The intent is to kill doctors, firefighters, first responders. In pretty much all situations this is considered an atrocity, morally repugnant, evil, etc.
These are civillians putting themselves in danger for the express purpose of helping other civilians. I shouldn't have to explain that killing civilians is a bad thing.
Are you really splitting hairs about this? Does it matter if it was 20 minutes and not 30? Does that exculpate them for bombing a school?
I find your line of questions repugnant, in the sense that it would seem you're examining it from every angle possible to find one tiny weakness that could help you dismantle the simple fact that they bombed a school full of children.
reverse question: Why does everyone assume that only one missile is justified per target? I think this line of reasoning came out of the "double tap" strikes used in Gaza where a five to 30m wait allowed a crowd to gather.
The first strike heavily damaged the building. Teachers and surviving students rushed to a prayer hall for protection but about 40 minutes after the first strike, a US airstrike hit again and killed all survivors.
A double-tap strike is often legal basis for war crimes already as the primary purpose is to hit first responders and avoid any survivors being saved.
The intent is to kill doctors, firefighters, first responders. In pretty much all situations this is considered an atrocity, morally repugnant, evil, etc.
These are civillians putting themselves in danger for the express purpose of helping other civilians. I shouldn't have to explain that killing civilians is a bad thing.
From the videos, the missiles struck relatively quickly - what kind of duration between strikes counts as double tap?
Are you really splitting hairs about this? Does it matter if it was 20 minutes and not 30? Does that exculpate them for bombing a school?
I find your line of questions repugnant, in the sense that it would seem you're examining it from every angle possible to find one tiny weakness that could help you dismantle the simple fact that they bombed a school full of children.
3 replies →
Is there some other purpose of a double tap besides killing first responders? Maybe to hit underground targets, or the second hit was unintentional?
reverse question: Why does everyone assume that only one missile is justified per target? I think this line of reasoning came out of the "double tap" strikes used in Gaza where a five to 30m wait allowed a crowd to gather.
What was the time between hits in this case?
The first strike heavily damaged the building. Teachers and surviving students rushed to a prayer hall for protection but about 40 minutes after the first strike, a US airstrike hit again and killed all survivors.
A double-tap strike is often legal basis for war crimes already as the primary purpose is to hit first responders and avoid any survivors being saved.
Because the first missile kills the intended targets. So the second one is implied to be for whoever comes to pick up the bodies.
7 replies →
There should be zero bombs falling on schools.