What I should have said is that if displacement were part of a plan or policy to destroy, it could be evidence of a specific intent to destroy. But displacement due to urban warfare, that is a result of warning people to leave, is not. If there were intent to “destroy” there wound be no warnings. As I said in my piece, Israel may have engaged in a disproportionate response - reasonable minds can disagree in that - but the inevitable horrors of war are not evidence of genocide.

And it’s by *my* response - it’s based on decade’s international jurisprudence. You may no like the findings of the international tribunals, but that doesn’t change the definition of genocide.