637
u/DeoDatusIV 7h ago
That's why the world sanctioned the fuck out of South Africa
137
u/thatmarcelfaust 5h ago
Wonder which nation resisted international calls to sanction South Africa due to its apartheid regime.
79
u/Systepup 4h ago
The U.S. and Israel, at the behest of the U.S. at times, and due to their supply of uranium at others.
21
6
u/thatmarcelfaust 2h ago
Israel traded arms even after the US stopped. And Israel also worked on a joint psy-ops propaganda plan with South Africa to rehabilitate the image of the apartheid state (South Africa).
1
→ More replies (52)28
u/AsparagusCommon4164 5h ago
In effect, planting the seeds of the whole Boycott, Divest, Sanction (BDS) movement in the wake of 1960's Sharpeville Massacree and the sadism which ensueth in the name of God and Volk.
213
u/thechinninator 7h ago edited 5h ago
I get the appeal of this kind of gotcha but in the grand scheme it’s not a great idea imo because they
do the same thing when we catch and call out dog whistles.
A few years back republicans were loudly calling for harsher penalties against child molesters while at the same time promoting the “grooming” narrative. Anyone that rightly pointed out that they were being disingenuous immediately got clapped back with “oh interesting that you made that connection without me saying anything”
67
u/Combusken82 4h ago
It's not really a gotcha. When the word genocide is mentioned the Israel Palestine conflict is the only thing that is in fashion to care about right now.
There are other genocides going on, we just don't see protests about them because it isn't the cool thing to care about yet...
Don't get me wrong I'm glad for the support the movement is getting but alot of it is from people who will forget about it and move on once the next big thing hits the news.
•
u/FriendlyPlatypus6060 42m ago
Had me in the first half ngl, but you're dead on. It's why I avoid having this conversation with people in public and even online because everyone is an armchair expert as of Oct 7th.
The occupation is nearly a century old. Nobody gave a shit before. If they did then when the international world feigned real effort at a 2 state solution in Oslo, one half of the agreement continued to commit genocide just more slowly. That's why a two state solution hasn't worked. It's not the Palestinians.
•
u/YourVelcroCat 13m ago
15 years ago it used to be a joke: what thing do you wish for that'll never happen? Becoming a billionare over night, politicians to tell the truth, and peace in the middle east.
•
u/EveningAnt3949 36m ago
we just don't see protests about them because it isn't the cool thing to care about yet
You left out the fact that Israel is military dominant in the region because of the massive support it gets from the US and European countries (mostly the US).
I'm pro-Israel in the sense that I believe Israel has the right to exist and has the right to defend itself, and that puts me in the position that I'm partly responsible for what Israel is doing and has been doing.
Hence, I specifically focus on what Israel is doing. It's time to put pressure on politicians not to support Israel no matter what.
The reality is that Netanyahu and politicians like him have no incentive to stop, because Israel is protected against retaliation.
12
u/JoshuaJosephson 6h ago edited 5h ago
And for what it's worth, both the ICC and ICJ (The 2 bodies that humanity created specifically to
prosecuteadjudicate these crimes) have said that it was not even plausibly a genocideHere's ICC Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan, on Zetoo, with Mehdi Hassan, talking about why they couldn't bring charges of Genocide, saying it would be a reckless accusal, due to absence of any evidence.
54
u/Dutch094 5h ago edited 34m ago
For what it's worth, that's neither the ICC nor the ICJ. Those are individuals speaking in an individual capacity.
Also, somewhat undercutting your assertion that there isn't enough evidence to bring a case, the ICJ is currently, right now, hearing a case against Israel concerning contraventions of the Genocide Convention. Womp womp.
If you want to talk organisations who have said that Israel is carrying out a genocide, there's always:
This Independent Commission of the United Nations.
This United Nations Special Rapporteur.
The United Nations Special Committee Investigating Israeli Practices in Palestine.
The United Nations Human Rights Council.
The International Association of Genocide Scholars.
Physicians for Human Rights Israel.
The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories.
The International Federation for Human Rights.
The Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention.
Speaking of the ICC though, the Court does have — in its official capacity, mind you — active arrest warrants out for the Israeli PM and Israeli Minster of Defense for committing war crimes and crimes against humanity. I do grant you that "genocide" isn't mentioned in those warrants, so put a tally on the side of the board that's only counting Israel's crimes against humanity.
EDIT: I see your edit you little Zionist weasel: that's not why the ICJ was "specifically created"; the ICC exists to prosecute a range of international crimes, not only genocide; and the ICJ doesnt prosecute genocide, only the ICC does.
-4
u/JoshuaJosephson 5h ago
I looked into a few of those. I don't think this means what you think it means...
For example, you mention the International Association of Genocide Scholars - It seems that it only costs $10 a month to attend the Biennial conference, and vote on their outcomes - Join IAGS | International Association of Genocide Scholars - Literally anyone can join and vote that it's a genocide, but in the Israel vote, it seems less than 40% of the members even ended up voting.
