-
Had the pager and walkie talkie attacks not been obviously committed by a US ally, or had they anonymous struck one, the US government would absolutely be calling them a terrorist attack.On twitter.com
❤️ 1 Favorite
Mood -2 🙁
-
This would be true even if they had largely struck members of an extreme political party, members of the military off base, or state or non-state organizations involved in planning past human rights abuses.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood -2 🙁
-
Nations reasonably expect other nations not to detonate thousands of explosions on their territory. And even military members expect to sleep peacefully with their families when out of combat.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood +1 🙂
-
These protections part of what make civilian life livable, and they should not be abandoned lightly.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood -2 🙁
-
In practice, the United States has abandoned respecting such protections for its military adversaries outside of Europe and North America. Bush, Obama, and Trump-era drone assassination programs broke this promise.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood -4 🙁
-
That shift was based on a vision of terrorist organizations as engaged in perpetual plotting, with imminent danger to the countries striking them.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood -3 🙁
-
And based on desires for revenge against perpetrators of mass casualty events like 9/11.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood -4 🙁
-
The current Israeli decision to systematically bomb the homes of families with Hamas members in Gaza and to simultaneously explode the tech of Hezbollah members in Lebanon escalates this pattern even more, stretching the argument beyond recognition.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood +1 🙂
-
The vast majority of Hezbollah members have never engaged in terrorism, only military combat, in ways that are no worse than the Israeli or American military. No significant mass casualty event has been caused by the organization in two decades.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood -7 🙁
-
The American and Israeli militaries, like those of states like Syria and Russia, and the organizations Hamas, have generated mass casualty attacks that violate the rules of war.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood -3 🙁
-
The moral and legal lines we draw should put mass atrocities by states and non-state actors on the same side of the line. Not permit infinite violence against non-state actors while treating those who fight states as non-people.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood -3 🙁
-
Any defensible rules of protection for combatants should apply to both state and non-state combatants, particularly when the latter are resisting military occupation, itself unlawful.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood 0
-
You want to fight combatants on the battlefield? That's legal. You want to kill soldiers or militants at home with their families? That's criminal.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood -4 🙁
-
The US presidents who opened up this legal black hole as part of the Global War on Terror™️ imagined that the states who break the rules would never have to have the rules broken against them. It's now clear that was an illusion.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood -1 🙁