Biden Calls for 'War Crimes Trial' Against Putin
Evidence mounts in Bucha, Ukraine, indicating that Russian troops killed civilians arbitrarily and mercilessly.

Russian President Vladimir Putin began his invasion of Ukraine on February 24, and the U.S. started collecting evidence of possible Russian war crimes in the first week of March. This past weekend, when Ukrainian soldiers recaptured the town of Bucha, just 36 miles from Kyiv, they found themselves in the midst of what Ukrainian authorities called a "scene from a horror movie."
Horrifying photos and videos were released of victims' corpses lining the streets with their hands tied behind their back. More than 300 bodies were found shot dead in a mass grave.
Officials in Moscow repeatedly denied that Russian troops slaughtered innocent Ukrainians. Some even suggested that the images and videos circulating around the world are hoaxes or actors pretending to be dead in a "coordinated media campaign."
Time-lapse satellite imagery and reporting from the New York Times indicate that bodies had been laying in the streets of Bucha for a few weeks, rebuking the Kremlin's claim that the bodies were added to the streets after Russian soldiers "withdrew completely from Bucha around March 30." Dark objects similar in size to human bodies appeared on the street between March 9 and March 11. Footage from April 1 shows that these presumed bodies remained untouched until Ukrainian soldiers recaptured the contested area.
"The Ukrainian city of Bucha was in the hands of [Russian] animals for several weeks. Local civilians were being executed arbitrarily, some with hands tied behind their backs, their bodies scattered in the streets of the city," Ukraine's defense ministry told reporters on Sunday. Also on CBS's Face the Nation on Sunday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said that Russian forces are committing genocide by "destroying and exterminating" the Ukrainian people. These atrocities committed by Russian soldiers have enraged the international community—with many countries now calling for tougher sanctions.
"I will do everything in my power to starve Putin's war machine. We are stepping up our sanctions and military support, as well as bolstering our humanitarian support package to help those in need on the ground," said England's Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Sunday. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz stressed that "Putin and his supporters will feel the consequences." President Joe Biden said Monday that "what's happening in Bucha is outrageous." No leader has gone so far as Zelenskyy to define Russia's actions as genocide.
In a more symbolic move, the U.S. and the U.K. have called to remove Russia from the U.N. Human Rights Council, with Biden calling for Putin to be put on trial for war crimes committed during the Bucha massacre.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I think every leader who murders civilians should face charges,
I don’t think either Biden or Obama would like that though.
Ah glad to see the Strawman is alive and well on Reason.
They would like to be put on trial?
Naah. Easily explained by mentioning that ICC is full of shit.
At worst its a non sequitur, but hardly a strawman
Under the principle of command responsibility, which we enforced on General Yamashita, war-crimes trials are something that Bush, Biden, and Obama should all worry about.
They have less to worry about under the principle we enforced on Hirohito
Home income solution to enable everyone to work online and receive weekly payments to bank acc. Earn over $500 every day and get payouts every week straight to account bank. (re53) My last month of income was $30,390 and all I do is work up to 4 hours a day on my computer. Easy work and steady income are great with this job. More information. >> https://brilliantfuture01.blogspot.com/
You have to lose the total war for generals, much less civilian military authorities, to be tried. Otherwise, the buck stops at Lt. Calley.
If you win, you’re on the side of the angels.
It's neither a non sequitur nor a strawman.
Both Biden and Obama are responsible for the drone deaths of civilians. They could argue that those civilian deaths were inadvertent, but so could Putin (albeit increasingly less effectively). But I think Obama still has the lead in total numbers.
I've been advocating a fullscale US - Russia war ever since they attacked us in 2016. As soon as a few mainstream American politicians start using the word "genocide" it should be impossible to prevent a major escalation on our part. NEVER AGAIN!
#LibertariansForWarWithRussia
The nukes! Tell of the nukes!
He’s for Nuclear War if it can save just one life in Ukraine
Home income solution to enable everyone to work online and receive weekly payments to bank acc. Earn over $500 every day and get payouts every week straight to account bank. (qaz04) My last month of income was $30,390 and all I do is work up to 4 hours a day on my computer. Easy work and steady income are great with this job.
More information. >> http://StartEarning10.Cf
Hillary says don't talk about the nukes.
Izziz the reason Shrillary lost? Rooshian assault hackers, not Libertarian spoiler votes?
Need to include every living US president in the tribunal.
This is already turning into another Katyn Forest massacre, where whoever surrendered got blamed until another belligerent surrendered. But somebody needs to explain to Sleepy Joe that no Nazis or Hirohitans were tried for war crimes until AFTER they surrendered. Czech republicans made home movies of rounding up, shooting and running over Germans after Germany lost, no trials needed. These are European and Haitian customs democratic Americans can only regard with bovine incomprehension.
Moo.
Why the hatin' on the Hatians? Sure, they have some weird customs like voodoo, and life is shitty there (might even qualify as a "shithole country" as one former Twitter user purportedly said), but accusing them of WWII atrocities seems a bit unfair.
Because of the media's deplorable reporting on the Syrian gas attacks*, I find it hard to believe anything I read at this point. I'm not discounting out of hand what's going on here, but like the Syrian gas attacks, this would provide a convenient galvanizing event to get the west more deeply involved in the conflict.
I mean, tying civilians' hands behind their backs and executing them in the street, then just leaving the bodies there... in that state-- still bound at the wrists seems so insane it's hard to wrap your head around the possible motivation for such a war crime in the era of social media.
*I had to go to duckduckgo to find the stories about how terrible the reporting was on this, because using the exact same search terms initially in Google simply brought me reams of New York Times articles on their investigation of the Syrian Gas attack which was pretty much proven false. Make of that what you will.
I'm not discounting out of hand what's going on here, but like the Syrian gas attacks, this would provide a convenient galvanizing event to get the west more deeply involved in the conflict.
^
Ever hear of My Lai?
so insane it's hard to wrap your head around the possible motivation for such a war crime in the era of social media.
I'm no historian, but I'll have to go back and do some reading on how wide Twitter's reach was in 1968.
what was Walter Cronkite's wingspan?
Ever hear of My Lai?
I've heard of My Lai, My Khe and Katyn. That's not really the point. This all seems a tad on the nose.
I'm not discounting it either, but my BS detector gives a little chirp at the idea that the Russians, after deliberately slaughtering a bunch of civilians, just left them out in the open for war-crimes investigators to find, and didn't at least try to bury the evidence, Katyn-Forest-style.
Yeah, let's just leave these bodies on the goddamned street, still bound and gagged so half an hour after we leave, any yahoo with a half-decent cell phone connection or inexpensive high-def camera drone can easily find this evidence that will make its way into Brian Stelter's hands later on the same day is highly suspicious to me.
I'm really trying hard to not go down that rabbit hole and just disbelieve everything I hear out of the establishment media on a 'just because' basis.
But after what I've seen out of our so-called venerated media institutions over the last few years, I'm waiting for more facts to flush out before I'm calling for Putin to personally be arrested and tried on war crimes for a regional conflict that the same venerated media institutions are desperately trying to get the Biden administration to involve us in.
That is the major problem for all choices here -- that the bodies show up on satellite pictures several weeks ago during the Russian occupation. If those are real satellite pictures, then the Russians were stupid enough to leave the bodies out in the open for all that time, whether or not they killed them or Ukrainians did, whether as a false flag operation or as revenge on collaborators.
I don't know. I simply don't know. All the evidence we currently have is tangential. See my comment below. It's entirely conceivable that this is exactly what the NYT is reporting. It's just that it comes in a very tidily wrapped package with a ribbon on it at exactly the time Sean Penn is calling for a US War against Russia.
This behavior is more reflective of cartels and criminal gangs. Wouldn't be shocked given Ukrainian corruption this is those groups and not the military.
Given the chaos on the ground, and some disturbing things I've heard about Ukrainians and reprisals, it's possible those bodies were killed while bound and gagged, the Russians came through and said, "huh" and left them there.
I simply don't know. I'm not going to latch onto a speculative theory and stick to it... I simply have no idea what the circumstances are. I really wish that my country's media hadn't turned into such utter shit, willingly lying on a regular basis to provide a preferred narrative, but when you lose trust in your institutions, this is what happens... you start not believing everything.
The reports say the bodies showed up on satellite images during the Russian occupation. That is my only doubt; whose satellite images? If they are real, then the Russians bear the primary responsibility for leaving them out in the open. It also makes it much more likely the Russians killed them, because I don't see how Ukrainians have done such a deed while occupied. One or two, sure. A dozen, maybe. But not hundreds.
So it is not possible for Ukranian gangs or criminal opportunists to have broken into the homes and murdered the occupants pre-occupation, then the Russians found the bodies and left them in the open to declare "we didn't do this, we're not this stupid"
This. Right here.
Since early 2016 the media has done nothing but completely trash what credibility they had with their bullshit TDS and then the fortification. As a result, I don’t trust a single goddamned word from them, because they’re proven liars on a mass scale.
If the bodies were left lying out for weeks, wouldn't they be seriously decayed or eaten by dogs and rats by the time the Ukrainians were able to take back control? Maybe that's exactly what happened, but the stories I've been reading say nothing about bodies looking like they had been left for weeks at the mercy of the elements and wild animals.
Sure but to steelman the argument, if they were bound and gagged, that probably would be evident even after lying on the ground for a couple of weeks. There's a lot of evidence to investigate here and hopefully someone will do a good job of it.
On the other hand, there is some evidence that the Russians *did* try to hide the evidence by hastily burying some of their victims. This article from the WSJ describes the killing of the mayor of Motyzhyn: https://www.wsj.com/articles/execution-of-village-mayor-becomes-symbol-of-russian-brutality-in-ukraine-11649176611
(Interestingly, when you read the article, it turns out that she was "helping pass information on Russian troop locations and movements to the Ukrainian army"--in other words, spying. I'm not sure whether her husband and son were doing the same thing, but that kind of behavior by civilians in occupied territory has traditionally been treated harshly by occupiers, including the United States Army in Northern Virginia during the Civil War. Nowadays, we require some kind of trial before we execute spies, but we don't know whether or not one was held here.)
I assume that in wartime, both sides lie as much as they think is to their advantage, so I'm not going to believe either the Russian or the Ukrainian narrative without a lot of verification.
The Geneva convention is quite clear that any civilians who take up arms loses any protections afforded under the law of war. Non-uniformed combatants have no protections under the laws of war.
https://twitter.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1508999907654336515?t=f8GOE_AktiyW_hUr58HmjA&s=19
This Bellingcat/WSJ poisoning story has got to be one of the biggest disinformation fails of the entire Ukraine war.
Within a few hours it was denied by the U.S., Russia, Ukraine and by the fact that Abramovich himself was fine attending the peace talks in Turkey.
[Links]
et's just leave these bodies on the goddamned street, still bound and gagged
If their goal is to scare Ukrainians into cutting and running, it makes sense.
-jcr
Yep. Crazy that.
Several weeks seems a bit of a stretch. If the city was occupied by Russian troops, the stench alone would be enough to motivate them to do something about the bodies (not to mention the health impacts on the troops). I'm not saying it did or didn't happen, but it's pretty hard to conceive it. Yeah, the SS slaughtered a bunch of allied prisoners, and left their bodies in a field, but it was in a field outside of town, in the middle of winter, and they were retreating because their offensive had gone been checked by allied counterattacks (referring to the Malmedy massacre). It did take a month for the allies to recover the bodies, so it isn't inconceivable, but the allied high command knew within hours of it occuring because survivors had escaped and reported it.
Because of the media's deplorable reporting on the Syrian gas attacks*, I find it hard to believe anything I read at this point. I'm not discounting out of hand what's going on here, but like the Syrian gas attacks, this would provide a convenient galvanizing event to get the west more deeply involved in the conflict.
Not to criticize too harshly but, Syria? We impeached Trump. Twice. Once over the contents of Hunter's laptop. I don't see how they wouldn't impeach Putin. Orban's probably next. Fuck, why stop there? Impeach or try everyone except Biden, Trudeau, and Ursala von der Leyen. Why not?
Did you like the bodies waving as the trucks rode by? Dude standing visible in the side mirror was hilarious.
Watching Ukrainian soldiers execute POWs and hearing the doctor state he had ordered his staff to castrate captured Russians was not so amusing. War crimes there too?
