Analyst Believes China’s Missiles Near Russian Borders Target USA

a reply to: the2ofusr1

/sigh...

War Crime:
Is an act that constitutes a serious violation of the law of war that gives rise to individual criminal responsibility.

Examples of war crimes include:
Intentionally killing civilians or prisoners, torture, destroying civilian property, taking hostages, perfidy, rape, using child soldiers, pillaging, declaring that no quarter will be given, and using weapons that cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering.

Protected buildings (schools / hospitals / religious buildings / etc) lose their protected status when used in a manner that is inconsistent with its declared purpose. A few examples would be storing of weapons or being used as a firing location by armed forces.

Protected persons (civilians) lose their protected status when they perform an action inconsistent with that of a civilian. A few examples would be armed partisans, assisting forces engaged in armed conflict, etc.

In all cases a war crime is incumbent on the intentional targeting of civilians / protected buildings and the knowledge the person / building being targeted is protected.

The IV Geneva convention is specific to civilians during times of war however it is geared towards civilians in occupied territories. It does not cover military action like airstrikes / bombardments in civilian areas during armed conflict.

A war crime requires intentional targeting of civilian / protected buildings along with the knowledge that what is being targeted is an fact a civilian or a protected structure.

Attacking a person and killing them based on a mistaken observation (like a tv camera looking like a rocket launcher) and being in an area where previous attacks have occurred only to find out after the fact they were civilians and not armed combatants does not necessarily constitute a war crime. Attacking a building only to find out after the fact it was a hospitals does not necessarily constitute a war crime.

A war crime is defined by international law, all the Geneva conventions and their additional protocols, the Rome statutes, International humanitarian law, etc...

Of all of that there is a defined area called "grave breaches" which form the legal basis for a war crime. Those breaches and the following legal requirements use the term "willfully" coupled with the "knowledge" the person / building being attacked is protected.

I asked you to define it because people seem to have an issue of substituting their opinion of what a war crime should be for what an actual war crime is.

Opinion in this area does not work.

a reply to: Xcathdra

A war crime requires intentional

What a wonderful clause that must be for defense lawyers . When anything is plausible it also becomes deniable . Now who would deny doing the wrong thing . Surely not the military . That could end up being a black mark on their career and really frig up their freedom 55 plans . We know that all guilty people go to jail and innocent people never do right .

I ask you and you give me text .I could have googled the same crap .You actually figure that stuff is worth regurgitating .Time to get real man .

a reply to: the2ofusr1

No I provided you with what a war crime is and what the definition is based on. I pointed that out because people are using their own opinion on what a war crime is, like your examples and how you suggest they are war crimes when in reality they are not.

If you are going to accuse the US of war crimes then base it on facts and the internationally recognized legal requirements. If we were discussing Russian actions you would be making the same argument I am right now. I cant use my personal opinion as fact when accusing Russia of war crimes and the same holds for you and accusing the US of war crimes.

originally posted by: makemap

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
It is probably too simple but is China not even a little worried about the idea of Russia/US relations? I mean, China's whole military expansion program would still ride in Russia being their alley. China can't take on the whole world. Are the BRIC's going to end up being the BIC's?

Um, Russia isn't that dumb to attack China its called balance of Power. US has been stabbing Russo's in the back since WW1. What makes you think they will help? Heck US back stabs everyone.

It is be White American or don't bother living. White slavery still exists today since KKK. Without China white corporations would be the suppressors.

China is a communist dictatorship. They are not even a real country. They are western sanctioned sweat shop with a billion slave laborers. Their own government harvests their people's organs unwillingly and they keep 2 sets of books and lie to investors about the value of their currency. There is nothing that could balance China. It is the worst country on the planet, everyone except communist dictatorship sympathizers know this. Russia only cooperated with them because the west left them in the cold. Once the sanctions are lifted against Russia, their economy recovers and trade opens up for them again with the the west, China will be left to themselves and nobody is going to want to touch them.

The Chinese elites know this but thought they could become a global leader in some technologies and military might before the rug got pulled out from under them. Times up. They didn't make it in time.

a reply to: MALBOSIA

Russia only cooperated with them because the west left them in the cold. Once the sanctions are lifted against Russia, their economy recovers and trade opens up for them again with the the west, China will be left to themselves and nobody is going to want to touch them.

BRICS was well underway prior to the sanctions .I think the west told Russia to back off and away from China or else . Putin probably said neh .And so the hate Putin along with Assad must go and look what we can do to Ukraine and FU@$ the EU went down and then came the economic war and here we are. This is what Russia has ...Do you think that China doesn't have similar operations ?

china has biggest army, and they are much more evolved than most.

a reply to: ZarahRoseG

china has biggest army, and they are much more evolved than most.

Correct . They have been at this game for a long long time .Plus they don't have to leave home to fight a war with the US . All they have to do is defend their home in order not to loose. The US on the other hand is in someone else's home turf and has to win to win ...big difference .China is not alone either , not that they need any help but it would probably be there if called upon .