Gaza-Israel Conflict | 2023-2024

[LeonBlack08]

Essentially, what ICJ is saying is - we know there is genocide going but Israel can you please do it gently? Ceasefire? Who needs that!

 

[LeonBlack08]

 

[UKBengali]

View attachment 14414


Essentially, what ICJ is saying is - we know there is genocide going but Israel, but can you please do it gently? Ceasefire? Who needs that!

Yep, if there was no evidence of genocide then this would not be the ruling given.

It is obvious that this was due to pressure from the Zionist influenced western countries.

You cannot separate the judges from the countries they come from or earn their living in. Anyone thinking otherwise is being naive.

 

[LeonBlack08]

Yep, if there was no evidence of genocide then this would not be the ruling given.

It is obvious that this was due to pressure from the Zionist influenced western countries.

You cannot separate the judges from the countries they come from or earn their living in. Anyone thinking otherwise is being naive.

Exactly.

I didn't have any expectations from ICJ, because we all know Israel would not have stopped even if ICJ had called for an immediate ceasefire. US would have continued to back them up to do as they please.

 

[hussain0216]

This is a "flux" decade as we move from a western-based world order to one where the Chinese and "Global South" have their own alternative economic, military and technological system. When this decade is over we will truly be in a multi-polar world.

Most countries will choose either the US-led western system or the Chinese-led "Global South" system.

The Arab and Muslim world itself needs to stand,, their are enough nations, enough resources, youth on our side to create trade and economic blocks

The Arabs are scared for no reason



The Jews, the Hindus these people are our enemies and you need to be aware and awake to them and not allow them space within the Muslim world and steps need to be taken


Every few months we have the same crap threads in the forum "should we recognize Israel", the answer is NO and not only no, how do we begin to pull apart the Muslim world and 2 BILLION Muslims from Israel and hindus

 

[hussain0216]

Enforcement of a ceasefire is the main issue. The court may have jurisdiction, but a ceasefire depends on UNSC backing which the court understands will be vetoed by the US and UK. Simple as that.

The court doesn't have the means to stop the conflict, so it's trying to pass measures that can be enforced without going to the UNSC, thus giving Israel no choice but to comply unless it wants to be found guilty of genocide later on as the case moves forward.

It was a cop out

Basically the U.S and western lackeys would be forced to veto in the UNSC, that would create a big issue for them when in future they would want to use the IcJ to target countries like Russia or Iran, so the ICJ accepted that Israel is commiting genocide but gave the weakest possible enforceable options

When it should have , sent it to the UNSC and let the U.S and UK etc hang themselves

 

[Musings]

So Israel does have a case to answer. I guess the decision was taken before more evidence yesterday that emerged of a man carrying a white flag being shot in cold blood - and the 60 Palestinians that were shot whilst waiting for food supplies to reach them.
The evidence is now their in black and white - I wonder how they will wash this one away?

 

[That_Guy]

To be clear, the court did not say Israel is guilty of genocide, that ruling will come later on.

The court said that it has jurisdiction, and that South Africa has presented enough evidence to suggest that there is an immediate and present danger of a potential to commit genocide.

 

[Persian Gulf]

‘If you read the order, by implication a ceasefire must happen’: South Africa​

Speaking on the steps of the seat of the ICJ, Naledi Pandor, South Africa’s minister of international relations, tells reporters Israel will have to halt fighting in Gaza if it wants to adhere to the orders of the UN’s top court.

“How do you provide aid and water without a ceasefire?” Pandor said. “If you read the order, by implication a ceasefire must happen.”
Back in South Africa, senior officials welcomed the ruling.

“It’s a watershed judgement for all those who want to see peace in Palestine,” Fikile Mbalula, secretary-general of the ruling African National Congress party, told reporters.

 

[Meengla]

Enforcement of a ceasefire is the main issue. The court may have jurisdiction, but a ceasefire depends on UNSC backing which the court understands will be vetoed by the US and UK. Simple as that.

The court doesn't have the means to stop the conflict, so it's trying to pass measures that can be enforced without going to the UNSC, thus giving Israel no choice but to comply unless it wants to be found guilty of genocide later on as the case moves forward.

