“I genocided your brothers and bombed your schools and seiged you but please don’t hit my military targets cause I put them in densely populated areas”
Your humanitarian principle requires everyone in the world to basically allow themselves to be attacked by America, it’s European lapdogs and the zionist occupation.
From a legal and military standpoint your logic is simply absurd.
Reading comprehension curse strikes again
I have never once advocated for the deliberate targeting of civilians and have specified again and again that warfighting should be between militaries.
The implication here is: “You people are detached, soft, and incapable of understanding real war.”
No the implication is that westerners love killing civilians so much that they forget that wars are fought between militaries. I’ll be more clear about this next time.
That’s not an argument. That’s a moral superiority pose.
You want an argument? It’s trivial to give one. All western countries have been involved in warmongering in west asia since before I was born. There is full justification for any group in west asia to launch attacks on western military assets.
Even under international law (which western militaries refuse to follow), retaliating against military attacks is fully allowed. America and its zionist occupation of Palestine attacked Iran (military targets and civilians), and even inside its borders and capital city*. The Iranian state has every right to bomb any American military target, even if it were inside US border.
*this isn’t the first time either. The Americans did this last year, and even in trump’s 1rst term
minimizing the reality that modern warfare absolutely does kill civilians
Sure, there are civilians casualties from war. So should America be allowed to bomb and genocide whoever they want with no one fighting back?
Civilian harm is a central moral and legal issue in contemporary conflict. That’s not Western fragility. That’s international humanitarian law.
Lmao western militaries do not give a single fuck about civilians or collateral damage or international law. You really want to present the butchers of gaza as some sort of hippies in 2026?
Are westerners only able to conceptualise the killing of civilians? Are they so far removed from having normal countries that they forget that wars are fought between armies?
Yeah it’s a good thing when fascist states get bombed. You’d be the kind to both sides WW2 if it was socially acceptable to go to bat for the nazis
In fairness, a lot of socialist theory has a distinction between a “state” and a “government”. The former is the repressive apparatus (police, army and ideological state aparatuses) and the latter consists of the civilian administration which deals with centralised organisation of labor/economy. This is why marx could describe a “stateless society” as developed-communism.
If removing literal serfdom is not liberation then what the hell is “liberation”?
When all the exploiter monks gather their serfs together and ask them politely “do y’all want to be integrated with the PRC?”, and then they do a vote and if 90% of the population votes yes, then they set up enclaves to test PRC rule but like, it’s a free market of states where you can choose to get services from either the PRC or the feudal monks and basically over time the people will provide more money to the superior product and drive the feudal monks out of the government business?
What will Russia and China do on the global stage? Offer you cheap commodities? Continue not bombing the middle east?
The European libs are barely even cognisant of the concepts of dollar hegemony or uni/multi polarity. For them, politics is a struggle between good and evil.
I don’t even know what point you’re trying to make anymore. Let’s cut this thread honestly it’s long enough.