• UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    11 months ago

    “He bombed me back first”

    Targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure, mass arrests and forced removal of native populations, and indiscriminate use of chemical weapons are all war crimes. Hell, use of cluster bombs and mines have been recognized as war crimes since the mid-90s, and yet the US is the world’s largest manufacturer and distributor of both.

    • Rapidcreek@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      So, nobody should be held accountable for firing on a US Navy ship sailing in international waters?

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        11 months ago

        Of course someone should be held responsible. So fling a few bombs up in the air and declare anyone they land on “enemy combatants” and then we can say justice was served.

      • hark@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        So, nobody should be held accountable for the US eagerly aiding Israel in its quest of genocide? Also, the US has been helping Saudi Arabia bomb the Houthis for almost a decade now and have created a humanitarian crisis in Yemen.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          11 months ago

          Shooting at international shipping isn’t holding anyone accountable unless you hate shipping corporations. And yeah if you shoot at the military (any military) don’t be surprised when they shoot back.

          • hark@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            It’s clearly made the US take notice (since they care more about trade than people’s lives), so mission accomplished. How else do you propose they do it, given the limited resources they have? Take it up with the UN, where the US vetoes any resolution against israel?

            • Maggoty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              I suggest they pressure Egypt to allow all aid into Gaza no matter what Israel wants.

              I suggest they donate to the IRC.

              I suggest they go join the people they see as comrades and fight Israel.

              I do not suggest that they declare war on the entire world’s shipping. Which is responsible, in part, for delivering their own Humanitarian Aid. And transferring food and energy the world over. Furthermore effectiveness at getting attention does not equal moral. I don’t get to shoot at random cars on the freeway because I don’t like how the next state over handles homeless people. And they don’t get shoot at random ships.

              • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                I suggest they pressure Egypt to allow all aid into Gaza no matter what Israel wants.

                Shutting down the Suez traffic does this.

                I suggest they donate to the IRC.

                “Okay, yes, you’ve had an enormous impact on geopolitics with a few warning shots, but have you considered starting a GoFundMe?”

                I do not suggest that they declare war on the entire world’s shipping.

                Hardly the whole world. They’re very clearly targeting traffic through the Red Sea. Nightmarish news for all those Israeli shipping magnets and major ports on the back end of the Mediterranean. Amazing news for ports along the southern coast of Africa. The Houthis have, with a few hundred dollars in military hardware, done what amounts to a direct cash transfer of billions of dollars from the Israeli Zionists to pro-Palestinian South Africans.

                What could they possibly do that would be more effective for their allies in Gaza than this?

                • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  It’s not that shutting down Suez traffic doesn’t do this. It’s that it’s an act of war against any country moving cargo through there. It’s entirely too broad.

                  And they haven’t had an impact. Not beyond discussing it here and lining themselves up for NATO ground mission (If not a UN one). We already have a military UN mission keeping the Suez Canal open and it has been the subject of wars before. It really is that important as a logistical route. And the IRC is hardly a GoFundMe.

                  They could go fight the Israelis directly. Because it’s not just Mediterranean. It’s literally the entirety of Europe from all point east of the canal. And Europe is not going to tolerate it. The most impactful thing they get is actually the first ever foreign deployment of an EU military force.

                  • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    It’s that it’s an act of war against any country moving cargo through there.

                    If you consider the history of Yemen and the decade-long struggle of Houthi insurgents against a Saudi backed dictatorship, eh? They’ve been at war with a proxy of a proxy of the US for some time now. Might as well claim the Taliban is committing an act of war against countries moving cargo through Kabul.

                    And they haven’t had an impact.

                    95% of traffic routed from the Red Sea isn’t an impact?

                    They could go fight the Israelis directly.

                    They are. This is a direct attack on the Israeli economy. It is costing the state billions.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      The US no longer makes leave in place mines. They are all command detonated. That was a Clinton thing. The cluster bombs… We’re actually phasing them out of our arsenal. However the US maintains they’re legal as long as they’re not used in urban areas. Largely because Russia and China still use them and they’re very effective. We’d need to get them seriously on board to actually stop making cluster munitions.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        The US no longer makes leave in place mines. They are all command detonated.

        We continue to use them on the Korean divide, probably the most heavily mined place on earth. And while we’ve definitely updated our arsenal, I would not bet my life on the reliability of these ostensibly more advanced systems.

        The cluster bombs… We’re actually phasing them out of our arsenal.

        Sure. By selling them to our allies.

        Largely because Russia and China still use them and they’re very effective.

        Well, they’re cheap by tonnage, which is why the Russians love them. But they’re also unreliable, which is what makes them so dangerous. They don’t always detonate where they land, and that makes them function as land mines after the fact. They are only “effective” in the sense that they’re explosive devices that litter a large area.

        As to China, when was the last time they bombed anyone? Like, at all? To my knowledge, the Chinese haven’t been involved in a war since they signed a peace deal with Vietnam in the 70s. The closest we’ve seen has been police actions along border territories (Xinjiang getting a bunch of jihadist spillover from Afghanistan, slap fights with Indian border guard counterparts, etc). Who have they been dropping cluster bombs on, in living memory even?

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          The DMZ landmines have been there for 70 years and de-mining that would come with serious risks of sniper attacks, ambushes, and nuclear war. Yeah it really ramps up that quick over there. All we need is for the Hermit King to think we’re clearing breach routes and Seoul goes up. So yeah we’re not removing those.

          Even under the Trump administration we’re sticking to “non-permanent” landmines. The most prominent and widespread of which is the command activated claymore.

          Most of our allies are also getting rid of cluster bombs. And when Ukraine specifically asked for them we hesitated to sell them. The reason we did so is because of parity in that war. And while they aren’t reliable enough to leave the area safe of UXO, they are extremely reliable at destroying military equipment.

          China matters because they’re constantly threatening military action.