Israel has not applied to be a member of the ICC so anything Israel does or does not do is irrelevant to the question of whether or not the ICC should admit or have admitted anyone else.

PS: I don't understand why this is controversial (which I infer that it is watching its points rapidly fluctuate).

The ICC exists to enforce certain international criminal law.

Someone suggested that intending to abide by those laws should be a requirement for admissions to the ICC. This seems like a pretty common sense approach. They also pointed out that the leaders in Gaza do not abide by those laws, and that this would have been a good reason for the ICC to not accept their application for admission.

Several people then pointed out that Israel also does not abide by those laws. My point is that this is a reason to reject Israel if they ever apply to join the ICC. When anyone applies to join the ICC it should be what they do that matters, not what others do.