What if the United States is helping commit genocide?

By Christopher Moore

Not “what if” as in tin-foil hat. “What if” as in: match the facts on the ground with the law on paper, and then look at what Washington is doing while those facts pile up.

First, the ground truth (the part everyone wants to skip)

Since October 7, 2023, Gaza’s been hammered into a humanitarian black hole. By late July 2025, Gaza’s Health Ministry said 60,034 Palestinians were dead and 145,870 injured; The Washington Post ran a database of 18,500 children named among the dead. That toll keeps climbing. Famine isn’t a “risk” anymore—it’s happening; WHO counted a surge of malnutrition deaths in July, and U.S. and allied media have documented children and adults literally starving. Multiple governments are now pleading for Israel to open the gates for aid, calling the situation “unimaginable.”

Meanwhile, Israel has moved toward formal occupation plans in Gaza City and says it will seize new areas “quickly,” even as starvation spreads and airdrops substitute for blocked convoys. That’s not me editorializing; that’s their own positioning.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ)—the U.N.’s top court—didn’t (yet) say “genocide proven,” but it did find South Africa’s genocide case against Israel is plausible, and it ordered Israel—three separate times—to ensure unimpeded aid, prevent genocidal acts, and, in May 2024, to halt the Rafah offensive. Those are binding provisional measures.

U.N. human-rights experts went further this spring: stop an “unfolding genocide,” and warned that states fiddling with bespoke aid schemes while bombs fall are flirting with complicity. Their words, not mine.

So yeah—the “is something criminal happening?” question is not coming out of thin air.

Now the uncomfortable part: what the U.S. is doing while that happens

Washington has delivered unprecedented support. AP tallied at least $17.9B in military aid in one year after Oct. 7—the biggest single-year total ever—on top of the long-standing $3.8B annual pipeline and extra appropriations. Congress’ own researchers clock the scale and mechanisms (FMF, missile defense, special transfers). This isn’t abstract sympathy; it’s jets, shells, precision kits, fuel, and political cover.

Diplomatically, the U.S. has repeatedly vetoed Security Council cease-fire resolutions (Dec 8, 2023; Feb 20, 2024; Nov 20, 2024; June 5, 2025), even as civilian deaths and hunger spiked. The U.S. did abstain once in March 2024, letting a Ramadan cease-fire resolution pass—but the broader pattern is clear: keep the military campaign going, negotiate pauses later.

Under Biden, the White House momentarily paused 2,000-lb bombs in May 2024 (the city-buster kind), then resumed other munitions. Under Trump (2025-), restrictions were dropped or rolled back; Reuters reported the rescission of a Biden-era oversight memo on the use of U.S.-supplied weapons, and pro-government outlets touted the release of the very bombs Biden had held. Net effect: the spigot is open wider today.

Meanwhile, famine alarms are blaring. WHO says July’s malnutrition deaths exploded. The Post and Reuters have chronicled starvation and aid obstruction. A bloc of U.S. allies is publicly saying Israel must grant full, permanent U.N. access because current plans aren’t stopping the hunger. That’s the scene while U.S. munitions keep moving.

“What if” through a legal lens (not vibes—law)

Two legal frames matter:

1. Genocide Convention: It punishes not only genocide itself but complicity in genocide (Article III(e)). You don’t have to pull the trigger; helping the trigger-puller knowing what’s happening can bite.


2. State Responsibility (Article 16, ILC): A state that aids or assists another state’s internationally wrongful act is responsible if it does so with knowledge of the circumstances and if the act would be wrongful for the assisting state too. In plain English: if you know your support materially enables violations—say, starvation of civilians or indiscriminate strikes—you don’t get to wash your hands because somebody else dropped the bomb. Knowledge matters. Timing matters. Scale matters.

Do we have “knowledge”? The ICJ’s orders, U.N./WHO warnings, and front-page reporting about starvation and blocked aid aren’t secrets. They’re the headlines of our era. When the top court orders unimpeded aid and a halt in Rafah, and the famine worsens anyway, you can’t claim you missed the memo.

Is the underlying act “internationally wrongful”? Using starvation as a method of warfare and preventing life-saving aid are banned under international humanitarian law; that’s why the court flagged them. At minimum, we’re deep into alleged war crimes/crimes against humanity territory; multiple U.N. experts are already using the “genocide” word with the evidentiary posture the ICJ described as plausible. That’s the danger zone for complicity.

“But we’re sending aid too!”

True—and some of it’s real money and logistics. But ask the only question that counts to a starving child: is it getting in, at scale, safely, every day? The answer, according to WHO and dozens of governments, is no. The U.S. has also vetoed U.N. routes to a durable cease-fire that aid groups say is the first precondition for stopping the hunger. You can’t airdrop your way out of a siege.