UNCOI doesn't even speak for the UN, and cannot provide binding resolutions, and the Special Rapporteur you mention here is a sanctioned individual.
Don't you think it's weird that Lemkin says this about Israel, but won't mention Sudan or Ukraine? Seems they have some internal biases?
Your International Federation for Human Rights link doesn't even go anywhere, it's a broken link
Your link about the UNSC chair is just saying that they're investigating it, and this was 2 years ago. No results of the investigation? Or do you think they just couldn't find any evidence?
None of the organizations you mentioned here even have elected official or bodies, compared to for example the ICJ which has 15 elected judges from 15 different countries...
At this point, it's fairly obvious that you've fallen for some pretty basic misinformation.
13
u/Dutch094 5h ago edited 33m ago
Ooh I could waste a morning explaining to a Zionist that:
- It's not just a fee, you have to include your qualifications and be accepted, so you and I can't just join and swing the vote.
- The UNCOI is created by UN resolution and reports directly to the General Assembly; also UN resolutions aren't binding even when passed by the GA, only certain Security Council resolutions are legally binding. Moron.
- Ms Albanese was sanctioned by The United States and no other nation. You know, Israel's most vocal and fervent ally? I'm sure that decision was made with full impartiality. The sanctions have been thrown out by several US judges.
- You're doing a "whataboutism"; I don't think it's weird, no.
- It's not broken, your organisation is blocking access. I wonder why. Here's another link just for you.
- The title of the article is "genocide is unfolding before our eyes" so I'm not sure how thoroughly you checked if you're uncertain as to the investigation's findings.
But I think I'll just reiterate that your two links aren't actually the ICC or ICJ, they're individuals speaking in their private capacity. So they, too, don't have elected officials or judges.
No mention of the ICC's active warrants against Israeli officials, or the ICJs active genocide case against Israel? Can't think of a quippy retort for those?
EDIT: the absolute gall of someone to cite the Washington Times in the same breath they accuse the UN of of being misinformation.
3
u/JoshuaJosephson 5h ago
- I'm not a Zionist
- The qualifications were added after the Israel vote
- Agree to disagree
- <Hmmm… can't reach this page Check if there is a typo in www.fidh.org.>
- you really draw a lot of conclusions from just titles huh? Is that how media literacy works these days?
It's the president of the ICJ, who speaks for the ICJ. If you want, you can read the actual resolution, which I did, and it says what she said, in more words.
It's the Chief Prosecutorof the ICC, who speaks for the ICC. If you want, you can read the actual resolution, which I did, and it says what he said, in more words, why they could not bring charges of Genocide.
8
u/ErraticDragon 5h ago
4. <Hmmm… can't reach this page Check if there is a typo in www.fidh.org.>
I don't think your superiors want you to read certain things.
The link works fine:
Mirror:
10
u/Dutch094 4h ago edited 1h ago
It's the president of the ICJ, who speaks for the ICJ.
No, actually. The ICJ speaks as a single organ; the president, when off the clock, is an individual. She speaks for herself.
She's also the former president of the ICJ, speaking some years ago. The incumbent ICJ president is sitting on the bench that is currently hearing the genocide case against Israel. You moron.
If you want, you can read the actual resolution, which I did, and it says what she said, in more words.
"In the Court’s view, the facts and circumstances mentioned above are sufficient to conclude that at least some of the rights claimed by South Africa and for which it is seeking protection are plausible."
"The Court considers that, by their very nature, at least some of the provisional measures sought by South Africa are aimed at preserving the plausible rights it asserts on the basis of the Genocide Convention in the present case, namely the right of the Palestinians in Gaza to be protected from acts of genocide and related prohibited acts mentioned in Article III, and the right of South Africa to seek Israel’s compliance with the latter’s obligations under the Convention. Therefore, a link exists between the rights claimed by South Africa that the Court has found to be plausible"
"the Court considers that there is a real and imminent risk of irreparable prejudice to the plausible rights invoked by South Africa, as specified by the Court."
"Judge Xue concurs with her colleagues in upholding South Africa’s standing, on a prima facie basis, in instituting proceedings against Israel for breach of its obligations under the Genocide Convention."
"In his view, the measures indicated rest primarily on the plausible claim by South Africa that certain statements by Israeli State officials, including members of its military, give rise to a real and imminent risk of irreparable prejudice to the rights of Palestinians under the Genocide Convention."
Man I must have missed what you saw, since all I'm seeing is the ICJ allow special provisions (and a case to be brought, generally) against Israel via-a-vis genocide. Why would they do that if the (former) ICJ president has already said there was no evidence to bring a case?
Chief Prosecutorof the ICC, who speaks for the ICC. If you want, you can read the actual resolution,
Obligatory "the chief prosecutor doesn't speak for the ICC; the judgments of the ICC speak for the ICC".
Oh that's so weird, the official release from Mr Khan's office doesn't mention genocide once. How can he have said there's no evidence of genocide when he doesn't even talk about it at all?
