committed (results varied) genocide of its first nations not by killing children (though they did do that) but by making continuation of indigenous ways of living/ culture untenable.
China is attempting genocide of its Uigher population in a similar way.
Russia’s denial of Ukrainian identity and treatment of orphaned Ukrainian children is also genocidal.
Genocide is the attempt to destroy a nation/ ethnicity. It doesn’t have to be murder factories to be genocide.
Would a strategy of making life in Palestine so difficult that everyone either capitulates or becomes radicalized [and therefore a legitimate military target] be genocide?
No.
First of all, the Palestinian population has grown substantially since 1967. That alone is sufficient to disprove the genocide accusation.
Second, blaming Israel for the plight of the Palestinian people ignores the fact that they have been governed by corrupt terrorist leaders who have done nothing to improve the lives of the people they govern because they have been single-mindedly focused on destroying Israel. Plus, it’s pretty damn disrespectful to treat the Palestinian people as if they have no agency whatsoever and are just destined to be radicalized because of external forces.
Would a strategy of making life in Palestine so difficult that everyone either capitulates or becomes radicalized [and therefore a legitimate military target] be genocide?
You answered “no”. Can you elaborate on how you reconcile your answer with our understanding of genocide:
Genocide is the attempt to destroy a nation/ ethnicity.
Yeah this isn’t a conversation we can have. If you’re going to sit there and deny the international criminal court and somehow accept the killing of tens of thousands of children, many by sniper fire like it’s comparable to bad tax policy then there’s no hope for you.
Typical. “This person doesn’t agree with my opinion so we can’t have a conversation.”
The ICJ has not ruled on the genocide accusation. Which, by the way, was brought by a country with a strong anti-Israel bias a month after entertaining Hamas leaders as visiting diplomats. And to pre-empt your response, no the ICJ did not say that genocide is plausible. The former head of the ICJ clarified herself that what they actually ruled was that it is plausible that Palestinian rights to be protected from genocide have been engaged, which is a fancy way of saying that the ICJ has jurisdiction to hear the case.
Did you know that children are the largest victim population in literally every major war in history? Do you know how many children died in WWII? If you don’t want children to die in war, don’t start wars.
I’m not the person you were replying to but thought I’d weigh in.
Canada attempted/committed (results varied) genocide of its first nations not by killing children (though they did do that) but by making continuation of indigenous ways of living/ culture untenable.
China is attempting genocide of its Uigher population in a similar way.
Russia’s denial of Ukrainian identity and treatment of orphaned Ukrainian children is also genocidal.
Genocide is the attempt to destroy a nation/ ethnicity. It doesn’t have to be murder factories to be genocide.
Do you agree?
Yes.
Do you think Israel has an interest in there not being a Palestinian nation?
Of course.
Would a strategy of making life in Palestine so difficult that everyone either capitulates or becomes radicalized [and therefore a legitimate military target] be genocide?
What would that strategy look like?
No. First of all, the Palestinian population has grown substantially since 1967. That alone is sufficient to disprove the genocide accusation. Second, blaming Israel for the plight of the Palestinian people ignores the fact that they have been governed by corrupt terrorist leaders who have done nothing to improve the lives of the people they govern because they have been single-mindedly focused on destroying Israel. Plus, it’s pretty damn disrespectful to treat the Palestinian people as if they have no agency whatsoever and are just destined to be radicalized because of external forces.
I asked:
You answered “no”. Can you elaborate on how you reconcile your answer with our understanding of genocide: