How could relocation within the same territory be ethnic cleansing? By that logic, I was ethnically cleansed by our fire department due to an approaching wildfire. Ethnic cleaning also wouldn't imply genocide anyway.
> So the Warsaw ghetto wasn't ethnic cleasing because they stayed in Poland?
I suppose you have a point, my framing was off. But the IDF asking people to leave a dangerous area is much closer to a fire evacuation than a ghetto where residents are broadly denied freedom of movement.
> Did they leave people of certain ethnicities out of the evacuation?
Neither did. IDF couldn't care less about someone's skin color either, just that they're in a dangerous area. Jews would have been asked to leave just like anyone else, had they not already been ethnically cleansed from Gaza in 2005.
> How exactly do you expect Israel to fight a war without creating dangerous areas?
Forced displacement is a war crime. 90% of Gazans have been displaced, with up to 3/4 of the area under interdict (and the areas outside that were still bombed quite regularly). War certainly comes with some inherent danger, but beligerents have responsibilities to civilian populations, especially ones in territories they occupy.
> The target population they sought to evacuate is just whoever resided in the combat area, which is not an ethnicity.
This is not an argument made in good faith, and you know it.
With a very important exception for the security of civilians. It's much better to ask civilians to leave before a major military operation than to just start the operation with all the civilians there.
Or do you have a different suggestion for what Israel should done? Just left Hamas alone after Oct 7?
> beligerents have responsibilities to civilian populations
Of course, but you haven't identified any particular responsibilities that were not met here.
> This is not an argument made in good faith, and you know it.
Do you have an actual argument for why what look like standard measures to minimize civilian harm were actually some backdoor ethnic cleansing scheme?
> Israel was still occupying Gaza, according to an ICJ ruling
That's not what the court said. Its language was
> In light of the above, the Court is of the view that Israel’s withdrawal from the Gaza Strip has not entirely released it of its obligations under the law of occupation. Israel’s obligations have remained commensurate with the degree of its effective control over the Gaza Strip.
As it often does, the court used intentionally ambiguous language to try to get a majority of judges on board. But the most natural reading seems to be a novel idea that occupation is non-binary, and Gaza lies somewhere on a spectrum of being occupied or not.
No, Gaza was considered definitively occupied again starting in 2007, after Israel instituted air and sea border control, and control of its 2 land borders with influence on its Egypt border as well
UN reports have consistently referred to Gaza is occupied; your point about the ambiguity of the ICJ's 2004 ruling is noted, but it looks like UN's policy was to provisionally consider that a claim that Gaza is still occupied, while in 2022 or early 2023, requesting the ICJ put out a clarifying advisory opinion.
IPC had to ignore their own definition to declare a famine though. An actual famine involves at least 2 starvations per 10,000 people per day, among other requirements. According to Hamas' own data, Gaza was always several orders of magnitude short of that.
First, the IPC famine scale is a scale in phases, not a simple yes-no binary.
Second, yes there is a war going on - solid data is hard to come by. But that’s a lack of data, not a change in their criteria. You can read their full mortality analysis and reasoning starting on page 24 https://www.ipcinfo.org/fileadmin/user_upload/ipcinfo/docs/I...
The conclusion is:
>Considering the available evidence, and in line with
the IPC Guidance Note on Famine Classification,64
the FRC infers from the available data that mortality
thresholds for Famine have already been exceeded in
Gaza Governorate. Based on expert judgement, we also
conclude that the Famine thresholds for mortality have
not yet been crossed in Deir al-Balah or Khan Younis
governorates.
No goalposts moved. Based on the data we have, people are dying of malnutrition.
There is 400 amp residential service you can get 80 amp 19.2 kw level 2 chargers.
You would need 5 80 amp charger to approach 100kw but with other loads in a large house, I have seen large HVAC systems and elaborate pools with lazy rivers etc that can add up very quickly which is why they had 400 amp service.
100kw isn't really that much, a modern EV can put out 3 times that from its battery pack into the motor for short bursts and easily sustain 100kw until drained.
480v 200 amp 3 phase commercial supply can provide 100kw continuous and would be some thing used in a medium sized office building.
As the sibling comment notes, these days 400a residential service is available as an option in many places.
One home actually consuming close to 400a is pretty rare, but it's possible mainly in gas-free builds, if using things like electric tankless water heaters (a bit niche) in addition to multiple EV chargers, a range, dryer, etc.
Maybe a better way to convey that 100kW is “small” is to point out that industrial sites all around us, such as smaller datacenters, are well into the MW range.
Gaza's "air defense" is hundreds of miles of tunnels, civilians just aren't allowed to shelter in them. Hamas having better technology wouldn't change the fact that they're not interested in protecting civilians.
I’m not going to defend hamas’ choices, but i think it’s disingenuous to say that they have the ability to protect the people of gaza. A few thousand fighters in tunnels is possible, but millions of civilians? And wouldn’t that be more of this “using human shields” stuff people like to point out so often?
I think you have it backwards. Israel tolerated something like ~30k rocket attacks from Gaza (between 2005-2023) before finally launching a major military campaign that sought to remove Hamas from power.
It would normally be absurd to expect a state with military superiority to tolerate ~30k rocket attacks from its weaker neighbor. That was only tenable because Israel's air defenses mitigated the bulk of the damage.
If Israel's air defenses and bunkers suddenly disappeared, Israel would be forced to respond far more aggressively to each terrorist attack.
reply