Quote (Prox1m1ty @ Sep 23 2022 12:47pm)
"War crime" implies intentionality and rational decision-making. We have to assume that individuals do not always act with perfect rationality.
I also disagree that the RAF and USAF intended to inflict the number of civilian casualties.
I do think the amount of munitions dropped was likely disproportionate, particularly in 1945.
Absolving the allies of atrocities would not be accurate either. However tarring Churchill with the same brush as Stalin or Hitler is inaccurate and unbased in my opinion.
Intent doesn't just mean intent
to do harm directly to civilians, it means intent to carry out the act that led to that harm. Just like intent in criminal trials, you don't have to have intended to kill someone to be charged with intentional homicide, you just have to have intended to carry out the act which led to it.
I'm not really drawing a comparison with Allied war crimes with Axis war crimes. I just want to note that we aren't clean in this.
Quote (chopstickz777 @ Sep 23 2022 01:11pm)
As usual you get everything wrong. When has Russia deliberately targeted civilians? Oh yeah, that's right, NEVER - which is ironic given that the US does the exact opposite in pretty much every conflict.
Targeting schools, hospitals, etc that are full of Ukrainian soldiers and Ukrainian military equipment is not the same as doing it when they are full of civilians.
But of course getting you to understand something like this is like trying to convince a chimpanzee that they can run for president.
Just last week when they launched precision munitions into power plants and water treatment plants? How short is your memory?