Great, now I’ve got to go watch “The Ballard of Buster Scruggs” again
Great, now I’ve got to go watch “The Ballard of Buster Scruggs” again
You seen people rolling Coal? Long distance flight, plastic and energy usage? Wide scale industrial farming?
An outdoor cat doesn’t even register by comparison.
Looked through history, they aren’t a bot.
Did you look, or just assume because you disagree?
Apparently that doesn’t matter.
Good on you for looking at facts that support you objectively.
Can’t belive i had to scroll to the bottom to find this.
Nothing he said is actually wrong, just missed that recognition is also a big part of it.
Id argue that 4% is why it needs to be used.
Im not telling you to speak it fluently, but if you asked the general population if they use Maori at least once on a daily basis it would be much higher that 4%.
Or just simply remember its like sign language - if its all people want to or can “speak” and an official language they should be disadvantaged.
Fish are food, not friends
US can only veto security council resolutions. ICC doesn’t need UNSC to investigate.
Same result - UN won’t take military action, but ICC can still proceed.
Tamgent point here.
Many of these countries also have territory claims in Antarctica. For reasons.
Call of the void.
Yeah, id probably join you.
Extention level threat, qualified officer, not injured who can serve. Predjiced against said event.
100% would be allowed to stay.
Depends on your defined of terrorism, and what these actions are.
The usual one i see is to the effect of “non state actor using violence against a civilization population to further political objectives”. By that one:
no, Israel is a state
violence, yes.
civilian population is a maybe, depending on your definition of Hezbollah actions and position. Are they civilians, combatants, terrorists themselves?
further political objectives is likely, however I don’t see what the objective is. Kill people we don’t like is murder, not terrorism.
Of note, if its not a terrorist act it could very well be an act of war, invoking the right of self defense (Art 30???). If so, and civilian casualties weren’t minimized its leading towards war crime territory. I wouldn’t say it was - small explosive, on an object usually carried by the target, which was unlikely to be used by civilians.
Israel could use the same article to call this attack self defense against actions already taken. You can look at gulf War for the whole discussion around preemptive strikes for self defense.
Personally, I say no. Same way Chinese vessels “only” ramming and using waterguns on Philippine vessels isn’t terrorism.
In all fairness alot of it stemmed from the fact she watched her partner die after they were betrayed by a supposedly ally - trust from that wouldn’t come back quickly.
Would have liked to see the series carry on a bit more though
Don’t mess with Americas boats
How did something that only killed 10 targets injure thousands, especially when you are considering explosives.
I don’t think I could injure 1000s of civilians with only 10 targets killed with an explosive hidden on their person if I tried.
Close - you’re looking at letter, not action and intentions.
Booby traps are banned for use in ways that are likely to be used by civilians and remove protections on the civilian population. Things like placing explosives on public transport, the side of the road, in marketplaces or protected places. Targeted strikes, like on a piece of civilian equipment that is likely to only be used by the target (cellphone, personal vehicle, laptop) are permitted as they are unlikely to be set off by a random civilian.
What is a question, however, is if the targets were actually combatants.
That’s a warcrime
Correct.
Killing civilians isn’t a war crime. Deliberately killing civilians, or not taking reasonable steps to minimize civilian casualties is a war crime.
“Small” explosive that is embedded in something passed to and likely worn by the target is unlikely to be a war crime. If they somehow snuck a 1000lb bomb into one it absolutely would be however.
Devils advocate.
How many peaces, truces, agreements in that area have ever meant something?