You’re acting like this is some sort of situation that brushes up against being a war crime but falls just short because of some small, pedantic technicality, but no. As you can plainly read, this isn’t even close to a war crime under international law, which is the entire way a war crime is defined, because it’s, you know, a crime. You can’t just hallucinate up international conventions on war and then act all offended when someone points out they don’t exist.
This isn’t just “not technically a war crime”; this is unambiguously not a war crime and was never in any danger of even approximating one.
You’re acting like this is some sort of situation that brushes up against being a war crime but falls just short because of some small, pedantic technicality, but no. As you can plainly read, this isn’t even close to a war crime under international law, which is the entire way a war crime is defined, because it’s, you know, a crime. You can’t just hallucinate up international conventions on war and then act all offended when someone points out they don’t exist.
This isn’t just “not technically a war crime”; this is unambiguously not a war crime and was never in any danger of even approximating one.
But it doesn’t seem fair…/s