this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2024
200 points (96.7% liked)
Not The Onion
12374 readers
530 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Sooo... just bog-standard "counter-insurgency," then?
No. Just because the US military does it with impunity doesn't mean it's standard and not a war crime.
Strange... I could swear it was the exact same strategy used by colonialist forces since colonialism began, including every European power in Africa, right up to modern-day conflicts such as the Anglo-Malayan War, the Vietnam War, and pretty much everything Israel has done right up to this very day.
Are you saying it was all war crimes?
Yeah, international humanitarian laws weren't codified because nobody was doing things that they should never do..
All the instances of targeting civilians and food sources as a weapon of war? You bet your ass I am.
Well... fine, then.
No, it was added to the Geneva convention in 1977
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starvation_(crime)
So something is only evil once a pack of institutionalized racketeers writes a bunch of legalese about it?
Well, the question was on the practice's legality, not its morality.
So yes.
I'd say that there's a whole lot more to it than merely it's legality and/or morality.
I agree, but you asked specifically about legality.
Depends on whether you define a crime as a "legal" bad action or a "moral" bad action. While the latter may be problematic, because anyone can have different values, it is still widely considered a bad thing to kill people who did not do anything.
Is that all there is to it, though? The backlash against Israel since Oct 7 isn't adequately explained by either... neither is the generalized silence on Israel's behavior before Oct 7.
I'm reminded here of Sun Tzu's concept of "moral law" - which neither concerns itself with morality nor law, but rather the credibility of the actors in question.
I am by far not an expert on this matter, but my understanding is that if people started becoming vocal about that, it's because most people did not really care or know about the situation until Oct 7, and were bathed in a swarm of news articles since then. It's hard not to have an opinion on something you know nothing about when you hear about it daily.