[metadat]

Sir or madame, please at least look up the definition before posting, because this is pure nonsense.

> Genocide is the intentional destruction of a people in whole or in part.

Are you saying that, from your perspective, ethnic cleansing is more okay than genocide? This kind of hair splitting is disgusting, and doesn't even apply to this scenario.

Just stop it. Real people in real life, who are innocent, are being murdered in cold blood by Israelis who won't even give them the opportunity to leave the area, much less live a peaceful coexistence.

[ronjobber]

I am fully aware of the definition of genocide. There have been three in modern times: the Holocaust, the Armenian genocide, and the Rwandan genocide.

Go look at a map of the airstrikes and tell me Israel is indiscriminately bombing with the explicit intent to kill civilians.

And yes, I am implying that ethnic cleansing is more okay than genocide. In case this needs to be stated: I do not think either are good things.

Live a peaceful coexistence? Is that really what you think this is about? Why won't Egypt give innocent civilians the opportunity to leave the area? Why won't Jordan?

I personally think Israel should do more to limit civilian casualties, and they need to get the West Bank settlers back the fuck out from the Green Line. But the rhetoric you're using tries to cast the whole thing as a Manichean fantasy. Who does that help?

[generj]

By only listing three examples, I am suspect that you do understand the definition of genocide.

There have been many, many more than three genocides in modern times. Since the Armenian Genocide qualifies as modern, anything post 1913 or so qualifies - that’s a minimum of 33 Genocides [0]. The Political Instability Task Force estimated that 43 genocides occurred between 1956 and 2016, resulting in about 50 million deaths (probably using a more flexible definition of genocide) [1].

There are at least three ongoing genocides right now: Rohingya, Uyghur, and Darfur. Toss on Ukraine onto that list (forcibly transferring children of the group to another group is genocidal, and they have been doing that). Azerbaijan genocide of Armenians is also happening though it hasn’t been as broadly confirmed yet.

But many people argue the Genocide Convention has too narrow of a definition, and excludes things like the Yemen civil war, the conflict in Palestine / Israel. A review of the ten steps of genocide by Genocide Watch finds 6/10 steps are being followed [2].

“Imposing living conditions intended to destroy the group”, such as denying entry of food, is a qualifier of genocide under the Genocide Convention. The current level of food imports into Gaza is low enough that this is arguably a true accusation. It doesn’t matter if Israel does this unilaterally or alongside Egypt, it’s still collective punishment and a war crime, and probably genocidal.

Apologies for Wikipedia links, but I saw three modern genocides and immediately knew that was wildly off. Better sources exist but these are sufficient to show much higher than three have occurred. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genocides [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide [2] https://www.genocidewatch.com/single-post/genocide-emergency...

[ronjobber]

Thanks for calling me out! I am aware of the other atrocities. And on further reflection, I'd even agree some of these constitute genocide.

But you raised precisely the point I wanted to address. The definition of genocide is complicated and there isn't really one broadly accepted definition. And it is often the case that those who want to expand the definition have an agenda. I think language is important, and we should not allow the meaning of words to change without a broad debate and conversation.

Here are some Wikipedia links: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_studies?wprov=sfla1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_definitions?wprov=sfl...