questioning whether it was a terror attack is like questioning whether rain is water. definitionally, executing civilian targets is terrorism. deserved (9/11) or otherwise (this), that's what terrorism is. when obamna drone struck a wedding? definitionally terrorism. not because of the presence or lack of presence of a military objective, but because of the presence of civilians. that's why the rhetoric about this gives away the terrorism question in order to accuse literal children of also being military targets.
but have you considered that terrorism is actually defined as "any detrimental act committed by an enemy of the empire against imperial property?"
It's crazy there's even a debate over this. Imagine seeing people essentially spontaneously combust and not being traumatized for life.
satan sitting you down and soberly letting you know that shit was blasphemous
I don't think the US would have done something like this with this little media prep. One of the most Israel friendly friendly newspapers here only managed to scrape together an article about how this might not be a war crime if only (lots of unfounded speculation).
If the US did this they would have at least circulated some talking points. Not that that would make it better, but once you start seeing the word "murdered" in headlines instead of the passive "died" someone has fuscked up.
Is this a sign of the start of a turn away from the Zionists by mainstream Dems? Leon Panetta was one of the special speakers at the DNC endorsing Kamala. Maybe the US/CIA is working towards a heel turn on the Zionists by giving them plenty of rope? Maybe I'm just feeling a bit hopeful today in the face of escalating war.
Between Zel in Ukr and Bibi et al in Isntreal, maybe the failed Biden strategic vision is shifting into a managed decline and/or cut your losses situation as the election approaches?
The US leadership is still not doing anything effective to end the genocide though. This is just political theater stuff.
