|
Irony Be My Shield posted: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. Bruh I'm not sure what else to call ruling 15-2 and 16-1 on 4 orders
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 14:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 17:48 |
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:Bruh I'm not sure what else to call ruling 15-2 and 16-1 on 4 orders Overwhelming thoughts and prayers
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 15:04
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:Bruh I'm not sure what else to call ruling 15-2 and 16-1 on 4 orders Overwhelmingly agree with Joe Biden's opinion in the SA case for Palestine?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 15:38
|
|
|
like to comply with the order they need to cease all aggressive activities vs palestine https://www.washingtonpost.com/documents/433cf258-6e70-43dc-afc3-46c2889d0ae9.pdf?itid=lk_inline_manual_2 quote:78. The Court considers that, with regard to the situation described above, Israel must, in im honestly at a loss to conclude how this was anything but a huge defeat for israel on the international stage! To proclaim the belief that nothing matters because they didn't call for an explicit ceasefire reeks of rank doomerism A big flaming stink fucked around with this message at 15:53 on Jan 26, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 15:40
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:like to comply with the order they need to cease all aggressive activities vs palestine This is the same thing that the US has been pushing as well. Hell, the ICJ haven't even ruled on if Israel is committing a genocide: https://www.wionews.com/world/watch-south-african-president-cyril-ramaphosa-breaks-into-celebration-as-icj-rules-against-israel-684014 I guess it's good to add additional pressure to Israel, but I don't see how this will change anything. Israel will just continue to say things such as "we thought those civilians were Hamas soldiers" and "we had to destroy Hamas infrastructure that they hid in civilian infrastructure".
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 15:56
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:like to comply with the order they need to cease all aggressive activities vs palestine quote:At the end of its Request, South Africa asked the Court to indicate the following provisional The language is very precise here, and it's missing from the decision. It is obviously a blow to Israel's reputation, which is good even if Israel doesn't seem to care much about its own reputation anymore, as some Western countries do. There are also steps that Israel is now required to take not to have things move beyond provisional measures, however, saying that the court ordered Israel to suspend its military operation altogether is a misinterpretation, in my opinion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 16:10
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:like to comply with the order they need to cease all aggressive activities vs palestine
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 16:20
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:like to comply with the order they need to cease all aggressive activities vs palestine It is absolutely a (provisional) win, but it is not the case that Israel needs to cease all aggressive activities in Palestine to comply with this ruling, the ICJ explicitly rejected that. Our team specifically asked for that and the ICJ said no. Note here: 78. The Court considers that, with regard to the situation described above, Israel must, in accordance with its obligations under the Genocide Convention, in relation to Palestinians in Gaza, take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article II of this Convention, in particular: (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; and (d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group. The Court recalls that these acts fall within the scope of Article II of the Convention when they are committed with the intent to destroy in whole or in part a group as such (see paragraph 44 above). The Court further considers that Israel must ensure with immediate effect that its military forces do not commit any of the above-described acts. It only bars acts that are done with intent to commit genocide. Israel is free to continue killing as long as they're doing it to "defend themselves from terrorists" or whatever bullshit excuse they have for any given attack. That being said, I think it paves the way for a lot more political pressure by the international community on Israel to reduce it's attacks and institute stricter targeting rules, and requires allowing humanitarian relief. Maybe even pressure to commit to a ceasefire, though Israel might be insulated from that for a time since they can claim they offered one and Hamas said no. Internally, to comply the Israeli government will have to crack down on all these far right types going to the media and saying they're going to annihilate the Palestinians. I guess the gov. would need to publicly reprimand them and put out messaging of that not being the policy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 16:20
|
|
|
