alt Hacker NewsWho is "we" in:
> We also don’t give two shits about “Roman statutes”.
?
It doesn't improve credibility if you openly express disdain for that section of international law that describes human shields as war crimes, which defines the concept of human shields, and then proceed to dictate that nobody uses human shields. Are you claiming this section of law is superfluous because it never happens?
BTW, my user name refers to a well known frozen pizza brand.
The well known food brand was run by a card carrying wafen-SS member name Oetker who used his influence with the party to get sweetheart deals to supply the Wehrmacht. It’s an odd choice.
I’m not expressing disdain for the part of international law that bans human shields. I’m saying that civilian infrastructure near military infrastructure is not that. The “Rome Statute” - the accepted name for the law you are calling the Roman Statutes - does not have anything in it about it being fair game to massacre civilians. The disgusting argument that these girls had it coming since they were being g used as human shields is bunk since they were specifically targeted by precision munitions intended only for the civilian target. The entire tragedy could have been avoided with the same military outcome by just not bombing the school.
I’m not going to get into the weeds on semantic details with someone who coincidentally uses a nazi username and claims a moral imperative to bomb countries for placing a school within an arbitrary radius of a defense facility.
Your takes are wholesale indefensible, regardless of any quibbles about details.
There is never a justification for intentionally bombing a grade school. Period.