2024-05-27 04:09:14
The article in question explicitly discusses this in the context of prosecuting Israel for war crimes & recording the number of civilian deaths in Gaza, criticizing Israel for its lack of transparency in reporting, & even within the screenshot does not support the claim of OP [Link] NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(11-1-39) Author
2024-05-27 05:16:54
The passage does not imply that killing children legally is good. In fact, it clearly states the opposite directly after the underlined words. The legality of killing a child under certain conditions is a fact; whether each specific case is justified is a different question [Link] NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(11-2-72) Author
2024-05-27 09:44:28
NNN - The author is literally saying that it is possible to kill children legally; that is justifying the fact that children are being killed right now. NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(23-0-3) Author
2024-05-27 09:47:13
NNN. Te article does provide a justification for killing children ("for example, if an enemy..." . It just says it's aesthetically ugly ("the sight [...] is no less disturbing..."). NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(21-0-3) Author
2024-05-28 18:42:06
NNN: be serious NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(1-0-0) Author
2024-05-29 06:52:32
NNN- OP states that The Atlantic provides a justification, which they did. This isn’t a matter on whether or not The Atlantic says it’s good, it’s on whether or not a justification was made, which it was. NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(2-0-0) Author
2024-06-15 21:07:46
Note needed for clarification: It is important to distinguish between moral and legal justification. Without this distinction, OP's tweet can be interpreted as if The Atlantic's article endorses killing children, while it merely states its legality without moral endorsement. [Link] NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(0-0-1) Author