4 ms·
> Do you think that may fall under the category of “indiscriminate?” It may not, because the number of civilian casualties was way too low for that.
by XajniN 2y ago
> Do you think that may fall under the category of “indiscriminate?”
It may not, because the number of civilian casualties was way too low for that.
- JohnMakin 2y agoWhat number is the threshold? afaik this isn’t really defined anywhere
- XajniN 2y agoIt’s relative the potential threat the main target presents. So, the collateral damage is justified as long as it is approximately lower or equivalent to the lives saved by eliminating the threat.
- JohnMakin 2y agosource?
- XajniN 2y agoArticle 51 of the Geneva Conventions [1]. It is slightly ambiguous on purpose, more details can be found in the commentary [2]. [1] https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/article-51 https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/arti... [2] https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/article-51/commentary/1987 https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/arti...