If it's a single country? Maybe Iceland just off the top of the head? I feel like they would do their best to listen to everyone and go over all the data.
Maybe some sort of neutral council that expressly uses smaller, non dominate countries, that could vote in secrecy and be protected from the wishes of the international super powers.
Speaking at the United Nations, Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian said that Hamas is ready to release hostages on the condition that 6,000 Palestinians, who are currently in Israeli jails, are released as well.
"According to our negotiations, Hamas is ready to release civilian prisoners. On the other hand, the world should support the release of 6,000 Palestinians held in Israeli prisons," he told a meeting of the 193-member General Assembly on the Middle East on Thursday.
Probably not the preferred outcome, but it stops the killing now
Your right, better to just keep bombing. I meant it more as the neutral party decides but both sides agree up front to abide by the terms of the agreement and have no say in how that neutral party decides. Perhaps protection guarantees are made and loss of claims imposed on any further hostilities?
So you also agree that Israel should immediately cease the siege of Gaza and look toward a diplomatic solution that aims to heal both parties loss. Perhaps a brokered peace and lasting agreement by a neutral 3rd party to finally solve all disputes? I think that's a wonderful idea.
Don't forget Tokyo! Those we're all war crimes interestingly enough.
Oddly the siege of Gaza may very well fall into that category with the amount of ordinance that's been dropped, although the terminology would likely be different due to the guided aspect.
Carpet bombing of cities, towns, villages, or other areas containing a concentration of civilians is considered a war crime[5] as of Article 51 of the 1977 Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions.[6][7][8]
The term obliteration bombing is sometimes used to describe especially intensified bombing with the intention of destroying a city or a large part of the city. The term area bombing refers to indiscriminate bombing of an area and also encompasses cases of carpet bombing, including obliteration bombing.
Perhaps it might even get it's own unique term someday. I do find it quite similar from what I'm reading on the first instance of carpet bombing though, the bombing of Barcelona
Along with the variance of the times between each individual attack, this had a demoralizing effect on the civilian population, which suffered prolonged anxiety quite out of proportion to the number of bombs dropped over a long period of time. Coupled with the fact that there was little discernible military value in the choice of targets within the city, and the cessation of the attacks for no apparent reason
Edit: sorry meant to add this as well
The Italian bombers dropped 44 tons of bombs.[7] Rather than aiming at military targets, the Italians intended to destroy industrial areas of the city and demoralize the Republican side, in what some authors have described as the first aerial carpet bombing in history.[1] Their targets and declared objectives were military warehouses, arms factories, trains with soldiers, and the port, but civil buildings, cinemas, consulates, and theatres were also hit or destroyed during the bombing.[8]
I'm not sure how "discriminate" it can be when you're approaching the likely number of bombs dropped being on par with the total number of Hamas members (20-25 thousand). History will not look back on this kindly, no matter what debate will be left on what Israels "intent" was.
So again it's only a matter of time before they report themselves for war crimes or there's a whistle blower.
They'd dropped 6,000 bombs 2 weeks ago and reports say that bombardments have only intensified since then. Hell, at this very moment people are saying it's on a whole different level. I'm sure there's a paper trail and targeting data on all of that which will be meticulously preserved, thoroughly analyzed and made public. Not like it's just indiscriminate bombings...
It could just be this is an active war zone where people are killing each other, and they have other priorities besides guaranteeing the safety of journalists there to be critical of them at present.
You know how many journalists died covering the Ukraine/Russia conflict since 2014? 17. You know how many this year? 2.
I get that no bar of proof will be high enough for you outside of Israel literally admitting to it or someone escaping with inside proof.
Well here's multiple pieces of reporting then as well as a Wikipedia section on this very topic.
This NPR piece sums up the significance of the journalist death toll quite soundly, as well as speaking about alleged crackdowns on journalists. I found this part striking:
"This is unprecedented," Westcott said.
The committee's latest tally is most likely an undercount, as CPJ officials say they are also investigating at least 100 additional reports of journalists killed, missing, detained or threatened. Among those cases are reports of damage done to journalists' offices and homes, Westcott said.
"Based on preliminary reporting, we've also estimated that 48 media facilities in Gaza have been hit or destroyed," she said.
Here's a New York Times article from a week ago titled "Some Israeli Journalists Express Fear About Conveying Dissenting Views"
The first paragraph or so:
Last weekend, at least a dozen people surrounded the home of a left-wing Israeli commentator who had expressed concern about civilian deaths in Gaza, shouting “traitor” and firing flares in his direction.
This week, a prominent right-wing activist posted a video of himself shouting at and threatening members of a TV crew that was filming Israeli soldiers. Other journalists say they are getting threats and being harassed on social media.
Here's a 2021 article titled "Why Israel Blows Up Media Offices and Targets Journalists" by FreePress.org
Here is the CPJ(Committee to Protect Journalists) report titled "Attacks, arrests, threats, censorship: The high risks of reporting the Israel-Hamas war"
and here is the wiki page titled "Violence against journalists in the 2023 Israel–Hamas war"
Seems like a lot of deaths. Almost so much so that there's a questionable amount where a news org like Reuters would ask for some assurances that they wouldn't be targeted. This article is literally how a news org would say that, but not explicitly, so that they wouldn't automatically trigger reprisals.
“The situation on the ground is dire, and the IDF’s unwillingness to give assurances about the safety of our staff threatens their ability to deliver the news about this conflict without fear of being injured or killed," Reuters said in a statement in response to receiving the Israel military letter.
That's a quote from a website, it's not my language, and besides we're not talking about that. We are talking about burdens of proof, specifically what it would take to prove something, and that something being the hypothetical status of Joe Biden as president and devil. Stay on topic.
So what would it take in your personal opinion to prove he is the devil? Obviously not saying he is, but lay out a few scenarios.
So for Joe Biden to be Satan he would have to admit to being Satan? What about pictures of him with a tail or pitchfork? Second hand accounts of transformations? Let's open this up upon your analogy to better understand what works.
Should we listen to religious leaders if they point out he carries the mark of Satan? If there's other lesser demons about should we put more weight to their words if one of them says he's the king of hell? Is there a certain point where enough tangential evidence comes to light that we could say his possession of dark powers is likely?
I guess a fair question to ask in return would be how accurate do you believe Israeli intelligence is at providing location data for bomb strikes in Gaza?
“The situation on the ground is dire, and the IDF’s unwillingness to give assurances about the safety of our staff threatens their ability to deliver the news about this conflict without fear of being injured or killed," Reuters said in a statement in response to receiving the Israel military letter.
Would you say that it's just indiscriminate bombing at this point or that it's more of a deliberate threat?
If it's a single country? Maybe Iceland just off the top of the head? I feel like they would do their best to listen to everyone and go over all the data.
Maybe some sort of neutral council that expressly uses smaller, non dominate countries, that could vote in secrecy and be protected from the wishes of the international super powers.