• Funwayguy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    203
    ·
    1 day ago

    No no. If you read between the lines, they didn’t explicitly say no. They only insinuated he hasn’t met the criteria under international law yet… But they do acknowledge the assholery.

    • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      49
      ·
      1 day ago

      They only insinuated he hasn’t met the criteria under international law yet

      Hell, if you go COMPLETELY literal, they’re not even necessarily saying THAT!

      They COULD be saying that the Tates are legitimate targets for OTHER reasons (such as being in the enemy’s army), just not for being assholes 😉

    • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Wouldn’t the clear line be actually taking up arms against Ukraine? If he does a publicity stunt at a Russian army training base, that’s an evil and stupid thing to do, but it’s not actually helping the military effort against Ukraine. Now, if they trained him as a FPV attack drone pilot, and then showed on camera him piloting drones targeting Ukrainian troops? That would probably make him a legitimate target. At least that’s what I would think. But my thought would be that the line would be actually taking up arms in some form against Ukrainian troops or civilians.