‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

Updated Google Maps shows destruction of the city of Rafah

943 points · 947 comments · slowin

  1. bognition · · focus · HN ↗
    Its really telling to see the destruction limited to where the structures used to be rather than to all of the surrounding green spaces. If the destruction of civilian dwellings was purely an accident you'd expect to see the destruction spread evenly over the area. Instead it looks much more like a prolonged set of surgical strikes to destroy the buildings while preserving as much of the surrounding areas as possible.

    For a great example of this, look at this pin <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;maps.app.goo.gl&#x2F;ZcMbdFcx87PrqoYNA" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;maps.app.goo.gl&#x2F;ZcMbdFcx87PrqoYNA

    And here&#x27;s a pin of where the farms were spared <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;maps.app.goo.gl&#x2F;iZbbTH4iH27FCz4s9" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;maps.app.goo.gl&#x2F;iZbbTH4iH27FCz4s9

    1. YZF · · focus · HN ↗
      The buildings were levelled with bulldozers for the most part after the civilians left during combat operations against the tunnel infrastructure and any remaining combatants. Not sure what the &quot;surgical strikes&quot; comment is about. Are you asking why weren&#x27;t open spaces destroyed or attacked?
      1. a_paddy · · focus · HN ↗
        How does bulldozing a family home have any affect on a tunnel?
        1. vkou · · focus · HN ↗

          [dead]

          1. fesoliveira · · focus · HN ↗
            That is a definition of a genocide[1].

            [1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.un.org&#x2F;en&#x2F;genocide-prevention&#x2F;definition" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.un.org&#x2F;en&#x2F;genocide-prevention&#x2F;definition

            1. mb2100 · · focus · HN ↗
              Not quite. Perhaps you were thinking of &quot;ethnic cleansing&quot; ?
              1. latexr · · focus · HN ↗
                It seems bonkers to me that we’re nitpicking what to call a given mass extermination of human lives, like some kind of deranged Clippy. Talk about loss of perspective.

                The link provided in your parent post explicitly says there is no precise definition of “ethnic cleansing”, so I don’t even understand why you’d think the distinction matters.

                1. JumpCrisscross · · focus · HN ↗
                  &gt; seems bonkers to me that we’re nitpicking what to call a given mass extermination of human lives

                  The OG genocides involved deaths in the millions [1]. That requires killing with industrial efficiency, something that made it categorically unique from the &quot;wipe out the village&quot; warfare that goes back to, probably, before civilisation. (Chimpanzees do it. To my knowledge, they&#x27;re the only other species that annihilates versus merely fighting off enemies.)

                  At lower kill volumes, even in the tens and possibly even hundreds of thousands, the line between conventional warfare done conservatively, conventional warfare done brutally and a process that, if left unhindered, will reach a million-man death toll.

                  (Then you have the ambiguity, one which does not apply in Gaza, introduced by displacement also being included in genocide and it starts to intersect pretty much perfectly with war.)

                  If we want these words to keep having meaning, we have to nitpick around their use. Otherwise, overinclusivity will consume them.

                  [1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;List_of_genocides" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;List_of_genocides

                  1. claykkari · · focus · HN ↗
                    Nitpick all you want, but at some point you should also ask why this is being debated so widely in the first place, and whether it&#x27;s time for the international community to step in. Those approaches aren&#x27;t mutually exclusive.
                    1. JumpCrisscross · · focus · HN ↗
                      &gt; you should also ask why this is being debated so widely in the first place

                      Because there are lots of wars burning all over the planet. We tried to carve an exception into international law, after WWII, about it being permissible to intervene in the internal affairs of another sovereign state if they&#x27;re doing genocide. So this is a real debate that should be had. The problem is by practically every definition, there are at least a handful of active genocides happening in multiple theaters around the world.

                      The abhorrence of genocide is one that needs to be refreshed with action if we&#x27;re to restore the norm that it&#x27;s not okay. But to do that, you have to set the new threshold.

                      1. kyboren · · focus · HN ↗
                        [delayed]
Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.