ICJ ruling orders Israel to....

Legal onion for former judges AKA retired with no actual input or standing start grandstanding. ICJ remind me isn't this the body part of the UN whose employees took part in the 7th of October atrocities against innocent civilians?
 
Last edited:
Sponsored Links
LOL The judges?
You have to remember that Andy Pandy hasn't got a clue what he's talking about...

He has to get guidance from his 'master' before posting, which results in the inevitable gibberish ;)

Got to feel sorry for him though...
 
Sponsored Links
It isn't an onion; more of a pickle, really, for the government in deciding how future relations will look as long as Israel maintains it's MAD rush to the destruction of Hamas in Rafah - they may even achieve their aim, but at what cost? Netanyahu's political career will end in a blizzard of condemnation and recriminations that'll drag Israel into the UN for a detailed explanation of its conduct towards civilians in this war. The evidence is plain to see and Rish! has to decide on whether to keep sending arms to feed the Zionist war machine or place a temporary embargo on the regime until they bring their dogs of war to heel.
 
Well the Uk can suspend some arms supplies to Israel

Which won’t make a **ts bit of difference :giggle:

Perhaps if the Uk did so it would appease the protestors ??

And they can than find some thing else to protest / march over
 
Sure, blame protestors for marching in defiance of Israel walking over International law every day.

Meanwhile...@Al Jazz
Late last month, the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian Territory Francesca Albanese sent a warning to Israel’s Western allies, issuing a report stating that there were clear indications that Israel was violating the UN Genocide Convention, and emphasising that complicity in genocide was also “expressly prohibited, giving rise to obligations for third states”.

“A failure by states such as Germany, the UK and the US to reassess how they are providing support to Israel provides grounds to question whether those states are violating the obligation to prevent genocide or could even at some point be considered complicit in acts of genocide or other violations of international law,” Michael Becker, a professor of international human rights law at Trinity College in Dublin who has previously worked at the ICJ, told Al Jazeera.

These countries are finding it harder to plead ignorance. In a leaked recording on Saturday, Alicia Kearns, a Conservative member who is the chair of the UK parliament’s foreign affairs committee, is heard saying that UK government lawyers have advised that Israel has breached international humanitarian law, but the British government has not announced it.
 
Triggered a few then - that's always a bonus. Yet not one them have addressed any of the issues. Remember October the 7th by any chance?
Rather than that they go straight to personal attack - well says it all really.
 
Triggered a few then - that's always a bonus. Yet not one them have addressed any of the issues. Remember October the 7th by any chance?
Rather than that they go straight to personal attack - well says it all really.
Do you believe Israel has acted proportionately in response to the Oct 7th attack?
 
Remember October the 7th by any chance?
That doesn't matter in a broad sense. The reasons for Israel's attack are irrelevant they still need to stick to international law. That puts obligations on the attacker eg aid is one. Destruction of infrastructure also figures. Take electricity. A technical war crime as both military and civilians use it. Water and fuel can also be regarded the same way. A military commander has no alternative other than to think about this and justify their actions. The same applies to collateral damage. Hospitals are more or less a no no in terms of an attack. Also military action interfering with aid.

Benjamin gets off to a flying start by stating no essentials at all will go into the Gaza Strip. Hasn't worked out but a variety of Israeli decisions have reduced it to a trickle. Political decisions.

There is another aspect as well. Israel pulls out of the Strip. However they place a very heavy embargo on it so in effect are still occupying it.
 
1712313921625.png


1200 civilians murdered, Women raped and sexually tortured, 200+ civilians taken hostage. But they don't matter and are irrelevant. FFS.
 
57 days for the UN to acknowledge there 'may' have been some sexual violence in the attack. Unfortunately its not just on here that think they had it coming.
 
'They had it coming' seems to be a consensus among many on here.
I have a feeling that the consensus amongst those who oppose the continual circle of violence is that the only way to solve the problem is to provide a two state solution...
 
'They had it coming' seems to be a consensus among many on here.
That doesn't figure in law. The law is what it is. All countries have to live with it. They can still result in lots of civilian deaths but there are also all of the other factors that have to be considered as well.
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top