Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)BE
Posts
0
Comments
372
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • That’s not what the geneva convention says. The right of self defense takes precedence. So according to international law those locations become valid targets. They are not “supposed to keel over and die”, that’s not valuing their own lives.

  • Just like people don’t say that rebel israeli soldiers acting illegally committed whatever atrocities and just say it was israel (or even worse the jewish people) i do not make the distinction between the terrorists sub divisions.

  • I think we need to address the problem by preventing companies from externalizing their costs. If they had to pay exactly as much as it cost to clean up the pollution they emit then they will actually internalize that cost and have financial incentives to decrease pollution. I am obviously oversimplifyng since the cost is not constant and this would create a financial incentive to create companies that remove/ filter pollutants more effectively and efficiently.

    It’s complicated because it requires international agreements but it’s a more realistic approach than thinking companies should do it because we need them to.

  • It’s wishful thinking to hope that companies will change their goals and prioritize whatever someone else says. Ultimately companies are trying to create profit by providing value. If we want them to change we need to understand what motivates a company. If someone “disagrees” and thinks reality should be something else, then no one is stopping them from forming a company and run it under those principles.