"I mean, tying civilians' hands behind their backs and executing them in the street, then just leaving the bodies there... in that state-- still bound at the wrists seems so insane it's hard to wrap your head around the possible motivation for such a war crime in the era of social media."
There is the possibility that those dead were actual partisans, caught in the act, and duly executed.
More likely the perps didn't think they were going to lose.
If it's any help, Putin was a part of a system of thought that murdered a total of 160 million human beings and claimed it was working towards a "Worker's Paradise." Kind of shoot the wad on his credibility.
I have no doubt the Russians have killed many innocent people. I am equally sure that if the Russians wanted to, the carnage could be significantly worse. They haven't 'Grozny-ed' Ukraine yet. They can easily make that happen if they chose to.
The problem the Russians have is their tactics are limited with respect to the sophistication of their weaponry, and their conscript army can't execute worth a damn.
The bigger problem is POTUS Biden's mouth. He needs to shut it. It is really dumb to needlessly provoke a man with his finger on the button of 5K nukes. POTUS Biden should look to a resolution of the conflict, not exacerbate tensions preventing a resolution.
The bigger problem is POTUS Biden.
A murderous autocrat launches an unprovoked invasion of a foreign country, decimates civilian targets (including food storage and distribution), kills thousands of Ukrainians and the bigger problem is ... Biden?
What the actual fuck?
Murderous autocrats launching unprovoked invasions foreign countries is otherwise known as the way of the world.
Biden cretinously singling out one armed with nuclear weapons, thus escalating an existing conflict is indeed the bigger problem.
His job is not to make bad things worse, yet that is all he's done since being 'elected.'
They haven't 'Grozny-ed' Ukraine yet.
Guess you have missed all the reporting on Mariupol.
It ain't Grozny.
A dictator that turned the name of a town filled with his own into a adjective synonymous with war crimes would totally not commit attrocities against people he claimes to be Nazis.
You aren't, I am guessing, going to get anywhere. The bias has set in. On a different tack, I picked up Forshpil's album Tsvey. If you are into garage punk aesthetic Yiddish folk, it may be your jam. I plan on doing a lot of skateboarding while listening to them this summer. Yah, damned retired Gen X weirdo.
"Guess you have missed all the reporting"
LOL
https://www.nextgov.com/cybersecurity/2022/04/russian-disinformation-all-bot-no-bite/363897/
Nardz has read and agreed with all 5 million of them. Hell, he reposted almost half them here.
Repeat the State Department script (much of it written by Hillary Clinton, btw) and make sure to keep Wikileaks Vault_7 deep down in the memory hole.
Did you get your 5th booster shot yet?
Or wrote them. He's irrational enough to work for the Internet Research Agency.
There are three possibilities here:
1. Russians massacred civilians.
2. Ukrainians massacred civilians and blamed it on the Russians.
3. The whole thing was made up and nobody actually died (like the Iraqis throwing babies out of incubators story).
I'm hoping for three, since nobody died in that scenario. Both two and three are far more likely than one, since the Ukrainian government is the only group that benefits.
I think 1 because the Russian army is mostly conscripts blundering about with poor training and lousy leaders. Then the question is if it's deliberate or a result of incompetence.
Putin's stated goal is genocide and subjugation. There's no mystery here.
Cite?
LOL
It's all over their state media. You of all people Ivan know exactly that.
You do know what Genocide means, correct? Can you show where Putin called for the extermination of Ukrainians (who are ethnically the same as Russians, BTW)? If it's all over state media, I'm sure you can find those references? I haven't even seen CNN or MSNBC run stories about Putin calling for the extermination of Ukrainians. The only reference I can find, cherry picked a sentence out of a larger piece, that was really about "denazifying" Ukraine by eliminating Ukraine as a nation and replacing it with several self governing republics, tied to Russia. I don't believe the Nazi rhetoric of Putin, but that is hardly a call for genocide. In fact it's what the allies did after World War 2 (or attempted to do).
