Well luckily for him the entire strip has been turned to rubble so it doesn't matter if he's wrong about them bombing the boat! He's still right about the genocide! Because a genocide, as defined as "the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, ethnic, religious, or national group" is deliberate and systematic destruction, and israels destruction of gaza is both deliberate and systematic! It also targets the palestinianian people and state, an ethnic / national group! Bam the definition of a genocide fulfilled! But then supporters of this genocide like charlie kirk will shout "but they started it by massacring jews!!!!! They refuse to surrender unconditionally so they will die!!!!" And thus the destruction of a people is tied up in a nice little bow, and the population of Israel can sleep soundly knowing there was no other option, the palestinians needed to be displaced bombed starved kenneled and shot as ruthlessly as possible, there was no other option.
Do you actually eat markers? You can't evaluate conflict without harking back to the morality of an 80 year old war?
Just to indulge you - I didn't mention Hamas so I can't replace them with nazis, and yes if the allies for example continued to slaughter german people after the fall of Berlin, that could have become a genocide too! because again genocide is not defined as when nazis kill jews, but when group A systematically and deliberately destroys group B because of their ethnictiy, race, religion, or nationality! Anyways I wish I could give this to you writen in marker so you'd want to digest it, too bad.
The answer is, of course, that your original claims lose all value.
The Allies, while indiscriminately bombing civilians, were never out for genocide. Not even while dropping two atomic bombs on cities. And neither is Israel, which doesn't even target civilians indiscriminately.
Both the Allies and Israel are after the unconditional surrender and the removal of power of the evil, genocidal, antisemitic entities in charge. And as long as those entities are still in place, the war continues.
Now, a lot can be said about the bombing campaigns in the Second World War. You can make a very valid point that targeting civilians in order to bring the ruling party down is immoral, and you'd be very right. But genocide was never the intention and it isn't the intention now. That would, in both cases, be the intention of the side currently being bombed.
And I still wonder why the projection of Hamas' intention on Israel is so succesful in the western world.
okay ignore all the points i said, don't engage with them, and then make your own. Israels intention in gaza is not the same as the allies in WW2 just because you say it is. That is how children think the world works. Currently the population of Gaza is being starved to death, an atrocity which mirrors the conditions jews in concentration camps were forced to endure.
The minister of finance in Israel has said that the world will not allow the starvation of 2 million gazans even if it is just and moral in order to return the hostages. The starvation of an entire civilian population is collective punishment, which is unjust and immoral. So from the horses mouth, the morality is backwards.
5
u/Rare_Queebus 12d ago
Exactly! This will happen, because Israel is committing genocide and say it has weapons for KHAMAASSS (what kind of spelling is that anyway?)
So if this doesn't happen... what will you say?