this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2024
156 points (95.9% liked)

World News

39110 readers
2670 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Live coverage thread of the International Court of Justice and the case of South Africa vs. Israel.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

When a court orders you to reverse an action, it's a recognition that you are currently engaging in that action.

So when this court ruled "that its (Israels) forces do not commit any of the act in the genocide convention."

They are stating that Israeli forces are, in fact, committing acts covered under the genocide convention.

If they weren't, there would be no need for the court order.

Now, Israel's defense could be that any genocidal action is the act of individual soldiers or units and is not official Israeli policy... I don't BUY that, but it's plausible deniability.

In this case, now, the court is saying Israel has an obligation to stop it regardless of who ordered it.

[–] Aussiemandeus@aussie.zone 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I don't read it the same way you do.

I read it as in your way to school tomorrow make sure you don't play in the road.

During your invasion of Palestine ensure you don't commit any of the acts outlined here

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

The problem with that reading is we already know Israel is on the wrong side of the genocide convention (bolding mine):

https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml

"In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

a. Killing members of the group;
b. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
c. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

d. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
e. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."

Israel is already engaging in A, B, and C. So it's not a matter of telling them to not do something they are currently not doing.