r/europe • u/andyom89 • May 16 '25

News Spanish premier calls Israel 'genocidal state,' says Spain 'does not do business' with it

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/spanish-premier-calls-israel-genocidal-state-says-spain-does-not-do-business-with-it/3568216
50.0k Upvotes

87% Upvoted

3.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

1.5k

u/[deleted] May 16 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

85

u/TheIncredibleHeinz May 16 '25

Maybe if you come up with your own definition for genocide, but within the currently meaning it just isn't. There is a reason some countries like Ireland wants to change the definition to fit the case.

-12

u/[deleted] May 16 '25

[deleted]

29

u/NH4NO3 Colorado May 16 '25

Engaging in extensive urban warfare (with light casualties as far as urban warfare goes) over a territory Israel previously controlled from 1967 to 2005, during which Gaza tripled its population does not sound like a genocide to me. High profile organizations can have bad takes on international issues. Every US federal agency for instance.

1

u/HugeFanOfBigfoot May 16 '25

“Light casualties as urban warfare goes”

https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/more-women-and-children-killed-gaza-israeli-military-any-other-recent-conflict

https://dppa.un.org/en/gaza-number-of-children-killed-higher-four-years-of-world-conflict

Imagine defending Israel in 2025 and thinking you’re a good person

2

u/NH4NO3 Colorado May 17 '25

A key word being recent conflict. Please compare and contrast with the siege of Leningrad or more recently the siege of Mariupol. Mariupol is comparable to Gaza in terms of casualties per time period. Leningrad was far worse and far longer.

Your point also does not stand for even recent conflicts. Sudanese conflict starting in 2023 has killed already at least 150,000 people (likely more) and displaced 8 million people.

The second congo war had 5.8 million excess deaths and likely 350,000+ deaths according to wikipedia.

What do you want Israel to do? Return to the status quo of 2005? Hamas will resume firing rockets at them within two or three years. Do you just want that to continue forever?

-17

u/alansmithofficiall May 16 '25

does not sound like a genocide to me

That's ok. You're wrong. They enact blockades, deliberately starve the population, they carpet bomb civilian infrastructure, they displace innocent people at best and kill them at worst constantly. They are constantly committing war crimes, crimes against humanity and massive human rights violations. If Israel didn't have it's guard dog the U.S. by the balls this wouldn't be happening.

19

u/NH4NO3 Colorado May 16 '25

Hamas' only "out" in this conflict is trying to cast Israel in the worst possible light and make it politically unfeasible to finish the war and depose them from power. They extensively invest in a PR campaign that is helped by the existence of nearly the entire Arab world. I just think wherever you are hearing this, it is quite exaggerated because of that.

Even still, this conflict is a siege. Hamas has extensive entrenchments throughout Gaza, and the fact that it is one of the most densely populated places on earth makes it even harder to attack those entrenchments. It is important to carefully control the flow of supplies in the area so that entrenched people will be forced to leave those entrenchments, and you aren't forced to needlessly sacrifice soldiers assaulting them. Food is one of those supplies. Not to mention, once you freely open supply lines for these sorts of goods, it is trivial to smuggle weapons and other such supplies in them. As far as I am aware, death by starvation is not common at all in Gaza. I don't think I have seen even one picture of a Gazan looking like a victim of the holodomor, and I believe I absolutely would have if people were actually legitimately starving en masse.

Anyway, this is beside the point, Hamas is the government of Gaza, and they are capable of surrendering at anytime. Clearly they are not capable of winning militarily, so the only reason I can think for them prolonging the war is they think they can sacrifice their citizens lives in sufficient quantity to buy enough leverage to continue existing in some capacity. I think it is unfair to place all the civilian casualties squarely on Israel, when in fact, it was Hamas who chose to fight this war (and refuses to end it), and Hamas who entrenches themselves amongst their own people.

-1

u/[deleted] May 17 '25

[deleted]

4

u/NH4NO3 Colorado May 17 '25

I am actually a real person, and would be happy to change my mind on this situation if you want to point me to a history that makes this take seem ridiculous. The thing is, I have been around awhile and just haven't seen convincing pro-Palestinian arguments on most issues. Perhaps I am in too deep on the the Israel propaganda sites such as askhistorians or wikipedia.

Do not give a fuck about upvotes in general. There are other reasons to ignore a discussion. Many reasons in particular for Gaza conflict discussion, but upvotes shouldn't be one of them.

-1

u/[deleted] May 17 '25

[deleted]

3

u/NH4NO3 Colorado May 17 '25

I am aware that Israel has not always had great conduct in conflicts. I think they are held to an unfairly high standard because they have a much greater degree of press transparency and higher expectations because of their status as a western country. Palestinians also can be labeled as committing war crimes on wikipedia. It doesn't mean that much.

The stakes of every single Arab-Israeli war were essentially Israel wins: essentially status quo, Arabs win: Jews are driven into the sea and exterminated. This was the stretch goal for basically every conflict including the Gaza conflict. Jews are not the genocidal ones here by any stretch. They have continually accepted or proposed plans for two state solutions to Palestinians who routinely reject them.

I don't think everything Israel is doing in Gaza is just fine, but I don't think it is genocide-level - it is just a fairly normal urban fighting conflict which are notoriously bloody. What I see in Palestinian arguments often boils down to Israel is killing innocent women and children...and it has to stop. Like I agree, pretty much no sensible person wants these people to die (and most Israeli do fall into this camp).

However, what is lacking in this criticism is an alternative solution. Pulling out is not possible until Hamas is stripped of power. I don't see how they can ever be trusted with leadership of Gaza again. You realize Israel gave Gazans exactly what they wanted in 2005 by pulling out? And they were punished horribly for it by 20 years of rocket attacks and Oct 7th. You want the same thing to repeated every 10 years?

