|
Stringent posted:This raises an interesting question. If the alternative to negotiation is an ineffective show of force, which is the better option? If memory serves, bombing the Houthis is an approach that's been tried previously and wasn't particularly effective. So which makes the US and their allies look worse, negotiating or bombing to no effect? The goal of bombing the Houthis is so that those in charge of the US can say that they're doing something when someone asks. Pure reflexive tit for tat bloodletting. In that sense, the US is meeting its goals, for now. This differs a lot from the Gulf state goals in fighting Yemen. That was mostly about killing and suppressing a hated minority as a prestige project. They failed the prestige part of the war, but had some success in the killing and suppression part.
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 12:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 19:55 |
|
|
Saladman posted:It's also worth mentioning that the Houthi shipping attacks are adding to the misery in Sudan. Egypt is also being hosed by this too. They're losing billions of dollars in canal revenue, at a time when the state is already very much struggling to pay for neccessities. And its not going to be the Egyptian military that suffers cutbacks, its going to be the poor people.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 13:02
|
|
|
Blut posted:Egypt is also being hosed by this too. They're losing billions of dollars in canal revenue, at a time when the state is already very much struggling to pay for neccessities. And its not going to be the Egyptian military that suffers cutbacks, its going to be the poor people. That seems like more of a condemnation of the Egyptian regime than the Houthis. Aren't the Houthi actions wildly popular amongst the populace in Egypt?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 13:21
|
|
|
Stringent posted:That seems like more of a condemnation of the Egyptian regime than the Houthis. Aren't the Houthi actions wildly popular amongst the populace in Egypt?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 13:28
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:Do you have a source on that? There's obviously sympathy for Gaza but I don't know if that would outweigh the fact that the Houthis are part of the Iranian/Shia axis which as far as I'm aware is not popular among any significant segment of Egyptian society. Man, that's a really good question, and unfortunately I can't read Arabic so I don't have a source that would pass muster in this forum. To be honest, it's mostly just social media posts that have been translated in CSPAM that I'm drawing that from, so I just hedged and framed it as a question. Honest answer is I don't know, so if anyone can provide more information I'm all ears.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 13:34
|
|
|
Egypt is kind of lacking in both free speech and free elections, so judging public opinion is purely vibes and guesswork. Sisi's position appears to be 'we aren't having 2 million gazans coming over the border' full stop.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 14:25
|
|
|
Stringent posted:Man, that's a really good question, and unfortunately I can't read Arabic so I don't have a source that would pass muster in this forum. To be honest, it's mostly just social media posts that have been translated in CSPAM that I'm drawing that from, so I just hedged and framed it as a question. Honest answer is I don't know, so if anyone can provide more information I'm all ears. I dunno, that's a pretty high level of evidence to overcome. I doubt anyone has a better source than that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 15:24
|
|
|
Stringent posted:That seems like more of a condemnation of the Egyptian regime than the Houthis. Aren't the Houthi actions wildly popular amongst the populace in Egypt? The vast majority of people in the Arab world will give one gently caress about the Palestinians when it comes up in conversation, but then zero fucks in their day to day life because it doesn’t actually affect them in any way, except emotionally. It’s like with the average Western European and Russia post 2022. « gently caress RuZzia »if anyone mentions it, but Russia no longer comes up on a weekly or monthly basis, and it isn’t really in an average person’s headspace in Europe within the past 10-12 months. Just like if you went to any Arab Reddit in mid October it was full of posts about gently caress Israel go Palestine, and now Gaza probably gets like one thread a month that gets five comments if you go to r/Egypt and r/Algeria. Most people care about where they’re getting their next paycheck and how inflation is going, not about some distant geopolitical event. Even when it does affect them (see: Egypt) people are more likely to blame their government rather than the Houthis, as they’ll blame the proximal factor and not the source cause. Most people are not that ideological, and most people are incredibly poorly informed - people on average are far worse informed about current events in the Arab world than in the US, which is terrifying to think about.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 16:12
|
|
|
