Dead on. The AI quote demonstrates a not always subtle mindset. If AI were truly objective the “is” rather than “may” would have been used.

The problem is that “may” follows “if”. So, if they were mutilated and/or tortured it “may’ rise to the level of a war crime? Would they say that if Americans were the subject?
If proven true, it IS a war crime. There is no question about that. ‘If’ is fine, ‘may’- in this context- is not.

You have to understand what you read or it doesn’t count.

In executing someone by chopping off their head, a clean execution goes right through the vertebrae, and such requires control and precision. The Europeans had such a problem with that, that they created the guillotine. Their weapons forging and skill with a blade, were fundamentally inferior to Asian and Oriental standards.

The point I made before then, was to state that we had beaten the fascistic and fanatical Japanese human wave attacks and preserved the future of Japanese children in peace and prosperity. The Islamic Jihad are not nearly as lethal, and their fate will be similar.

People should have hope in this conflict because AMericans learn from our former enemies and our current friends. We are not a xenophobic culture as is the Leftist academia and the French are.

America is not great because we look inwards like a turtle, our enlightenment comes as much from outside influences as it does from Western ancestral practices (Wild West).

We have balance, and I believe everything becomes easier if one has balance, still hard, yet easier as well.

Yes, a farrari is about right. Read Lowry’s books, if you haven’t, “Moving Toward Stillness” is excellent. There is an importer, I’ve lost the url, but search on katana or japanese sword and you may find it. He is a practitioner. The site is excellent.

If the stroke to the neck is correct, the bone is not touched, or only slightly nicked. Practiced Judo as a boy, Aikido as a young man in Hawaii, and Shuri-ryu (Okinawan based) in later life. Never got good at any of them as I am too prone to ligament damage and spent too much time healing. My Renshi would agree. He wants my yougest though because she is kick a**. I considered the sword, but my wife (first wife) threw a fit.

There is no balance in this conflict – very much like the Israel Palestine conflict…

But the best ones made by their national treasures, is quite expensive. Cost more than a ferrari last time I heard.

“I take it that you’re fixating on the use of “may” in Amnesty’s statement “if proven true, it may rise to the level of a war crime”.”

Yes, that is the issue. I am not sure why you were hesitant to properly spell it out before.

If it is proven true that two soldiers taken prisoner, and tortured, murdered, dismembered and/or burned, then “may” does not enter into it. It is a war crime, or there is no such thing. The fact that Amnesty felt the need to qualify even such a obvious example is the issue.

In professional writing (used in the world of business/diplomacy — and, yes, press releases) it’s standard practice to write “may” when in ordinary conversation you will use “will”.

What else needs be said except this is nonsensical. In business writing, as you call it, if you indicate that you “will” do something, and then later claim you meant “may”, I hope you have either a very forgiving boss or a good lawyer.

For instace, a pharmacutical company issues a disclaimer for drug X. Are you telling me that there is no difference between the following two sentences?

“Drug X may cause dizziness, blood clots, stroke and cerebral bleeding.”

“Drug X will cause dizziness, blood clots, stroke and cerebral bleeding.”

Don’t answer the question, it was rhetorical, Charlemagne. Instead of parsing hairs, how about we chalk it up to AI mispoke?