Conservative
A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff
-
Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
-
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
-
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.
A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.
view the rest of the comments
Well again there is a claim being made without evidence or explanation so what am I supposed to do here? Are you saying my personal experiences are not sufficient to form my opinions? Can you suggest a more reliable method of forming opinions?
I'll tell you what's not an opinion: killing civilians is a war crime. Aiding and abetting war crimes is also illegal. Plenty of assholes were found guilty of aiding and abetting war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide in the former Republic of Yugoslavia. Theres people still doing jail time for providing weapons, logistics support and intelligence to those commiting atrocities. Check it out: there is a neat website for the successor to the criminal tribunals for Rwanda and Yugoslavia https://www.irmct.org/en/about
I understand you want to focus on precise language as a way of dodging any discussion of Americans being involved in any such nasty business. I don't think many people reading this will be so easily fooled. A fact is a fact, jack. Providing bombs you know will be dropped on children is not a morally ambiguous act.
Generalizations about a group require more than the 10ish people you've interacted with.
*Intentionally killing
There are specific criteria that have to be met. Being complicit in an act requires knowledge of the act and participation in the act. Filling up the gas tank of a car used as a get away vehicle doesn't make you a bank robber. Supplying a group arms that are later used to commit war crimes is not by itself a violation of arms treaties or internantional law. Once you prove a war crime has been committed you then need to prove that the supplier knew the weapons would be used to commit war crimes.
Do you have evidence that the Israeli government has a policy to target civilians? Killing civilians is bad but for war crimes you need to prove intent. Before you get assed up I'm not disputing individual Israeli soldiers committed war crimes but whether those acts were Israeli policy.
Next do you have evidence that the US knew that the Israeli government was targeting citizens when it supplied Israel with weapons?