Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less



That's the problem with not calling for a ceasefire. The US propaganda machine is doing their spin and declaring the measures as something they always agreed with.
 
maniak said:
That would imply leadership is involved. Is that the case?
Click to expand...

The leadership wouldn't necessarily need to be involved as long as employees acting in the name of the agency were. Fortunately, it looks like they have sacked the offenders. Now the organization will have to work to not lose any more funding.
 
Raoul said:
Not a good look for UNRWA here being perceived as having been apart of 10-7
Click to expand...

Let's first see what status these terrorists had within the organisation first. I have worked with UN help organisation in the past and many of their employees like, cooks, drivers, cleaners etc are employed from the local population, in this case Palestinians. If these terrorist are within the administration then there really is a problem and a very bad look for the organisation.
 
Denis79 said:
Let's first see what status these terrorists had within the organisation first. I have worked with UN help organisation in the past and many of their employees like, cooks, drivers, cleaners etc are employed from the local population, in this case Palestinians. If these terrorist are within the administration then there really is a problem and a very bad look for the organisation.
Click to expand...

You may be right. I have worked extensively with various UN orgs as well and they often employ locals and third country nationals etc.
 
maniak said:
That would imply leadership is involved. Is that the case?
Click to expand...
That would be a devastating blow for the UNRWA and I really hope that it wasn't the case. The fact that some of their employees are involved in 10/7 is bad enough and will be without a doubt used against them in the future.
 


Israel will need to provide evidence in a month that they stopped any mental and bodily harm on the population in Gaza.
 
maniak said:
That would imply leadership is involved. Is that the case?
Click to expand...

Very serious if that is the case, hopefully not as the UN does some very important and good work in the region and that would tarnish or even destroy it's local credibility.

I once worked with UN organisations in Rwanda and we used translators employed by them. One man was assigned to us during 2 week period. He was friendly, funny and we had lunch and dinner together on a daily basis, only to later (few years later) find out that he was a part of a militia that murdered and raped a whole village.

The UN usually employ locals for various tasks like translators, guides, cooks etc and bad eggs can slip through. This doesn't change the motive of the organisation nor it's important function.

This ofcourse would be a completely different story if that man was the administrator of that specific organisation or held some other high post. Or that the organisation knew who and what he was when they employed him.
 
Israelis beefing with the UN, WHO and ICJ is...quite something. What a way to present yourself.
 
Denis79 said:
On the contrary, the verdict is quite serious. The court recognizes that the potential for genocide is there which is huge. They also call for measured and controlled reactions by the Israeli forces meaning the way they are fighting now is not acceptable according to the court, they also demand that provisions and aid are not stopped by Israel. But what surprised me the most is that it calls for the prosecution of leaders within Israel that call for genocide (Some high ranking officials have done this). I don't think Israel will abide by any of this but they are officially under scrutiny now which was the best we could hope for. It is also good that the court called for the release of the remaining hostages and I hope Hamas do this to show compliance.
Click to expand...
Disagree with you. The bar for this initial part was always very low. This decision was extremely political and slap bang right in the middle - both sides can claim a bit of a 'victory': Israel are being told to abide by the genocide convention and try to minimise civilian casualties (something they should be doing by being a signatory), which can be seen as a victory for SA. The court however did not even hint at a potential cease fire, which ultimately is a victory for Israel.

Regarding potential genocide, this was always going to be the case. SA just had to prove that there is potential for there to maybe be some actions which can be construed as genocide at this point. However, to prove the full genocide route, is going to take a lot more evidence than what has been provided. Further, the ICJ has given Israel an out by providing confidential evidence of government meetings etc.

Lastly, the best people could've hoped for is quite clearly a ceasefire order. The exact same court issued one against Russia in 2022. Like I said, this was a middle of the road decision, giving both parties enough to see their actions as legitimate.
 
Traub said:
Disagree with you. The bar for this initial part was always very low. This decision was extremely political and slap bang right in the middle - both sides can claim a bit of a 'victory': Israel are being told to abide by the genocide convention and try to minimise civilian casualties (something they should be doing by being a signatory), which can be seen as a victory for SA. The court however did not even hint at a potential cease fire, which ultimately is a victory for Israel.

Regarding potential genocide, this was always going to be the case. SA just had to prove that there is potential for there to maybe be some actions which can be construed as genocide at this point. However, to prove the full genocide route, is going to take a lot more evidence than what has been provided. Further, the ICJ has given Israel an out by providing confidential evidence of government meetings etc.

