Trump will be much worse. Wrong or disastrous are the choices. Yet Biden still blocking a ceasefire, why...

I'm curious what the US has to say tomorrow at the ICJ hearings on Israel's occupation of Palestine. So far 10 countries have passionately condemned Israel's apartheid regime and ongoing occupation and violent expropriation of Palestinian properties in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Is the US going to be the lone voice defending Israel (Israel itself isn't bothering to show up) in between 50 other countries.

Biden still says he's for a 2 state solution, but maybe that's on the condition there aren't any Palestinians left in Gaza...

Biden-linked Israel advocate previously urged ‘scrutiny’ of Muslims

I think the US will stand by Israel. But I think so for different reasons that I dont feel need to be addressed.
Could this be a lead into WWIII?

So far Iran isn't interested in escalation. They're fine pestering US bases through their proxy groups. Contrary to Israel's belief, Arab countries rather just want 'peace' in the sense they get the economic benefits of normalization with Israel while maintaining their own control of their population. They don't want refugees, just like Europe.

Russia is decimating their own army reserves in Ukraine, but they do still have nukes :/

Which leaves China, which doesn't seem interested in joining the conflict either. There is this maybe worrying report
https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/21/business/china-corporate-militias-resurgence-int-hnk/index.html

Chinese companies are doing something rarely seen since the 1970s: setting up their own volunteer armies. At least 16 major Chinese firms, including a privately-owned dairy giant, have established fighting forces over the past year, according to a CNN analysis of state media reports.

These units, known as the People’s Armed Forces Departments, are composed of civilians who retain their regular jobs. They act as a reserve and auxiliary force for China’s military, the world’s largest, and are available for missions ranging from responding to natural disasters and helping maintain “social order” to providing support during wartime.

I don't think anyone has any interest in WW3, rather they want less US influence. (So they can do their own dirty work) The US still has by far the largest army and is the only country which has shown they will use nukes. Instead of leading into WW3, this more likely leads to more isolation of the US, more preference in the ME to deal with China rather than the US. And depending on how it is resolved, it might bolster people like Putin to annex more territory. Same with China. If the international order can't stop the Ukraine invasion nor the Gaza genocide, what would any other country care about violating international law.

No WW3, just gonna be an even shittier place for the oppressed :( And there will be some economic consequences.

It has always been a shitty dog-eat-dog world. Wars and coups were all the rage until the 70s and 80s, UN be damned. We'll look back at the anomalously quiet decades in the aftermath of the Soviet Union's dissolution most of us grew in and remember them as the most peaceful (and democratic) period of our lifetimes.

Hmm. I grew up with the IRA bombings, Freddy Heineken hostage taking and frequent plane hijackings, Lebanon, Falklands, Iran-Iraq wars, Tsjernobyl fallout, Rwanda genocide, Gulf war, Kosovo war, then 9/11 happened and things only heated up more.

I don't remember any quiet decades...

https://isnblog.ethz.ch/uncategorized/trends-in-armed-conflict-1946-2018

Death toll from armed conflict has been going down, but that's changed completely in the past 5 years
https://ourworldindata.org/war-and-peace

It's more that conflicts also took a lot longer, 20 years of Afghanistan from 2001

During the War in Afghanistan, according to the Costs of War Project the war killed 176,000 people in Afghanistan: 46,319 civilians, 69,095 military and police and at least 52,893 opposition fighters.

Invasion of Iraq since 2003

https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/human/civilians/iraqi

• There have been between 280,771-315,190 Iraqi civilians killed by direct violence since the U.S. invasion.

• The actual number of civilians killed by direct and indirect war violence is unknown but likely much higher.

• Life-threatening damage to Iraqi health care and other infrastructure has not been repaired: civilians are still dying in significant numbers.

Probably also one of the reasons Israel is saying, "what's the big deal"... Big daddy could flatten Mosul and Fallujah without consequences.

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/03/iraq-20-years-since-the-us-led-coalition-invaded-iraq-impunity-reigns-supreme/

Peaceful if you ignore the news...

Not sure how you can continue to watch the news, @SvennoJ, thank you for keeping the Palestinian thread updated, I shut off recently and my mood has been cranky, even Bernie fumbled easy questions by Novara Media. People don't seem to understand that the Israeli genocide is more disgusting than the Russian one because one is preventable by a push of a button, funded by our money and the other one is simply not.

The Israel genocide is much bigger indicator of the west fading relevancy than the Russian will be when it's all said and done. Labour and Biden can't get the IDF soldiers to stop parading & documenting their genocide on TikTok despite the massive damage its doing to their election chances. I have been moaning a lot about the weak west and the rising global south recently even before this war, glad to see Israel clearly telling us which faction it belongs to despite all the help and protection they receive, as if MBS and the gulf states needed more reassurances that their continuous humiliation of Biden is consequence-less 

Our politicians continue to shell for their donors first, mega-corporations and foreign rich donors above all. I hope people continue to harass them in public and expose them for the obedient drones they are. Labour can thank their luck that the average right-wing British voter seems to off-put-able by lies and broken promises compared to Republican voters, otherwise, Kier would be in a similar position to Biden, i.e., losing in most polls. 

The 90s and the 00s were definitely more peaceful than the preceding decades, even more so if you account for population growth.

US Politicians also can't stop inciting genocide. Imagine if anyone congressman would openly call for the death of all jews...

Republican Congressman Andy Ogles said of Gaza, "We should kill them all."



Long time US impunity has done its work as well.



Meanwhile Canada is acting the coward again, pulled out of the ICJ arguments at the last minute, but did submit a written statement earlier in support of Israel.

Some see it as a positive:
Canada’s shift in stance appears to be a strategic move to distance itself from any potential implication of genocide. The withdrawal from advocating on behalf of Israel suggests recognizing the urgency and gravity of the situation.

However it's just a coward move not to get called out in the media

Global Affairs Canada says an oral submission was unnecessary because the government's position, while still relevant, has not changed. In a written submission from last summer, Canada says it should be the UN Security Council, not the General Assembly, to help broker a negotiated peace. Canada is urging the court not to issue an advisory opinion for fear it would disrupt efforts to work towards a two-state solution.

It's basically the same legal maneuvering the US and Hungary have provided
https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/186/186-20230724-wri-01-00-en.pdf

The UK hasn't submitted a written statement, I'm curious what they have to say tomorrow.

I wouldn't really call it more peaceful, just that the conflicts at the time were either over very quickly or lower intensity in general, so they couldn't "compete" with conflicts like the Chinese civil war (first spike, late 1940's), Vietnam (second spike, mid-60's to mid-70's), the Irak-Iran war (third spike, 80's) or the Arab Winter (fourth spike, 2010's) in terms of people killed directly by those wars.

I mean, if one were to extend that graph for 10 additional years until 1936, then everything after 1945 would be looking peaceful by comparison - but was it really?

It is factually more peaceful (= fewer lives lost, less material damage), you just helped explain why. Just like the Cold War period was more peaceful than WW2, yes (hence the name).

That doesn't mean it was *absolutely* peaceful by any stretch of the imagination.