Stringent posted:That seems like more of a condemnation of the Egyptian regime than the Houthis. Aren't the Houthi actions wildly popular amongst the populace in Egypt? Its a condemnation of both. The Egyptian regime should absolutely be prioritising funding social programs when it comes to making cuts, but it won't. But it wouldn't have to be making those cuts in the first place if not for the actions of the Houthis. For thousands of Egyptians starvation is going to be the very real consequence of Houthi actions. And as mentioned above by others, the Egyptian populace tends to not favour Shias or Iran in general. And more specifically, even more so when they're impacting the Egyptian quality of life directly like in this case. Wildly unpopular would be far more accurate. Blut fucked around with this message at 16:23 on Jan 24, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 16:21
|
|
|
It sounds like the Houthis should be armed with better weapons technology, or at least the US should stop intercepting their missiles. Then they could directly strike Israeli military targets to help stop the ethnic cleansing without having to resort to these indirect techniques of blockade or piracy which may be causing unjust suffering. That would be greatly preferable, yes? As it wouldn't be as impactful to global shipping?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 18:28
|
|
|
celadon posted:It sounds like the Houthis should be armed with better weapons technology, or at least the US should stop intercepting their missiles. Then they could directly strike Israeli military targets to help stop the ethnic cleansing without having to resort to these indirect techniques of blockade or piracy which may be causing unjust suffering. It's possible to not want innocent people to get bombed, you aren't required to pick people to get bombed, you can just say please don't!
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 19:14
|
|
|
Stringent posted:This raises an interesting question. If the alternative to negotiation is an ineffective show of force, which is the better option? If memory serves, bombing the Houthis is an approach that's been tried previously and wasn't particularly effective. So which makes the US and their allies look worse, negotiating or bombing to no effect? What exactly has been ineffective about the show of force to date? celadon posted:It sounds like the Houthis should be armed with better weapons technology, or at least the US should stop intercepting their missiles. Then they could directly strike Israeli military targets to help stop the ethnic cleansing without having to resort to these indirect techniques of blockade or piracy which may be causing unjust suffering. What's your thoughts on arming US neo-nazis or the Azov battalion? Are you in favor of arming any organization that proclaims their intention to destroy Israel and kill jews?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 19:25
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:It's possible to not want innocent people to get bombed, you aren't required to pick people to get bombed, you can just say please don't! Does this work in general? In the meantime, it would make sense to upgrade all involved parties to western munitions, which don't cause civilian casualties. Or at least, the civilian casualties actually caused by western munitions are less important than the hypothetical casualties caused by other, less advanced, munitions. Also I'm not sure why you think targeting the military sites of a nation actively ethnically cleansing a minority population would be causing 'innocent people to get bombed'.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 19:25
|
|
|
Grip it and rip it posted:What's your thoughts on arming US neo-nazis or the Azov battalion? Are you in favor of arming any organization that proclaims their intention to destroy Israel and kill jews? I do not think this would be a productive tangent
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 20:04
|
|
|
Count Roland posted:I do not think this would be a productive tangent It seems in line with the proposal of arming an organization that has been accused of pogroms and terrorism with modern weaponry so they can more effectively attack those they choose, like passing civilian tankers. I realize it may appear inflammatory, but I think its necessary to understand exactly what could be served by giving an organization like the Houthis modern weapons and what other organizations might be able to accomplish the same aims. Grip it and rip it fucked around with this message at 20:17 on Jan 24, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 20:13
|
|
|
I think the openly anti-semitic organisation that has consistently chosen to attack civilians would probably continue to attack civilians but moreso, if it were given better weapons.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 20:18
|
|
|
This is a dumb tangent but I feel it should be pointed out that azov and the Ukrainian far right, much like their ideological bedfellows in the US and other countries, actually admire Israel to a degree. They may still have antisemitic views but see Israel as an example of a successful ethnonationalist project they want to emulate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 20:19
|
|
|
