POLL: Worst War Crimes or Crimes Against Humanity?

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Is Russia guilty of war crimes or crimes against humanity? Is Israel? Either? Both? If both, which nation is worse?

As far as I know, neither nation has been convicted, but both have been widely accused. Putin was judged guilty on some such charge, but not the nation.

What's your opinion?

Disclaimer: I assume everyone agrees that Hamas is guilty of these crimes, so I didn't include them in the poll. If you believe otherwise, feel free to express that view.

 

[alaskanseminole]

 

[FAUlty Gator]

I assume we are trying to figure out second and third place after Palestine ran away with the top spot.

 

[alaskanseminole]

I assume we are trying to figure out second and third place after Palestine ran away with the top spot.

He said as much in his comments.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

He said as much in his comments.

Thank you for noticing,

 

[alaskanseminole]

Thank you for noticing,

👍I have the reads.

 

[Aardvark86]

First, well articulated poll questions.

With that said, a qualifier to my answer (Russia yes, Israel no).. My answer is at the strategic/governmental level. The reality of war at the street/tactical level is that war crimes happen all the time, by many soldiers, because, well, war is hell and puts people at a total loss of control.

As to the strategic/governmental level, Russia's on offense, and it's awfully hard to see any sense of targeting/civilian avoidance to what they are doing (though I am sure there is at least a little). Israel's actions are responsive, and while incredibly destructive, have included things like warnings etc. consistent with an intent to minimize civilian casualties. And frankly, while 30000 or so dead sounds like a large number, imo, it's actually consistent with minimization given the small territory and density of population therein.

 

[FAUlty Gator]

He said as much in his comments.

Thank you for noticing,

No. He didn’t. He separated the Palestinian democratically elected government from the country and didn’t do that for the others for some reason. If he changes “Hamas” to “Palestine is guilty of war crimes”, I’ll withdraw the comment.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

No. He didn’t. He separated the Palestinian democratically elected government from the country and didn’t do that for the others for some reason. If he changes “Hamas” to “Palestine is guilty of war crimes”, I’ll withdraw the comment.

What justification would there be for doing that? When we blame Russia or Israel, we are blaming their government, not the civilians. Hamas is the right target, not the civilians.

If there were a Palestinian state, then blaming Palestine would be isomorphic, but we would still mean the government.

 

[seminole97]

What justification would there be for doing that? When we blame Russia or Israel, we are blaming their government, not the civilians. Hamas is the right target, not the civilians.

If there were a Palestinian state, then blaming Palestine would be isomorphic, but we would still mean the government.

You think Russian people are getting a pass?
They’re overall supportive, and judged accordingly.

Palestinians overwhelmingly support Hamas, why not judge them accordingly?

 

[RicoSuave102954]

Is Russia guilty of war crimes or crimes against humanity? Is Israel? Either? Both? If both, which nation is worse?

As far as I know, neither nation has been convicted, but both have been widely accused. Putin was judged guilty on some such charge, but not the nation.

What's your opinion?

Disclaimer: I assume everyone agrees that Hamas is guilty of these crimes, so I didn't include them in the poll. If you believe otherwise, feel free to express that view.

You're insane.

Russia invaded a sovereign nation, while Israel is defending itself from a neighboring governing authority that has publicly stated that every citizen of Israel must be killed.

 

[Madman_1]

You're insane.

New here?

 

[Scruddy]

Pretty sure every major government is guilty of these crimes. Joe biden and the US certainly are. Remember when he drone striked a family full of children/us allies and tried to lie and claim they were isis leaders? Pot meet kettle moment is all I'm saying.

 

[seminole97]

Pretty sure every major government is guilty of these crimes. Joe biden and the US certainly are. Remember when he drone striked a family full of children/us allies and tried to lie and claim they were isis leaders? Pot meet kettle moment is all I'm saying.

Out of hundreds and hundreds of drone strikes, that one is probably the only mistake.

Right?

In 2012, The New York Times reported that the Obama Administration excluded all Military-Age Males from the collateral damage count in areas where the U.S engaged in drone warfare/ Though the Military-Age Male (MAM) category references the draft, the term is applied to all boys and men, including civilians, who are aged sixteen years and older. The Military-Aged Male category is not synonymous with 'combatant,' but marks boys and men for differentiated treatment in conflict zones, to the point where male bodies are used as a shorthand for 'combatant' when assessing the collateral damage count.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

You think Russian people are getting a pass?
They’re overall supportive, and judged accordingly.

Palestinians overwhelmingly support Hamas, why not judge them accordingly?

I tend to agree with that argument. But you should recognize that this is basically the terrorists' argument. That argument goes something like this...

1. Once you identify a "wrong" you are justified in attacking the wrongdoer.

2. If the wrongdoer is a government, you are justified in attacking that government.

3. If the government is supported by the people, you are justified in attacking those people, too.

In this sense, citizens of democracies are even more justifiable targets than citizens of dictatorships. Why? Because in a dictatorship citizens may oppose and disagree with what their government does, but they can't do anything about it. Whereas in democracies we agree to go along with what our government does - even if we don't approve - because that's how democracies work.

So, for example, Al Qaeda identified "wrongs" done by the US and attacked the twin towers full of citizens because they considered all of us legit targets. We disagree with their assessment of "wrong" but we reason the same way when we go after targets we consider legitimate.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

You're insane.

Russia invaded a sovereign nation, while Israel is defending itself from a neighboring governing authority that has publicly stated that every citizen of Israel must be killed.

Common mistake.

The discussion isn't about who started the conflict or why. The discussion is about whether it's OK to harm civilians during the conflict.

Try to keep up.

 

[seminole97]

I tend to agree with that argument. But you should recognize that this is basically the terrorists' argument. That argument goes something like this...

