this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2025
1766 points (97.7% liked)

Microblog Memes

7989 readers
3165 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Allah@infosec.pub -5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

no one is saying it is right smart ass, i am just saying you should accuse the entity that militarizes civillian areas

[–] h4lf8yte@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

As I know we have no other information source about hamas using civilian infrastructure like hospitals as military bases than the IDF. That's because no external journalists are allowed in gaza by the IDF. And in the beginning exactly this IDF also claimed they don't target hospitals and it was a hamas rocket that hit the biggest hospital of gaza. Now there is not a single hospital left. So maybe we shouldn't believe this kind of information. Also there are other methods than bombing the whole area if the enemy is really using civilian infrastructure as military bases. So it's still on the attacker if civilians die. Especially if the attacker has massive military capacities and options for other methods like in the case of the IDF.

[–] smol_beans@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

It doesn’t matter what your justification is, killing civilians is wrong

Do you know how to read?

IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOUR JUSTIFICATION IS

[–] swordfish@lemmy.world -3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What to do then in a situation where civilians are killing other civilians?

[–] smol_beans@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Its wrong for anyone to kill civilians, what are you talking about?

[–] swordfish@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Civil war. When one group of civilians is going against another group of civilians.

[–] smol_beans@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Do you think that the union army or the Confederate army were civilians in the American civil war?

Civilians = non-combatants

If they're engaging in warfare, they aren't civilians

[–] swordfish@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That is very USA centric, so I dont know the background enough there. The argument i am trying to make is against the "there is no justification" part of your statement. A similar statement would be there is no justification to kill anybody ever. Sounds all good and valid, until shit hits the fan properly. If you read my question as "killing civillians is fine" then that is an incorrect interpretation.

[–] smol_beans@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Killing should only be done in self defense. Dropping bombs on civilians is not self defense

[–] swordfish@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

I got no argument against this formulation. Unless of course someone would threaten to kill my family unless i press a button and then random people die and my family gets to live. Not self defense, not combatants. I'd press the shit out of it anyway.

[–] Allah@infosec.pub 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

"engaging in warfare" is subjective

[–] smol_beans@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

I bet the Geneva convention has a pretty objective definition.

[–] Allah@infosec.pub -4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

ok but who is to blame for their deaths? the allies or axis ?

[–] smol_beans@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The people that drop bombs on civilians are responsible for killing civilians.
The people who starve a population are responsible for starving a population.

IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THE JUSTIFICATION IS

[–] Allah@infosec.pub -3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

wrong it was axis fault for militarizing it in the first place, by not bombing it they would have incentivized the practice

THE FAULT IS ON AXIS NOT ALLIES

[–] smol_beans@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Were the nazis justified in destroying the Warsaw ghetto because Jewish groups had militarized it?

[–] Allah@infosec.pub -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

of course not because they were agressor in invading poland which had a goverment of it's own

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago

You're not even trying to be consistent

[–] smol_beans@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Are you saying that people have the right to militarize parts of their own country? And doing that doesn't justify murdering civilians? Sounds like you've switched to my side

[–] Allah@infosec.pub 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

i am saying germans were agressors in ww2 that's why it was bad

[–] smol_beans@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

International Law doesn't make that distinction. The only reason you make that distinction is because you want to justify killing some civilians

[–] Allah@infosec.pub 0 points 1 day ago

i am confused, i mean isn't reducing civillian casualties good? Sounds like you’ve switched to my side