Second airman in F-15E that was shot down over Iran rescued safely, U.S. officials say

The defense is that they don't need a defense. They wanted to kill those people, so they did. They don't even have to prove that they were actually drug traffickers. The idea of this administration at war scares me because you see the kind of shit they pull on their own citizens right out in the open where everyone can see. What will they do when there are no consequences and they can claim national security to keep everything hidden?

Certainly longer, lol Honestly the question is "do war crimes committed before the modern use of the term count" more than "how far back we talkin'" Don't get me wrong: other countries have done horrific shit I have family members who's Arabic skills were used to translate the atrocities the Syrian military were doing against rebels just to think of one situation But given the size of our military and our claim to be a global force for good, it's bullshit to think that a review of the chain of events that led to a bombing of a school in the middle east or double tapping civilians in the Caribbean will hinder our national defense If as much of my tax dollars are going to the military instead of Medicare as they are, I'm owed an explanation or at least an investigation into how that occurred  I pay enough to think that I am owed a certain ability to sleep at night, and if my tax dollars are going to bombing schools, at least that amount needs to be going towards checking why something labeled as a school for children in Google Maps was targeted by precision munitions  By being a US citizen, a portion of ever hour I work went to murdering more schoolgirls than I want to think about, and I f****** want an accounting for that mistake

Or a bunch of schoolkids evacuating from a warzone. (Tsushima Maru, 1944)

> Those 2 examples cannot be compared. On the contrary, I think it's effective that you did just that. People have to know the scale/severity of what they discuss, one way or the other. Also, there has to be an understanding about the significance of intent. For example, a campaign *to exterminate* (e.g., Holocaust, Rwanda, Darfur) is clearly worse than another campaign whose intent is not to exterminate. The fact that intent matters is, of course, non-controversial from a legal perspective.

Clearly you don't know anything about American soldiers during the Gulf War and Vietnam War. Committing unprovoked war crimes was their daily bread and butter. Tons of content you can watch if you don't believe me. Murdering and raping innocent women and children was fun for them and their favorite pastime. There's no difference between them, except that one is being ordered by a country the West considers good and the other isn't. Apply your logic to Russian soldiers and listen to how insane you sound...

But they were told that the civilians were (insert x reason). Soldiers should be held accountable for their actions.

I don't want to bomb schools so I didn't join the military. You sign up for what you sign up for, dawg.

>These guys are people too, they don’t want to bomb schools. So unfortunately we don't know if they do or don't want to bomb schools. I'm sure a lot of the military don't, but unfortunately there are a decent number who do. They are people, and people are capable of doing really terrible shit.