Yes any state sponsored assainations of private citizens (especially indirectly associated citizens) should be protested. Including the US’sactions… But that’s not what we’re here to talk about now is it?
Also, completely valid to draft plans to invade anyone. Acting on those plans are where the line is crossed.
Typical exaggeration by the media then.
The US too drafted a plan to invade the Netherlands “just in case” the International Court decided that the US should follow international law.
I’m guessing a slow news day at Politico
You mean, another day in Europe when we are both continuously threatened by our so-called ally and sabotaged by Russian/Chinese plots . Sure/s.
Comparing strategic war plans to state sponsored assainations of private citizens…
Gold medal in mental gymnastics
Removed by mod
You’re talking about the US’ policy abroad here, right?
Or is this your attempt at justifying drafting plans to invade a friendly country?
Either way…whatever you gotta tell yourself
Yes any state sponsored assainations of private citizens (especially indirectly associated citizens) should be protested. Including the US’sactions… But that’s not what we’re here to talk about now is it?
Also, completely valid to draft plans to invade anyone. Acting on those plans are where the line is crossed.
Removed by mod
No. The US, at one point, stated that it would use any and all means necessary to prevent ICC prosecution of US servicemembers.
…including, but not limited too, carrying an offensive attack on a friendly NATO country, to cover up any possible attempts at justice.
Nice effort at jedi mind tricking your way around it lol
He’s not ‘jedi mind tricking’ you. He’s correcting you moving the goal post to suit your argument.
You stated they had plans. A political threat and drafting invasion plans are two VASTLY different things.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod