The destruction of Palestine is breaking the world | Moustafa Bayoumi
www.theguardian.com
The rules of the institutions that define our lives bend like reeds when it comes to Israel – so much that the whole global order is on the verge of collapse

Israel’s war in Gaza is chipping away at so much of what we – in the United States but also internationally – had agreed upon as acceptable, from the rules governing our freedom of speech to the very laws of armed conflict. It seems no exaggeration to say that the foundation of the international order of the last 77 years is threatened by this change in the obligations governing our legal and political responsibilities to each other.

  • IndustryStandard@lemmy.worldEnglish
    153·
    1 month ago

    You really have to do whataboutism on every post concerning Israel.

    1967: Israel launches the Six-Day War, illegality debated.

    Nice how you question the illegality of Israel doing war crimes.

      • rumimevlevi@lemmings.worldBannedEnglish
        4·
        1 month ago

        Resolution 242: On November 22, 1967, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 242

        • The “inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war.”

        • The need for Israeli withdrawal from territories occupied during the conflict.

        They attacked on a Monday, knowing that on Wednesday the Egyptian vice-president would arrive in Washington to talk about re-opening the Strait of Tiran. We might not have succeeded in getting Egypt to reopen the strait, but it was a real possibility.” -  Dean Rusk, the Secretary of State of that time

        “The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.” -  Menachem Begin

        So there was no eminent security risk, the attack was not proportional and Israel kept the west bank and east Jerusalem violating the need for Israeli withdrawal from territories occupied during the conflict

          • rumimevlevi@lemmings.worldBannedEnglish
            3·
            1 month ago

            My reading comprehension is perfect. You been calling anybofy who disagree with you stupid. Thst’s mean it’s you the stupid one. Get off your high horse.

    • IhaveCrabs111@lemmy.worldEnglish
      11·
      1 month ago

      I’m still not convinced about criticism of whataboutism being an actual defence. I’ve heard the argument that it doesn’t make the original criticism any less valid but to me it does. It’s more of a go fuck off together and be shit somewhere else rather than a let’s focus on this one point only purely because it was brought up before the other. And purely because it was brought up first there is not allowed to be any mention of any hypocrisy?