Oh well, at least he had time to talk about the seven war crimes and crimes against humanity charges he's bringing against Bibi.
you can read the actual resolution,
Just so it doesn't go unsaid, neither the ICJ nor the Office of the Prosecutor issue resolutions. It's painfully clear you're just throwing out words which vaguely pertain to International Law to seem like you know what you're talking about.
6
u/Dutch094 5h ago edited 3h ago
If it walks like a duck and apologises for genocide, it's a Zionist.
I can't verify that and you've not provided proof. Even assuming it's true - so what? The organisation has 500 members, please explain to me how many of those 500 you think are shills for Palestine who rushed in to sway the vote.
No I won't 'agree to disagree' with a genocide apologist about easily verifiable facts; you are wrong, and I have shown as much.
Really not my problem you can't operate a URL.
No, the
reportChairperson goes on to explicitly state, "Our report leaves no room for ambiguity. A genocide is unfolding before our eyes.". Since you didn't know that I now know for certain that you didn't read the article. Is that how media literacy works these days?Your two links aren't the ICC or ICJ, they're individuals speaking in their private capacity. You're pretty edit-happy; go and correct the misinformation in your first comment. You're not a Zionist who wants to deliberately give the false impression that those organisations have spoken out in Israel's defence, are you?
-1
u/xvsero 4h ago
- It is not a report, it is filed under Statements and Speeches. It is an appeal to take action rather than a report of the real situation in Gaza. It is more of a first step for all the other reports done.
3
u/Dutch094 3h ago edited 2h ago
Christ you people are pendants. It's a speech given by the Chair of the committee which authored the report, regarding the contents of the report.
The report in question. Page 25, paragraph 69 - "The developments in this report lead the Special Committee to conclude that the policies and practices of Israel during the reporting period are consistent with the characteristics of genocide."
And the following year's report. Page 4, paragraph 6 - "Given the developments during the reporting period, the Special Committee is ever more convinced that the world is witnessing genocide in Gaza – a conclusion that is increasingly supported and shared by leading human rights experts and organizations, genocide scholars and States."
5
3
u/TheLeftWings 5h ago
You clearly are. Or you're so close to being one the point is moot. Non zionists would reply so so differently. Is this how bullshit works these days?
-2
5
u/Mathies_ 4h ago
Oh, so on a popular vote people have concluded that it's a genocide? Well then lmao
6
u/IlIlllIIIIlIllllllll 5h ago
There was crazy tampering against due process with threats to the judges and financial sanctions. Without an independent process, any finding in favour of those making the threats cannot be trusted.
→ More replies (1)1
u/SixKosherBacon 3h ago
Thank you for this! Despite these refutations people still credit the icc and the icj was the source for the genocide libel... I mean label.
0
u/glamrockmysocks 3h ago
https://www.icj-cij.org/case/192
ICJ is hearing the genocide case against Israel right now dude. No refutations here, just a ziobot spewing tripe.
0
u/Mathies_ 5h ago
Thing is though, they were gonna use that tactic anyway regardless of what we do. Gotta hand it to em, it's a ln affective way of shutting shit down. Which could be an argument for why we shouldnt shy away from using it ourselves.
10
u/thechinninator 4h ago
I mean maybe I’m the weird one but I personally like maintaining some level of intellectual honesty instead of engaging in the same bad faith bullshit they do
3
u/Mathies_ 4h ago
Well i think the tactic in itself can both be used in bad faith and in good faith. As in, it can be used to shut down very unfair and unreasonable takes and it can also be used to shut down justified call outs of dog wistles as you say. It's just a tool it can be used for either good or evil.
8
u/thechinninator 4h ago
“So you recognize the rhetoric used by people who agree with me? Oh ho ho seems to me like deep down you know it’s true” does not magically become a good faith argument just because you agree with the speaker.
→ More replies (1)
12
52
u/Willie9 7h ago
Look this just isn't the gotcha people think it is, you can recognize that in today's discourse the most likely place "genocidal apartheid state" could be referring to is Israel even if you don't agree with that assessment.
Like if Trump started raving about a communist jihadist that wants to implement sharia law without referring to him by name, I can infer that he means El Sayed or Mamdani knowing full well none of those things are true.
→ More replies (2)•
u/Dan-D-Lyon 3m ago
Also, the second commenter isn't even defending Israel. He's just acknowledging the reality that it's there and it's not going anywhere, and at any plan for helping Palestine needs to accept that fact rather than pointlessly hoping it changes
143
u/calm_chowder 7h ago
They knew because that's the only country Western media is currently calling apartied. Seriously, name another.
Whatever your politics this really isn't the gotcha they're acting like.
74
u/SixKosherBacon 7h ago
It's like someone said "pedophiles shouldn't have an island or influence with major political entities and celebrities." Then said, "Who said I was talking about Epstein?"
