QuantumLaws

2883 pts · January 22, 2016


Lol ready at any time to inject US domestic politics into other nation's affairs

5 years ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 1

Yep

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Thats how they became rivals

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

German here. Never heard that translation. Usually fairytale ="Märchen"

5 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 1

Why so rude? Also re your argument: you claim I "defend him" - i dont hence my last comment.

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Ok, got'cha. Yeah its kinda an odd legal peculiarity given that its technically a "chemical weapon" causing unnecessary suffering

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Its not a War Crime given that America is not in a state of armed conflict which International law requires - source: I study Int. Law

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I'm not american and couldn't care less about supporting or defending trump

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Holy fuck. He couldn't use the term "Gassed" more broadly. Jewish Genocide in GAS CHAMBERS is not the same as riot gas. Wtf

5 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 21

True - I inferred. However race wasn't a topic -only religion. It was the only sequitur. Hence, reasonable to infer it as your implication.

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Uhh why?

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The post did. And you linked downvotes to racism. "Racism against muslims" is the inference.

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I'm downvoting since I'm a european and dislike the amount of american politics on imgur - esp thr polarizing kind.

5 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Muslims arent a race, the same way Catholics arent.

5 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

True, my bad. However the same logic still applies. Just cause there is no mention of X doesn't prove X is less important.

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Lol np :)

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Sorry, I don't understand. :D

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

If you wanna know more you can dm me :) Also Article 7 of the ICC Statute defines CAH well. Facunating stuff.

5 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

In VERY short, the evidence you list, and the general evidence from the US doesn't conform to what Int. Law defines as CAH.

5 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Also, no - I'm not from the US. MY Arguments are based on International law, evidence from satalites and witness evidence (2)

5 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Oh haha, misunderstanding. I know you werent trying to argue - just had to be short because of word limit. Thanks for your interest :) (1)

5 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

2 things: 1) do you have any academic sources claiming CAH in the US? 2) Geneva conventions dont apply because there is no state of war.

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

If you have any questions, you can always dm me. I'd be happy to chat and share what I know :)

5 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Yeah, also facinating. Thanks for your interest, it meas a lot. Also - funny username :D

5 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I refered to Article 6 of the "ICC Statute" for Genocide and Article 7 for CAH as well as caselaw. Facinating stuff.

5 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

YES! and Rwanda.

5 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

np :) idk about "pushing conrona conpiracies". But controlling telecommunication technology is def. happenig. I wouldnt be supprised re 5G

5 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0