Date: 2013-11-12 02:21 am (UTC)
I agree that there is a difference between killing enemy soldiers and killing civilians, but you'd be extremely hard pressed to find a revolutionary who didn't do both. Not every revolutionary has the means to fight a conventional war and in this case the civilians were legitimate collateral damage. Thorn didn't set out to kill civilians and (he says) he gave the confederation the means to prevent civilian deaths, but cutting off the confederation from the Lands Below is a legitimate military objective. In his other attacks (Gringotts, the schools) he has also gone out of his way to limit collateral damage. The way I see it he is waging this war as cleanly as possible while still being effective.
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

Profile

inverarity: (Default)
inverarity

May 2025

S M T W T F S
    1 2 3
4 5678 910
11121314 151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 18th, 2025 11:54 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios