Ukraine Conflict - "There is no instance of a nation benefitting from prolonged warfare"

[Malcador]

3 hours ago, Gorth said:

Doesn't that only apply in a war? Remember, according to Putin there is no war, just a special military operation. I.e. no official state of war exists, so the rules of war don't apply, only peace time rules.

"Everything up to then and still later were "incidents," "patrols," or "police actions." However, you are just as dead if you buy the farm in an "incident" as you are if you buy it in a declared war." - Starship Troopers

 

[xzar_monty]

Better prepare for more and more Bucha-like atrocities: https://khpg.org/en/1608811136

Let's hope that's not what it is, but I can't see any basis for hope.

Edited September 12, 2022 by xzar_monty

[Lexx]

Looking at the map each morning brings much joy now.

[xzar_monty]

8 hours ago, Sarex said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_during_Operation_Allied_Force

We're not ignorant of this; I'm pretty sure that goes for most of us taking part in this discussion.

However, we're talking about the Ukraine conflict in this thread, and commenting on what Russia does is not a comment upon what other nations or organizations have done elsewhere. I find it very odd that there are forum members who appear to take it that way.

Edited September 12, 2022 by xzar_monty

[BruceVC]

11 hours ago, xzar_monty said:

As soon as Russia encounters difficulties on the battlefield, it will take revenge on the civilian population. This has been apparent both in this war and in its previous wars. The Russian army is quite good at killing unarmed people with all kinds of weapons.

We have seen what the Russians are most effective at in there military efforts. Targeting civilians building, rape and killing of civilians 

So of course there mass retreat will be followed by attacks on electricity stations and the attempts to destroy infrastructure and of course @Zoraptor will defend and justify it and we will hear about Kosovo\Bosnia as usual .." yawn" 

And whataboutism is a distraction to a point raised, here is the definition 

"the technique or practice of responding to an accusation or difficult question by making a counteraccusation or raising a different issue " 

So when we say " Russia are using the normal cowardly response and targeting civilian infrastructure" and someone says " yes but look at what happened in Bosnia\Kosovo " that is whataboutism 

We not talking about Bosnia\Kosovo, we talking about Putins War and one of the charges of war crimes is targeting of civilians  and civilian infrastructure and this is a war crime because its  " unnecessarily destroying civilian property " 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crime

 

 

 

[xzar_monty]

It ought to be unnecessary to refer to the subject of the thread and stress that we are, indeed, talking about the Ukraine conflict, but clearly it isn't. It ought to be unnecessary to point out that my anger towards Russia's actions in Ukraine is not lack of anger towards other actions elsewhere, but clearly it isn't.

 

EDIT: Isn't there a bit of an irony in the fact that substantial swaths of the Russian army essentially spent the past three or four days screaming, "I need a ride, not ammunition!"

Edited September 12, 2022 by xzar_monty

[Lexx]

wtf this is hilarious

 

[Mamoulian War]

9 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

 Always use the most relevant and recent example.

Well, that’s why I have asked for your input on comparing how Russian and Ukrainians are waging their current offensives. That’s the obvious most recent example, isn’t it? Clearly you can give us your insights on differences how they both impact civilians. I am still waiting for your answer  

Edited September 12, 2022 by Mamoulian War

[BruceVC]

18 minutes ago, Lexx said:

wtf this is hilarious

 

As mentioned the Russian retreat has provided the Ukrainians with a wealth of military resources and this link confirms it again, great news 

[Lexx]

Here is more military hardware. Some of it looks like crap, but others not so

 

[Zoraptor]

2 minutes ago, Mamoulian War said:

Well, that’s why I have asked for your input on comparing how Russian and Ukrainians are waging their current offensives. That’s the obvious most recent example, isn’t it? Clearly you can give us your insights on differences how they both impact civilians. I am still waiting for your answer  

You didn't get a reply because the point is, I'm afraid, asinine.

Let's say that Russia blows up everything in its advance. OK. So how do you tell if Ukraine is doing the same? You can't, it's already all shot up.

You can't say 'Behind Russian actions, all you can see is completely destroyed towns and villages with thousands upon thousands killed civilians' then say 'look at all the perfect towns Ukraine has liberated [from Russia, "where all you can see is completely destroyed towns and villages" after they were taken]'. It's logically inconsistent and not really worth bothering with. Current evidence to the contrary not withstanding

(The main difference seems to be that Ukraine is defending built up areas while Russia withdraws from them. Withdrawal will inevitably result in less destruction, because the fighting is a lot less prolonged)

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

So when we say " Russia are using the normal cowardly response and targeting civilian infrastructure" and someone says " yes but look at what happened in Bosnia\Kosovo " that is whataboutism 

No. It's just pointing out uncomfortable facts that are directly relevant.

