ISIS is chiefly concerned with butchering anyone, regardless of civilian status, to gain, and maintain through fear, power in a region.
Hmm, who does that remind me of? Israel? Yes, that shining beacon of democracy that gets almost unlimited weapons of mass destruction from the US to kill a majority of unarmed civilians.
And btw, the US may have “laws against targetting civilians” but it doesn’t mean these laws are followed. There are ample records of this.
Ample records of disproportionate strikes? Yes. Ample records of targetting civilians? No. Those rules of engagement are absolutely followed, and we know this from the thousands of instances where strikes were called off because civilian presence in the area changed. They keep endless records because they are accountable to Congress.
It’s a moot point when comparing America to ISIS because terrorists definitionally don’t have any concept of proportionality because killing civilians is the goal.
I don’t really care to argue I/P, that conflict is forever fucked and nobody knows anything about it.
I do believe you have not looked deeply enough into what you say. It’s nice though to have such an unflinching belief in the ethics of the US (and most) military.
Terrorists kill innocent people to spread terror. The US would never kill innocents except for all the innocents they kill.
Exactly, to spread terror. You’ve correctly identified that motive is a part of the definition. Congrats.
The US is chiefly concerned with fighting militants for material strategic goals, and has laws against targetting civilians.
ISIS is chiefly concerned with butchering anyone, regardless of civilian status, to gain, and maintain through fear, power in a region.
Hmm, who does that remind me of? Israel? Yes, that shining beacon of democracy that gets almost unlimited weapons of mass destruction from the US to kill a majority of unarmed civilians.
And btw, the US may have “laws against targetting civilians” but it doesn’t mean these laws are followed. There are ample records of this.
Ample records of disproportionate strikes? Yes. Ample records of targetting civilians? No. Those rules of engagement are absolutely followed, and we know this from the thousands of instances where strikes were called off because civilian presence in the area changed. They keep endless records because they are accountable to Congress.
It’s a moot point when comparing America to ISIS because terrorists definitionally don’t have any concept of proportionality because killing civilians is the goal.
I don’t really care to argue I/P, that conflict is forever fucked and nobody knows anything about it.
I do believe you have not looked deeply enough into what you say. It’s nice though to have such an unflinching belief in the ethics of the US (and most) military.