163
Senators Have a Chance to Halt Weapons Sales to Israel. Will They Take It?
(theintercept.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2024
163 points (94.1% liked)
politics
19148 readers
2868 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Can you give an example from, say, the last decade? Just one example will do.
I mean, trump pardoned a bunch of us government contracted (by the military) mercenaries who were convicted(by a US federal Court) of killing Iraqi civilians in 2014. The act of pardoning such criminals is in itself a war crime, and occurred in 2020.
It wasn't a bunch, it was one guy. He was court marshalled, and his own men testified against him. He was found guilty and stripped of rank. He was about to be sentenced to federal lockup for war crimes. THEN Trump pardoned him against the wishes of the US Military. I think your apples and oranges comparison failed.
You asked for one example, I gave you one. Literally the incoming commander in chief committing a war crime 4 years ago.
I didn't ask you. I clarified for you
Not this decade, but during the battles of Fallujah we gave the civilians there 24 hours to evacuate, and then after that the official rules of engagement were pretty damn close to "everyone left is presumed to be an Al Qaeda militant." They were allowed to shoot people with phones or radios in their hands on sight. We also bombed the fuck out of that city, including with white phosphorous. We know WP was used because there was a recorded friendly fire incident with it.
And all of this was basically reprisal for the killings of those four Blackwater mercenaries.
So, no?
I can answer for you. The US betrayal of their Kurdish allies was evil and that was fairly recent.
The reason white phosphorus was used in Fallujah. If you've ever been to an Arab city, you'll note that sometimes in markets, cloth is hung over the streets. This cloth provides shade to shoppers. Fallujah had more of that than usual, it masked movement from sight overhead. So, to get rid of it, they dropped white phosphorus to burn it away.
A logical and strategic justification. Still a literal warcrime.
Nope. Wrong on the law.
Protocol on incendiary weapons states that using them in civilian area, such as in a marketplace in an urban area that was not properly evacuated, is prohibited.
And we actually signed that one, which is surprising considering how many protocols and treaties we are not party to.
It was used as flares not as an incendiary.
Not really. White phosphorus is used for many things, mostly making smoke. It only becomes a crime when you use it against people.
And, blocked user. You have yourself a nice day now "rapidcreek"
Sorry if the truth offends you.
right, also known as a war crime.
No. Read the law.
Did you ready the Leahy law? I did.
Also the UN and ICC ruled on it. I imagine during their ruling on that they "read the law" and that you have no idea what you are talking about.
Not really