Pointing out NATO has done the exact same thing isn't whataboutism. It's directly relevant to whether that thing is a warcrime. I can understand you not liking that sort of argument though Bruce, give your propensity to defend human rights violations, so long as they're from someone you like. You are, after all, the number one defender of a journalist getting dismembered while still alive on this forum.

Now see, that's whataboutism for you since it's not relevant.

"we're only talking about [subject], you can't use directly relevant things that don't directly involve [subject]" is perhaps the most pathetic argument ever and a complete admission that you don't have an actual counter argument. It's just plain embarrassing.

[Mamoulian War]

7 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

You didn't get a reply because the point is, I'm afraid, asinine.

Let's say that Russia blows up everything in its advance. OK. So how do you tell if Ukraine is doing the same? You can't, it's already all shot up.

You can't say 'Behind Russian actions, all you can see is completely destroyed towns and villages with thousands upon thousands killed civilians' then say 'look at all the perfect towns Ukraine has liberated [from Russia, "where all you can see is completely destroyed towns and villages" after they were taken]'. It's logically inconsistent and not really worth bothering with. Current evidence to the contrary not withstanding

(The main difference seems to be that Ukraine is defending built up areas while Russia withdraws from them. Withdrawal will inevitably result in less destruction, because the fighting is a lot less prolonged)

No. It's just pointing out uncomfortable facts that are directly relevant.

Pointing out NATO has done the exact same thing isn't whataboutism. It's directly relevant to whether that thing is a warcrime. I can understand you not liking that sort of argument though Bruce, give your propensity to defend human rights violations, so long as they're from someone you like. You are, after all, the number one defender of a journalist getting dismembered while still alive on this forum.

Now see, that's whataboutism for you since it's not relevant.

"we're only talking about [subject], you can't use directly relevant things that don't directly involve [subject]" is perhaps the most pathetic argument ever and a complete admission that you don't have an actual counter argument. It's just plain embarrassing.

Well, You can for example tell the difference between capturing Popasna by Russians, and liberating Vysokopillia by Ukrainians, can you? Both are strongholds, where the opposing side have decided not to retreat and defend them until the planned retreat. Both offensive took approximately the same time, and both were in good conditions, before the attacking side decided to get them

Edited September 12, 2022 by Mamoulian War

[xzar_monty]

14 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

You didn't get a reply because the point is, I'm afraid, asinine.

It's not asinine, and it was not intended in the sense you took it. But I'm not the one to argue this point further.

What I find particularly interesting about your line of argumentation is that you are quick to bring up things that other parties have done wrong (many of which I don't dispute, as they're fairly indisputable), and this, indeed, remains the essence of what you do, in many ways. I may be wrong with this next point because I haven't read all the threads on the topic, nor even all the comments in the threads I have read, but I don't think you've come even close to admitting that or agreeing with the idea that Russia is currently doing something wrong.

So, a direct question: is Russia's war perfectly fine, in your opinion? It seems to be, by implication, and by your insistence on bringing up what has been done elsewhere.

[BruceVC]

15 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

You didn't get a reply because the point is, I'm afraid, asinine.

Let's say that Russia blows up everything in its advance. OK. So how do you tell if Ukraine is doing the same? You can't, it's already all shot up.

You can't say 'Behind Russian actions, all you can see is completely destroyed towns and villages with thousands upon thousands killed civilians' then say 'look at all the perfect towns Ukraine has liberated [from Russia, "where all you can see is completely destroyed towns and villages" after they were taken]'. It's logically inconsistent and not really worth bothering with. Current evidence to the contrary not withstanding

(The main difference seems to be that Ukraine is defending built up areas while Russia withdraws from them. Withdrawal will inevitably result in less destruction, because the fighting is a lot less prolonged)

No. It's just pointing out uncomfortable facts that are directly relevant.

Pointing out NATO has done the exact same thing isn't whataboutism. It's directly relevant to whether that thing is a warcrime. I can understand you not liking that sort of argument though Bruce, give your propensity to defend human rights violations, so long as they're from someone you like. You are, after all, the number one defender of a journalist getting dismembered while still alive on this forum.

Now see, that's whataboutism for you since it's not relevant.

"we're only talking about [subject], you can't use directly relevant things that don't directly involve [subject]" is perhaps the most pathetic argument ever and a complete admission that you don't have an actual counter argument. It's just plain embarrassing.