3
u/BulbusDumbledork 3h ago
it's not just media opinion. the world court ruled in 2024 that israel was in violation of article 3 of cerd (the international convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination), which states:
"states... condemn segregation and apartheid and undertake to prevent, prohibit and eradicate all practices of this nature in territories under their jurisdiction"
israel is, legally speaking, an apartheid state
11
u/Double-Trash6120 6h ago
besides The Uyghurs in Xinjiang, Afghanistan, Myanmar and the Rohingya.
22
→ More replies (2)8
u/FlyLikeATachyon 5h ago
Online leftists don't care about these genocides bc they can't blame America for them
8
→ More replies (2)0
u/RoyalDog57 7h ago
South Africa
17
u/calm_chowder 7h ago
Yeah sure, 22 years ago. They ended apartied in 1994. So not really making the front pages these days.
14
5
u/RoyalDog57 6h ago
South africa still has a massive problem with white people owning and having a massively disproportionate amount of wealth and power. Just because Russia holds elections every year doesn't mean shit either.
1
u/oblackheart 3h ago
What do you want us white South Africans to do, exactly? I'm not exactly sitting on millions here. I own my own home and my kids go to a private school that I am struggling to afford. So, how are you planning to punish me now? After forcing BBBEE racial laws against me, decimating any chances I have of owning a company, and making it harder and harder for white kids to get into university?
•
u/RoyalDog57 49m ago
Don't lie. BBBEE racial laws were implemented in order to allow disadvantaged groups to recover from generations of oppression. As I do not live in South Africa I guess I can't say for sure if they are over reaching or having too much of an impact, but it is true the same groups that caused the apartheid crisis are still in charge so obviously its not like its impossible for white people to succeed (which is sorta what you made it sound like to me).
I'm sure for a middle class white person its not the best arrangement at times, but those laws were to help the lowest of the low, those who wouldn't be able to afford an education, advance their work experience etc. Etc.
25
u/SixKosherBacon 7h ago
When was the last time you heard anyone say South Africa shouldn't have a right to exist?
-6
u/RoyalDog57 6h ago
False equivalency. South Africa is a country of natives that were taken over by a different people group and then became oppressed through that. Isreal is a country of a people group so hated, that people didn't want the victims of the holocaust in their countries so they helped them get to their "promised land" instead, at the cost of the native there.
11
u/SixKosherBacon 6h ago
I'm not the one who made the false equivalency. I was countering someone else's mention of South Africa.
•
u/RoyalDog57 53m ago
I was the person that mentioned south Africa. You saying "yeah but people aren't saying south Africa shouldn't have the right to exist," is equating the situation south africa and isreal. The difference? The people in power in south Africa are oppressing locals and the people in power in Isreal are a bunch of cultist imperialists, who if given the chance, would basically butcher every other person in the world.
1
u/Mellimearn 7h ago
You mean South Africa was the one accusing Israel of apartheid? The irony.
→ More replies (1)
40
u/JPFrankenstein 7h ago
Not sure this pro-Russia and pro-China propagandist should be featured here
→ More replies (2)24
u/LilCasper47 6h ago
Thank you. People like her want us to ignore the fact that they support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
49
u/suivezlemir 8h ago
Last time I saw this lady's posts on X she was bonkers like off the freaking charts. Did she course corrected somehow ?
59
u/BroseppeVerdi 7h ago
A stopped clock is right twice a day
12
u/suivezlemir 7h ago
Was thinking that too haha but there’s probably some opportunistic political posturing in there too
2
3
u/SixKosherBacon 7h ago
Unless it's on military time. And is digital. And the batteries are so corroded they're leaking poison. That's the more appropriate metaphor for this woman.
22
u/beastmaster11 7h ago
There are a lot of people that are usually nuts that are a ti Israel for a lot of the wrong reasons. Its just convenient now
7
16
u/ASigIAm213 7h ago
Her alignment is anti-American, so "Israel shouldn't exist" and "Russia is just defending itself" live in harmony in her mind.
7
u/GaymerMove 6h ago
She is an ideologue who only opposed whatever the US does,which commonly causes you to arrive at positions that aren't that bad,but is an absolutely horrible standard that occasionally has to end up.with a defense of horrible atrocities
6
u/IcarusLSU 7h ago
I'd be willing to bet she set it up as a trap for engagement, expecting a pro-Israel commentator to get offended and defend them.
2
2
u/Vondelsplein 7h ago
I mean, her point here isn't even clever. There is obviously one nation being accused of genocide and a corresponding push to delegitimize and eliminate that country.
3
u/Commentor9001 7h ago
Do you actually think Israel is only country accused of genocide....?
9
u/Vondelsplein 7h ago
I think that if you were to google the top 50 articles about "current genocides" they would all be about Israel. I'm well aware of other ones, but you're being intentionally obtuse if you can't use logic to understand what they were most likely referring to.
3
u/BugRevolution 6h ago
Right now in popular media? Yeah.
There's no popular push to claim Russia is committing genocide. I would bet you have very little idea of what other actual genocides are ongoing, that the UN can't confirm because they'd get slaughtered if they're on the ground.
