The Invasion of Ukraine

[EACLucifer]

Oh, and speaking of warcrimes, the f.ckers shelled a hospital in Mykolaiv today. Part of a pattern both in Syria and Ukraine.

[El Pollo Diablo]

Captain f.ckwit speaks

[Herainestold]

Captain f.ckwit speaks

Jezza is right, but I don't think he realizes how little influence he has today.

[Grumble]

Captain f.ckwit speaks

Jezza is right, but I don't think he realizes how little influence he has today.

What little sympathy I had for his general point of view before the invasion of Ukraine has completely gone now. How you can possibly say he’s right I cannot comprehend.

[jimbob]

Oh, and speaking of warcrimes, the f.ckers shelled a hospital in Mykolaiv today. Part of a pattern both in Syria and Ukraine.

Elsewhere someone pointed out that when Ukraine hits munitions dumps or trains the explosions are huge, yet when Russia hits schools, hospitals or shopping malls where it claims ammunition is stored, the only explosions come from the initial missiles.

[EACLucifer]

Oh, and speaking of warcrimes, the f.ckers shelled a hospital in Mykolaiv today. Part of a pattern both in Syria and Ukraine.

Elsewhere someone pointed out that when Ukraine hits munitions dumps or trains the explosions are huge, yet when Russia hits schools, hospitals or shopping malls where it claims ammunition is stored, the only explosions come from the initial missiles.

Yes. Secondaries are not a perfect tell of military facilities - they don't always happen - but when they do, they generally mean military equipment stored there. Particularly notable were strikes where the Russians claimed it was gas cylinders exploding in the fire, and yet people were able to film bits of mortar bomb and RPG grenade that had been flung into the street by the blasts.

I just posted this video on the Blyatskrieg thread, for those wondering what secondary explosions look like.

PS - for those completely new to this, secondary explosions are what happens when a strike hits stored ammunition and the ensuing fire causes the stored ammunition to explode. These explosions can be a lot bigger than the initial strike, depending on how much ammunition is stored at the target.

[EACLucifer]

Captain f.ckwit speaks

Jezza is right, but I don't think he realizes how little influence he has today.

What little sympathy I had for his general point of view before the invasion of Ukraine has completely gone now. How you can possibly say he’s right I cannot comprehend.

It's also where he said it - Al Mayadeen - an Assadist, pro-Iran and IRGC, pro-Hezbollah and, by extension, pro-Russian hate outfit. They reportedly approvingly on celebrations of the murder of civilians in Tel Aviv - including a Rabbi killed while taking his two year old son for a quick walk to help him sleep - and take a similar attitude to the killing of civilians and attacks on the infrastructure necessary to support society and life in areas of Syria that oppose the tyrannical Assad.

[temptar]

Oh, and speaking of warcrimes, the f.ckers shelled a hospital in Mykolaiv today. Part of a pattern both in Syria and Ukraine.

Elsewhere someone pointed out that when Ukraine hits munitions dumps or trains the explosions are huge, yet when Russia hits schools, hospitals or shopping malls where it claims ammunition is stored, the only explosions come from the initial missiles.

Can you explain this to whoever is running Amnesty's twitter feed?

[TopBadger]

Can you explain this to whoever is running Amnesty's twitter feed?

Something popped up on a news feed this morning that Amnesty was accusing Ukraine of war crimes by accusing it of locating soldiers in towns and cities, thus making them a target for the Russians... I'm guessing you're referring to this (I don't do Twitter).

I'd be interested to know what other methods they're proposing for the Ukrainian military to defend towns and cities without stationing troops there.

[Woodchopper]

Can you explain this to whoever is running Amnesty's twitter feed?

Something popped up on a news feed this morning that Amnesty was accusing Ukraine of war crimes by accusing it of locating soldiers in towns and cities, thus making them a target for the Russians... I'm guessing you're referring to this (I don't do Twitter).

I'd be interested to know what other methods they're proposing for the Ukrainian military to defend towns and cities without stationing troops there.

Here's more: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/ ... civilians/

[Bird on a Fire]

Sounds like reasonable and justified criticism of a risky (and apparently illegal) practice, though of course I'd be interested to hear Ukraine's justification of using unevacuated civilian areas like that.

I don't think we have to avoid any criticism of Ukraine whatsoever, even if it's obvious that Russia is far worse.

[TopBadger]

Sounds like reasonable and justified criticism of a risky (and apparently illegal) practice, though of course I'd be interested to hear Ukraine's justification of using unevacuated civilian areas like that.

