I won't knock him in beliving that. It is a crime. It's just a question of the root. Like Murder is a crime. But self defense isn't... well, not in the UK... Hummm....
So, the UK and US leadership should have been on trial along side the Nazi-Germany and Japanese leadership?
No. But then again, my house isn't an ecosystem that has functioned just fine for millions of years. And besides. I rent.
Maybe. I'm not suggesting a methodology for trials, or saying who specifically was responsible. But firebombing (and nuking) cities with the deliberate intention of killing as many people as possible was criminal.
How else is one to interpret his "Who cares about preserving the ecosystem as it has been?" attitude? His attitude is one adopted by those same people who decided to drain the everglades. Based on what he stated, he ought to agree with that decision. Now, maybe he does't mean it that way. Fine. Let's hear him say so.
So if someone moved in and started doing said things, how would that effect your house "system" Funny, so do we, and should treat the earth as such.
In the case of the U.S. do you have proof an the "intent" of killing as many people as possible? You might in the case of the UK because IIRC, one of their highest ranking RAF officers openly talked about killing the most Germans possible. Which is why the RAF stayed committed to highly inaccurate nighttime bombing raids. The United States lost thousands of airmen in daytime bombing raids because we sought to accurately target military and industrial facilities. The U.S. firebombed Japan because it was known that most Japanese industry was based in small, wooden structures vulnerable to fire.
I'm not picking nits. The general answer is "yes, they should", but I don't have exact ideas as to what the legal processes should have been.
If that's the case, they would have been acquitted at said trials. But no - I'm not trawling the web looking for evidence, becasue we all know that no standard of evidence will ever - by definition - be enough to persuade you.
What if avoiding civilian casualties serves to lengthen the war? Which brings much more misery for both sides? Isn't that a greater evil that targeting civilians?
Sorry, fuckface. I'm weary of debating with you at all given your recent support for terrorism and mass murder. It's highlighted just how much of a lowlife you are and how pointless such an exercise is. You'll try to obfuscate and make excuses all night, and I have better things to do.
I'd say you have no case against the US, but you've got one against the UK. Question, what about Russia's actions during WWII, are they deserving of War Crime charges?
Because they're civilians, for Christ's sake! You honestly think that, so long as it preserves some American lives, there's nothing wrong with purposely targeting noncombatants? Women? Children? Old geezers in nursing homes? We condemn terrorists for specifically targeting civilians, and rightly so. But we sure as hell can not do that, then turn around and say "Well, so long as it finishes things off more quickly for US..." If you're going to say that it's ok for us to target civilians, then you have to allow the same rules of combat for the enemy as well.
You take out the entire pops of two cities with nukes. Saves millions of lives on both sides by breaking the spirit of the enemy and bringing an end to the war.
Americans target civilians with the aim of destroying facilities, expertise, and infrastructure that supports the military. Terrorists target civilians simply to spread terror.
Shouldn't you be selling shrubbery and landscaping services? Or are all your plants and products native and harmonious with Gaia?
Yeah, the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki wasn't meant to have ANY effect on morale at all. "Shock and awe" has nothing to do with instilling fear in the enemy. Civilians, working in factories, are a gray area. But then I ask you this: How upset would YOU have been if Japanese bombers had blown an American munitions factory, manned by servicemen's wives, to smithereens?
Tell me more about how you don't know a single thing about what you refer to. I have no doubt that, in terms of certain agricultural areas of expertise, you are very knowledgable. But you're out of your depth here, waaay outside your sphere of knowledge. You know nothing about the Florida ecosystem, the regulations regarding plant maintenance and other such areas, or what sort of work our company does in regards to these areas. To demonstrate the vast gulf between your knowledge of the situation and reality, that cemetary you mentioned? Built on a plot of land that was choked with a forest of maleleuca trees. All installed plant material, from the grass to the shrubs to the trees, are native Florida plants. And the job we just finished for the Dept. of Transportation? Installation of damaged sea oats, a protected plant, along the sea dunes on A1A. To correct an error from a construction project. We HELP the environment with what we do.
Missing that connection there hh, you must be having problems with your link-fu. And for the record, if it takes dropping a fully loaded 767 that's headed for something like a 9/11, all I can say is good luck to the pilot pulling the trigger. Splash that puppy.