1. Once you identify a "wrong" you are justified in attacking the wrongdoer.

2. If the wrongdoer is a government, you are justified in attacking that government.

3. If the government is supported by the people, you are justified in attacking those people, too.

In this sense, citizens of democracies are even more justifiable targets than citizens of dictatorships. Why? Because in a dictatorship citizens may oppose and disagree with what their government does, but they can't do anything about it. Whereas in democracies we agree to go along with what our government does - even if we don't approve - because that's how democracies work.

So, for example, Al Qaeda identified "wrongs" done by the US and attacked the twin towers full of citizens because they considered all of us legit targets. We disagree with their assessment of "wrong" but we reason the same way when we go after targets we consider legitimate.

I agree.
Bin Laden’s attack was an effort to pierce the impunity with which Americans support our incredibly deadly overseas adventures.

But when polls are putting Palestinian support for Hamas attacking kids at a concert over 80%, I don’t really understand the effort to distinguish Hamas and Palestinians. What’s the goal?

A subset of Germans opposed to Hitler didn’t stop the Allies from doing what it took to remove Nazi leadership from power.

 

[seminole97]

Common mistake.

The discussion isn't about who started the conflict or why. The discussion is about whether it's OK to harm civilians during the conflict.

Try to keep up.

Hamas deliberately hides their equipment and launches rockets from the midst of civilian infrastructure.

Should such tactics deliver immunity from attack? Or does Hamas bear the responsibility for the civilian deaths consequent to their tactics in your opinion?

 

[FAUlty Gator]

What justification would there be for doing that? When we blame Russia or Israel, we are blaming their government, not the civilians. Hamas is the right target, not the civilians.

If there were a Palestinian state, then blaming Palestine would be isomorphic, but we would still mean the government.

So, you're saying Palestine doesn't exist but the government of Palestine exists, just to get out of saying "Palestine". It's either, "Israel, Russian and Palestine" or "Hamas, Bibi and Putin". You're parsing, Parser.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Hamas deliberately hides their equipment and launches rockets from the midst of civilian infrastructure.

Should such tactics deliver immunity from attack? Or does Hamas bear the responsibility for the civilian deaths consequent to their tactics in your opinion?

Of course Hamas shares responsibility.

Why do so many people think that criticism of Israel means Hamas gets a pass? It doesn't.

As for the human shields argument, we should stop playing that broken record. We do NOT let the existence of human shields keep us from attacks that kill civilians. Very simply, it's not a human shield if you shoot anyway. We don't say "we didn't take the shot because they had a human shield." Instead we claim "we were justified killing those civilians because they were being used as human shields." It's just an excuse.

Because they were bad, we were justified killing civilians.

We kill civilians with impunity when it suits our military objectives. Whining about human shields is simply disingenuous and everybody knows it. We should stop.

BTW, when I say "we" I mean us, Israel and even bad guys. Everybody excuses their bad acts by claiming the other side used human shields. Sometimes it may even be true. But since decisions rarely change when there are human shields, what difference does it make?

 

[Bro D]

lol jfc

 

[FAUlty Gator]

Of course Hamas shares responsibility.

Why do so many people think that criticism of Israel means Hamas gets a pass? It doesn't.

As for the human shields argument, we should stop playing that broken record. We do NOT let the existence of human shields keep us from attacks that kill civilians. Very simply, it's not a human shield if you shoot anyway. We don't say "we didn't take the shot because they had a human shield." Instead we claim "we were justified killing those civilians because they were being used as human shields." It's just an excuse.

Because they were bad, we were justified killing civilians.

We kill civilians with impunity when it suits our military objectives. Whining about human shields is simply disingenuous and everybody knows it. We should stop.

BTW, when I say "we" I mean us, Israel and even bad guys. Everybody excuses their bad acts by claiming the other side used human shields. Sometimes it may even be true. But since decisions rarely change when there are human shields, what difference does it make?

You're leaving something big out. If you don't take out their weaponry, you are killing your own civilians. So, they need to choose. Kill their own civilians or kill the ones who support the rape and murder of their own civilians, in an effort to remove the weaponry and leadership that Hamas hides behind them.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

You're leaving something big out. If you don't take out their weaponry, you are killing your own civilians. So, they need to choose. Kill their own civilians or kill the ones who support the rape and murder of their own civilians, in an effort to remove the weaponry and leadership that Hamas hides behind them.

That's a much better argument. We should use that one. And there are other decent arguments. Why use the ones that make us sound as dishonest as Putin and other bad actors?

When we use excuses that have been tested in focus groups, it makes it sound like we don't have good reasons for what we do.

 

[FAUlty Gator]

That's a much better argument. We should use that one. And there are other decent arguments. Why use the ones that make us sound as dishonest as Putin and other bad actors?

When we use excuses that have been tested in focus groups, it makes it sound like we don't have good reasons for what we do.

Kind of like my "abortion is choosing to murder babies" argument you don't like!

 

[RicoSuave102954]

Common mistake.

The discussion isn't about who started the conflict or why. The discussion is about whether it's OK to harm civilians during the conflict.

Try to keep up.

It's a war for the survival of Israel, how do you tell a civilian from a member of Hamas?

We all know the majority of the Palestinians support and probably love Hamas so are they really civilians?

If Russia decided to attack America do you think they would only kill American leaders or just the military? Grow up!

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

It's a war for the survival of Israel, how do you tell a civilian from a member of Hamas?

We all know the majority of the Palestinians support and probably love Hamas so are they really civilians?

If Russia decided to attack America do you think they would only kill American leaders or just the military? Grow up!

Solid terrorist reasoning.

I approve.

 

[RicoSuave102954]

Solid terrorist reasoning.

I approve.

Wise decision on your part.