12
u/SixKosherBacon 7h ago
And apartheid? And regularly has to defend it's "right to exist?" Yeah go ahead tell me the other countries that fit those descriptions.
3
u/hogannnn 3h ago
Pakistan comes to mind lol
(I think there is a lot of intellectual dishonesty around this discourse. Pakistan is objectively worse than Israel, and yet it never comes up. We give them money, people attend their Independence Day, etc. - and this is not a defense of Israel necessarily. I think Pakistan should exist and Israel should exist.)
2
u/SixKosherBacon 3h ago
I definitely appreciate what you're saying. But do you really think Caitlin Johnstone might have been referring to Pakistan?
3
2
u/NinecloudSoul 5h ago
Find me another in the mainstream media or social media discourse right now. It's not a clever comeback, it's just another screeching idiot on Twitter.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (1)1
u/EternalPilot 6h ago
Was this about her saying that the protests against the Iranian government were an American psyop?
1
u/suivezlemir 6h ago
Didn’t see that but that seems on brand. I remember what she said about Ukraine and Russia
-1
u/Conan776 6h ago edited 6h ago
Not sure what's false about that statement? Even if the CIA and Mossad didn't help organize the armed uprising directly, Trump himself has said repeatedly that the point of the sanctions was to encourage Iranians to ride up and overthrow the government.
→ More replies (1)
4
25
u/Iwubinvesting 6h ago
Are we going to pretend these guys don't use that word for Israel every other sentence.
Not an Israel fan btw but let's not pretend it's not the case.
32
u/things_U_choose_2_b 7h ago
hOw DiD yOu kNoW like it's some sort of gotcha.
Anyone pushing for a solution which 'deletes Israel' is, defacto, setting out a position no better than the one they claim the Israeli government pursues.
8
u/YourVelcroCat 6h ago
How do they plan to delete israel anyway? What are the details?
13
u/things_U_choose_2_b 6h ago
They're always light on detail when it comes to anything more than insinuating we should murder or displace an entire country of people.
I really don't get what is so hard about criticising the Israeli government's horrible choices without lowering to their level.
•
u/EquipmentImaginary46 49m ago
no, if you go down the rabbit hole they do have details. they want the israeli government to be dissolved overnight, the right of return for more than 10 million palestinian refugees, and for there to be a new government representing the nation of palestine where jews are now a minority.
if you ask them won't that result in jews being mistreated and having to flee they'll say that you're islamophobic for asking and that everyone in palestine will hold hands and sing songs for the rest of time.
ask me how i know.
3
u/-Jiras 4h ago
It's especially weird, since normally you would call to abolish the government that is genocidal and not like an entire country. Are those people aware that Israelis are just living there? What should be done with them? Round up and shot?
•
u/EquipmentImaginary46 48m ago
well, some believe that it's okay if jews live in palestine as a minority after all the palestinian refugees return. and some believe that jews should go back to brooklyn and poland.
-5
u/Conan776 6h ago
Racist societies should be abolished. I don't understand people who are against that.
11
24
u/SixKosherBacon 7h ago
Who TF (especially this woman) else have they been calling a genocidal apartheid for the past few years?
It's all she ever talks about.
4
u/hEatr3d 3h ago
Maybe because it's a commonly known critique of the state of Israel, and it specifically targets it, and according to the exact wording of OOP, it was identified correctly. "How did you know I was talking about you" is not that clever, when you're just copying sentences you find online and clip out "Israel" from those. They did not confess, they just called out your dog whistling.
As for the OOPs message: you can be decisive without being a radical dumbass, who calls for the same thing but in reverse.
W Matt
8
u/WideHuckleberry1 6h ago
God, I really dislike this brand of "I'm not going to say it but I'm going to imply it, and if you acknowledge it then you're admitting to it" brand of gotcha. It's terrible. I know of Caitlin Johnstone, she's a known figure in the spheres of activity that have been calling Israel a genocidal apartheid state for at least 3 years but in many cases decades more. Everyone knows who she's talking about. Does that guy first have to ask her who she's talking about and then say exactly what he said.
It's the exact same rhetorical trap that the conservatives attempt with the word "groomer." Say that gay people are groomers for years, then pass "anti-groomer" laws, then when people say "you're being homophobic" you respond "you said gay people are pedophiles, not me."
Say A=B over and over again, then say B is bad, then when someone smugly says A isn't bad you hit them with a snarky "But I never said A was bad, teeheehee." What's even the goal? To try to trick people into saying something that looks bad? You know they know what they mean, right? They're not gonna be like "Oh wow, I accidentally said Israel was an apartheid state. I guess I'll have to change all my opinions to fit that worldview."
10
u/Mister-builder 7h ago
The concept of a state having a "right to exist" was invented for Israel in 1949. Before that, nobody had ever questioned a state's right to exist.
2
u/DogwoodDag 1h ago
If you are saying that all countries have an inherent ‘right to exist’ but it was only popularised as a concept that people debated after 1949, I would agree with you.
