- Joined
- Sep 20, 2018
- Messages
- 24,308
- SLU Posts
- 18459
My position is that Israel is guilty of a wide range of specific war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza and the West Bank, for which there's a very strong case indeed, rather than that it's guilty of genocide, which opens the door to all sorts of definitional arguments that I'd prefer to avoid because they divert attention from the strong cases that can easily be made.I think the core of our disagreement is just that you are looking at this from the perspective of the law, which is arguably owned by the court. Meanwhile, many of us look at this as a moral thing, which isn't actually owned by any particular entity.
I understand your perspective, but maybe am less willing to agree that the ICC or other such entities have full ownership of the term. In any case, I can see the argument for saying that the slaughter is just a different set of still very grisly crimes that arguably are just as bad.
Last edited:






