You are reading a single comment by @nick_h. and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
My point was that if you kill more and more civilians - far more than were killed in the Blitz - eventually the angry will to fight is overcome by hopelessness and despair. Generals know this, which is partly why they sometimes target civilians. In other words they deliberately commit war crimes if they think there's a military benefit.
Some British war crimes are very recent. It's not that long ago that the majority of British citizens said they wanted Blair tried as a war criminal.
nick_h.
n3il
I'm not comparing, I'm saying that killing lots of civilians doesnt mean you break the opponent, as Dibble has also.
Yeah, you can have legal precedent for what makes for a war crime and who's pretending Dresden didnt get bombed? Your argument came across very much as we can't point the finger at Russia when at a point in our history our ancestors did something that would today be a war crime.
And now I will go back to not debating things on the internet.