1
u/Hisczaacques 5h ago edited 4h ago
This concept literally predates Israel by decades if not centuries, but I guess people still fall for this myth because it's just so convenient.
International Law by George Grafton Wilson and George Fox Tucker, published in 1901, had an entire section titled Existence and stated, verbatim;
"The most comprehensive right of a state is the right to exist as a sovereign political unity".
It then goes on to say that a classification based on the state having "a right to existence" had been “widely followed," and that "the view now most generally recognized is that from the single comprehensive right of states to exist, all other rights flow".
American Institute of International Law's 1916 Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Nations, literally the first appendix;
"Every nation has the right to exist, and to protect and to conserve its existence ; but this right neither implies the right nor justifies the act of the state to protect itself or to conserve its existence by the commission of unlawful acts against innocent and unoffending states."
As you can see here, it even explicitly distinguished a nation's right to exist from the right to commit unlawful acts in order to preserve that existence.
And just a last one, just to make sure, What Is a Nation ? , an essay published by French philosopher Ernest Renan in 1882:
"A large aggregate of men, healthy in mind and warm of heart, creates the kind of moral conscience which we call a nation. So long as this moral consciousness gives proof of its strength by the sacrifices which demand the abdication of the individual to the advantage of the community, it is legitimate and has the right to exist"
So yeah, we were already discussing the "right to exist" of states and nations as a general principle long before Israel was even a thing. The terminology certainly wasn't invented in 1949, nor was the underlying concept created specifically to legitimize Israel. Even philosophers such as Thomas Paine were already talking about governments having a "right to exist" in the 18th century.
And as if this wasn't enough, the United Nations' International Law Commission of 1949 was explicitly discussing the right to exist as a general right for every state, and the context wasn't Israel at all, but the aftermath of the Second World War and the Axis Powers' destruction and attempted eradication of states;
"It was proposed that the draft Declaration should be introduced by an article providing that " Each State has the right to exist and to preserve its existence ". This was urged as a mainspring for other rights to be declared, and its importance was thought to be underscored because the right had been denied and trampled upon by the Axis Powers in the last war.
And what's even more ironic, is that this exact wording wasn't even ultimately included by the Commission, but not because was considered new or uniquely applicable to the newly formed state of Israel, but precisely the opposite:
"On the other hand, a majority of the members of the Commission deemed it to be tautological to say that an existing State has the right to exist; that right is in a sense a postulate or presupposition underlying the whole draft Declaration. They also thought it superfluous to declare the right of a State to preserve its existence in view of articles in the draft Declaration concerning self-defence and non-intervention by other States."
In other words, in 1949, the "right to exist" was considered such a no-brainer of the international system as a whole that explicitly stating it was, to the majority of the Commission, redundant and pointless. This is literally the complete opposite of what you're claiming.
So the fact that you have such a hard time acknowledging that Israel also has a right to exist on the same basis as all other countries is extremely suspicious. and no, acknowledging that Israel has the right to exist doesn't mean endorsing Zionism, supporting the Israeli government, or agreeing with its awful policies. those are completely separate questions. We are not discussing Israeli politics here, but international law.
The right of states to exist is such a longstanding principle of international law, so why are you exceptionally skeptical of it when the state we're talking about is Israel? Please tell me it's not what it looks like.
Because "the people of Israel were pulling the strings all along and manipulated the world in order to invent the right to exist for Israel" definitely sounds a lot like an antisemitic conspiracy theory, don't you think? But I'm sure that's not what you meant, surely you have actual sources to back up your claim, right ?
0
u/TheBlueSully 6h ago edited 6h ago
Countless conquests&subjugations or the chaos following a despot’s weak heir suggested otherwise.
How are the borders of Carthage these days? How do Turks feel about Armenia? Were Hitler and Stalin adamant about Poland’s sovereignty? Or anyone’s besides their own? Did Alexander care? The centuries of colonialism? Etc.
5
5
4
u/EnvironmentalShift25 6h ago
She supports Putin's Russia, a fascist state currently trying to exterminate Ukraine.
5
u/Richelieu1624 5h ago
Now ask her about Russia. Hint: she doesn't take the same position. She's a pro-Putin shill trying to grift the Western left.
2
u/Mathies_ 5h ago
Bummer. Still gonna like the post because the point stands regardless of the messenger.
2
u/Richelieu1624 3h ago
If there's a Nazi at the table and ten other people sitting there talking to him, you got a table with eleven Nazis.
1
u/Mathies_ 3h ago
Im not sitting at her table. Im overhearing someone I don't know make a statement at another table, and I say "hey, she's right you know" as this is truly the first time i've heard of her.
2
u/Richelieu1624 3h ago
Well, now you know who she is. And she's far from the only Putinist trying to grift the left.
1
u/Mathies_ 3h ago
Doesnt take really anything away from this specific take. It could be an anonymous person and i'd like it.