adebisi lives posted:This is a dumb tangent but I feel it should be pointed out that azov and the Ukrainian far right, much like their ideological bedfellows in the US and other countries, actually admire Israel to a degree. They may still have antisemitic views but see Israel as an example of a successful ethnonationalist project they want to emulate. So that differentiates them from the Houthis in what substantial capacity?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 20:22
|
|
|
Grip it and rip it posted:It seems in line with the proposal of arming an organization that has been accused of pogroms and terrorism with modern weaponry so they can more effectively attack those they choose, like passing civilian tankers. I think that they'd probably prefer to strike military targets that are more directly responsible for the ethnic cleansing. You're basically assuming that these are mindless barbarians who only thirst for civilian blood and have no real strategy or planning otherwise. Given the massive amount of civilian casualties they've caused, would you assume the IDF would use any and all advances in weaponry to inflict more civilian casualties? Or are they reasonable and rational humans who would solely choose to attack Hamas wherever possible with improved weapons. And whats the operant difference that lets one side be bloodthirsty psychopaths and the other side be seeking a clean military resolution when the latter is responsible for killing ten thousand children in the last few months? Given that they are causing hundreds of civilian deaths per day, surely striking at the Israeli military is fully justified?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 21:07
|
|
|
i mean i'm not sure what point you're trying to make exactly. First, the Houthis already shot missiles at Israel. The Saudis shot them down. Second, their accuracy is going to be garbo at this range; the notion of cleanly striking israeli military targets is laughable. Civilian casualties are a given. Third, Israel has anti missile defense designed precisely to stop small scale missile attacks. Fourth, everyone knows they're Iranian missiles; a series of tit for tat strikes could easily escalate into a war with Hezbollah, and historically Israel has won their major wars. However, military circumstances being what they are, such a war would necessarily involve massive rocket barrages of israeli cities by Hezbollah and equally ugly Israeli retaliation, all of which basics are known by everyone involved, which is why noone actually wants to start a war. TheDeadlyShoe fucked around with this message at 21:26 on Jan 24, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 21:22
|
|
|
celadon posted:I think that they'd probably prefer to strike military targets that are more directly responsible for the ethnic cleansing. You're basically assuming that these are mindless barbarians who only thirst for civilian blood and have no real strategy or planning otherwise. Given the massive amount of civilian casualties they've caused, would you assume the IDF would use any and all advances in weaponry to inflict more civilian casualties? Or are they reasonable and rational humans who would solely choose to attack Hamas wherever possible with improved weapons. And whats the operant difference that lets one side be bloodthirsty psychopaths and the other side be seeking a clean military resolution when the latter is responsible for killing ten thousand children in the last few months? You're the only person who seems to think adding more weapons to this region is somehow going to improve things. I'd just like to understand your metric for how you would choose to distribute the weapons you suggest adding. It doesn't appear you have any metric other than "they said they would kill the jews" which seems like a fantastically bad metric to adopt. I'm afraid what you wrote above doesn't really clarify anything. You want to stop the IDF? What exactly have the Houthis done to stop the IDF at any point in their existence? Edit: Also drop the suggestions that I'm some kind of bigot or whatever you were inferring. I just think you have a terrible idea you haven't put much thought into. Grip it and rip it fucked around with this message at 21:44 on Jan 24, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 21:25
|
|
|
I thought people had been arguing for pages about how bad the Houthis were for attacking civilian targets. Them being able to attack military targets would therefore be preferable. Unless its bad to attack IDF military targets as well? And you shouldn't conflate the state of Israel with the Jewish people, since I've only been referring to the IDF or Israel itself. Also I don't really understand the profound importance placed on hypothetical casualties, when every day that this goes on hundreds of civilians will die and the ethnic cleansing of the Gaza Strip further progresses. You'd have to sink a dozen container ships, killing everyone aboard, to equal a single day of deaths for the Palestinian people. And if its unjust to attempt to strike military bases because they are far away and you might miss, you are saying that any attempt to stop the IDF from ethnically cleansing the Gaza Strip is unethical, as it would cause too many casualties, and thats pretty insane. Any form of military action is going to have a substantial civilian casualty component to it, see every form of military action taken in history so far. Legitimately, how would you force Israels hand? Economic harm to civilians is also apparently a bridge too far. Or is there a killcount where things open up and you can start applying pressure?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 21:44
