But it's not. It's bombing an airfield where they launched chemical weapons on their own people.https://twitter.com/aurabogado/status/850202341978406912 …
But that will never happen. We only ever apply consequences for international conventions violations to Muslim-majority nations.
-
-
I will attest to your point on Guantanamo, but it doesn't revolve around being a Muslim majority nation. It's about military capacity.
-
So the US *should* be bombed, since we're violating international protocol?
-
I can attest that the US should face repercussions for certain actions. If those are military offensives, other countries will hesitate.
-
China has the capacity to bomb the US. Do you agree it should use its troops/technology to do so for our violations of international law?
-
Do you believe they're prepared for the retaliation that comes with it? I don't think these Red Herrings are helping your argument.
-
I only have so much time to ask the same question. Third try, yes or no: Should the US be bombed for our violations of international law?
-
I have plenty of time to acknowledge false equivalency of situations of national security.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
No one wants to hold US accountable because of military prowess, so there's a double standard there, and also an inherent responsibility.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The responsibility is that we as a nation have the capacity to do this when other nations can't. And per our global consensus, we will.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.