Firstly Im not defending what happened to the journalist by the Saudis. It wrong and I condemn it 

I have always made the same point which you guys dont want to understand. I am saying its not worth cutting ties with Saudi Arabia and impacting the global  oil supply. Its just not worth it and Im not going to change my view on that economic reality and impact to all our economies 

But do me favor, can you state in your own words something like  " you unequivocally condemn the various wars crimes and human right abuses committed by the Russian military in Ukraine" 

Just that, I want you to say it? Humor me ...its not hard? Because it will confirm you  are consistent in what you say you believe

 

 

 

[xzar_monty]

This video may not be groundbreaking, but it does make me happy. It is important to remember that living under Russian occupation is not just a formal change of local authorities. It means subjugation, torture, and arbitrary killings of civilians.

 

Edited September 12, 2022 by xzar_monty

[Zoraptor]

40 minutes ago, Mamoulian War said:

Well, You can for example tell the difference between capturing Popasna by Russians, and liberating Vysokopillia by Ukrainians, can you? Both are strongholds, where the opposing side have decided not to retreat and defend them until the planned retreat. Both offensive took approximately the same time, and both were in good conditions, before the attacking side decided to get them

...

"Behind Russian actions, all you can see is completely destroyed towns and villages", yes?

So, if the Russians captured Vysokopilla then it was already "completely destroyed, yes?

Did the Ukrainians fire shells that rebuilt the town? Or was it not "completely destroyed"?

That's why it's not really worth replying to, the whole rationale makes no sense.

(Vysokopila and Popasna aren't a great comparison anyway, Popasna is 7 times larger if nothing else. And the topography of Popasna is significantly different too. Most damage is done by artillery, which Russia has a lot of, and Ukraine doesn't)

27 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

..but I don't think you've come even close to admitting that or agreeing with the idea that Russia is currently doing something wrong.

That's because you haven't been paying attention.

If I say that NATO or anyone else has done something wrong, and I think it's the same thing / directly relevant to what Russia is doing then --> --> Russia has also done something wrong. Yes? Pointing out that others have done the same without consequence is not the same as saying it's all good, is it?

There isn't some finite pool of guilt that is in danger of being used up.

I've used this example a lot, but I liken the application of International Law to a policeman. If a policeman only goes after criminals that have no power, or that a group of powerful politicians- who have done similar things- don't like then is he a good policeman, or a bad one?

23 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

But do me favor, can you state in your own words something like  " you unequivocally condemn the various wars crimes and human right abuses committed by the Russian military in Ukraine"

Sure Bruce, I unequivocally condemn the various war crimes and human rights abuses committed by the Russian military in Ukraine.

In an odd twist of fate I also condemn all the various war crimes and human rights abuses committed by anyone else outside (or inside, for that matter) of Ukraine. Which, sadly, is not true of everyone.

Edited September 12, 2022 by Zoraptor

[xzar_monty]

1 minute ago, Zoraptor said:

That's because you haven't been paying attention.

If I say that NATO or anyone else has done something wrong, and I think it's the same thing / directly relevant to what Russia is doing then --> --> Russia has also done something wrong. Yes? Pointing out that others have done the same without consequence is not the same as saying it's all good, is it?

Fair enough. No argument there.

From my point of view, I'd say that the question is not so much one of paying attention (although I don't deny you have point) but of an impression created by that which is repeatedly stressed. In other words, when we are discussing what is happening in Ukraine and you, thread after thread and comment after comment, bring up examples of what others have done elsewhere while not exactly commenting on what is happening now (except in terms of military strategy, whenever that is discussed), then this by itself, by force of repetition, begins to create an impression of glossing over what Russia is doing and of perhaps ultimately siding with Russia.

It's fairly close to being equivalent to someone who, let's say on a Pink Floyd forum, repeatedly points out that Roger Waters sings this or that out of tune and doesn't really have much of a range, David Gilmour relies a tad too heavily on a fairly limited number of what can be called tricks -- and by all this, ultimately gives the impression that he actually doesn't like Pink Floyd at all, even if his mere presence on the forum sort of suggests that he surely must.

So there's this. Clearly I'm not the only one to have received this impression, and it might not be completely unhelpful to you to recognize that this sort of thing can happen.

[BruceVC]

10 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

...

"

Sure Bruce, I unequivocally condemn the various war crimes and human rights abuses committed by the Russian military in Ukraine.

In an odd twist of fate I also condemn all the various war crimes and human rights abuses committed by anyone else outside (or inside, for that matter) of Ukraine. Which, sadly, is not true of everyone.