Good points but I still think this was a cop-out due to external pressure.

By demanding an immediate ceasefire then this would have signalled that the current situation is unacceptable and put both the Zionists and their supporters on the wrong side of the “rules based order”.

In essence the court should not look at whether a ceasefire can be enforced but more what should happen from a legal viewpoint.

Yep, if there was no evidence of genocide then this would not be the ruling given.

It is obvious that this was due to pressure from the Zionist influenced western countries.

You cannot separate the judges from the countries they come from or earn their living in. Anyone thinking otherwise is being naive.

All good posts.

The Court found a middle ground--covering the judges' own career-butts while providing some 'historic' stand. Norman Finklestein, who knows such courts, had low hopes because of the nature of such courts. Ray McGovern said CIA has 'files' on everyone--including those judges--look at how the Harvard President was found to have 'plagiarized'?!!

Both sides will claim to have 'won' the case but, in the end, the real verdict will come from the battlefields. It always does!

 

[That_Guy]

It was a cop out

Basically the U.S and western lackeys would be forced to veto in the UNSC, that would create a big issue for them when in future they would want to use the IcJ to target countries like Russia or Iran, so the ICJ accepted that Israel is commiting genocide but gave the weakest possible enforceable options

When it should have , sent it to the UNSC and let the U.S and UK etc hang themselves

Hang themselves on what exactly? The US and UK have never given a shit what the courts say. The US doesn't even recognize its authority.

They would immediately ignore the court and carry on as usual.

Nothing changes in the end.

The court isn't stupid, by linking the provisional measures to the unsc, any provisional measure could have potentially been struck down.

 

[Oldenwisdom...قول بزرگ]

So Israel does have a case to answer. I guess the decision was taken before more evidence yesterday that emerged of a man carrying a white flag being shot in cold blood - and the 60 Palestinians that were shot whilst waiting for food supplies to reach them.
The evidence is now their in black and white - I wonder how they will wash this one away?

Does it matter though?
When everyone knows... there is a history, a tradition and a goal, a destiny... Eretz Yisrael!
When colonizers both former and current stand on one side... arming and funding it even further.
The ruling, thus will be purposefully vague, difficult to parse and careful use of words... placating that very small crowd who'd be assuaged and satisfied as, also ran... did our bit.

 

[UKBengali]

Hang themselves on what exactly? The US and UK have never given a shit what the courts say. The US doesn't even recognize its authority.

They would immediately ignore the court and carry on as usual.

Nothing changes in the end.

The court isn't stupid, by linking the provisional measures to the unsc, any provisional measure could have potentially been struck down.

You are getting confused between the ICC which the US does not recognise and the ICJ which they do. UK recognises both ICC and ICJ.

Even the Zionists turned up to defend themselves.

If the judgement was given calling for immediate ceasefire then this would put the Zionists and their supporters in a very compromised position as they would be ignoring a court that they either help set up and/or are a signatory to.

 

[mulj]

In all huge waste of time about this verdict and one more proof there is no justice for weak and poor ones.

 

[Meengla]

You are getting confused between the ICC which the US does not recognise and the ICJ which they do. UK recognises both ICC and ICJ.
Even the Zionists turned up to defend themselves.
If the judgement was given calling for immediate ceasefire then this would put the Zionists and their supporters in a very compromised position as they would be ignoring a court that they either help set up and/or are a signatory to.

Good post again.
But even a total anti-Israel judgement wouldn't have mattered. Remember: The UN is biased and so by extension all UN affiliates are biased. In fact, Alan Dershowitz--another Israel Firster in America-- was saying that Israel shouldn't have bothered to defend itself and should just ignore whatever the ICJ would say.
Israelis must have some 'hopes' in the hope the Americans / Germans would be able to 'influence' the Judges and so they decided to roll the dice and now they can twist the verdict to their advantage--but that won't matter. The real verdict is going to come from the battlefield and a careful analyst like Max Blumenthal is saying that 'to this point', Israel has lost in Gaza.