4 ms·

The difference is that police, at least in theory, do not default to "kill any males 16 or older in the target area".

• Retra 10y ago
  That's a war crime whether you use drones or not.
  • arethuza 10y ago
    Whether something is a war crime rather does depend on whether you are on the winning side or not. e.g. Curtis LeMay stated that he thought that had the US lost the war with Japan "he fully expected to be tried for war crimes." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_LeMay https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_LeMay
    • dragonwriter 10y ago
      Less so for the last several decades than any time in the past, due to the establishment of first as hoc (e.g., ICTY) and then standing (i.e., ICC) tribunals not directly tied to a particular belligerent's military. But, yes, that's still an issue, particularly with the US electing not to ratify the Rome Statute.
      • arethuza 10y ago
        Worth noting that I've been reading a lot about the UK's involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan recently and have started reading "The Wrong Enemy" about the US involvement in Afghanistan: http://www.amazon.com/Wrong-Enemy-America-Afghanistan-2001-2014/dp/0544046692?ie=UTF8&*Version*=1&*entries*=0 http://www.amazon.com/Wrong-Enemy-America-Afghanistan-2001-2... NB I'm certainly not one for prosecuting low level individuals (i.e. the forces actually on the ground) apart from exceptional circumstances (e.g. the Royal Marine who was caught on camera executing a wounded person) but I do have a lot of anger directed at the political and military leaderships in the UK.
  • chillwaves 10y ago
    And who will prosecute America?