Israel v Hamas

[CPFCSaturn]

Your response should be: No the UN has not officially labeled Israel's actions in Gaza as Genocide.

And I would say I can't see any evidence that the UN have made a mistake. Which leads us back to the UN not officially labeling Israel actions as genocide correct then.

So you are correct they have not made a mistake.
But you are wrong saying the UN have officially labeled it genocide in Gaza.

(Although there are criticisms for potential mistakes in labeling genocide.)

I'm struggling to make any sense of this post.

Change the word 'UN' to 'UN Commission' if it makes you happier - can you highlight a previous time a UN commission has incorrectly labelled something a genocide?

The overlap between people who support Israel and who are fundamentally dishonest and disingenuous is quite something - I guess it's a position which can't be maintained truthfully or reasonably anymore.

 

[eaglesdare]

I'm struggling to make any sense of this post.

Change the word 'UN' to 'UN Commission' if it makes you happier - can you highlight a previous time a UN commission has incorrectly labelled something a genocide?

The overlap between people who support Israel and who are fundamentally dishonest and disingenuous is quite something - I guess it's a position which can't be maintained truthfully or reasonably anymore.

My original question was: "Have the UN actually officially labeled it genocide in Gaza?"

I am not talking about an independent UN commission.

So have the UN officially labeled Israel actions in Gaza as Genocide? Please show me the link and evidence if they have.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

My original question was: "Have the UN actually officially labeled it genocide in Gaza?"

I am not talking about an independent UN commission.

So have the UN officially labeled Israel actions in Gaza as Genocide? Please show me the link and evidence if they have.

Just poor.

No actual argument so latch onto a semantic and divert.

Really low-level stuff.

 

[eaglesdare]

Just poor.

No actual argument so latch onto a semantic and divert.

Really low-level stuff.

No.

I asked you in the original post "Have the UN actually officially labeled it genocide in Gaza?"

You responded with "Yes" and provided information from an "independent UN commission" which is not what I asked you.

Please actually provide me with evidence that the UN have officially labeled it genocide in Gaza and then we can continue our civilized debate.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

No.

I asked you in the original post "Have the UN actually officially labeled it genocide in Gaza?"

You responded with "Yes" and provided information from an "independent UN commission" which is not what I asked you.

Please actually provide me with evidence that the UN have officially labeled it genocide in Gaza and then we can continue our civilized debate.

Really embracing the low-level stuff - fair enough.

You are correct - only the UN commission have labelled it a genocide.

Perhaps we could continue the discussion now - why do you know better than the UN commission and can you point to previous examples where they have been inaccurate or unreliable?

 

[chris123]

It's on the United nations commission for human rights website

 

[eaglesdare]

Really embracing the low-level stuff - fair enough.

You are correct - only the UN commission have labelled it a genocide.

Perhaps we could continue the discussion now - why do you know better than the UN commission and can you point to previous examples where they have been inaccurate or unreliable?

Finally. Thank you.

As your question about the UN commission and some previous examples:

There have been some previous disputes and inaccuracies:

Goldstone Report (2009) – Gaza Conflict.
UN Commission of Inquiry on Syria
Sri Lanka Civil War (2009)
UN Commission on Human Rights – Rwanda Genocide (1994)
UN commission Inquiry into Yemen Conflict
UN Commission of Inquiry on North Korea (2014)

 

[CPFCSaturn]

Finally. Thank you.

As your question about the UN commission and some previous examples:

There have been some previous disputes and inaccuracies:

Goldstone Report (2009) – Gaza Conflict.
UN Commission of Inquiry on Syria
Sri Lanka Civil War (2009)
UN Commission on Human Rights – Rwanda Genocide (1994)
UN commission Inquiry into Yemen Conflict
UN Commission of Inquiry on North Korea (2014)

Why do you know better than the UN commission what constitutes a genocide? Do you think they're unaware of ideas like collateral damage?

Copying and pasting a list of reports from Grok is not an argument, particularly when half of them do not even involve accusations of genocide.

Please be more specific - I have no problem with using AI as a source, but it can't do all the work for you - when has a UN commission alleged genocide and been proved incorrect?

 

[eaglesdare]

Why do you know better than the UN commission what constitutes a genocide? Do you think they're unaware of ideas like collateral damage?

Copying and pasting a list of reports from Grok is not an argument, particularly when half of them do not even involve accusations of genocide.

Please be more specific - I have no problem with using AI as a source, but it can't do all the work for you - when has a UN commission alleged genocide and been proved incorrect?

There are plenty of examples of the
The UN Independent commission concluding with genocide but legally not confirmed by court. I have provided you some examples of potential inaccuracies which you asked for.

But as yet they have not been proved incorrect but also have not been proved correct.

If the independent commission is correct and legally proven then why have the UN not officially designated it Genocide in Gaza?

 

[Penge Eagle]

Why do you know better than the UN commission what constitutes a genocide? Do you think they're unaware of ideas like collateral damage?

