مناقشة تعريف الإبادة الجماعية | FriendZone

Everyone is bored now i guess

I am ngl

Yeah but it provides some context

Give me Latinas

Like you expect smth from the non state actors that have no official army on their side

Non state actors? Lmao

context explains background motives, but in international law context doesn't equal a legal defense.
​when a state is standing before international courts like the ICJ or ICC, "they broke the rules first" or "they operate in urban areas" does not lower the legal bar for war crimes or genocide. military necessity and context are already factored into basic rules of distinction and proportionality—they don't grant blanket immunity to wipe out entire urban zones, destroy food networks, or dismantle healthcare systems.
​context gives you the why behind a military strategy, but international law strictly judges the what and the how on the ground...

We going around in circles so it's boring now

Ur the one how is doing that by simplying the war 🥀

Yeah

That's what they are lol

Fair enough

Bruh🥀

Same

A man of taste unlike maggie

Yeah

Insert dap gif

Inserting dap gif in progress

Same 😭

Maybe bc of bots

Literally there is no war in human history or even just modern history where both parties adhere to international law. Not saying that it should just be ignored but I am saying that you are holding Israel to some pretty high standards here like you expect them to be perfect in an urban setting war

Ur oversimplifing this conflict

framing this as "demanding perfection in urban warfare" completely misrepresents what international law actually tests
​nobody is expecting perfection in a dense urban combat zone. urban warfare is inherently chaotic and collateral damage happens. international law does not require zero civilian casualties—it requires adherence to basic threshold legal principles: distinction, proportionality, and precautionary measures.
​the legal argument before tribunals like the ICJ and ICC is not about accidental collateral damage or imperfect military operations. it is about systematic, structural actions:
​Total destruction of survival systems: Wiping out 80%+ of residential housing, systematically dismantling every hospital, destroying water treatment facilities, and engineering famine conditions isn't "imperfect urban fighting." It is the total destruction of the infrastructure required for human life to exist in a territory.
​Policy vs. mistakes: When senior officials explicitly order total blockades of food, water, and fuel, and that exact blockade is enforced for months, that isn't an operational mistake made by a soldier in the heat of urban battle—it is state policy executed at scale.
​Proportionality: Dropping 2,000-pound unguided bombs on densely populated refugee zones or designated safe zones to target single combatants violates the legal standard of proportionality. Urban warfare creates challenges, but it doesn't give a state legal permission to flatten an entire society and call the total erasure of a region "standard military difficulty."
​International law sets a realistic baseline for war, not perfection. When a military campaign systematically targets the conditions of life for two millioon people, trying to pass off total societal destruction as "just hard urban fighting" doesn't holdd up in any international court.

Trueeeee

Whatever it is, what Isreal is doing is not right. You cannot argue with that.

Same with Nagasaki and Hiroshima

They're also using chemicals to poison the land for future generations so uhhh

Surely Israel could deploy ground troops to yk, not bomb hospitals?

Even their ground troops snipe kids 🫩

Can we just be done with these dictatorships 🫩

Unfortunately that's not gonna happen anytime soon 💔

It will be if peeps get the guillotines 🥹

Great idea, the french should take over again