Lastly, the best people could've hoped for is quite clearly a ceasefire order. The exact same court issued one against Russia in 2022. Like I said, this was a middle of the road decision, giving both parties enough to see their actions as legitimate.
Click to expand...

You're right that the best would have been a call for cease-fire but it was never going to happen considering the circumstances. Would the ICJ have ordered a cease-fire if the Ukraine provoked an invasion by killing 1000 Russians and kidnapping another 200? They might have but I don't believe so.
 
Traub said:
Disagree with you. The bar for this initial part was always very low. This decision was extremely political and slap bang right in the middle - both sides can claim a bit of a 'victory': Israel are being told to abide by the genocide convention and try to minimise civilian casualties (something they should be doing by being a signatory), which can be seen as a victory for SA. The court however did not even hint at a potential cease fire, which ultimately is a victory for Israel.

Regarding potential genocide, this was always going to be the case. SA just had to prove that there is potential for there to maybe be some actions which can be construed as genocide at this point. However, to prove the full genocide route, is going to take a lot more evidence than what has been provided. Further, the ICJ has given Israel an out by providing confidential evidence of government meetings etc.

Lastly, the best people could've hoped for is quite clearly a ceasefire order. The exact same court issued one against Russia in 2022. Like I said, this was a middle of the road decision, giving both parties enough to see their actions as legitimate.
Click to expand...

 
Traub said:
Disagree with you. The bar for this initial part was always very low. This decision was extremely political and slap bang right in the middle - both sides can claim a bit of a 'victory': Israel are being told to abide by the genocide convention and try to minimise civilian casualties (something they should be doing by being a signatory), which can be seen as a victory for SA. The court however did not even hint at a potential cease fire, which ultimately is a victory for Israel.

Regarding potential genocide, this was always going to be the case. SA just had to prove that there is potential for there to maybe be some actions which can be construed as genocide at this point. However, to prove the full genocide route, is going to take a lot more evidence than what has been provided. Further, the ICJ has given Israel an out by providing confidential evidence of government meetings etc.

Lastly, the best people could've hoped for is quite clearly a ceasefire order. The exact same court issued one against Russia in 2022. Like I said, this was a middle of the road decision, giving both parties enough to see their actions as legitimate.
Click to expand...

The court could not do that I guess as that would take time to differentiate what is the right of self defence and what not in order to order the ceasefire unlike the Russian case, that is why it will take a long time and the case for further proceedings,

“I never thought the court was going to go as far as to order a ceasefire,” Juliette McIntyre, a lecturer in law at the University of South Australia, told Middle East Eye.

“The court is saying we can't get into the question of the full extent of [Israel’s] rights of self-defence. So we are not going to say anything about a ceasefire," McIntyre said.
Click to expand...

Also this

Israel's largest human rights group, B’Tselem,
"The only way to implement the orders issued today by the International Court of Justice in the Hague is through an immediate ceasefire. It is impossible to protect civilian life as long as the fighting continues," it said.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Traub said:
Disagree with you. The bar for this initial part was always very low. This decision was extremely political and slap bang right in the middle - both sides can claim a bit of a 'victory': Israel are being told to abide by the genocide convention and try to minimise civilian casualties (something they should be doing by being a signatory), which can be seen as a victory for SA. The court however did not even hint at a potential cease fire, which ultimately is a victory for Israel.

Regarding potential genocide, this was always going to be the case. SA just had to prove that there is potential for there to maybe be some actions which can be construed as genocide at this point. However, to prove the full genocide route, is going to take a lot more evidence than what has been provided. Further, the ICJ has given Israel an out by providing confidential evidence of government meetings etc.

Lastly, the best people could've hoped for is quite clearly a ceasefire order. The exact same court issued one against Russia in 2022. Like I said, this was a middle of the road decision, giving both parties enough to see their actions as legitimate.
Click to expand...

They told Russia to stop it's military intervention because that's what the case pertained to, not genocide, this one was brought on a case of genocide so they ruled to stop/prevent anything that could be genocide. Big difference but largely the same outcome.

This certainly isn't the end of it and if Israel keep commuting such acts then Netanyahu will be up on charges.
 
Giggsy PO said:
It seems the evidence must be pretty solid as they have been fired on the spot.
Click to expand...

Very likely that the evidence is very solid. In any case, this news story is a major black eye for UNRWA.

maniak said:
That would imply leadership is involved. Is that the case?
Click to expand...