ICJ wasn't going to rule that Israel has to stop the war, but that was never really on the table, too much of an outreach for a provisional ruling. South Africa won out on basically everything else; even the judge Israel provided ruled in favor. It's possible (even likely) Israel ignores the provisions, but it would be pretty unwise to thumb your nose at the ICJ while they're investigating you for genocide. This is why Netanyahu ordered government ministers not to reply until the government crafts a response (he's been ignored so far.) A number of countries have clauses that theoretically should apply to the current situation WRT suspending aid/trade with countries plausibly committing genocide. Expect a bunch of rule abolishing. Yemen's argument that they are acting in accordance to the Genocide Convention has gained strength, and it looks a bit more awkward that America is bombing random dirt hills in opposition. Obviously their argument would be that the Houthis are being opportunistic and not in support of Palestine, although that's undercut as Chinese & Russian ships appear to write in their transponders "NO ISRAELIS" or "NOT TO ISRAEL" and pass by unmolested. Israel's options at this point are to either halt any proof of genocide before the final ruling, or accelerate the genocide until its completion is a historical fact. They could hope their allied states sabotage the final ruling, but they've just failed to do so just now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 16:25
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Chinese & Russian ships appear to write in their transponders "NO ISRAELIS" or "NOT TO ISRAEL" and pass by unmolested. They've been doing that? EDIT: https://maritime-executive.com/article/china-and-russia-get-a-free-pass-through-houthis-red-sea-blockade quote:Chinese shipping interests appear to be aware of this exception. Many China-linked ships have been broadcasting "All Chinese" or "Chinese Ship" as their AIS "destination" during transits through the Red Sea. Likewise, some ships with Russian cargoes have been broadcasting some variant of "Vessel No Contact Israel." Interesting. Eric Cantonese fucked around with this message at 16:36 on Jan 26, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 16:33
|
|
|
I'm confused by your claim of Neurolimal posted:South Africa won out on basically everything else; even the judge Israel provided ruled in favor. Wasn't the main (or entire) point of South Africa's case that Israel was committing genocide? Which the ICJ has not made a ruling on [yet?]. I'm trying to find the entire document that South Africa submitted to the ICJ in December, but having a hard time (if anyone has a link, I'd appreciate it!). However, numerous news articles I've read (e.g. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/dec/29/south-africa-accuses-israel-of-committing-genocide-in-gaza) seems to summarize it as "Israel are committing genocide, here are the reasons [...]". In addition for calling for an immediate ceasefire of course, which you already addressed*. Based on this, I'm confused on how South Africa "won out on basically everything else". *Although, TBH, I'm confused on your assumption on why ICJ wouldn't rule that. It's not unheard of for them to give a ceasefire/halt invasion rulings, such as the one they gave to Russia to stop their invasion a couple years ago.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 16:36
|
|
|
Kalit posted:Based on this, I'm confused on how South Africa "won out on basically everything else". This was a provisional ruling on if it was plausible that Israel is committing a genocide; the court ruled that it was plausible. You could mentally amend "within the scope of the preliminary ruling" to the end of my sentence if you'd like.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 16:40
|
|
|
Kalit posted:I'm confused by your claim of Not exactly, this stage is basically the ICJ equivalent of saying South Africa's case survives a motion to dismiss and the provisional rulings are injunctions to prevent further irreparable harm until the merits of the case can be decided. Edit: which is to say South Africa won the day's argument pretty handily, but the relief sought wasn't entirely granted. Here's South Africa's application: https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/192/192-20231228-app-01-00-en.pdf Something worth noting, though-- Israel argued that the case should be determined under IHL not the Genocide Convention and that got rejected so the case proceeds on those grounds. Dopilsya fucked around with this message at 16:55 on Jan 26, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 16:51
|
|
|
Dopilsya posted:Not exactly, this stage is basically the ICJ equivalent of saying South Africa's case survives a motion to dismiss and the provisional rulings are injunctions to prevent further irreparable harm until the merits of the case can be decided. Edit: which is to say South Africa won the day's argument pretty handily, but the relief sought wasn't entirely granted. Oh nice, thanks for the link! I'll read through it later. Although, I think I disagree that South Africa's motion not being dismissed and their request of an immediate ceasefire being denied as "they won", but ah well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 17:00
|
|
|
Kalit posted:Oh nice, thanks for the link! I'll read through it later. Well, there'd you'd be wrong. The ruling today was very much a victory for the Palestinian people. It's going to take time to bear fruit, but today was a victory for Palestine.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 17:15
|
|
|
Stringent posted:Well, there'd you'd be wrong. The ruling today was very much a victory for the Palestinian people. It's going to take time to bear fruit, but today was a victory for Palestine. I'm talking about this claim: Neurolimal posted:South Africa won out on basically everything else; even the judge Israel provided ruled in favor. This ICJ ruling is definitely better than nothing for Palestine. But it could have, and should have, been a more strict ruling that can't be easily followed by Israel by simply claiming stuff like: Kalit posted:"we thought those civilians were Hamas soldiers" and "we had to destroy Hamas infrastructure that they hid in civilian infrastructure".
