> The whole concept of "war crimes" is so depressing. It literally means, "THESE are the things you shouldn't do, but the rest of war is okay".
Well, no, it doesn't, because their are also crimes against peace (mostly, aggressive war, even if no war crimes are committed in it).
So, war crimes really mean that even in the case where you are fighting to defend yourself and war itself is not a crime, there are still things you aren't allowed to do.
"So, war crimes really mean that even in the case where you are fighting to defend yourself and war itself is not a crime."
You may have put a restriction on it, but otherwise this is exactly what I said. "The rest of war is okay" -- or in your view, "The rest of war is okay as long as you are defending yourself."
You know what the problem with that is? Even the aggressors in war often believe they are defending themselves. Hitler believed he was defending Germany from invasion by "those who are not German enough". Putin believes he is defending Russia from "those who will soon attack us" (via NATO) "and are destroying us by pretending they aren't Russian".
In the end, very few evil people do things they believe are evil. Most people do evil things believing they are right to do it, and in the case of war, it's often through some rationalization that leads them to believe they are defending themselves against some threat to their nation.
Now, we can say "but that's not REALLY defense", and I'd agree; but who gets to make that decision? Who gets to decide that People A are defending themselves while People B are delusional and never needed to defend themselves? In an ideal world, that delineation would be based on evidence of threat, but we do not live in an ideal world, and evidence isn't as important as you might think outside of science. (Perhaps sadly.)
So, yeah; "killing a bunch of people is not a crime as long as you are defending yourself" is not as clear-cut a definition as you'd think. Instead, I believe what you mean is "killing a bunch of people is not a crime as long as the majority of the world agrees you are defending yourself." And honestly, that idea is not much more palatable to me than the more generic "war is not criminal as long as you don't do these specific things that we call war crimes or crimes against peace".
All war is bad. All killing is bad. To me, there is no such thing as a "justified war," and while there are cases (such as in Ukraine right now) where defense is required, that doesn't make it better. A Ukranian soldier shooting a Russian to death is equally awful as a Russian soldier shooting a Ukranian to death; the only difference is practical, in that one is required to save lives while the other is not, but it is not, in my humble and personal opinion, more moral.
To quote from a recent cartoon, "ethics are a luxury we currently can't afford" -- but that doesn't mean we should forget about them.
