>
where I'm sitting it sounds like you're trying to avoid the reading assignmentI’ve worked at the UN. I know the Rome Statute. You’re citing it wrong. (Also, your link doesn’t work.)
The operating law is also NOT Article 8, but the Geneva Conventions. Art. 8 is about giving the ICC jurisdiction, not what is and isn’t illegal. (The entire Rome Statute is about establishing the ICC as a venue. Again, not what is and isn’t illegal.)
> IF war crimes are committed AND a company's product features prominently in the planning of said THEN it stands to reason that the executives and major investors of the company should share a slice of the responsibility for the war crimes
This isn’t how the Geneva Conventions work. (“Features prominently” doesn’t factor into jurisdiction nor criminality.)
But again, do you have an example of even an alleged war crime being committed where Lavender is being blamed? (10% error rate isn’t a war crime.)
I’ve been genuinely asking for facts on the ground, not misquoted international law. To my knowledge, Lavender hasn’t been cited in the targeting of an aid convoy—if anything, having that happen in code would make intent trivial to demonstrate.
