Yeah, a bunch of those orders would, if carried out, not result in conscripts being convicted by a war crimes tribunal. Maybe some would, idk, but not all, from what I’ve read.
I think you see the blatant immorality of the effect of Israel’s actions and want to blame everyone for it that you can. But that’s an emotional response, not a rational one. There are those responsible who should be prosecuted, but as the individual gets further away from an architect of that effect, that responsibility necessarily diminishes. If cleaning the toilets is immoral, what about an IDF soldier’s partner who cooks for them when they’re on leave? What about someone who buys an Israeli export? What about someone who fails to go on an anti-genocide march? Surely you’d want all those people to do what they can, but is there a sharp dividing line in criminal responsibility before an international court in there? Because surely you don’t think any of those are guilty of war crimes like those “just following orders” were, even if you do want them to act differently.
Nice moving of the goalposts, but in two of your examples, the IDF soldier and their partner- both are complicit in supporting the genocidal settler state in their actions, and both are living off land stolen from the people that lived there before they were criminally displaced.
I dont disagree that the people responsible should be punished, that goes without saying, but suggesting that people who unknowingly purchase produce (not including those actively supporting the genocide by providing arms and equipment, who are responsible and should be punished accordingly) and the ones who aren’t at the protests hold far less sway than the people actively perpetrating war crimes, and suggestion to the otherwise is willfully ignorant of both how international law works and intentionally misinterpreting my point.
Yeah, a bunch of those orders would, if carried out, not result in conscripts being convicted by a war crimes tribunal. Maybe some would, idk, but not all, from what I’ve read.
I think you see the blatant immorality of the effect of Israel’s actions and want to blame everyone for it that you can. But that’s an emotional response, not a rational one. There are those responsible who should be prosecuted, but as the individual gets further away from an architect of that effect, that responsibility necessarily diminishes. If cleaning the toilets is immoral, what about an IDF soldier’s partner who cooks for them when they’re on leave? What about someone who buys an Israeli export? What about someone who fails to go on an anti-genocide march? Surely you’d want all those people to do what they can, but is there a sharp dividing line in criminal responsibility before an international court in there? Because surely you don’t think any of those are guilty of war crimes like those “just following orders” were, even if you do want them to act differently.
Nice moving of the goalposts, but in two of your examples, the IDF soldier and their partner- both are complicit in supporting the genocidal settler state in their actions, and both are living off land stolen from the people that lived there before they were criminally displaced.
I dont disagree that the people responsible should be punished, that goes without saying, but suggesting that people who unknowingly purchase produce (not including those actively supporting the genocide by providing arms and equipment, who are responsible and should be punished accordingly) and the ones who aren’t at the protests hold far less sway than the people actively perpetrating war crimes, and suggestion to the otherwise is willfully ignorant of both how international law works and intentionally misinterpreting my point.