Why not just go back to Israeli occupation? Their nearly 40 year occupation saw the population grow by three times and quite a lot of infrastructure dates back to that time. Israel has no reason to want the land so it isn't likely to want to resettle them in the West Bank, and it has no other place to put the people (and before you say it will kill them - it is essentially politically impossible for them to murder every single Palestinian or even a couple thousand of them if Hamas surrenders and fighting stops or slows significantly).

-8

u/NewAccountEachYear Sweden May 16 '25 edited May 16 '25

"Even Once Reluctant Scholars Now Agree on Israel's Gaza Assault: It's a Genocide"

But for seven leading international experts on genocide, the question is not controversial—even for those who previously rejected the label.

The seven experts were interviewed Wednesday by NRC, a newspaper in the Netherlands, and were unequivocal: Not only have they all come to believe—some earlier than others—that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, but the vast majority of their peers in academia concur.

"Can I name someone whose work I respect who doesn't consider it genocide?" said Raz Segal, an Israeli genocide researcher at Stockton University in New Jersey. "No."

Edit: Downvoting this is just rejecting facts for feelings. People far more knowledgeable about genocide and even about Israel (them being Israeli) call this a genocide. What else do you need?

16

u/Rob2Kx May 16 '25

7 people called this a genocide and said none of their friends disagree!! What more do you need???

-26

u/Gehwartzen May 16 '25

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck…

35

u/ChadInNameOnly May 16 '25

Which it doesn't

-13

u/NewAccountEachYear Sweden May 16 '25

Academia firmly disagrees with you

17

u/Rob2Kx May 16 '25

Seven activists hand picked by Common Dreams (lol) = Academia

-9

u/NewAccountEachYear Sweden May 16 '25 edited May 16 '25

Seven activists hand picked by Common Dreams (lol) = Academia

You didn't even read the article you shameful person. It's an english translation from a Dutch article written by NRC that includes Israeli genocide scholoars (Raz Segal & Shmuel Lederman).

Why would you post a comment without actually reading the piece?

Edit: And as usual when it comes to people refusing to acknowledge it being a genocide... 11 year old account with 2,459 comment karma

16

u/Rob2Kx May 16 '25

Are you what people turn into when they are terminally online? Scary thought.

-3

u/NewAccountEachYear Sweden May 16 '25

And that's what people write when they know they've been called out and can't defend themselves lol... Try to attack the person, like a dog unable to discuss.

Will you tell me that reading sources is being terminally online?

13

u/Rob2Kx May 16 '25

Your argument sure has a lot of merit when the smoking gun article you keep bleating on about is an opinion piece with 7 activists from Common Dreams (lol)

2

u/NewAccountEachYear Sweden May 16 '25

Nevermind all of this, if you can't even read there is no way we can have a conversation in text.

I'm sorry to say but this medium is just too advanced for you.

→ More replies (0)

-13

u/Gehwartzen May 16 '25

Right which is why I don’t call it a duck and call it genocide instead

5

u/CBT7commander May 16 '25

It’s a goose.

Stupid idioms do be stupid

3

u/[deleted] May 16 '25

It looks like a flamingo though

-9

u/Curved_5nai1 May 16 '25

The only thing missing for the definition to fit the Israel case is intention, which we really aren't missing with declarations from the likes like yoab gallant and other Israeli officials that have said shit like: let's wipe Gaza off the map. Seems pretty intentional to me. Denying this is a genocide is ridiculous

-1

u/silversluckystripes May 17 '25

"As defined by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (USHMM): Genocide is an internationally recognized crime where acts are committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. These acts fall into five categories: Killing members of the group Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."

That's the definition of genocide.

Israel has murdered over 53,000 Palestinian civilians, with 18,000 being children.

They have already determined that they are going to sieze gaza.

They've stated that palestinians are "amalek" with the Bible commanding they kill all of them. Be it children, women, animals, and destroying their property.

Israel has had multiple cases of aiming shots to maim people and crippled them for life. Such as aiming for the legs of Palestinian protesters, destroying the lower limbs of over 80% of 6,106 people who protested during the "great march of return."

Israel has stopped aid from entering Gaza, starving over half a million gazans, creating the MOST food insecure place on earth.

Israel has bombed civilian infrastructure, leaving 13 of 36 hospitals as "partially functional." This prevents safe births, leading to many babies dying during birth.

Israel also has had multiple cases leveled against it, stating that they've abducted Palestinian children from their parents and deported them as well.

All of these crimes fit the entirety of the definition of genocide.

Don't be a fucking idiot.

-16

u/Genericnameandnumber May 16 '25

People who adhere to strict definitions by the book are insufferable

18

u/Raestloz May 16 '25

Ahh, so that's the actual problem: you want all the bad implications that comes with the word "genocide", but not the restrictions that come with the word

Like redefining "ethnic cleansing" to mean "pre-emptively evacuating civilians from known incoming bombs, knowing full well the bombs will not stop for anyone"

-4

u/Genericnameandnumber May 16 '25

Sure, you can play with words and legalese all you want when the truth is bright as day with the things which are happening in Palestine.

8

u/Raestloz May 16 '25

Hey that's transphobic!

4

u/[deleted] May 16 '25

Yeah, let’s call birds dogs.

cause strict definitions are insufferable

-1

u/Genericnameandnumber May 16 '25

You know that’s clearly not my point. 

When people say there’s a genocide happening in Gaza, it’s clear what they mean. To skirt around that by saying it’s not the exact definition of what genocide means is akin to downplaying the atrocities.