We know that IBM or other types of bombing usually cause thousands of civilians’ death and destruction of private homes and wealth not used in war.
2007-11-02 07:00:01 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Why twice? When they are shooting at you first!
I am having deja vu all over again!
2007-11-02 07:03:40 · answer #1 · answered by fairly smart 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If it where just militaries fighting each other away from civilians and property was the only legal way of fighting war, only naval warfare would be legal.
Bottom line is when the enemy moves in around their own civilians, it makes them a target. If they put an anti-aircraft gun on top of a hospital, it makes that hospital a legal target. If you park tanks in a school yard and use the schools gym as a barracks, it makes the school a legal target. If a train carrying war materials is parked in a trail yard, the yard is a legal target.
2007-11-02 14:07:54 · answer #2 · answered by Chris 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hard to tell the difference sometimes when the combatants are dressed as civilians and hiding among them. In some cases, they are being sheltered and protected by them, so, if I were an innocent civilian, I would not fraternize with the combatants.
2007-11-02 14:04:40 · answer #3 · answered by booman17 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
ask bush when he goes to meet his maker
in truth? the winner decides that
we werent prosecuted for the Dresden fire bombings (killed hundreds of thousands in a city with no military value)
same is true for the Tokyo fire bombings
let alone the 2 Nuclear bombs
the winners decide who committed the atrocities
2007-11-02 14:06:16 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If your asking should Bush and Blair be charge with war crimes then YES
2007-11-02 14:09:26 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