You misunderstand. By the Mirriam-Webster definition, genocide does not mean killing every single person of a people group, but the attempted murder of all
Well, of course not. I did not say there was no time in history genocide happened, nor did Mirriam-Webster. The Germans tried to destroy all Jews in WW2 times, and killed 6 million. As for the IDF, my point was not very well put if you think I meant the killing of every single Palestinian. Note that: (1) At this point, the population of Gaza is about 2.1 million. (2) According to the data, there have been about 73,470 killed out of a population of 2.1 million (
https://gisha.org/en/publication_type/gaza-now-current-facts-and-figures/). BBC News (a neutral source) says that about 23,600 of those are Hamas fighters (citing Israeli sources,
Israeli media cite official accepting Hamas figure of 70,000 war dead). So, out of 2,100,000 total population (many still Hamas fighters), 49,870 civilians have died. That means only 2.4 per cent of the civilian population of Gaza have died.
So, you have been deceived. There is no genocide. 2.4% of a population, with the fighting stopped, is not genocide in any way, shape or form. Even liberal Democrats are not using that term any more, as I have shown. So you are to the left of the most leftist politicians.
Sorry, I can't ignore the fact that you are using the most inadequate source on the planet: Wikipedia. I consider it completely untrustworthy. Most academics do not allow Wikipedia, and the schools where I teach do not allow it as a source in any endeavor. I once looked up a Greek NT ms on it, and there were two different notes about the content of the ms. That is because any amateur can correct any professional on it.
And no, the Genocide Convention has no legitimacy whatsoever. It has an antisemite agenda. And as for including "intent" in the crime of genocide, that's ridiculous. If I go into a store with the "intent" to shoplift, but think better of it and leave the store, have I shoplifted? No, of course not. "Intent" makes the accuser out to be a mind reader, and that is impossible. No one can tell "intent" accurately. It is exactly what the "thought police" of the novel 1984 were supposed to control.