I don't think we have to avoid any criticism of Ukraine whatsoever, even if it's obvious that Russia is far worse.

Agreed... I didn't realize they were using schools and hospitals as bases... Seems a v. stupid thing for the Ukrainian's to be doing

[EACLucifer]

Sounds like reasonable and justified criticism of a risky (and apparently illegal) practice, though of course I'd be interested to hear Ukraine's justification of using unevacuated civilian areas like that.

I don't think we have to avoid any criticism of Ukraine whatsoever, even if it's obvious that Russia is far worse.

The most obvious argument is that they are defending those cities from direct attack, and for things like short ranged air defence, they have to go there in order to defend them. They didn't get any choice about this war, and it's not like they are using in positions in cities to attack Russian soil or by choice at all.

Remember, using civilians as human shields wouldn't be a viable tactic for Ukraine anyway - it wouldn't in the slightest deter the Russians.

And in many cases, these were areas where there don't appear to have been civilians present. I initially condemned the attack on the Retroville Mall as an attack on a civilian target. When it emerged that there were either military cargo trucks or Grad launchers stored there, I amended that to an attack that was part of an unjustifiable invasion, but not an attack on a non-military target. However, there were no reports of civilian casualties from that attack. It appears that that area near Kyiv had been used for military basing, but that there weren't civilians present.

It is ok to criticise those who have higher standards, just so long that is remember that is that which you are doing. Make sure you do not judge each side by a different standard and then compare them not by how they measure of to each other, but by how far they fall behind those differing standards.

Russia, meanwhile, is sheltering troops at the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant as fear of hitting something vital limits the Ukrainian response.

Likewise when they have converted civilian vehicles for military purposes, the Ukrainians are usually giving them camo paint jobs and insignia, and TDF wearing whatever combat geat they can scrounge wear clear armbands to indicate allegiance. Russians have been caught using Ukrainian uniforms, and it appears they might be using unmarked civilian vans to move ammunition up in the Kherson area.

And when a couple of Ukrainian troops killed a couple of Russian prisoners that had apparently been among those shelling civilians in Kharkiv, it was still murder - just not murder as part of a systematic policy of tolerating and encouraging it. That is the key difference - the invididuals who did that to those Russian captives were responsible, whereas when Russian commanders order attacks on civilians or POWs, or tolerate a culture of it, their entire system becomes culpable.

Amnesty are all over the place these days. Some of their work is exceptional. Some is very, very poor.

[causan_dux]

And in many cases, these were areas where there don't appear to have been civilians present. I initially condemned the attack on the Retroville Mall as an attack on a civilian target. When it emerged that there were either military cargo trucks or Grad launchers stored there, I amended that to an attack that was part of an unjustifiable invasion, but not an attack on a non-military target. However, there were no reports of civilian casualties from that attack. It appears that that area near Kyiv had been used for military basing, but that there weren't civilians present.

Eight deaths, including an employee of the Leroy Merlin DIY store. Some of the others are thought to have been civilian mall guards. Reported on 21 March, the morning after it happened.

[EACLucifer]

And in many cases, these were areas where there don't appear to have been civilians present. I initially condemned the attack on the Retroville Mall as an attack on a civilian target. When it emerged that there were either military cargo trucks or Grad launchers stored there, I amended that to an attack that was part of an unjustifiable invasion, but not an attack on a non-military target. However, there were no reports of civilian casualties from that attack. It appears that that area near Kyiv had been used for military basing, but that there weren't civilians present.

Eight deaths, including an employee of the Leroy Merlin DIY store. Some of the others are thought to have been civilian mall guards. Reported on 21 March, the morning after it happened.

I'd seen eight deaths, I'd not seen anything confirming civilian deaths. It is also worth remembering the issue of proportionality - if the warhead used was bigger than needed for the military job (which it was), and that difference was what harmed the civilians, then it's still entirely on Russia.

Of course in this situation Ukraine simply could not have fully separated their troops from urban areas - there were defending northwest Kyiv from a Russian assault through the suburbs - Irpin, Bucha and Hostomel.

There have also definitely been situations where Ukrainian authorities have ordered evacuations and civilians have refused to go.

I've now read the Amnesty report, and to be honest, it seems like tiny stuff compared to Russia's behaviour. If Amnesty think this is worth a big report - and the media likewise think that - while not bothering to report on the Olenivka massacre, they are living down to the low expectations I've had for them ever since they decided to side with the extremist (and deeply misogynist) c.nt Moazzam Begg over their own senior staffer's feminist objections to platforming him.

