Do you put “sitting in the comfort of the first world trying to be the moral arbiter of a people desperately defending themselves from a fascist war of extermination” as one of your hobbies on your dating profile?
I mean, our money is funding this war instead of our own health care, so yeah, I think our people have every right to criticize if they want to.
And besides, it wasn’t that long ago that people were saying these same things about Iraq and Afghanistan, and we later learned our money was grossly misused and corruption rampant.
Stories have already circulated about corruption in the Zelensky government.
Unlike Iraq and Afghanistan, which were immoral American misadventures, this is a Russian misadventure, and supporting the Ukrainians is pushing back against aggression.
I don’t know why you added the sarcasm tag, because it’s true.
There has been extensive reporting of corruption in Zelensky’s government, which always seems to be the case when the US is involved. The only difference is this time we’ve swapped out Saddam Hussein and Hamid Karzai for a white gentleman who’s easier to market to the masses.
If you had anything real to say you’d be linking to it or even talking about specific examples. Instead it’s “there’s stories”, “there’s been reporting”.
I mean, our money is funding this war instead of our own health care,
USian, I presume. You already spend as many federal tax payer dollars, per capita, on healthcare as the UK pays for the NHS, per capita. You’re just not getting the results because you rather bail out hospitals providing ER treatment for people who can’t pay than letting those same people visit the doctor once a year for free so that their condition doesn’t become an emergency. Granted, the NHS is underfunded, but if you’d take say 5% of what Americans pay for health insurance and add it to the sum you have quite a bit to work with.
Don’t try to justify your lack of moral fibre when it comes to standing up to fascists with your dysfunctional politics, that’s not the flex you think it is.
It’s also an armchair ethicist with absolutely no skin in the game wagging their finger at an underdog, outmanned, and outgunned country defending itself from a blatant foreign invasion.
Russia has long since moved to sending contract soldiers into Ukraine. They either support Putin’s war on principle or because of greed from Russia’s ballooning sign-up bonuses. I don’t honestly care what happens to people who voluntarily signed up to commit a genocide when it’s them or the innocent people protecting themselves and everything they love from being genocided.
You’re acting like this is some sort of situation that brushes up against being a war crime but falls just short because of some small, pedantic technicality, but no. As you can plainly read, this isn’t even close to a war crime under international law, which is the entire way a war crime is defined, because it’s, you know, a crime. You can’t just hallucinate up international conventions on war and then act all offended when someone points out they don’t exist.
This isn’t just “not technically a war crime”; this is unambiguously not a war crime and was never in any danger of even approximating one.
It’s also a war crime if it’s a weapon inflicting excessively injurious or having indiscriminate effects. Like flamethrowers, landmines and blinding lased weapons.
All of these weapons are banned under Geneva Convention, and by using them in a war you would be committing a war crime
Why are you so pressed? What part of what I said is somehow in support of Russia?
Do you then not think that U.S. using Agent Orange wouldnt count as a war crime? or any flamethrower use in WW1? or White Phosphorus?
What would using a banned weapon during war be called if not a war crime?
Clearly these weapons are banned because they are overly cruel, meaning it gets the job too well done.
Last time I checked if someone used banned substances that counts as a crime. And if someone were to break the same rules for war, it would qualify as a crime during wartime (war crime for short).
But no you just think that every hint of criticism against anyone good means that you’re against that fully? Have you heard of the word ‘nuance’ before?
“it’s not a war crime if we’re defending ourselves”
Do you put “sitting in the comfort of the first world trying to be the moral arbiter of a people desperately defending themselves from a fascist war of extermination” as one of your hobbies on your dating profile?
Edit: This reply was so ridiculous that I actually completely forgot to mention that this isn’t a war crime under international law.
I mean, our money is funding this war instead of our own health care, so yeah, I think our people have every right to criticize if they want to.
And besides, it wasn’t that long ago that people were saying these same things about Iraq and Afghanistan, and we later learned our money was grossly misused and corruption rampant.
Stories have already circulated about corruption in the Zelensky government.
