This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

SW-User
I agree that this conflict is an apartheid. Not so much with it being a genocide.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@SW-User There is some genocide and it could be building up to a greater one. It's definitely ethnic cleansing, a periodic ultra-violence.

SW-User
@Burnley123 The reason I don't agree with this conflict being a genocide is because, the population of arabs living in either Israel or Palestine would have been in decline since they would have been targeted and murdered just because they're arab, muslim, etc.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@SW-User Well, this is the definition of genocide:
I think this applies if you look at the actions of the Israeli state over the last few decades. Maybe slow genocide of genocide-lite, if we wanna be generous.
the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group.
I think this applies if you look at the actions of the Israeli state over the last few decades. Maybe slow genocide of genocide-lite, if we wanna be generous.

SW-User
@Burnley123 Well, things like forced evictions, arbitrary detention, and civilian casualties that hasn't drastically effected the arab population (which is in the millions) over a span of the last few decades doesn't really constitute as a genocide.
An example of a genocide would be the Rwandan genocide where about 491,000 to 800,000 Tutsi civilians were literally hunted down and murdered by Hutu militia, their neighbors, and police almost wiping them out. This lasted in a span of 100 days. This Israeli-Palestine conflict has lasted for what, 70 years now? While any civilian death is a horrible tragedy, the amount of casualties in Gaza or Palestine does not affect overall population size or even begin to threaten its existence, unlike in the example of Rwanda.
I think we should keep using "genocide" for the Rwanda-like things, not for every war being fought today. It's important to distinguish one horrible thing from another far more horrible thing. If we call everything by the worst name, we lose that capability.
An example of a genocide would be the Rwandan genocide where about 491,000 to 800,000 Tutsi civilians were literally hunted down and murdered by Hutu militia, their neighbors, and police almost wiping them out. This lasted in a span of 100 days. This Israeli-Palestine conflict has lasted for what, 70 years now? While any civilian death is a horrible tragedy, the amount of casualties in Gaza or Palestine does not affect overall population size or even begin to threaten its existence, unlike in the example of Rwanda.
I think we should keep using "genocide" for the Rwanda-like things, not for every war being fought today. It's important to distinguish one horrible thing from another far more horrible thing. If we call everything by the worst name, we lose that capability.
MickRogers · 26-30, M
@SW-User It's not though.
Apartheid would be if only ethnic Jews had rights. There are Arabs in their military, so I'm not buying this "Ethnic Arabs are treated like second class citizens."
Maybe Arab Palestinians but not Arab Israelis.
Apartheid would be if only ethnic Jews had rights. There are Arabs in their military, so I'm not buying this "Ethnic Arabs are treated like second class citizens."
Maybe Arab Palestinians but not Arab Israelis.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@MickRogers https://www.vox.com/world/2018/7/31/17623978/israel-jewish-nation-state-law-bill-explained-apartheid-netanyahu-democracy
Maybe take a look at this.
Maybe take a look at this.