Thats all I wanted to hear, thanks for responding

I believed you would say it but I wasnt sure. Im glad you responded in this way 

[Lexx]

Make sure he didn't had the fingers crossed behind his back while typing that.

[Mamoulian War]

2 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

...

"Behind Russian actions, all you can see is completely destroyed towns and villages", yes?

So, if the Russians captured Vysokopilla then it was already "completely destroyed, yes?

Did the Ukrainians fire shells that rebuilt the town? Or was it not "completely destroyed"?

That's why it's not really worth replying to, the whole rationale makes no sense.

(Vysokopila and Popasna aren't a great comparison anyway, Popasna is 7 times larger if nothing else. And the topography of Popasna is significantly different too. Most damage is done by artillery, which Russia has a lot of, and Ukraine doesn't)

That's because you haven't been paying attention.

If I say that NATO or anyone else has done something wrong, and I think it's the same thing / directly relevant to what Russia is doing then --> --> Russia has also done something wrong. Yes? Pointing out that others have done the same without consequence is not the same as saying it's all good, is it?

There isn't some finite pool of guilt that is in danger of being used up.

I've used this example a lot, but I liken the application of International Law to a policeman. If a policeman only goes after criminals that have no power, or that a group of powerful politicians- who have done similar things- don't like then is he a good policeman, or a bad one?

Sure Bruce, I unequivocally condemn the various war crimes and human rights abuses committed by the Russian military in Ukraine.

In an odd twist of fate I also condemn all the various war crimes and human rights abuses committed by anyone else outside (or inside, for that matter) of Ukraine. Which, sadly, is not true of everyone.

You are again escaping the question and scapegoating. Vysokopillia has been occupied during the first 2 months of offensive, so no one was defending it, that’s why it was not destroyed. Popasna is a prime example, how Russian acts, when the go full on offensive and someone defends. Vysokopillia on the other hand, despite being much smaller, is the prime example how Ukraine is going on offensive, when someone is defending.

So I answer for you, Russia almost completely levelled Popasna with artillery before they took it. They are doing The same currently as well, when they are shelling currently liberated villages in Kherson blast all day long…

Maybe you’ve missed it, but Ukraine has a lot of artillery currently as well, and despite that, they choose not to destroy everything in their path, like Russians do.

Now back to Vysokopyllia. Some time between july/august there were reports that Ukraine encircled 1200 Russian soldiers at their stronghold. Have you noticed any crazy artillery, to get it under their control? No, because it did not happen. Instead Ukraine fortified their positions around the city and pushed heavily for disruption of Russian logistic and command hubs, until they attrited the Russian forces there, and were able to defeat them, without ruining the whole city, like Russians did previously with Mariupol, Rubizhne, Sieverodonetsk, Hirske, Pisky, Popasna and dozens of other smaller or larger cities, which they levelled to the ground…

it took Ukraine one month longer to liberate it, but they saved countless of civilian lives and infrastructure.

 

EDIT: the simple reason, why I took Vysokopillia as an example is, that there are no settlements occupied after April, and recently liberated, which were not destroyed by Russia beforehand…

Edited September 12, 2022 by Mamoulian War

[Mamoulian War]

Comparison of taken and lost territory for Russia since the beginning of June.

 

[xzar_monty]

18 local politicians from Moscow and St. Petersburg are calling for Putin to step down, claiming that he and his regime are hurting the future of Russia and its citizens.

Not going to do anything, except perhaps end these 18 people in serious trouble, but given the state the country is in, I would not ignore this sort of bravery, either.

[BruceVC]

8 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

18 local politicians from Moscow and St. Petersburg are calling for Putin to step down, claiming that he and his regime are hurting the future of Russia and its citizens.

Not going to do anything, except perhaps end these 18 people in serious trouble, but given the state the country is in, I would not ignore this sort of bravery, either.

Brave men indeed, you never would seen this before Putins War started?

Its an example of the rising discontent from within Russia 

[Malcador]

6 hours ago, xzar_monty said:

We're not ignorant of this; I'm pretty sure that goes for most of us taking part in this discussion.

However, we're talking about the Ukraine conflict in this thread, and commenting on what Russia does is not a comment upon what other nations or organizations have done elsewhere. I find it very odd that there are forum members who appear to take it that way.

Amazing you still don't get the point of him referencing that.

[Mamoulian War]

There are rumours, that UA army continues deep into Luhansk oblast far from Oskil river… I am now starting to worry about overextension If that is not another PsyOps