Jokes aside, in military terms, refueling/supporting is not an offensive act. They are obviously part of a whole offensive command chain, but that makes their actions not automatically offensive, too.
Still a dick move by Britain, because they are trying to fool the public.
Sure bud, I’m just gonna needlessly condescend to you whilst retreating from the argument because I’m unable to see how openly helping just one side of a battle with their munitions and operations isn’t the same as taking sides
I don’t think the point is whether it’s actually an offensive act or not in general terms, it’s “this is the technical definition they will weasel out on”. Which is almost certainly true - refueling is not inherently offensive.
Sure bud, go and believe whatever you want. Just here to inform the more open minded people how military defines the term “offensive”. And with that, I will not continue to argue with you on this topic.
That’s correct. It is NOT an offensive action. Does it make their actions innocent? Of course not, because the whole chain of command is responsible, not just the one pushing the button.
I would argue facilitating somebody else’s offensive action, is an offensive action. If I encourage my friend to punch somebody else, I have participated in the attack, and therefore have committed an offensive action. Debating over culpability here is ridiculous, the man who loads the bombs is just as culpable as the man who drops them.
Nope. You confuse “aggressive” with “offensive”. Telling your friend to punch someone is an aggressive action. Punching someone is an offensive action.
Actually, refueling is indeed not an offensive action.
Refueling bomber* planes is a very offensive action.
I suppose a bombed plane is quite bad at flying in general.
The typo has been fixed as have the planes
Jokes aside, in military terms, refueling/supporting is not an offensive act. They are obviously part of a whole offensive command chain, but that makes their actions not automatically offensive, too.
Still a dick move by Britain, because they are trying to fool the public.
It’s very much an offensive act and makes the Cyprus base a valid military target for Iran.
Sure bud, I’m just gonna needlessly condescend to you whilst retreating from the argument because I’m unable to see how openly helping just one side of a battle with their munitions and operations isn’t the same as taking sides
I don’t think the point is whether it’s actually an offensive act or not in general terms, it’s “this is the technical definition they will weasel out on”. Which is almost certainly true - refueling is not inherently offensive.
Sure bud, go and believe whatever you want. Just here to inform the more open minded people how military defines the term “offensive”. And with that, I will not continue to argue with you on this topic.
By this logic Trump and Netanyahu aren’t undertaking any offensive action either because they’re not the people dropping the bombs
The persons fixing the planes have also been fixed
In the same way that doing admin for Auschwitz is not taking offensive action, sure…
That’s correct. It is NOT an offensive action. Does it make their actions innocent? Of course not, because the whole chain of command is responsible, not just the one pushing the button.
I would argue facilitating somebody else’s offensive action, is an offensive action. If I encourage my friend to punch somebody else, I have participated in the attack, and therefore have committed an offensive action. Debating over culpability here is ridiculous, the man who loads the bombs is just as culpable as the man who drops them.
Nope. You confuse “aggressive” with “offensive”. Telling your friend to punch someone is an aggressive action. Punching someone is an offensive action.