> Now, what would it take for you to change your mind and to start agreeing that contemporary crimes of deliberate starvation and exterminationist policies should be tried in an international court or tribunal?
Nothing, because that's already my opinion.
> What is it that makes the Holocaust so very special?
The name.
So this has been a trivial misunderstanding on terminology, and you kinda went full flak on me. Someone else got their point proven.
To a lurker scanning this thread, this comes off as “I’m more interested in semantics and winning an argument than condemning abusive and antisocial behavior.”
That's akin to a straw man, as shown by the quotes above. You clearly claimed that contemporary genocidal processes are "highly inappropriate" to compare to the Holocaust. This in response to someone using the Nuremberg trials as a frame of reference for suggesting that contemporary exterminationist criminals should be held accountable.
But it's great that you've changed your mind since then.
Maybe that unhappiness leads to you managing to better keep "garbage interpretations" at bay the next time you engage with a topic that touches on atrocities.
Nothing, because that's already my opinion.
> What is it that makes the Holocaust so very special?
The name.
So this has been a trivial misunderstanding on terminology, and you kinda went full flak on me. Someone else got their point proven.