Wow, stories have circulated you say? /s
Unlike Iraq and Afghanistan, which were immoral American misadventures, this is a Russian misadventure, and supporting the Ukrainians is pushing back against aggression.
I don’t know why you added the sarcasm tag, because it’s true.
There has been extensive reporting of corruption in Zelensky’s government, which always seems to be the case when the US is involved. The only difference is this time we’ve swapped out Saddam Hussein and Hamid Karzai for a white gentleman who’s easier to market to the masses.
If you had anything real to say you’d be linking to it or even talking about specific examples. Instead it’s “there’s stories”, “there’s been reporting”.
Want to provide sources for those claims boss? I need to see this “extensive reporting”.
Yeah, Russia says a lot, and also pays right wing news a hefty sum in order to report their bullshit.
USian, I presume. You already spend as many federal tax payer dollars, per capita, on healthcare as the UK pays for the NHS, per capita. You’re just not getting the results because you rather bail out hospitals providing ER treatment for people who can’t pay than letting those same people visit the doctor once a year for free so that their condition doesn’t become an emergency. Granted, the NHS is underfunded, but if you’d take say 5% of what Americans pay for health insurance and add it to the sum you have quite a bit to work with.
Don’t try to justify your lack of moral fibre when it comes to standing up to fascists with your dysfunctional politics, that’s not the flex you think it is.
The “right” to criticize was never infringed on, the criticism is just being ridiculed by the public.
I get that, and that’s fine.
We’re a warmongering country and it stands to reason that anyone criticizing the war of the week will not be looked upon favorably. I get it.
It’s also an armchair ethicist with absolutely no skin in the game wagging their finger at an underdog, outmanned, and outgunned country defending itself from a blatant foreign invasion.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
“if their government is bad”
Russia has long since moved to sending contract soldiers into Ukraine. They either support Putin’s war on principle or because of greed from Russia’s ballooning sign-up bonuses. I don’t honestly care what happens to people who voluntarily signed up to commit a genocide when it’s them or the innocent people protecting themselves and everything they love from being genocided.
Removed by mod
Sticking your head in the sand, a time-tested tactic.
When someone is being genocided they get a lot of leeway in how they defend themselves.
Removed by mod
You’re acting like this is some sort of situation that brushes up against being a war crime but falls just short because of some small, pedantic technicality, but no. As you can plainly read, this isn’t even close to a war crime under international law, which is the entire way a war crime is defined, because it’s, you know, a crime. You can’t just hallucinate up international conventions on war and then act all offended when someone points out they don’t exist.
This isn’t just “not technically a war crime”; this is unambiguously not a war crime and was never in any danger of even approximating one.
Yes.
Do you consider castration, rape, and other systematic tortures horrific and to be fought back against with every tooth and claw available?
if there is ever an exception there is always an exception
deleted by creator
It’s not even a war crime. It’s only a war crime specifically if it’s used where civilians are.
It’s also a war crime if it’s a weapon inflicting excessively injurious or having indiscriminate effects. Like flamethrowers, landmines and blinding lased weapons.
All of these weapons are banned under Geneva Convention, and by using them in a war you would be committing a war crime
Are you being stupid because you’re just that stupid or Russia is paying you to be stupid?, at least the money is a good excuse
Why are you so pressed? What part of what I said is somehow in support of Russia?
Do you then not think that U.S. using Agent Orange wouldnt count as a war crime? or any flamethrower use in WW1? or White Phosphorus?
What would using a banned weapon during war be called if not a war crime?
Clearly these weapons are banned because they are overly cruel, meaning it gets the job too well done.
Last time I checked if someone used banned substances that counts as a crime. And if someone were to break the same rules for war, it would qualify as a crime during wartime (war crime for short).
But no you just think that every hint of criticism against anyone good means that you’re against that fully? Have you heard of the word ‘nuance’ before?
deleted by creator
Honestly the Ukrainian brutality has been pretty constrained over time compared to the civil war. Russia started full 1865.