|
|
|
So you think a broader military confrontation between Israel and the Houthis, and presumably Iran and other forces in the region, is somehow going to save civilian lives?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 21:45
|
|
|
celadon posted:And you shouldn't conflate the state of Israel with the Jewish people, since I've only been referring to the IDF or Israel itself. I agree, and weapons should not be given to armies which refuse to make this distinction - like the Houthis, who use weapons to conduct repression against the religious minorities that they identify as responsible for Israeli crimes or otherwise contemptible, like Jews (until they were all driven out except the 1 prisoner) and Bahai (ongoing). This is not hypothetical but an actual reality that many Yemenis have to deal with, and it shouldn't be exacerbated by empowering the state that imprisons, disappears, or exiles them for being the wrong religion. We shouldn't be giving arms or money to the Houthis for the same reason we shouldn't be giving arms or money to Israel - their budget of weapons and money goes toward attacking civilians within their zone of control for having the wrong ethnic or religious identity. Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 22:16 on Jan 24, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 22:09
|
|
|
Grip it and rip it posted:So you think a broader military confrontation between Israel and the Houthis, and presumably Iran and other forces in the region, is somehow going to save civilian lives? Depending on the degree Israel's planning on taking this to completion, potentially. I don't think its a particularly complicated concept, wars are often started because a bad thing has a certain likelihood of happening, the cost of intervention is calculated, and the odds that the cost of war is worth it in human lives and immiseration is such that a war starts. Would the USA be better at stopping an ethnic cleansing, maybe, though we are pretty good at civilian casualties. If the most fit state isn't going to do it though, presumably you could have a different state wage a less optimal war with higher costs that still ends up being worth it. I don't think its a particularly good position to hold that you'd like the ethnic cleansing to stop, but not if anyone outside Gaza has to die for it. Nor is it that you think certain states would be justified in military action, but only the states that will never ever do so. Regardless, the death count can only rise, Gaza's infrastructure can only get more degraded, and the degree of justification for intervention will just go up. Civilized Fishbot posted:I agree, and weapons should not be given to armies which refuse to make this distinction - like the Houthis, who use weapons to conduct repression against the religious minorities that they identify as responsible for Israeli crimes or otherwise contemptible, like Jews (until they were all driven out except the 1 prisoner) and Bahai (ongoing). This is not hypothetical but an actual reality that many Yemenis have to deal with, and it shouldn't be exacerbated by empowering the state that imprisons, disappears, or exiles them for being the wrong religion. Whats the closest state that has a good enough civil rights record / system of government that could be justifiably supported in a war/military action against Israel? Like one that could force project sufficiently in order to end the ethnic cleansing?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 22:24
|
|
|
celadon posted:Whats the closest state that has a good enough civil rights record / system of government that could be justifiably supported in a war/military action against Israel? Like one that could force project sufficiently in order to end the ethnic cleansing? Is there an answer to this question that would mean that we should arm the state that uses its arms to conduct programs of detainment or forced removal against the religions it proclaims to be untermenschen? I would support arming any state that credibly pledges to: 1) use those arms to stop the Israeli ethnic cleansing campaign and 2) not engage in any campaign of ethnic cleansing or violent religious homogenization. Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 22:41 on Jan 24, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 22:33
|
|
|
celadon posted:Depending on the degree Israel's planning on taking this to completion, potentially. I don't think its a particularly complicated concept. Why wouldn't Israel simply complete it's bombing campaign against gaza, leveling every refugee camp and building in the area, before addressing it's external military threats? How could anyone prevent them from using Nuclear weapons if the conflict became a war of survival? Civilized Fishbot posted:Is there an answer to this question that would mean that we should arm the state that uses its arms to conduct programs of detainment or forced removal against the religions it proclaims to be untermenschen? Do you have anyone in mind? I'm not sure there are very many nations on the planet that would fit this bill and also have any interest in actually performing these duties. Grip it and rip it fucked around with this message at 22:46 on Jan 24, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 22:40
