news from Russo-Ukraine Front

[waldopepper]

Your sentence is quite misleading. The article you cited says that the US command knew that the shelter had been used as a civilian bomb shelter but believed it had been converted to a command center and targeted it as such. The US does not knowingly bomb civilian targets but in war mistakes are made. This is a far cry from the Russian pervasive, intentional and repeated targeting of civilian infrastructure in Ukraine.

Mistakes?
Why not use the word invented to sanitise the killing of civilians. Did you not get the message about 'Collaterally Damage?
Have another go and tell us about the Granai airstrike.

How do you know thay were not mistakes? Show us your evidence.

[Michael Kenny]

How do you know thay were not mistakes? Show us your evidence.

I 'know' in the same as the those who 'know' the Russian bombing was a deliberate targeting of civilians.

In short it matters not in the slightest if the killings were deliberate or intended. The effect is just the same. Neither The USA or The Russians care much about who gets killed and so they both lie and claim the other is doing it deliberately whilst they only do it by mistake.

[waldopepper]

How do you know thay were not mistakes? Show us your evidence.

I 'know' in the same as the those who 'know' the Russian bombing was a deliberate targeting of civilians.

In short it matters not in the slightest if the killings were deliberate or intended. The effect is just the same. Neither The USA or The Russians care much about who gets killed and so they both lie and claim the other is doing it deliberately whilst they only do it by mistake.

There is a difference in degree from which one may infer whether the respective bombing campaigns deliberately targeted cililians or not.

Viz. Out of thousands of NATO airstrikes in Iraq and Afganistan very few airstrikes resulted in civilian casualties. Ukraine on the other hand, Russian missle attacks often (perhaps mostly) hit civilian targets.

The Russian are learning that air attacks on the civilian population tends to strengthen the enemy's will to resist rather than sapping it.

[wm]

Targeting civilians is a war crime. Targeting buildings isn't.

How does that work when the building is full of civilians?

It makes no difference.
After all, during ww2, bombed German cities were full of German civilians, and not only - they were full of citizens of Allied nations, i.e., millions of forced laborers.
So it was OK to bomb not only the enemy civilians but your own too.

Of course, belligerents could adopt their own, more stringed rules of engagement.
And that confuses people into thinking the (internal) rules are the actual rules of war.

[Globalization41]

How can one defend against invaders without being accused of committing war crimes?

Globalization41.

[Gooner1]

How do you know thay were not mistakes? Show us your evidence.

I 'know' in the same as the those who 'know' the Russian bombing was a deliberate targeting of civilians.

In short it matters not in the slightest if the killings were deliberate or intended. The effect is just the same. Neither The USA or The Russians care much about who gets killed and so they both lie and claim the other is doing it deliberately whilst they only do it by mistake.

There is a difference in degree from which one may infer whether the respective bombing campaigns deliberately targeted cililians or not.

Viz. Out of thousands of NATO airstrikes in Iraq and Afganistan very few airstrikes resulted in civilian casualties. Ukraine on the other hand, Russian missle attacks often (perhaps mostly) hit civilian targets.

Water off a duck's back I'm afraid. To a 'looney' lefter like MK, the USA will always be the great satan. Take it as progress, though, that in his mind he is beginning to think that Russia might be as bad!
That won't stop him talking more about America's 'crimes' in this thread about Russia's invasion of Ukraine than he will about Russian ones ...

[Michael Kenny]

It makes no difference.
After all, during ww2, bombed German cities were full of German civilians, and not only - they were full of citizens of Allied nations, i.e., millions of forced laborers.
So it was OK to bomb not only the enemy civilians but your own too.

Of course, belligerents could adopt their own, more stringed rules of engagement.
And that confuses people into thinking the (internal) rules are the actual rules of war.

Nice swerve.
Unable to deny the killing of civilians you move the goal-posts and now start talking about 'war crimes'.
At least you have stopped trying to say the US did not kill civilians.

