comment: >
  
  Thermobaric or incendiary?
  They can have a similar outcome (fire), but according to West Point, the former are lawful in most circumstances, and not prohibited.
  International military law is wild.
context: “Prohibited”. Man, war laws are weird. I get it, but, I don’t get it. >
  
  They’re not prohibited unless used on civilian targets. Just like cluster bombs and napalm. 
  In this case, I think it’s prohibited >
  
  Terrorists, all they can do is attack civilians. >
  
  Been doing it for months. Tons of videos on Reddit, even. >
  
  Russia, like the US, is not a signatory to that prohibition.
  Unlike the US, they have no problem just throwing them at the population. >
  
  Yet another Putin war crime. >
  
  Russian war crime* >
  
  No, Putin war crime. The people are at worst, guilty by proxy. But it does matter who pulls the trigger, and in this case, that person is Putin. >
  
  Disgusting, not surprising. >
  
  Surprising that they have ammunition at all >
  
  Well they seem to keep pulling it from somewhere, but it's no surprise they use it as a way to indiscriminately attack Ukrainian civilian areas - cowards. >
  
  I hope all the warcrimes are brought up when they eventually have to pay reparations.