I prefer any given platform remove such blatant statements akin to, "I like that these people are getting killed", but it does beg the question about how we cat

I prefer any given platform remove such blatant statements akin to, "I like that these people are getting killed", but it does beg the question about how we categorize calls for violence (not what Twitter's rules say - I mean the generalized question). If I say any version of "I support my side's rationale in choosing to fight against X people", during a shooting war, I am pretty clearly supporting the killing of X people despite not saying it. But it seems unreasonable to moderate that kind of statement. It's hard to say where the line is between simple support for one side in a conflict, and repugnant support for violence. I am absolutely not of the mind that there must be some way to objectively measure something in order to base content moderation policy on it - sometimes that's just not realistic. War is a really good example where the ability to make reasonable, clear, consistent rules really goes out the window.