|
|
|
Grip it and rip it posted:Do you have anyone in mind? I'm not sure there are very many nations on the planet that would fit this bill and also have any interest in actually performing these duties. If the US underwent such an incredible revolution in its diplomatic approach that it was now arming states against Israel instead of protecting Israel, then you'd have more interested parties, because the risk-reward calculus of attacking Israel would be completely inverted. I don't have a particular country "in mind" because it's such a wild what-if scenario that visualizing geopolitics afterward is very difficult, especially for me, a dumb American. I am pretty sure that Jordan and Lebanon are states that don't violently attack their citizens for belonging to the wrong religion and which would align with the US in this new US-turns-on-Israel world order. What I do know is that I don't want my tax dollars to go toward arming any state that uses its arms to imprison, exile, or simply kill people for being the wrong ethnicity or religion - which is why I'm desperate for the US to stop arming Israel and do not like the fantasy of the US arming the Houthi state. Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 23:02 on Jan 24, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 22:53
|
|
|
Civilized Fishbot posted:Is there an answer to this question that would mean that we should arm the state that uses its arms to conduct programs of detainment or forced removal against the religions it proclaims to be untermenschen? Essentially you want the most unimpeachable possible candidate for any sort of action to minimize the claims that it was solely acting out of antisemitism or a deep hatred of the progressive values of Israel or out of pure malice and desire to cause carnage. Grip it and rip it posted:Why wouldn't Israel simply complete it's bombing campaign against gaza, leveling every refugee camp and building in the area, before addressing it's external military threats? How could anyone prevent them from using Nuclear weapons if the conflict became a war of survival? I guess they could but that seems pretty unwise, you'd want to be using your military capacity to defend yourself and prioritizing the bombing of a captive population during an invasion presumably to help that captive population would be extremely looked down upon. It implies that you prioritize the destruction of those people above the survival of your own state.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 23:06
|
|
|
celadon posted:What oh no, just that I've frequently seen the lack of civil rights of Middle Eastern countries used as an arguments supporting unjust action against them, as a rhetorical device. I get that. I completely disagree with bombing/helping the Saudis bomb Yemen. The fact that the Houthi state is right-wing authoritarian is no justification for it, because the bombing exclusively compounds the enormous suffering of the people living/dying there and entrenches the conditions in which right-wing authoritarianism thrives. But the Houthi state being right-wing authoritarian is a good reason not to arm it, because that would facilitate right-wing authoritarian violence against innocent people. The same reason the US should not be arming the Israeli state. Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 23:27 on Jan 24, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 23:12
|
|
|
celadon posted:What oh no, just that I've frequently seen the lack of civil rights of Middle Eastern countries used as an arguments supporting unjust action against them, as a rhetorical device. Like justifying actions of the West against countries because of their poor human rights records, though those records wouldn't be relevant to the reason for Western abuses. People saying not to support Palestine in the current war because they had a homophobic society sort of thing. Additionally, if you had two otherwise equally capable countries of pressuring Israel, and one was on relatively neutral or at least tolerant terms and one was like, Israel must be immediately obliterated, then obviously it'd be better for the former to be pulling off the operation, for everyone. No it would effectively end the entire purpose of the invasion, because there is nobody to rescue. Further it would take care of a potential hostile force on your immediate border who has demonstrated the capacity, interest, and ability to strike your own forces and civilian targets. Also if you're at the point where your country is being invaded to stop a genocide, you're likely in a fight for your life, or at the very least your freedom. I don't expect that the current government of Israel would meet those circumstances by meekly laying down their arms. They have previously attacked their neighbors when they thought that there was a credible possibility of war breaking out on their border, as recently as this year. All of this is to say that the idea of escalating to de-escalate in this situation seems far-fetched. Hair-brained even. Which is likely the reason why most of Israel's neighbors aren't really doing much more than condemning their actions. Further escalation really wouldn't serve anybody's interests, least of all the Palestinians. In a very real sense they are hostages. Grip it and rip it fucked around with this message at 23:20 on Jan 24, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2024 23:13