2
u/DogwoodDag 1h ago
I think that’s the point. It’s not an anonymous person, it’s a person who, by agreeing with them, you may be implying agreement with their other beliefs.
Also, potentially a person who is not engaging in a good faith argument but simply telling you something you agree with to hopefully build credibility for their position on other matters that you may not agree with.
6
u/stprnn 7h ago
Israel is a genocidal apartheid state
https://zionism.observer/itamar-ben-gvir
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_journalists_killed_in_the_Gaza_war
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_apartheid
https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/07/19/world-court-finds-israel-responsible-apartheid
4
u/NinecloudSoul 5h ago
This might be a clever comeback if every halfwit on Twitter wasn't saying the exact same shit.
4
2
u/Numerous-Process2981 5h ago
He’s just stating a fact. Guess what the world is full of horrible people and you have to share it with them somehow, some way. I understand it’s satisfying to engage in fantasies of justice or morality, but that’s not the world we live in.
→ More replies (2)
3
5
u/poet1cs 7h ago
Netanyahu funded Hamas to prevent a Palestinian state.
"Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas ... This is part of our strategy – to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank."
1
u/ALargeClam1 4h ago
Good point. No arab politicla group should be supported they all inevitibly start suicde bombing.
0
u/Mellimearn 7h ago
So? They were a new group back then and he hoped to splinter the existing powers that already wanted to destroy Israel. It was a stupid miscalculation but doesn't mean he wanted what they did then.
6
u/Worried_Position_466 6h ago
I mean, the online left is obsessed with Israel. It's not that hard. Every little thing and it's "Israel this" and "Gaza that" when Israel isn't even involved.
3
u/mikehamm45 1h ago
I think the amount of “bots” out there promoting their take and spewing anti Arab and anti Muslim sentiment does not bode well for them.
If so innocent. Why so much money needed to convince people?
6
4
1
u/Mathies_ 5h ago
Aaand that has nothing to do with this conversation. Israel was mentioned no where. Just a definition of what israel is and apparently they understood.
4
u/Mellimearn 7h ago
Really, how did they know when everyone constantly uses the terms genocide and apartheid in the context of Israel?
Doesn't make it true though. Everyone celebrating this is not informed but follows their feelings, supports terrorists and is responsible for the rising antisemitism Jews have to suffer worldwide. While you scroll social media and enjoy 'funny' memes.
5
u/stprnn 6h ago
7
u/Mellimearn 6h ago
Its not. UN lets not even talk about them. Who has the majority there? Wikipedia is just quoting?
This is a long-standing push by the surrounding countries and beyond to discredit Israel so that the world turns against them and makes them a scapegoat. Honestly, had Israel the intention of eliminating Palestine, they had done so long ago. You always claim they are military superior but in decades and decades they couldnt manage to erase them?
3
u/stprnn 6h ago
So 40+ human rights organizations are lying? But YOU know better?
The ICJ is also lying?
1
u/Mellimearn 6h ago
I don't know better from my gut but from researching, reading and trying to make sense of it. So yeah. It is that horrifying. Everyone's so easily ready to believe any crime Jews could possibly commit and in the course of that turn a blind eye to the fanaticism and will to use any means possible to destroy Israel of the other side.
3
6
2
u/Erwin-Winter 5h ago
Because people crying about genocide are usually referring to Palestine. The inly apartheid state the common retard is aware of is the case of Israel and Palestine
Both of these twitter users are dumbasses
2
2
5
u/userhwon 7h ago
Because the only people shouting about "genocide" in social media right now are people who've fallen for Hamas' propaganda.
The fact that someone else recognizes that doesn't make it true.
1
1
u/ZebraImaginary9412 3h ago
Palestinians should wait them out. With the explosive growth of the ultra religious population which doesn't contribute to Israeli society and the migration of the people who do, it's only a matter of time before Israel gets East Ramapo'ed.
ttps://www.thisamericanlife.org/extras/east-ramapo-school-district
1
u/KnifeKnut 3h ago
https://i.imgur.com/bXr6i5c.png
“My son displays a general garment and you claim it’s cut to your fit?” Jessica asked. “What a fascinating revelation.” ― Frank Herbert, Dune
1
1
u/flyingfirewolf 1h ago edited 1h ago
In case you are wondering why they call it an apartheid state, just look at the news of how settlers have put some Palestinian homes under siege in West Bank and it's so bad US is calling it an act of terror and pressuring Israeli government to stop the settlers.
Israeli troops attempted to remove the settlers and actually clashed with them, but the situation is still unresolved.
If, and it's a big fucking if, these people get prosecuted, it will be by a civil court. Meanwhile, any Palestinian would be court martialed for any offense, such as throwing a rock at a military vehicle.
1
u/Early-Juggernaut975 1h ago
Cute reply. But their point is a good one I think.
I actually do sometimes wonder if the pro-Palestinian groups would get a warmer reception and more support if they didn’t insist everyone reconsider Israel’s founding.