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 17:18
|
|
|
Kalit posted:I'm talking about this claim: they cant simply proceed as they have been, those concerns are no excuse for committing actions that could result in genocide, thats why they have to report in a month about what they're doing to stop genocidal actions
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 17:21
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:they cant simply proceed as they have been, those concerns are no excuse for committing actions that could result in genocide, thats why they have to report in a month about what they're doing to stop genocidal actions And hold the people that have been calling for genocide to account. A portion of the ruling that has been very ignored.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 17:23
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:they cant simply proceed as they have been, those concerns are no excuse for committing actions that could result in genocide, thats why they have to report in a month about what they're doing to stop genocidal actions The report doesn't seem to be about what they've changed? The ICJ hasn't ruled that Israel has been committing genocidal actions, so I'm not sure why you're trying to claim that the report requires them to say what they're doing to stop genocidal actions. As far as what the report requires, as you noted above, it is: quote:82. Regarding the provisional measure requested by South Africa that Israel must submit a And the orders to follow specifically includes this: quote:The Court recalls that these acts fall within the scope of Article II of the Convention when they are committed with the intent to destroy in whole or in part a group as such (see paragraph 44 above) Which can easily be covered by claiming any Palestinian civilians killed were collateral damage. Or, at least my non-lawyer brain thinks that would still be following the ICJ orders. Kalit fucked around with this message at 17:33 on Jan 26, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 17:31
|
|
|
Kalit posted:The report doesn't seem to be about what they've changed? The ICJ hasn't ruled that Israel has been committing genocidal actions, so I'm not sure why you're trying to claim that the report requires them to say what they're doing to stop genocidal actions. While you're correct that the Israelis can claim it's jist normal collateral damage, keep in mind that's covered by ihl. The icj rejected that framing and instead this case is proceeding under the genocide convention which I read as recognizing that those claims should be approached with a lot of skepticism. You're right that people shouldnt overstate the effect of this ruling (and I still think it's going to be an uphill battle), but imo it's still a big win even if it's still not enough.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 19:56
|
|
|
Dopilsya posted:You're right that people shouldnt overstate the effect of this ruling (and I still think it's going to be an uphill battle), but imo it's still a big win even if it's still not enough. I imagine it'll be about as impactful as the ICJ order for Russia to halt the invasion of Ukraine.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 22:30
|
|
|
Grip it and rip it posted: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. This finger wagging at the Houthis is really bizarre in the context. Unless Palestinian groups are condemning them, it's hard to take seriously these concerns from people presumably from countries that are actively helping Israel complete it's genocide trying to condemn a quasi-state group that is doing something. I do not really give a poo poo about shipping costs in the contexts of tens of thousands of corpses while millions of people are potentially starving to death or being blown up, and I think acting like this is some important concern is just geopolitical version of "Look I support [x] oppressed minority, but only as long as they protest the right way!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 23:20
|
|
|
SMEGMA_MAIL posted:This finger wagging at the Houthis is really bizarre in the context. Unless Palestinian groups are condemning them, it's hard to take seriously these concerns from people presumably from countries that are actively helping Israel complete it's genocide trying to condemn a quasi-state group that is doing something. I do not really give a poo poo about shipping costs in the contexts of tens of thousands of corpses while millions of people are potentially starving to death or being blown up, and I think acting like this is some important concern is just geopolitical version of "Look I support [x] oppressed minority, but only as long as they protest the right way!" Have you read any of the UN reports about the atrocities committed by the Houthis? celadon" post="537428966 posted:Palestinians are valued so little by the west that a single purely hypothetical nonpalestinian death weighs far more heavily than hundreds of actual daily Palestinian deaths. If airstrikes stopped the gaza war at the cost of the life of single dog aboard a cargo ship, the Houthis would be attacked for their barbarism and bloodlust. The dogs story would get turned into a made for tv movie. Palestinian orphans would be shown pictures of the dog and asked to condemn the Houthis. You realize you're cheerleading an organization that's accused of engaging in systematic sexual abuse of women within their territories of control, right? Does that rate on the same level as the cargo ship dog you referenced earlier? They have kidnapped and tortured hundreds of people, including women and children, including to death? Harass and