Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1
That's an interesting find that makes sense.
Also Sky News is saying that the US will countenance Israel's invasion until the end of the year but Israel wants longer.
https://news.sky.com/story/the-clock...ution-13026178
More inclined to believe the United States Government than someone on an internet forum tbf.
One suspects their definition of “occupied” is more robust than the selective interpretations we see on here to absolve Israel of its humanitarian responsibilities. A damning indictment of the views of some on here as to whether Palestinians have humanitarian rights at all.
Yes, it's about the definition. Discussed here. The article lists a selection of bodies who categorise Gaza as being occupied and notes
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blog...rnational-law/ |
I’d personally take the view that anything the US says is the minimum tolerable position.
As Israel’s only ally, they will naturally push back (regardless of evidence) against claims of war crimes or ethnic cleansing, and of course the worst accusations made by Palestinians of genocide.
.