[Michael Kenny]

That won't stop him talking more about America's 'crimes' in this thread about Russia's invasion of Ukraine than he will about Russian ones ...

Try and find a post by me saying anything about 'war crimes' in this thread then get back to us.

The nearest you will get is this

In WW2 Allied area bombing was 'allowed' because it was claimed that it was not civilians that were the target rather industry. Its all semantics and the key word is 'deliberate'.
Note I am not defending any party here rather I live in the real world where the mass slaughter of civilians has become sanitised by its redefinition (when 'The West' does it) as 'collateral damage'.

and I stand 100% behind that explanation.

[Cult Icon]

Zelensky is pinning everything on Bakhmut. There are approx 105 Ukr infantry battalions at Bakhmut, and up to 15-10 battalions each at Kupiansk, Kreminna, Adviika, Marinka, and Vuledar areas.

"Zelenskiy warns that unless his country wins the battle for Bakhmut, Russia could begin building international support for a deal requiring Ukraine to make unacceptable compromises."

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... #xj4y7vzkg

It was not realistic in the first place to demand that Russia withdrawn from captured territory. They are too strong now with 3-3.5 times more manpower compared to Sept 2022.

Ukraine needs a 'hail mary' miracle offensive.

[wm]

Unable to deny the killing of civilians you move the goal-posts and now start talking about 'war crimes'.
At least you have stopped trying to say the US did not kill civilians.

There is nothing wrong with killing civilians if the laws of war are respected.
Actually, the rule they taught me in the army was: there are no civilians on the battlefield, even if they are there.
Of course, it was a ww3 thing, not for today's puny wars with their own voluntary rules of engagement.

[Gooner1]

Try and find a post by me saying anything about 'war crimes' in this thread then get back to us.

Well that says it all really, in this thread about Russia's invasion of Ukraine not once have you managed to mention Russia's tremendous war crimes, which started on day one and are ongoing

[Cult Icon]

The thing with Russian 'bombing' is that they used too many conventional munitions compared to the US. This guarantees civilian losses.

They are the world's biggest practioner of 'annihilation by hectare' with artillery/MLRS. These techniques are designed to damage or kill up to 97% of all targets in the area. They annihilate whole cities, and in these cities thousands of civilians, particularly the elderly have not evacuated.

Also, their missiles can miss and accidently hit an apartment building on its way to a civilian infrastructure or military target.

And the pro Ukrainian biased curiously ignore the civilian losses in the DPR by Ukrainian firepower. The Russian side also weaponized these losses for similar propaganda as the West.

[Michael Kenny]

Well that says it all really................

Yes it does.

You claimed I was was attacking the US for 'war crimes' when in fact that charge is a figment of your imagination.

[Michael Kenny]

There is nothing wrong with killing civilians if the laws of war are respected.

That is not quite what you are saying.
What you actually believe is that:


There is nothing wrong with killing civilians by my side if the laws of war are respected. Any civilians killed by the other side for any reason are automatic war crimes

[Gooner1]

Zelensky is pinning everything on Bakhmut. There are approx 105 Ukr infantry battalions at Bakhmut, and up to 15-10 battalions each at Kupiansk, Kreminna, Adviika, Marinka, and Vuledar areas.

"Zelenskiy warns that unless his country wins the battle for Bakhmut, Russia could begin building international support for a deal requiring Ukraine to make unacceptable compromises."

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... #xj4y7vzkg

It was not realistic in the first place to demand that Russia withdrawn from captured territory. They are too strong now with 3-3.5 times more manpower compared to Sept 2022.

Ukraine needs a 'hail mary' miracle offensive.

Dunno why you pro-Putinites are getting so desperate for some sort of peace treaty.

Surely you realise that the steady stream of Western aid to Ukraine could become a flood once the West stops worrying about 'escalation'. Imagine a Ukraine equipped with scores of F-16s, Typhoons and Rafales; hundreds of Leopards, Abrams, Bradleys, CV90s, HIMARS, GLSDB etc etc