I am basing my observations on the fact that you are using terms without defining them and substituting one term for another without explanation. Dr. Craig does not do that and neither do I.
Fine. Mass extermination for land isn't genocide.
What, then, is the point of the article? Craig addressed the mass extermination. Was that not meant to be a response to Dawkins?
Did the Christian Post juxtapose Dawkins' accusation and Craig's response just for the hell of it?
Or was maybe Craig addressing the genocide accusation when he made his response?