• IndustryStandard@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Calling it a genocide comes with legal implications and gives credence to the gravity of the situation. It has nothing to do with virtue signalling. Bernie is doing virtue signalling here. He can both call it a genocide and demand to enter aid. Calling it a genocide would give more credence to his demands to enter aid.

    • xyro@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Legal implications usually come after the events. Seems like a waste of time to ask everyone this questions when they already stated support, no need to gatekeep. Action over words.

      • IndustryStandard@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The legal implications of genocide apply directly when asserted, not after the fact. Namely doing everything to prevent it.

        Actions do speak louder than words. And blocking so called offensive weapons is one thing. But it is very weird that Bernie is so reluctant to call it what it is.

    • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 🇮 @pawb.socialBanned from community
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      He literally says “it’s a legal term.” Since he is not a lawyer, and he clearly is against what Israel is doing, I would more assume he is merely covering his ass on a legal basis.