3 ms·
Take another step back: One side is defending its territorial integrity with help of Russia. Another side are terrorists receiving support of US/NATO. Why shoul
by meira 10y ago
Take another step back:
One side is defending its territorial integrity with help of Russia.
Another side are terrorists receiving support of US/NATO. Why shouldn't former totally obliterate the latter? Because of their big bully ally? At least don't make it looks like human rights defense, this is all propaganda.
- girvo 10y agoBombing civilians is never okay, though; it's not okay when the government does it, it's not okay when the rebels do it. It should be roundly condemned regardless of the perpetrator, and brushing it off as "defending territorial integrity" shows your _own_ bias, in my opinion. There are no "good guys" and there's a fucked messy situation there and I personally only have sympathy for the completely innocent people caught in the crossfire. Anyone doing the firing I have none for.
- meira 10y agoIf the people you call civilians are terrorists loaded with heavy guns gave by western "allies", I think it is ok to bomb them. I think it is not okay for a foreign country inadvertently bomb neither side, though.
- ocschwar 10y agoOne side, as a consistent modus operandi, seeks and destroys bread queues and hospitals. Don't try to paper that over.