zlacker

>>ahmetc+(OP)
The biggest problem with this isn’t the horror of the actual war crime. The far more serious concern are the lengths the government will go to avoid holding anyone accountable. That is so much worse because it unintentionally endorses future crimes and challenges the offenders to take ever more offensive actions without fear of consequences.

>>austin+C2
I do not believe it is unintentional.

>>lucubr+e4
They can take out nuclear scientists thousands of kilometers away by either planting bombs in their cars in traffic or firing accurate munitions through their windows when they sleep.

Thousands of kilometers away.

The IDF can be highly sophisticated in their plans and methods when they want to.

>>origin+Wd
Those things you described are also war crimes.

Calling it sophisticated does not change that fact.

>>alkhat+Bo
> Those things you described are also war crimes

No, it’s war. Targeted killing of a military scientist is war. Gunning down civilians trying to get food is a war crime. If we start labelling all war as criminal, the term loses all meaning.

>>JumpCr+Cc1
Unless prosecuted and people either go to jail or are executed, war crimes are just a label for anyone in opposition to Western domination.

>>alfied+wG1
> war crimes are just a label for anyone in opposition to Western domination

Eh, there is a broad consensus on what constitutes a war crime. But there is also broad precedent for these rules not applying to major powers. (China annexed Tibet in 1951.)

I’d also argue that recent history has almost rendered the term worthless, as activists label practically every civilian death as a war crime.