Hacker News Reader

I'm really not trying to troll here, but what then of military attacks on civilian targets?

"Civilian" targets can become valid military targets. For example, if an enemy force forms a line of resistance within an urban or suburban area, then it is legitimate to attack and destroy that area. A civilian area that is not occupied by an enemy force is not a legitimate target, and attacking it constitutes a war crime.

I always found that type of argumentation interesting, war is a crime.

The Law of Armed Conflict exists because you can't stop war from happening, especially if you aren't willing to fight a war yourself to stop it.

It's also worth pointing out that war/conflict are not the same thing, the definition of who is protected during a conflict is much broader than members of the armed forces during a formal war.

Sure, but "war crime" is a phrase with a particular history and usage that means something more specific. Even opposing sides in war often agree on some boundaries.

war crime?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com