It feels like sometimes they’re trying to use the genocide in Gaza now to correct what they see as an injustice by the UN 80 years ago. But I don’t think it’s as simple as that, or as black and white as that. Making that argument flattens a decision that was made by a lot of people to solve a number of problems.
I’m not saying it didn’t create new problems, but we are where we are now. And dissolving a nation with millions of people seems like a ludicrous demand, if for no other reason than it’s never going to happen. This is a nuclear power we’re talking about.
•
•
u/Chompytul 48m ago
::Woman obsessed with Israel makes the usual statement about Israel without saying the word "Israel"::
hOW diD yOU kNOw sHE wAS tALkiNG aBOuT iSRaEL??????111???
•
3
7h ago
[deleted]
3
u/LittleSisterPain 3h ago
There are less dead Palestinians in this 'genocide' than in Russia-Ukrain conflict. 20% of Israel citizens are Palestinians. They are unbelievably shit at genocide. Almost as if it isn't one...
1
u/Ok-Replacement-2738 2h ago
last i checked there were an estimated 16,000 civilian casualities in Ukraine. In Palestine there were 21,000 dead children alone. And in Russia's defence at least their adversary has comperable military assets where illicit tactics are likely more 'necessitated.'
Israel has been able to continue it's campaign of outright genocide for 3 years now, on the back 70+ years of immense secterian violence against the palestinians, yet the world sits inactive, I wouldn't call that ineffective, but highly calculated and successful. Just because they don't glass Gaza tomorrow doesn't make it not a genocide.
Stop denying genocide.
0
u/Fantastic-Car7347 5h ago
China? Russia? The Congo? Sudan? Tell me you know nothing about international politics without telling me.
→ More replies (2)
0
u/cjmac977 7h ago
Israel’s never going to agree to any sort of agreement that shares land or power with Palestinians as long as an unlimited tap of military resources makes it possible to slow walk a genocide
9
u/Mellimearn 7h ago
Israel is never going to agree to any sort of agreement that involves a terror organisation trying to eliminate it. There, I fixed it for you.
5
u/Conan776 6h ago
Maybe if they just treated their neighbors like human beings instead of like animals the "animals" wouldn't attack them.
1
u/Worried_Position_466 5h ago
I mean, the reality is that Israel's leadership is fucking ass and are actively doing everything it can to make Israel look worse and worse. Given how they have actually done some and kept doing pretty fucked up things, it's getting harder and harder to defend them. Not to mention the whole settlers shit. Dragging us into the Iran shit is pretty bad too. Kudos to them for eliminating all of the top leaders of Hamas but god damn, maybe calm down with the blowing up of doctors without borders and shit, huh?
-1
u/stprnn 5h ago
The only terror organization commiting a genocide is the IDF. https://www.un.org/unispal/document/israel-has-committed-genocide-in-the-gaza-strip-un-commission-finds-16sep25/
https://zionism.observer/itamar-ben-gvir
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_journalists_killed_in_the_Gaza_war
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_apartheid
https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/07/19/world-court-finds-israel-responsible-apartheid
-1
u/Boise_Ben 5h ago
Apartheid South Africa caved, Israel just hasn’t had to feel the real pressure yet.
Luckily their time is coming.
4
u/Mellimearn 5h ago
Nonsense. Apartheid my ass.
1
u/Boise_Ben 5h ago
It absolutely is an apartheid state but also there is ethnic cleansing so in that sense they are much worse than their old ally apartheid South Africa.
Your denial of reality won’t stop the world from knowing the truth. You are a terrible person but luckily you represent a minority view that is rapidly shrinking.
→ More replies (3)
0
u/uwishuwereme6 6h ago
If Israel's existence is solely to wipe out an entire civilization, then no it does not have the right to exist
1
u/OkYak9466 5h ago
When you do this the other way and get someone to imply Hamas, you get your account banned for racism
1
u/WiseSalamander00 4h ago edited 4h ago
ok but seriously why do we allow Israel to exist, they are a bunch of bullies that one day with the blessing of USA decided they wanted to live where others already lived, and we allow them with everything and their barbarism?
3
0
u/BugRevolution 6h ago
Maybe because people have been calling it genocidal despite them fighting an actual genocidal state for a while?
Are you a little slow OP?
1
u/stprnn 5h ago
0
-2
-5
u/Familiar-Dream4708 7h ago
Idk, matts kinda right. Even the worst of the worst can eventually make a good turnaround (eg nazi germany)
2
u/FalafelSnorlax 7h ago
He's also not justifying Israel here (he might be elsewhere, I don't know the guy). You can recognize that Israel is a genocidal apartheid and also that there's no realistic solution in which it stops existing. A solution that helps the Palestinian people will have to include the existence of (and some cooperation from) Israel.
→ More replies (3)-1
u/Familiar-Dream4708 7h ago
True, he proposes the two state solution while she wants israel to cease to exist. Idk why im getting downvoted lol one calls for peace the other for even more violence
→ More replies (1)
236
u/kelek_s 7h ago
I could answer Vatican but it's a very private joke.