Are you implying it’s ok to make excuses for war criminals if the civilian casualties caused by one war crime are lower than during another war crime? Because it sounds like that’s what you’re suggesting. I mean, sure, I agree with you that Israel’s war crimes have been *even worse *than Russia’s. But I’m not the person defending one of these genocidal wars because the other one has more civilian casualties. What I am saying, supported by facts and evidence, is that that you seem to be ok with defending one of these war crimes while condemning the other. Someone who isn’t politically partisan would be opposed to both.
Total deaths: Palestinians killed in Gaza: at least 40,005 […]
Civilians killed in Gaza: Gaza’s health ministry doesn’t distinguish between civilians and combatants in its count, but says at least 5,956 women and at least 10,627 children have been killed.
- Source
Nope. Where did I do that? The civilian casualties are horrific in both cases.
Where’s more civilian casualties
Are you implying it’s ok to make excuses for war criminals if the civilian casualties caused by one war crime are lower than during another war crime? Because it sounds like that’s what you’re suggesting. I mean, sure, I agree with you that Israel’s war crimes have been *even worse *than Russia’s. But I’m not the person defending one of these genocidal wars because the other one has more civilian casualties. What I am saying, supported by facts and evidence, is that that you seem to be ok with defending one of these war crimes while condemning the other. Someone who isn’t politically partisan would be opposed to both.
I suggest you read the context of the posts you’re quoting. Am I talking to an LLM?