It doesn't have to mean that, but the UNRWA have their work cut out for them if they want to rebuild their credibility and to retain their funding.

Referring to what I discussed with @Raoul on the other day about the prospect of a guardianship of Gaza by the UN similar to what has been deployed in Bosnia and in Kosovo, I think this new incident will force the UN to perform extreme vetting should they proceed in hiring the right people as peacekeepers and other support UN personnel for such mission. As much as a number of people at the UN would love to have Arab peacekeepers in the region, any course of action cannot allow to have bad apples rotting the cart. We should demand that the very best and most experienced people to go in there.
 
RedDevilQuebecois said:
Very likely that the evidence is very solid. In any case, this news story is a major black eye for UNRWA.



It doesn't have to mean that, but the UNRWA have their work cut out for them if they want to rebuild their credibility and to retain their funding.

Referring to what I discussed with @Raoul on the other day about the prospect of a guardianship of Gaza by the UN similar to what has been deployed in Bosnia and in Kosovo, I think this new incident will force the UN to perform extreme vetting should they proceed in hiring the right people as peacekeepers and other support UN personnel for such mission. As much as a number of people at the UN would love to have Arab peacekeepers in the region, any course of action cannot allow to have bad apples rotting the cart. We should demand that the very best and most experienced people to go in there.
Click to expand...

Extreme vetting of what? they have 13000 workers and they have found 7 of them to be in collaboration with Hamas. That is an error rate of 0.05% in an area under the complete control of an authoritarian organisation like Hamas.
 
Last edited:
Smores said:
They told Russia to stop it's military intervention because that's what the case pertained to, not genocide, this one was brought on a case of genocide so they ruled to stop/prevent anything that could be genocide. Big difference but largely the same outcome.

This certainly isn't the end of it and if Israel keep commuting such acts then Netanyahu will be up on charges.
Click to expand...
You're wrong. The very literal name of the case that Ukraine has brought up was: "The case concerning Allegations of Genocide under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Ukraine v. Russian Federation)".
 
Italy has followed the US, Australia and Canada in suspending financing of the United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA), reports Reuters.

Antonio Tajani, Italy’s foreign minister said on Saturday, via a post on X: “The Italian government has suspended financing of the UNRWA after the atrocious attack on Israel on 7 October.”

 
Frosty said:
Italy has followed the US, Australia and Canada in suspending financing of the United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA), reports Reuters.

Antonio Tajani, Italy’s foreign minister said on Saturday, via a post on X: “The Italian government has suspended financing of the UNRWA after the atrocious attack on Israel on 7 October.”

Click to expand...


And now the UK has suspended funding.
 
Western governments are showing their true face again, genocidal maniacs with no regard for human suffering.
 
RedDevilQuebecois said:
Very likely that the evidence is very solid. In any case, this news story is a major black eye for UNRWA.



It doesn't have to mean that, but the UNRWA have their work cut out for them if they want to rebuild their credibility and to retain their funding.
Click to expand...

12 out of 30.000 is as insignificant as it gets. This is not about credibility. Nobody cares anymore. The masks are off. Our governments are basically admitting that Genocide is ok and this is their move to deflect from yesterday’s ruling. Also indirectly punish the UN for the Court’s ruling.

The MSM is doing its best but unfortunately they are the ones losing credibility over this.

 
Frosty said:
Italy has followed the US, Australia and Canada in suspending financing of the United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA), reports Reuters.

Antonio Tajani, Italy’s foreign minister said on Saturday, via a post on X: “The Italian government has suspended financing of the UNRWA after the atrocious attack on Israel on 7 October.”

Click to expand...

Pathetic reaction by these countries.
 
So yesterday the ICJ rules against Israel, and today they accuse UN aid workers of participating in the attack to try to deflect attention. Whichever side of this you believe yourself to be on you have to admit even a child wouldn't be so brazen with their bullshit.
 
Frosty said:
Italy has followed the US, Australia and Canada in suspending financing of the United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA), reports Reuters.

Antonio Tajani, Italy’s foreign minister said on Saturday, via a post on X: “The Italian government has suspended financing of the UNRWA after the atrocious attack on Israel on 7 October.”

Click to expand...


So let me get this right. Suspend the UNRWA funding because of 7 workers from 15000 was connected to Hamas undergoing investigations.

But keep funding Israel while it's literally on trail of genocide.

This world is broken, and the cause is the western world that has been literally responsible for the vast majority of human suffering, secondary to their wars for the past 150 years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.