Accidental destruction of culturally important sites is, of course, sadly a part of war (in 1942, we destroyed Leutze's original of Washington Crossing the Delaware!). But we should not be in the business of deliberately targeting major pieces of any nation's cultural heritage.
-
Show this thread
-
I'm not in favor of tearing down monuments in the United States, or bombing them elsewhere.
4 replies 2 retweets 64 likesShow this thread -
Dan McLaughlin Retweeted
Cultural sites, like civilians, become more legit targets if they are used to shield weapons of war. But as with civilians, their presence should & does give us pause. That's different from targeting such sites to inflict pain. https://twitter.com/gm5626/status/1214013884073426944 …
Dan McLaughlin added,
This Tweet is unavailable.3 replies 5 retweets 71 likesShow this thread -
In both the 1848 siege of Rome and the 1870-71 siege of Paris, European governments raised high alarms against the besieging party shelling the cities. Europe got past that by the 1940s, but a lot was lost along the way.
5 replies 2 retweets 39 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @baseballcrank
A historian of the 1870-1871 war observed that bombardment of cities was rare before that time, not because earlier commanders were more humane, but because their guns didn't have enough range.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
It's easier to be humane about things you lack the technology to do.
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.