There’s also the optics problem: Washington backed a U.S.-branded aid mechanism while keeping weapons flowing. U.N. experts warned that leaving a state accused of genocide in charge of feeding the population it’s bombing isn’t a “humanitarian innovation,” it’s a complicity trap.

Biden vs. Trump (because policy isn’t neutral)

Biden tried to split the baby: big support + occasional pressure (that short pause on heavy bombs, public nudges on civilian protection), while still vetoing several full cease-fires. Net: high support with sporadic humanitarian caveats that didn’t change the arc of the campaign.

Trump blew past the caveats: green-lighting munitions Biden held, scrapping oversight, publicly aligning with maximal Israeli military aims while floating provocative “day-after” ideas. Net: accelerated transfers, fewer brakes.

If complicity is a spectrum, the needle moved right.

The “what if” test (how a prosecutor would frame the questions)

Were U.S. officials on notice that mass civilian harm and starvation were occurring? (ICJ orders; WHO famine warnings; allied statements; daily press.) Yes.

Did the U.S. materially enable the operations producing that harm? (Record weapons flows; vetoes shielding the campaign; rollback of safeguards.) Yes.

Did Washington tie aid to enforceable humanitarian conditions—and actually enforce them? (Mostly no; one brief bomb pause under Biden, then resumed; broader support continued.) Mostly no.

That doesn’t automatically equal legal complicity in genocide—the threshold is brutally high, and intent is the battlefield. But if you’re asking me, in plain language, whether the U.S. is taking real risks of complicity under Article 16 (aid/assist) and Genocide Convention Article III(e) (complicity), the evidence says: yeah, those risks are live.

So what does “not being complicit” look like?

Condition transfers on real, verified humanitarian access (open land crossings, U.N.-led distribution at scale), and suspend specific munitions when those conditions fail—no fig leaves. That’s how you reduce the Article 16 exposure.

Stop vetoing cease-fire resolutions that line up with your own stated goals (release hostages + sustained aid). Let the U.N. do its job.

Back the court orders you claim to respect. If the ICJ says “unimpeded aid” and “halt Rafah,” act like that’s binding—because it is.

Bottom line (the part you can’t unsee)

If genocide is the cliff, complicity is the gas pedal. And right now, the U.S. isn’t a bystander in the back seat—it’s got a foot on that pedal while yelling, “We’re tapping the brakes, promise,” as the guardrail gives way. You don’t need poetry to describe that. You just need to read the orders from The Hague, the famine bulletins, and the arms-transfer receipts stacked on the Resolute Desk.

That’s “what if.” It’s also “what now.”

-The Gun Loving Hippie Dad … Who Fixes Stuff

Postscript: Preempting the Evasion Game (I already told you it tried to be wrong)

There’s a predictable script to how people will try to wave this away. I’m just going to knock those points down now so you don’t have to scroll through the comment section later.

First, they’ll say “The Gaza Health Ministry is Hamas, so the numbers are propaganda.”
Fine. Pretend every death count is inflated. Now look at the rubble, the cratered neighborhoods, the drone footage, the thousands of independent videos from journalists, NGOs, and even Israeli soldiers. Unless we believe all of that is one giant deepfake, the destruction alone proves the human cost.

Next, they’ll insist “The starvation photos are staged.”
If those images were fake, then what explains the empty markets, the U.N. famine declarations, the hospitals overrun with skeletal children? You’d have to believe an entire global network of aid agencies conspired to fake the collapse of an entire food system—while under constant international scrutiny.

They’ll also say “Aid isn’t blocked, Hamas just steals it.”
Really? Let’s take their own number—say 30,000 Hamas fighters remain. Gaza is 25 kilometers long. It’s under 24/7 drone surveillance. Every convoy is tracked, guarded, and 90% of the perimeter is controlled by the IDF. How much can they possibly “steal” without the whole world watching? The math—and the logistics—don’t add up.

Here’s the harder truth: the entire world is implicated. Every Arab state. Every Western ally. But the United States, as the self-proclaimed moral superpower that’s started multiple wars “to liberate others,” carries a heavier obligation. Instead, our politicians are bought and sold, and the war narrative is wrapped in a massive, bipartisan lie.

And here’s the scoreboard Israel doesn’t want to talk about:

1. Disarm Hamas – Hamas is still armed, organized, and operating.

2. Free all hostages – Every single one released came through mediation, not military rescue.

By their own stated goals, this war has failed—except in one grim metric: the destruction of civilian life on a scale so vast that it can’t be spun away. And if the destruction isn’t an accident, then history won’t just ask what Israel did. It will ask what we did while we were holding the gas pedal.

If genocide doesn’t bother you, own it. Say, “Yeah, I’m fine with genocide.”

But don’t get all fragile when I call you a Nazi. That label fits red, blue, and every shade in between.

Rants, repairs, and realness