abuse religious minorities? Here is a quote from the UNSC Panel of Experts from 2022: "The POE reported in January that the “Houthi policy of sexual violence and repression against politically active and professional women continued.” The POE reported that former women detainees were particularly vulnerable in Houthi-controlled areas because of the assumption that they were subjected to sexual violence while in detention, carrying an associated stigma. The POE documented a case of a woman detainee forced to have sex with multiple men at Houthi detention centers, in preparation for future employment as a prostitute used to gather information for Houthi security services. The POE also reported investigation of cases of sexual violence where the Houthis women security wing (Zainabiyath) was directly involved in arrests, detention, or violence against women detainees." If you wanna hand it to em, I guess that's your prerogative. I find it nauseating. Grip it and rip it fucked around with this message at 01:31 on Jan 27, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 23:38
|
|
|
SMEGMA_MAIL posted:This finger wagging at the Houthis is really bizarre in the context. Unless Palestinian groups are condemning them, it's hard to take seriously these concerns from people presumably from countries that are actively helping Israel complete it's genocide trying to condemn a quasi-state group that is doing something. I do not really give a poo poo about shipping costs in the contexts of tens of thousands of corpses while millions of people are potentially starving to death or being blown up, and I think acting like this is some important concern is just geopolitical version of "Look I support [x] oppressed minority, but only as long as they protest the right way!" Palestinians are valued so little by the west that a single purely hypothetical nonpalestinian death weighs far more heavily than hundreds of actual daily Palestinian deaths. If airstrikes stopped the gaza war at the cost of the life of single dog aboard a cargo ship, the Houthis would be attacked for their barbarism and bloodlust. The dogs story would get turned into a made for tv movie. Palestinian orphans would be shown pictures of the dog and asked to condemn the Houthis.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 23:40
|
|
|
Grip it and rip it posted: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. i've spent several posts going over this in tedious detail a couple of pages ago but i'm happy to relitigate if it's necessary
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2024 23:45
|
|
|
Grip it and rip it posted:Have you read any of the UN reports about the atrocities committed by the Houthis? This all has nothing to do with the conflict between the Houthis vs the Gulf States, Israel, and the United States, it is a whataboutism in the context of the United States supporting a genocide. Hey, we could talk about what the US and it's proxies did to Yemen too! Why isn't that relevant? I have yet to see Palestinian groups condemn the Houthis, but I've so far seen the talking point of "The Houthis Don't Really Care About Gaza" in articles and arguments only from Israelis and Americans who, if they even acknowledge the reality of Gaza, seem to not feel terribly responsible or concerned about it. Why not defer to the Palestinians? Why do you know best? Butter Activities fucked around with this message at 02:06 on Jan 27, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2024 01:55
|
|
|
That someone is carrying out a brutal bombing campaign against the Palestinians does not actually grant Palestinians a free pass to legitimize other brutality. It's weird that you apparently think it does.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2024 02:08
|
|
|
SMEGMA_MAIL posted:I have yet to see Palestinian groups condemn the Houthis, but I've so far seen the talking point of "The Houthis Don't Really Care About Gaza" in articles and arguments only from Israelis and Americans who, if they even acknowledge the reality of Gaza, seem to not feel terribly responsible or concerned about it. Why not defer to the Palestinians? Why do you know best?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2024 02:10
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:That someone is carrying out a brutal bombing campaign against the Palestinians does not actually grant Palestinians a free pass to legitimize other brutality. It's weird that you apparently think it does. Lets say we are not talking about the Houthis. Can you clarify, hypothetically, what military actions any group or state is morally justified to do to prevent or slow the mass slaughter and displacement of about 2 million people?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2024 02:17
|
|
|
SMEGMA_MAIL posted:Can you clarify, hypothetically, what military actions any group or state is morally justified to do to prevent or slow the mass slaughter and displacement of about 2 million people? Actions that aren't bombing innocent people. It's incredible how easy and straightforward 'don't bomb innocent people' is as a moral guideline.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2024 02:18
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:Actions that aren't bombing innocent people. Interesting. How do you feel the actions and morality of the Houthis weigh compared to the current US bombing campaign of Yemen, or the previous years of US and Gulf States bombing campaigns and enforced famine in Yemen? Butter Activities fucked around with this message at 02:41 on Jan 27, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2024 02:23
|
|
|
