Does it matter? Do violations become more palatable depending on who started it, or whether it is condoned by your party?
When people try to blame events on one side even though both side are to blame, then yes, pointing out the violations of what they consider the "good" side matter to help people see reality. In my post that you responded to I didn't make a claim about who started it. In fact I was responding to a poster who clearly DID label a party as being the one who started it, by listing examples that predated it of similar actions. I however do understand that a person could take my earliest counterexample, either Clinton or Truman depending on post, and say I was trying to blame them, which I was not. There is no clear beginning to this, unless you are a fundamentalist and say it was Eve looking around to see if anyone was watching before picking the fruit.
If Joe is a villain, it doesn't imply that Jack is a saint.
Where did anyone here say that?
Stop blaming. Do something. Shout loud and clear "No more".
Probably unlike most here, I am, just not in a way Slashdot readers can see.