Joined
TTRPG enthusiast and lifelong DM. Very gay 🏳️🌈.
“Yes, yes. Aim for the sun. That way if you miss, at least your arrow will fall far away, and the person it kills will likely be someone you don’t know.”
\- Hoid
8 points ·
Why do you keep posting this? Your problem isn't with people looking at naked pictures or lewd stories, it's with exploitation. That's a capitalist problem, not a porn one. Are you suggesting that in cases of capitalist exploitation we ban the exploited industry instead of regulating the capitalists?
-1 points ·
>Both parties can be immoral, except in this particular case it's very clear that western backed fascist regime is the only immoral party.
Right this conversation isn't with having lol
-3 points ·
I'm not trying to argue that it's okay. I'm not a military expert or analyst. However, people that are those things don't make this argument and so I'm not willing to unless I'm provided evidence of a viable alternative. A better example might be the Ba'athist defense of Iraq during the unjustified 2003 invasion (not that the Ba'athist regime wasn't a nightmare for the Iraqi people, it just wasn't the US's place to involve themselves on false pretenses). Iraqi cities are being invaded, they simply don't have the military infrastructure to have their forces entirely separate from civilian targets, and so civilians end up getting hurt by airstrikes and artillery because of their proximity to military targets. Of course, party extremists also used extreme violence to prevent civilian retreat, but I've seen no evidence of this in Ukraine. Convention is all well and good until said conventions would require surrendering territory to avoid conflict in civilian areas. Governments will take any action they deem necessary to survive a conflict. Both parties in a conflict can be immoral.
-3 points ·
The human shield argument has never really passed the smell test for me, especially when used as condemnation against Palestinians. It's very difficult to defend against the invasion of a civilian area without occupying said civilian area. Existing military infrastructure typically doesn't exist at the scale a frontline needs in invaded territory. Strikes targeted specifically against civilians are obviously unacceptable and immoral regardless of perpetrator.
-1 points ·
Regardless of the truth of that statement, do you contradict the many, *many* Russian drone and missile attacks against Ukrainian civilian targets? I'm curious if the condemnation for violence against non-combatants goes both ways.