That's a stupid game. How do you feel about the actions and morality of the Houthis disrupting food shipments to Sudan? How many people would it be acceptable for the Houthis to kill so long as they claimed they were doing in the name of Palestine? I could thirst for blood and just love killing people and it wouldn't matter. Either the random terror attacks are wrong or they are not. If you're fine with the Houthis bombing innocent people, own it. Eric Cantonese posted:They've been doing that? darkly amusing you can skate on by the Genocide Blockade by flagging yourself Chinese.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2024 02:34
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:That's a stupid game. How do you feel about the actions and morality of the Americans and their allies disrupting food shipments to Yemen? How many people would it be acceptable for the Americans to kill so long as they claimed they were doing in the name of freedom of the seas? I could thirst for blood and just love killing people and it wouldn't matter. Either the random airstrikes are wrong or they are not. TheDeadlyShoe posted:That's a stupid game. How do you feel about the actions and morality of the Houthis disrupting food shipments to Sudan? How many people would it be acceptable for the Houthis to kill so long as they claimed they were doing in the name of Palestine? I could thirst for blood and just love killing people and it wouldn't matter. Either the random terror attacks are wrong or they are not. Causing famines is never justified in my opinion, and every country has an obligation to prevent those from happening. How do you feel about the edited statement compared to your post, and please answer if you believe the current US bombing campaign is morally justified, and if the previous Gulf State campaign against Yemen was justified? And I guess, just to make sure, how would you characterize what the IDF is doing in Gaza? This is all seems really confusing if your principle truly is that any action that may result in the death of innocent people is never okay, even if it prevents the killing of millions of other innocent people. Unless you hold the relative value of human lives across different ethnic groups to be orders of magnitude different, it seems odd to focus on Yemen in this context. You refused to answer, but it seems that you are quite okay with the United States actually killing at least a few innocent people in Yemen to prevent Yemen from potentially killing a person, and to ensure that Israel may continue to kill many innocent people. Butter Activities fucked around with this message at 02:52 on Jan 27, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2024 02:39
|
|
|
SMEGMA_MAIL posted:This all has nothing to do with the conflict between the Houthis vs the Gulf States, Israel, and the United States, it is a whataboutism in the context of the United States supporting a genocide. Hey, we could talk about what the US and it's proxies did to Yemen too! Why isn't that relevant? People in this thread are questioning the value of arming the Houthis with modern weaponry, and you have previously suggested that any criticism of the Houthis is the product of some kind of anti-muslim or anti-arab bias. My point is that just because they are acting in a way that is notionally aligned with what most people in this thread would like (ending the war in Gaza) doesn't mean you have to pretend they're some kind of great organization. It's loving weird and gross that so many people on this forum are willing to completely ignore the well documented history of oppression and violence that the Houthi's have undertaken against their own people just because they have made some gestures in solidarity with Palestine. Nobody has said the Gulf states are without blame for their conduct with respect to the recent war in Yemen. In fact most posters have discussed how horrific their behavior is. It's only a very specific subset of weirdos on this site who seem to think that you can brush aside a history of horrific violence when it becomes inconvenient to acknowledge. It's hardly whataboutism to bring up the very recent conduct of an organization when people are questioning whether giving them more sophisticated weaponry is a good idea. If you think the price of liberating Gaza is subjecting the Yemeni people to rule by the Houthis just say so. Quit acting like they're some kind of particularly moral actor in the region. By your own admission their conduct places them alongside the worst of the worst of the gulf states, which places them in a pretty bad position overall. Condemnation by Palestinian organizations isn't the only metric that matters. Pretending that it is is also bizarre. The world is a complex place with varying shades of gray. There is little reason to reduce everything to a "right" and "wrong" or good/bad dichotomy. Just because the Houthi's haven't reaped as much havoc as the United States has in the Middle East doesn't make the harm they're causing there any less significant or notable. Very real people are being killed and brutalized by the Hothis for a variety of deplorable reasons. If you think the scope and scale of that damage isn't worth noting then I would suggest that you're simply wrong. Grip it and rip it fucked around with this message at 05:31 on Jan 27, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2024 05:25
|
|
|
You guys keep bringing up the argument in GiP and incredibly cynical bullshit you guys pulled to get me banned because I called out what absolutely was disgusting bigotry and self-serving excuses on your complicity in a genocide, and then here you keep referring to it and then report me for “posting about posters” when I respond. Not falling for it this time.
