738
MIT bans class president from graduation commencement after pro-Palestinian speech
(www.nbcnews.com)
this post was submitted on 31 May 2025
738 points (99.1% liked)
News
29847 readers
2500 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's unreal that they can just say out loud "we design war crimes" like what the actual fuck.
There is a whole lot of terrible shit going on in Gaza, and Israel is committing war crimes all over the place.
However, chasing down and shooting a fleeing enemy combatant is not a war crime. If a russian soldier tries to flee from a failed assault, Ukrainian troops are free to shoot them in the back. The same applies to troops fleeing a position that is being attacked or encircled. They can be hunted down and shot unless they surrender.
I'm pointing it out because it's a common misconception the enemies that are unarmed, wounded or fleeing are "out of bounds", but that's not the case. It's perfectly legal to bomb an enemy camp full of sleeping soldiers, or shoot an unarmed or wounded enemy that hasn't surrendered.
The absolutely horrifying thing with Israel is that they treat starving civilians as if they were soldiers, and shoot unarmed civilian kids in the back.
That is a good shout, withdrawal =/= surrender. You're not wrong to clarify rules of war, as false accusations lead to propaganda reinforcing against the real accusations.
Though my statement does stand - "they design drone technology for war criminals to pursue fleeing targets" is a factual statement.
Plus, we will almost certainly see a new version of the Geneva convention in response to drone warfare in our lifetime.
Oh, they're absolutely selling weapons to war criminals that use them to commit crimes, I 100 % agree.
Just wanted to clarify that "persuing fleeing targets" isn't a war crime, it's the targeting of civilians itself that is. Your statement,
Made it sound like you thought chasing down fleeing targets was itself a war crime, regardless who the target was.
I can see there being some changes to laws of war, or at least interpretation in response to drone warfare. Specifically, there's a law against "causing unnecessary suffering" which prevents the use of weapons designed with the intent to maim rather than kill. Most countries have banned anti-personnel mines, and use this as part of the reasoning (another being the non-directed nature of the weapons, and long-term effects after the war is over).
Drone-dropped grenades have a clear tendency to wound rather than kill, and I can see an argument that when infantry throw grenades they usually follow up with gunfire rather than leaving the enemy in a field. With this in mind, I can see an argument against drone-dropped light grenades. Then again, drone-dropped grenades give such a massively asymmetric advantage that I have a hard time seeing any army giving them up.