[tehjoker]

RobertoG's comment is a good one, but I will add that the definition of genocide is defined in the genocide convention as:

Article 2 of the Convention defines genocide as:

    ... 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.

— Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article 2[9]

I was sloppy in saying "partial genocide" as a colloquialism, because "partial genocide" is the crime of genocide full stop.

[mhb]

Yeah. Let's pile on enough definitional nuance in order to apply it to a situation in which it is clear that the previous, universal understanding doesn't fit in order to stoke outrage.

Besides, that's clearly not Israel's intent or it would have already been accomplished.

Maybe the reason for your "sloppiness" is that you instinctively understand the absurdity?

[tehjoker]

This is the definition. People thought long and hard about what genocide is, because people are quite creative in finding ways of trying to destroy other people.

Israel is committing genocide because they have tried to destroy part of the population. Their goal is enthic cleansing. If they do not achieve it, they will continue to escalate, especially now that international law is shown to be toothless.

[neoromantique]

Their goal is for rockets to stop flying into their population centers.

[mhb]

Putting it in italics doesn't make it any more true. In fact, your whole reply is bullshit.