When Is Intentionally Targeting Civilians Not a War Crime?

Condemnation is always appropriate when targeting of civilians is intentional.
 
The winners write the history books. The intentional targeting of civilians was the strategy in late WW2 and during Bill Clinton's little war in Yugoslavia.
 
The winners write the history books. The intentional targeting of civilians was the strategy in late WW2 and during Bill Clinton's little war in Yugoslavia.

Anytime you drop a bomb from a plane or drone you are intentionally targeting civilians outside of a direct military target like a battleship or something.
 
The Big One dropped on Nagasaki and Heroshima was intended to kill as many civilians as it took to make the Bushido Japanese holdouts surrender unconditionally.
 
Do you detect a pattern here? The so-called "Palestinians" know that there will be no repercussions with the Biden Administration, regardless of what atrocities they commit.
The US never ever condemns "Israel" whenever they commit atrocities.
 
MTG calling out the Jihad Squad:
247C0B8B-BB6C-46AE-A273-46A44D02D328.jpeg
 
During wwII both England and Germany indiscriminately bombed civilians on both sides. We didn't have smart bombs to target military installations. We had to carpet bomb an area and hope we hit something.
That being said it's much different firing rockets when you don't have a hope in hell of winning the war. Then your just doing it to kill people not as a means to destroy an enemy or to win a war. Israel would be justified to cut off gaza completely. Allow anyone who wants to leave, leave without arms but not allow anyone to renenter the area. No food, no water, no power, no nothing.

I noticed a problem with the US's way of doing things that are alot alike how Israels way of doing things. They are both unwilling to do what it takes to win. Even when it's within their ability to do so.
 

Forum List

Back
Top