Copying and pasting a list of reports from Grok is not an argument, particularly when half of them do not even involve accusations of genocide.

Please be more specific - I have no problem with using AI as a source, but it can't do all the work for you - when has a UN commission alleged genocide and been proved incorrect?

The UN Security Council (UNSC) is the body that really counts when it comes to making official, binding decisions on matters of international peace and security, including genocide. Other UN bodies can investigate and accuse but cannot enforce.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

There are plenty of examples of the
The UN Independent commission concluding with genocide but legally not confirmed by court. I have provided you some examples of potential inaccuracies which you asked for.

But as yet they have not been proved incorrect but also have not been proved correct.

If the independent commission is correct and legally proven then why have the UN not officially designated it Genocide in Gaza?

My word, you've really latched tight onto this one - so transparent 🤣

Because it cannot be designated as genocide until after the fact - to give an analogy, if the police find a suspect holding a gun and standing over a dead body, they can charge him with murder, and everyone will know a murder has taken place, but he is not 'officially designated' a murderer until after the fact.

Pretty simple really.

It's also been labelled a genocide by nearly every other human rights organisation in the world, as well as the vast majority of genocide experts on the planet, including many prominent Israelis.

But you know better than all of them, because... collateral damage.

 

[Penge Eagle]

There are lots of examples where UN bodies have made accusations that have turned out to be incorrect after further investigation. One example in 2002, where some UN officials had accused Israel of a massacre in the Jenin refugee camp.

UN report rejects claims of Jenin massacre

A UN report into the fighting in the Jenin refugee camp will reject Palestinian claims of an Israeli massacre, but will criticise both sides for putting civilian lives at risks, western diplomats said today.

www.theguardian.com

 

[eaglesdare]

My word, you've really latched tight onto this one - so transparent 🤣

Because it cannot be designated as genocide until after the fact - to give an analogy, if the police find a suspect holding a gun and standing over a dead body, they can charge him with murder, and everyone will know a murder has taken place, but he is not 'officially designated' a murderer until after the fact.

Pretty simple really.

It's also been labelled a genocide by nearly every other human rights organisation in the world, as well as the vast majority of genocide experts on the planet, including many prominent Israelis.

But you know better than all of them, because... collateral damage.

That's because we as a civilised society treat suspects as innocent until proven guilty.

A man holding a gun over a dead body...could have been his friend and someone across the road has shot at them and he has his gun out in self defence but the time the police arrive the shooter has run away. 🤷🏻‍♂️

 

[CPFCSaturn]

There are lots of examples where UN bodies have made accusations that have turned out to be incorrect after further investigation. One example in 2002, where some UN officials had accused Israel of a massacre in the Jenin refugee camp.

UN report rejects claims of Jenin massacre

A UN report into the fighting in the Jenin refugee camp will reject Palestinian claims of an Israeli massacre, but will criticise both sides for putting civilian lives at risks, western diplomats said today.

www.theguardian.com

This is a reasonable example, and certainly the UN is capable of making mistakes.

But the existence of an unrelated mistake 20+ years ago does not do much to disprove their (and everyone else's) conclusion now.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

That's because we as a civilised society treat suspects as innocent until proven guilty.

A man holding a gun over a dead body...could have been his friend and someone across the road has shot at them and he has his gun out in self defence but the time the police arrive the shooter has run away. 🤷🏻‍♂️

Please try and keep up - it's an analogy; it doesn't need irrelevant hypotheticals springing off it.

You asked why the UN have not 'designated it a genocide' - I am simply highlighting that you are setting a bar that cannot be hit at this stage - it's like asking the police why the murderer isn't convicted before a court date. That's the point.

 

[silvertop]

Genocide is a heavy term let's not dilute it. Israel is defending itself, not targeting a group for extinction.

Even scholars get it wrong sometimes.

It was in October 2023.

It has not been from about November 2023.

 

[chris123]

The UN Security Council (UNSC) is the body that really counts when it comes to making official, binding decisions on matters of international peace and security, including genocide. Other UN bodies can investigate and accuse but cannot enforce.

Except when the US votes against anything that criticises Israel

 

[eaglesdare]

Please try and keep up - it's an analogy; it doesn't need irrelevant hypotheticals springing off it.

You asked why the UN have not 'designated it a genocide' - I am simply highlighting that you are setting a bar that cannot be hit at this stage - it's like asking the police why the murderer isn't convicted before a court date. That's the point.

Why not? As you said it's genocide so the UN should designate it as such. Or why won't they?

 

[CPFCSaturn]

Why not? As you said it's genocide so the UN should designate it as such. Or why won't they?

The answer is literally in the post you quoted FFS - "it's like asking the police why the murderer isn't convicted before a court date."

 

[eaglesdare]

The answer is literally in the post you quoted FFS - "it's like asking the police why the murderer isn't convicted before a court date."

Innocent until proven guilty then.