Really? Can you support that assertion with, well, anything?
Well it's self evident from you post
I agree. Why are we only interested in Israeli war criminals?
We are also interested in
Russian war criminals, for example. So we are are not
only interested in Israeli war criminals as you implied by your question.
I've listed far bigger conflicts, some of them current, in which the Irish media and Government has shown little of no interest.
What the media does or doesn't do is a red herring.
Would you like me to list them off individually again so that you can back up the proposition that we are just as interested in them as we are in what Israel does?
See how you've moved the goal posts, it was "we are
only interested in X" and now it's "we are not
as interested in Y as we are in X". This implies there is some other reason why X should be a particular focus and not the substantive issue itself e.g. in the Israel context, the substantive point is the application of HR/Int law but also the Irish are anitsemiites so that's why they are focusing on Israel. Its a nonsense. Y is moveable too.
As for other conflicts, in the other thread you posted the below:
Meanwhile in Sudan;
60,000 dead, 11,000,000 displaced and 25,000,000 living off aid.
Not a dickeybird out of Michael Martin about this conflict. Not a word against UAE, despite them backing one side, the same side as Russia, while stealing millions on gold from the country.
I responded with a number of references of how MM/Ireland directly addressed this and other conflicts in various actions over the course of months.
Here is a contribution to the Foreign Affairs Committee meeting on the Sudan conflict that I referenced in that thread
Ms Jane-Ann McKenna: I thank the Deputy. On the first question regarding the political solution, we would like to acknowledge that when the Tánaiste was in New York only a few weeks ago, he called out all the external actors that are fuelling this conflict very clearly. That was a welcome move because it is not an easy statement to make at the UN General Assembly that there are very much other actors fuelling this conflict. Unfortunately, we are not seeing people coming to the table collectively who are the critical actors in this conflict, not only obviously the relative parties but particularly the countries that are fuelling it. The Taoiseach will bein Washington today and we are hoping that he will address this with President Biden to exert political pressure.
So "not a dickybird" is not a fair reflection of the State's actions.
Intervening in SA's case at the ICC was seen as particularly targeting Israel, yet Ireland also intends to intervene in Gambia's case against Myanmar. Now is this a situation where Ireland is
as interested in the substantive issue or is the latter intervention done to ostensibly provide "cover" for the former? The answer shouldn't matter, by the way. It's the substantive issue that should be discussed on its own merits, relative to International law, not relative to other criminal actions.
It is a legitimate position for the State to pursue Israel at the ICC or Sudan or Russia as a standalone issue.