• Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            To reward you with the same treatment and reduce your opinion to an absurdity, are you saying an army with kids strapped to their chests would be invincible and allowed to kill whoever they choose with no consequence?

            There is absolutely a difference between targeting civilians on purpose, and not being able to avoid some civilian casualties while targeting an army/militia that is purposefully using their proximity to civilians as a shield.

          • DarkGamer@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            Congratulations, you took my response and went so reductionist with it that it no longer resembles anything I wrote.

            There’s a difference between collateral damage and intentionally targeting civilians. If you can’t see that your bias is showing.

        • Risk@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          I’ve learnt that it’s pointless trying to gently and politely disabuse idiots of their entrenched views. Instead it’s only ever worth highlighting their bigotry for passersby so they don’t get duped.

            • Risk@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              You telling me your government has never done a morally reprehensible thing you didn’t support? Or are you divinely insulated from the ‘justice’ of being bombed and deprived of basic human rights?

              You’re despicable.