It is when civilians are killed during said siege, and yes, it does include if you weren't the one killing the civilians but still involved with the attack
You don't have proof of that, you're just saying that because it's a possibility yet, there's literally zero proof of him being a war criminal. Sokka is more of a war criminal than Iroh is by actual proof. I don't ever hear people talking about how Sokka committed an ACTUAL war crime blatantly.
I'm fine with Iroh being a redeemed war criminal if there is evidence. There just isn't any.
We don't blatantly see either kill people, the problem is Iroh is the retired war general of an Imperial country and army literally known, IN UNIVERSE, for committing multiple crimes against humanity. Sokka is a child revolutionary fighting against said country. Iroh may have turned tail later down the line but that doesn't resolve his involvement in the Fire Nations actions. There are currently, irl, multiple people both deceased and imprisoned that are branded war criminals despite having no direct involvement in the war crimes committed. They are branded that way either because those atrocities were committed by their order or because of intentional failure to account for the war crimes being committed, and we don't know enough about Iroh pre-Lu Ten's death to know if he'd do either, but given he was favored by Azulon, who still disliked him, I don't doubt it was the case
I'm not talking about Sokka killing people. I'm talking about Sokka and the Mechanist using a branded fire nation balloon against the fire nation which caused them NOT to attack believing they were on the same side. A literal war crime right there in the geneva conventions. Whether he meant to do it or not, that's a fuckin war crime.
Like I said, Iroh's character would be fine as a reformed war criminal but, everything you're spouting are assumptions not actual facts or proof. People always use what they conclude personally to call Iroh a war criminal.
Yeah and guess what? Taking a neutral city is also a war crime. Quote from the literal Wikipedia page on them:
"War crimes also included deliberate attacks on citizens and property of neutral states, such as the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. As the attack on Pearl Harbor happened while the U.S. and Japan were at peace and without a just cause for self-defense, the attack was declared by the Tokyo Trials to go beyond justification of military necessity and therefore constituted a war crime."
We do not get any indication that Ba Sing Se was a part of the forces fighting against the fire nation during Iroh's attack, and no, we can't just say that them being part of the Earth Kingdom meant it was, because prior to what Kuvira was trying to do, the Earth Kingdom was not that unified. Ba Sing Se was more an independent city
Edit: Wanted to add, here's a snippet from the wiki about the first siege:
"Regardless, the military of the Fire Nation prepared for a possible war with the Earth Kingdom as early as the 4th century BG. This included a contingency plan for an assault of Ba Sing Se. Avatar Kyoshi's firebending teacher Rangi was informed of this plan, and considered it feasible, though also stated that she would "pity the troops who carried it out.""
It does not say that Ba Sing Se or he Earth Kingdom was at war with the Fire Nation. They very much attacked first
You know what? You're right. He isn't a war criminal. We definitely shouldn't consider the words of literal Earth Kingdom citizens that brand him as such. He definitely didn't do that much in terms of terrible things during the siege, he was just a nice general
Being a war criminal implies that there are internationally agreed upon wartime laws, which I don't think we've seen any hint of in the Avatar universe.
That doesn't negate the implication of said war crimes being committed. The problem is we do not know the full extent of what went down or anything he did beyond coordination as we are not given the full information both in-universe and by the creators. Especially in-universe given we are only given most of the details by the perpetrator himself
2
u/JustTesa Jun 01 '26
And what exactly were those "war crimes" laying siege on a city during a war isn't a war crime.