I think it does not go far enough. In this case, it is not simply a divorced couple who both acted badly and are irrational. This is a case of an abused woman (Israel) and an abusive husband (Hamas). To make it worse, the context would be in the deep south, say about 1955, when the judge (the ICJ, the UN, etc.) is drinking buddies with the abusive husband. Do you really think she will get the support she needs? Things will get worse, not better in this environment. Sure, the "husband" will call the ex-wife "abusive" if she acted out in any way to defend herself, and the "judge" will take those actions as justification for the real abuse perpetrated by the husband.
Well, my only point is that both sides are likely to say this. They’ll both accuse the other of being abusive and claim they are the real victim, and they’ll both say the other has the justice system on their side and that all the judges are biased against them. And they may well have legitimate reasons to back it up- real examples of abuse, genuine fear that the judge isn’t going to be fair based on past statements, how public opinion may play a role, and so forth. But that doesn’t mean we give them a blank check to fight on and on regardless of the consequences to their children and family and to do whatever they want. The community has to be firm, and the justice system as imperfect as it is has to step in and take control. The parties will complain loudly and bitterly, but there’s no other way.
I'll accept this analogy, but only to a point.
I think it does not go far enough. In this case, it is not simply a divorced couple who both acted badly and are irrational. This is a case of an abused woman (Israel) and an abusive husband (Hamas). To make it worse, the context would be in the deep south, say about 1955, when the judge (the ICJ, the UN, etc.) is drinking buddies with the abusive husband. Do you really think she will get the support she needs? Things will get worse, not better in this environment. Sure, the "husband" will call the ex-wife "abusive" if she acted out in any way to defend herself, and the "judge" will take those actions as justification for the real abuse perpetrated by the husband.
Good analogy, you just didn't take if far enough.
Well, my only point is that both sides are likely to say this. They’ll both accuse the other of being abusive and claim they are the real victim, and they’ll both say the other has the justice system on their side and that all the judges are biased against them. And they may well have legitimate reasons to back it up- real examples of abuse, genuine fear that the judge isn’t going to be fair based on past statements, how public opinion may play a role, and so forth. But that doesn’t mean we give them a blank check to fight on and on regardless of the consequences to their children and family and to do whatever they want. The community has to be firm, and the justice system as imperfect as it is has to step in and take control. The parties will complain loudly and bitterly, but there’s no other way.