Person 1: “Israel and Palestine have both done some horrid things to each other and deprived each other of basic needs. That isn’t something where genocide comes to mind.”
Person 2: “What Israel is doing to Palestine is genocide though.”
Person 1: “It’s a war crime. Not all war crimes are a genocide. Certain criteria have to be fulfilled for that. Similar to how not all mass shootings are acts of terrorism. Are you really dedicating a whole confrontation just to debate semantics?”
Person 2: Provides links to Amnesty International
Person 1: “I’m going by dictionary definitions, not what a certain biased organization says. I wouldn’t deny both of the organizations you mention there are biased. But the dictionary isn’t. Suppose you are right and the ADL is biased and controlled “by Zionism” (which sounds a bit like a conspiracy theory). What does that make the Snopes organization? What does that make the literal 50% of America who doesn’t disagree with the ADL? What does that make the people who call it a double standard that so many people are willing to support murder of one kind but not another, or that intentions matter sometimes but not all the time?”
Two questions: Is isreal committing genocide? Is this person denying that?
If a is yes and b is yes, it sounds like this person is denying a genocide.
Honest question, what part of the dictionary definition suggests that this isnt genocide?
It is just a tactic to argue semantics.
Call it what you wanna call. But Israel is systematically killing off Palestinian population via different methods.
No amount of semantics will change that and the American normies see it. AiPaC finally got expoaed for the Zionist vermin they are.
Genocide is a legal term. A dictionary don’t go into details like that
Details like what? Exterminating an ethnic group, either by murder, displacement or cultural eradication, genocide is genocide.
Like intent and the 5 actions that if one of them is proved they is a genocide
None of that has been mentioned by op, beyond “here is the actual definition of genocide.” op pointed to the amnesty international definition, and was refused by his opponent. so defaulting to the dictionary… Isreal is exterminating an ethnic group intentionally… Its fkn genocide.
What are you on about? Either we go by the legal definition of genocide, which isreal clearly meets, or we go by the dictionary definition of genocide that isreal clearly meets… What point do you think you are making?
Are you saying it can’t be genocide cause that must be proven in a court of law? That is asinine.
You are misunderstanding me there is definitely a genocide based on the official definition by the international law that is the definition that should be used and not the one in a random dictionary
I’m not misunderstanding you, you are misunderstanding op. the official definition was rejected. I didn’t come up with that dumb shit, their opponent did. I’m merely stating that denying that its genocide based on any definition available is fkn stupid, regardless of if its legalistic or layman.