←back to thread

Twitter hides Donald Trump tweet for “glorifying violence”

(twitter.com)
1061 points danso | 3 comments | 29 May 20 07:24 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
082349872349872 ◴[29 May 20 08:21 UTC] No.23347585[source]▶
One can also check easily-discoverable recent US military policy https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23347453 to discover that those who think these things through don't condone "looting ⊃ shooting".

Bonaparte was a fan of the "whiff of grape" https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_royaliste_du_13_v... but we all know how that ended.

replies(2): >>23353810 #>>23356356 #
meheleventyone ◴[29 May 20 18:36 UTC] No.23353810[source]▶
Isn't it a long standing thing that the US Military use of force rules in warzones are generally more restrictive than the policies for use on their fellow citizens by police back home?
replies(4): >>23354313 #>>23354337 #>>23354810 #>>23354914 #
dmoy ◴[29 May 20 19:17 UTC] No.23354337[source]▶
Yes

One obvious example of this is simply ammo. Military bullets don't expand as much as bullets available to cops or civilians. A military bullet is explicitly not allowed to be an expanding hollow point which really messes you up.

There are all sorts of international agreements on not using certain types of things in war - types of bullets are no exception.

replies(4): >>23354556 #>>23354605 #>>23354614 #>>23364027 #
nowandlater ◴[29 May 20 19:42 UTC] No.23354605{3}[source]▶
Correct, hollow-point ammunition is prohibited by the Geneva Conventions. This has always baffled me since large caliber and high explosive munitions (120mm HEAT rounds from an Abrams) are regularly used against soft targets in combat, not to mention things like hellfire missles or JDAMs. That's the rules of war for you.
replies(2): >>23354699 #>>23354970 #
1. arminiusreturns ◴[29 May 20 20:15 UTC] No.23354970{4}[source]▶
It's mostly because this isn't true, though lots of people love to wax on about what they think is prohibited by the Geneva Conventions. I've heard all kinds of stuff like this over the years, such as "you can't fire a 50 cal at a human" etc.

The Geneva Convention says nothing in particular about hollowpoints, so the verbiage has an "interpretation" by DoD about the Rules of Land Warfare that skirts around the issue . See https://www.justsecurity.org/25200/dod-law-war-manual-return...

I know this because I carried hollowpoints while deployed in an anti-terrorism capacity.

replies(1): >>23355110 #
2. dmoy ◴[29 May 20 20:28 UTC] No.23355110[source]▶
hollowpoint restrictions date back to the 19th century (hague convention), not the geneva convention. And yes that is addressing international war.

It explicitly prohibits frangible/flattening/expanding ammo in war. The US hasn't signed that, but in practice they adhere to that part of it (but yes exactly as you point out, only for "war" not "anti-terrorism")

replies(1): >>23355484 #
3. ◴[29 May 20 20:59 UTC] No.23355484[source]▶