• Okay, before I respond: Your point is that terror bombing is okay when you have been terror bombed already, right? That’s what you’re trying to say? And yes, using bombing “to put civilian domestic pressure towards political change” is the literal definition of terror bombing.

    • Leo Dal Pozzo ( LeoDalPozzo@infosec.pub ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s really worrying that people cna write stuff like that and not realising there is something wring with it. Literally justifying crimes against himanity with the moat silly and childish reasoning.

      • Are you going to be reductive and childish like in your edit rather than use adult conversation?

        I mean, I am using adult conversation as you can see. I can do two things at once.

        Are you saying it is wrong for an abused slave to murder his master, who has tortured him and killed or sold his family, when he escapes?

        No, but killing the master’s children would be. Collapsing governments with their civilian populations in the way you just did is both fallacious and dangerous (Zionists for example love to do this); there are Russians who are attacking Ukraine and Russians who are not and one group cannot be punished for the actions of the other. I’d shed no tears if the attacks targeted the Russian army or the political leadership giving it orders, but attacking civilian infrastructure without a clear military goal cannot be justified as retaliation anymore than getting punched by a man would justify punching his cousin.