[EACLucifer]

It's worth noting I follow a number of academic conflict researchers, who have not been slow to call out examples of war crimes when they have been committed by the Ukrainian side (notably the killing of a couple of artillerymen near Kharkiv by a couple of TDF members and a POW being filmed being made to chant "Putin Huilo"). Not one of them is not livid with both this report and the emphasis placed upon it.

And Agnes Callamard is continuing to prove she's a deeply unpleasant person.

[Woodchopper]

On the Amnesty report, I don't have time to go into the criticisms. But I'll point out that ...

Amnesty has published extensive criticism of Russia, much more so than of Ukraine. Criticism of Russia (and other dictatorships) carries more weight if Amnesty is seen to be an organization which is impartial and criticizes whichever side is seen to act against international laws and norms.

International Humanitarian Law applies to all states, irrespective of the rightness of their cause, and it is important that all states uphold those laws.

Amnesty International Ukraine has strongly criticized the report and stated that they were not involved in the research and excluded from editing the text. Which is not good.

[Grumble]

On the Amnesty report, I don't have time to go into the criticisms. But I'll point out that ...

Amnesty has published extensive criticism of Russia, much more so than of Ukraine. Criticism of Russia (and other dictatorships) carries more weight if Amnesty is seen to be an organization which is impartial and criticizes whichever side is seen to act against international laws and norms.

International Humanitarian Law applies to all states, irrespective of the rightness of their cause, and it is important that all states uphold those laws.

Amnesty International Ukraine has strongly criticized the report and stated that they were not involved in the research and excluded from editing the text. Which is not good.

As a rule Amnesty International never involve the country’s own organisation when writing a report about any country, to avoid conflict of interest.

[Woodchopper]

On the Amnesty report, I don't have time to go into the criticisms. But I'll point out that ...

Amnesty has published extensive criticism of Russia, much more so than of Ukraine. Criticism of Russia (and other dictatorships) carries more weight if Amnesty is seen to be an organization which is impartial and criticizes whichever side is seen to act against international laws and norms.

International Humanitarian Law applies to all states, irrespective of the rightness of their cause, and it is important that all states uphold those laws.

Amnesty International Ukraine has strongly criticized the report and stated that they were not involved in the research and excluded from editing the text. Which is not good.

As a rule Amnesty International never involve the country’s own organisation when writing a report about any country, to avoid conflict of interest.

Ok, though that is is not something that the Ukrainian organization seems to be aware of.

[Grumble]

On the Amnesty report, I don't have time to go into the criticisms. But I'll point out that ...

Amnesty has published extensive criticism of Russia, much more so than of Ukraine. Criticism of Russia (and other dictatorships) carries more weight if Amnesty is seen to be an organization which is impartial and criticizes whichever side is seen to act against international laws and norms.

International Humanitarian Law applies to all states, irrespective of the rightness of their cause, and it is important that all states uphold those laws.

Amnesty International Ukraine has strongly criticized the report and stated that they were not involved in the research and excluded from editing the text. Which is not good.

As a rule Amnesty International never involve the country’s own organisation when writing a report about any country, to avoid conflict of interest.

Ok, though that is is not something that the Ukrainian organization seems to be aware of.

It was certainly the case when Amnesty were writing about Northern Ireland back in the days before the Good Friday agreement that the U.K. branch of AI weren’t involved.

[Woodchopper]

ting about Northern Ireland back in the days before the Good Friday agreement that the U.K. branch of AI weren’t involved.

Would be good to know whether that's a general practice.

[Woodchopper]

The head of Amnesty International Ukraine has resigned: https://twitter.com/christopherjm/statu ... lJgML-8BJw

[Woodchopper]

The head of Amnesty International Ukraine has resigned: https://twitter.com/christopherjm/statu ... lJgML-8BJw

Translation of her statement: https://twitter.com/ash_stewart_/status ... lJgML-8BJw

[Woodchopper]

ting about Northern Ireland back in the days before the Good Friday agreement that the U.K. branch of AI weren’t involved.

Would be good to know whether that's a general practice.

I had a look and it appears that national sections can be involved in research on their own country:

Conducting own research projects focusing on human rights abuses in their own country – this must be developed from research work carried out by and is agreed by the International Board.

https://www.amnesty.org/en/about-us/how ... nd-people/

[WFJ]

The way Amnesty is being attacked for making a fairly mild criticisms of Ukraine is pretty chilling.