[Robbob]

Originally Posted by Bagor

Bit simplistic if you don't mind me saying so.


eg So...... Ukraine blows up base in Crimea.
A civilian contractor gains a contract to rebuild the base. A local quarry supplies the aggregate to rebuild the base.
They become legitimate targets? Yes? No? Eliminating them gives a "decisive military advantage"? No?

A local Crimean catering company strikes a deal with the Russian army to feed them. They become legitimate targets? Yes? No? Eliminating them and cutting off food supply gives a "decisive military advantage"? No?
An individual is sanctioned as ""a frequent and high-profile contributor of disinformation in relation to Ukraine and the Russian invasion of Ukraine on various online platforms". Legitimate target? Yes or No?

Point is this. In many conflicts civilians have been killed on the grounds that they have been considered legitimate targets and for decisive military advantage. The line is not as clear as you think and can be argued for both ways.