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:It's possible to not want innocent people to get bombed, you aren't required to pick people to get bombed, you can just say please don't! Uh celadon specifically suggested giving them the means to attack israeli military targets instead of ships, and if you think the israeli military qualifies as "innocent people" I don't know what you're smoking.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2024 07:34
|
|
|
So, interesting couple of events: Yemen engaged in a 2 hour battle with US warships attempting to escort merchant ships carrying US military supplies, claim to have struck one. https://twitter.com/army21ye/status/1750255554432250323 US confirms that missiles were fired, claim that they were all intercepted or missed. They still turned around and left anyways though, so the military supplies were not delivered & Maersk is suspending activity in the area (again.) quote:Maersk said in a statement: “En route, both ships reported seeing explosions close by and the US navy accompaniment also intercepted multiple projectiles. The crew, ship and cargo are safe and unharmed. The US navy has turned both ships around and is escorting them back to the Gulf of Aden.” QIRS is reporting that segments of Yemeni forces have started aiding the Houthis: quote:The OADs and the facilities used to manufacture and assemble them are spread across northwest Yemen. Most of these facilities are either underground or located in dense urban areas. Even with a continued air campaign against them, the Houthis are in a position to keep menacing international shipping with OADs and mines for months if not years. Having been thoroughly deterred by the strikes on Yemen, Secretary General of the Sayyid al-Shuhada Brigades in Iraq is proposing that they also participate in the blockade, target Israeli ports for the duration of the Gaza siege. https://twitter.com/aboalaa_alwalae/status/1749918306973143402 Presumably US weaponry is used to tactically strike the bottom of a hill: https://twitter.com/upholdreality/status/1749742824361239003 Neurolimal fucked around with this message at 08:21 on Jan 25, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2024 08:17
|
|
|
Tias posted:Uh celadon specifically suggested giving them the means to attack israeli military targets instead of ships, and if you think the israeli military qualifies as "innocent people" I don't know what you're smoking.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2024 08:26
|
|
|
Not to mention that these efforts have produced no tangible results for the Palestinians. They continue to be killed with impunity by the IDF while the Houthis attack civilian shipping "in their name". The whole thing is a distraction that actively harms communities in the area and whose only product has been increased US bombing in the region and a slight increase in the cost of goods being shipped around Africa instead of through the Red Sea.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2024 19:10
|
|
|
I don't really have any skin in the game, but I think it's pretty obvious people are cheering on the Houthis out of impotent anguish. In any sane world the Israeli war criminals would get their poo poo rocked by sanctions, boycotts and international condemnation, but that's not the one we live in and folks cope accordingly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 12:47
|
|
|
Tias posted:I don't really have any skin in the game, but I think it's pretty obvious people are cheering on the Houthis out of impotent anguish. In any sane world the Israeli war criminals would get their poo poo rocked by sanctions, boycotts and international condemnation, but that's not the one we live in and folks cope accordingly. Since it’s very clear that no one is going to step in to stop the Israelis turning all of Gaza into a parking lot
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 14:03
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Pretty much yeah. Questionable timing of this post since the icj just rolled overwhelmingly in favor of SA's case for Palestine! https://twitter.com/jeremyscahill/status/1750851378417696921
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 14:11
|
|
|
The ICJ has no enforcement power.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 14:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 19:55 |
|
|
I don't think you can say they ruled "overwhelmingly in favor" of SA's case given that they rejected SA's call for a ceasefire. Just telling Israel to take measures to avoid genocide is far weaker than a concrete instruction to stop the war.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 14:20
|
|