Butter Activities fucked around with this message at 07:27 on Jan 27, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2024 07:21
|
|
|
Since this seems like it's going to be a running theme for all discussions on Yemen, I feel like sharing these two posts for kicksNeurolimal posted:This is a lesson that has largely been suppressed within western thought (and it doesn't help that it's not something that you can just argue in a minute, socially off-hand, without coming off as a monster), but if you believe that your cause is worthwhile, then yes. You can in fact justify the violence, to an extent; If the cause is greater than the violence, and if the violence is necessary to the cause. Similar to how one person screaming epithets during a rally doesn't make the rally unjust. In relative terms it's fairly modern logic to assess the casualties first, then use that to determine how just a cause is, rather than the other way around (The Ends Don't Justify The Means), and it's not a logic that our actual world leaders use. Israel murdering vast swathes of Palestinians doesn't give them pause because they see it as acceptable for their cause (retaining a rabid dog to threaten nearby ME countries), they don't work backwards from "Israel is murdering vast swathes of Palestinians, and so we should not support them". It's sociopathic, and deeply traumatizing, but it is the reality that girds successful resistance; "Political power comes from the barrel of a gun". Neurolimal posted:There's an argument to be had that the targeting of civilians by an irregular group has a political benefit in conveying to the civilians that they cannot live within a bubble detached from the oppressed. It's an argument that's come up a mind-numbing amount of times within this very thread, in fact. The people supportive of Yemen's actions are going to be of the opinion that a couple imperiled ship crews are worth the added pressure against a genocide against 2 million people, even if the Yemeni in question are terrible. I don't think there's a good silver bullet to this disagreement, you either think the ends justify the means or the means justify the ends. There's been a second argument on efficacy, with the position that the Houthi aren't actually causing any damage or making any impact (and should therefore stop). Recent developments seem to suggest otherwise; a firefight with US warships that turns a ship carrying US military supplies around, a boat that was punched clean through, another that is as of this post still on fire, entire nations signaling that they aren't sailing to Israel...It seems Yemen is punching several divisions above its weight class.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2024 08:44
|
|
|
How many hundreds of civilians are the Houthis killing? It must be at least several hundred people getting mulched per day , easily, for them to command as much spilled ink as they do. Like of all the entities involved in the region, they surely must be responsible for the vast majority of civilian casualties right? Like if I was a simple folk who used this thread to inform themself, that’d be patently obvious. Personally I live in the United States which is responsible for a mere several hundred thousand civilian casualties in the region, multiple Olympic sized swimming pools full of blood, but those ululating savages must be so much worse if they dominate the conversation like they seem to do. It’d be crazy embarrassing to put the whole of my focus onto an entity responsible for orders of magnitude fewer rapidly deconstructed children than the protagonists I align with.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2024 08:55
|
|
|
The Houthis are jointly responsible for several hundred thousand civilian deaths in the last 10 years, yes. They are also actively right this very moment bombing and sieging and starving a city of around 1 million people (Taiz). They are also more indirectly aiding in the siege of army-controlled areas of Sudan by reducing access to Port Sudan. Until the past two months they were also actively killing many dozens if not more civilians per day, but now that they have a semi firm ceasefire (except they are still attacking Taiz - but no longer killing dozens per day in Marib) they can send some of those missiles at random ships hundreds of km off their shores, like the tanker they hit yesterday which is around 150 km away from the Houthi’s country, which is not synonymous with Yemen as they control like a quarter of the land and 2/3 of the population. You are not required to cheerlead one side when there are two bloodthirsty and awful regimes fighting. In this case Yemen is also not even fighting Israel in any even remotely meaningful way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2024 09:58
|
|
|
Saladman posted:In this case Yemen is also not even fighting Israel in any even remotely meaningful way. If that were true the US wouldn't be bombing them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2024 14:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 17:48 |
|
|
celadon posted:How many hundreds of civilians are the Houthis killing? It must be at least several hundred people getting mulched per day , easily, for them to command as much spilled ink as they do. Like of all the entities involved in the region, they surely must be responsible for the vast majority of civilian casualties right? Like if I was a simple folk who used this thread to inform themself, that’d be patently obvious. Personally I live in the United States which is responsible for a mere several hundred thousand civilian casualties in the region, multiple Olympic sized swimming pools full of blood, but those ululating savages must be so much worse if they dominate the conversation like they seem to do. It’d be crazy embarrassing to put the whole of my focus onto an entity responsible for orders of magnitude fewer rapidly deconstructed children than the protagonists I align with. The Houthis are not an organization you should cheerlead and definitely wouldn't want to live under. Its not because they're "undulating savages" (you sound like a racist moron by the way) but because they are responsible for a wide range of crimes against humanity within the territories they control. Did you read any of the UN reports? I'd be happy to link a couple for you if you cannot find them. For the record, being responsible for fewer Civilian deaths than the United States in the Middle East doesn't make you immune to critique. Edit: lol my new avatar suggest people are conflating not liking the Houthis with Israel apologism. I guess some people really can't read very well. Grip it and rip it fucked around with this message at 15:33 on Jan 27, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2024 15:14
|
|