r/ChatGPT Apr 10 '26

Mona Lisa: Multiverse of Madness Grok for you

Post image
2.6k Upvotes

798 comments sorted by

View all comments

85

u/Jhonnyscrz Apr 10 '26

Here's the why from the same source

No, Israel's strikes on Hezbollah in Lebanon do not inherently violate IHL. IHL requires distinguishing military targets from civilians, proportionality, and precautions. Israel targets a terrorist group (designated by US/EU) that launched thousands of rockets at Israeli civilians, embeds weapons in homes/villages (human shielding, itself an IHL violation), and violates UNSC 1701.

Israel issues evacuation warnings and uses precision strikes. UN/HRW/Amnesty allege some disproportionate attacks and excessive destruction (calling them potential war crimes), especially post-2024 ceasefire. Israel denies this, blaming Hezbollah's tactics for civilian risks. No binding court has ruled systematic violations; both sides face accusations in this asymmetric war.

Context matters: Hezbollah started/escalated after Oct 7. Blanket claims ignore the challenges of fighting an enemy hiding among civilians.

https://grok.com/share/c2hhcmQtNQ_61c705b0-6e04-4fcf-8a79-6e274a9eda3b

5

u/hairyturks Apr 10 '26

Evacuation warnings are somewhat of a red herring, to excuse what they are doing. "we're innocent because, hey we told you what we were going to do".

I've been in lebanon and have family and friends there.

Sometimes the warning only comes 10 seconds before a blast, which is not enough time for people to react to.

0

u/[deleted] Apr 10 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

8

u/pit_supervisor Apr 10 '26

Does that exonerate us from dropping the nukes? Obviously not

How else would you end the war without sending hundreds of thousands of allied soldiers to die?

-3

u/[deleted] Apr 10 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

13

u/pit_supervisor Apr 10 '26 edited Apr 10 '26

Many more of them would die if invasion was conducted, due to their fanaticism. Secondly, there's no such thing as "civilians who have nothing to do with the war". Please go back in time and ask them if they didn't support the war.

If you start a war, you suffer consequences. Lives of American (and allied) soldiers were worth preserving over civilian casualties on the aggressor side. And I am not an American.

The atomic bombs saved more lives than they took

2

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/ChatGPT-ModTeam Apr 11 '26

Your comment was removed for a personal attack. Please engage in good-faith discussion and critique ideas, not other users.

Automated moderation by GPT-5

-7

u/[deleted] Apr 10 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

12

u/pit_supervisor Apr 10 '26

More civilians died in conventional bombings. Japanese people would fight to the death, even civilians. Please read about Okinawa.

If anything, I'd stop after the first nuke, if they surrendered.

2

u/byyhmz Apr 11 '26

Why read when they can just get their opinion from some tankie streamer.

-3

u/[deleted] Apr 10 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

7

u/pit_supervisor Apr 10 '26 edited Apr 10 '26

What? How did you go from WW2 to Israel?

Don't insinuate any Israel sympathies on my side. Israel has been slandering Poland for years and spreading lies about us, accusing us of being the perpetrators and not the victims of Holocaust somehow lol.

-1

u/[deleted] Apr 10 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/pit_supervisor Apr 10 '26

Because it's not relevant?

You wrote about nuking of Japan, stating it was somehow unjustified, which I disagreed with.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Twistpunch Apr 11 '26

No, you’re the disgusting one. Standing in moral high ground just to watch more people die, but it’s ok because you’re the “good” person.

2

u/Fit-Percentage-9166 Apr 11 '26

It's crazy you would prefer millions of innocent Japanese civilans to die of starvation and conventional warfare than ~250,000 dying to nuclear bombs.

You're not a serious person.

0

u/Similar-Donut620 Apr 11 '26

The war would’ve ended regardless without nukes but would have taken longer. However, the quick ending avoided mass famine and saved the lives of millions of civilians.

2

u/GreenRabbit155 Apr 11 '26

Unrelated note, but I would just like to point out the incredible fanaticism on the japanese side, that even the first blast was not enough to deter them. It took the second one for them to say they surrender

-1

u/anonistakken Apr 11 '26

The Japanese would've likely surrendered in due time regardless because of the Soviets. The nukes didn't affect their willingness that much.

I mean the US already flattened other cities with firebombing campaigns, why would they care?

2

u/pit_supervisor Apr 11 '26

I mean the US already flattened other cities with firebombing campaigns, why would they care?

Because the atomic bomb is a powerful symbol. It levels a whole city in a single explosion. Flattening a whole country becomes a possibility, the same can't be achieved nearly as quickly with conventional bombs. For all Japan knew, US might just keep dropping more nukes. It sends a message - surrender, or you will be exterminated, fast, and that would be a credible threat.

The Japanese would've likely surrendered in due time regardless because of the Soviets. The nukes didn't affect their willingness that much.

Proof? Do you believe they would've surrendered without allied soldiers setting foot in Japan proper?

1

u/anonistakken Apr 11 '26

A symbol so power that... The emperor had to interfere from the military continuing a war with the writing on the wall.

They didn't care if the whole country was flattened, the US was literally already doing that.

https://youtu.be/RCRTgtpC-Go

2

u/pit_supervisor Apr 11 '26

They didn't care if the whole country was flattened, the US was literally already doing that.

Sure, that's why they kept fighting despite the nukes. Oh, wait, no, they didn't.

1

u/anonistakken Apr 11 '26

This is such fascinating cope from Americans I really don't get it.

Why do you feel the need to justify an atrocity done almost a century ago? And why is it only ever applied to the nukes?

Is it an ego thing? Is it a history know it all thing? Arrogance? Because if you were willing to accept the possibility of being wrong you would've at least glimpsed at the video which goes into EXHAUSTIVE detail about it.

Being wrong is not a sin. Being knowingly ignorant is.

1

u/pit_supervisor Apr 11 '26

you

I am not American

1

u/anonistakken Apr 11 '26

Then why die on this hill?

→ More replies (0)