Reposted by Bret Baier
The statement critiques the use of drone strikes and highlights potential war crimes, referencing international law. It contrasts actions taken by different administrations, suggesting hypocrisy. The tone is critical and accusatory, aiming to provoke discussion on military ethics and accountability.
- The statement raises concerns about harm caused by drone strikes, aligning with the principle of doing no harm. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- It respects privacy but could be seen as accusatory, potentially affecting dignity. [-1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement promotes understanding of complex issues like war crimes and international law. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- It engages in criticism of public figures, which could be seen as constructive or personal depending on interpretation.Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.