'Must be destroyed to the maximum’, Russian state media oultet openly calls for genocide of Ukrainians
A new op-ed by Timofey Sergeytsev published by Russian official mouthpiece RIA Novosti comes with blatant calls for demolition of the Ukrainian state and ruthless repressions against its people who must be subjugated through ‘re-education’ and stripped of their ‘Ukrainian self-identity’ to be fully ‘integrated’ in ‘Russian civilization’.
https://bykvu.com/eng/bukvy/must-be-destroyed-to-the-maximum-russian-state-media-oultet-openly-calls-for-genocide-of-ukrainians/
Yes, that's the one I was referring to. He isn't calling for the genocide of Ukrainians, but for their denazification. I'm not agreeing they are Nazis but nowhere did he call for genocide. As for their culture, it's basically the same as Russia's and he is calling for independent republics to replace Ukraine, that are allied to Russia. So, it isn't genocide. And that was a single editorial from yesterday. Did you actually read his article?
Sir Strudel isn’t paid fifty cents to read the actual articles.
It's not genocide. It is conquest. There is a difference. "Denazification" or whatever they want to call it is plain and simple elimination of all resistance to Russian rule.
Terrorizing people into not rising up supports that goal.
Additionally, they have a conscript army of young people with guns. Of course at least some of them are going to go power-mad and kill people for the fun of it.
There are no "Nazis". Again its a story designed to give license to murder. The "Nazis" are whoever they need to murder to subjugate Ukraine. If the town baker resists the subjugation then he's a "Nazi". So when they say we there to "kill the Nazis" it means quite clearly they're there to kill whoever resists.
I didn't say there was Nazis, I said that was what the editorial author was calling for, not the genocide of Ukraine but the denazification of Ukraine. Reading comprehension is difficult for you, isn't it?
Here is a direct quote from the post your replying too 'I don't believe the Nazi rhetoric of Putin, but that is hardly a call for genocide.'
You're missing the point. Putin says there are "Nazis in Ukraine". Anyone in Ukraine who resists Russian subjugation is the "Nazi" .
Streeeeeeeeeetchh...
No, that isn't the point. The point is, your citation isn't a call for genocide. It is propaganda, because, while there is Neo-Nazis in Ukraine, and even acting on the behalf of the government, Ukraine itself is not Nazi. But the editorial doesn't call for genocide, so you're wrong to assert that the Putin government has been calling for genocide. Fuck, you're really to stupid to understand aren't you?
And of course soldier is correct. Unless someone calls for genocide, they can't be found guilty of the charge. The only reason we can accuse Hitler of it is because of his famous speech where he called for the genocide of .........wait. He never gave such a speech and so soldier would not accuse him of genocide?
You're reading into it, to fit your narrative. There hasn't been a call for genocide. The editorial didn't call for Ukrainians to be killed en masse. It was actually a plan for how to reform Ukraine, in the writers opinion, as the writer believes they are Nazis. The writer is an idiot or a mouthpiece, but it isn't proof of your assertion that Putin and the government are calling for genocide, unlike Mein Kampf which directly called for a solution to the Jewish problem and stated that Jews needed to be eliminated from German and European society. There's tens of thousands of Ukrainians living in Russia, they haven't been arrested and sent to camps, which you would expect if Putin was bent on genocide. There's also tens of thousands living in Byelorus, and nothings been done to them either. If this was an actual genocide, those in Russia and Byelorus would be the first ones Putin and would target. I'm not denying that it's likely Russian troops killed civilians, all I said was it's stupid to label it genocide or call Putin a war criminal (especially before it's been independently investigated, which is really just starting) when at some point (barring a miracle) we'll have to negotiate with Putin.
I know your IQ is sub room temperature and that is too hard a concept for you to grasp, and you're just repeating what CNN and MSNBC told you to repeat, but not everyone who disagrees with you, automatically supports Putin. Some of us really want the war to end, because we believe it's what's best for Ukraine and the rest of the world. Ukraine already had the fastest decreasing population in Europe, the war has displaced over 10,000,000 and killed thousands. It's destroyed half of their food production (which is also one of the largest economic drivers), the longer this goes on, the more people flee and the more people die, and the less acres that get planted. Which hurts not just Ukraine but the world. You can believe David will kill Goliath, but it will take a miracle. Ukraine has done a good job on the defense but lacks the equipment to go on the offense on a major scale.
Soldier, Hitler did not make a public call for genocide. Cripes, what's wrong with this guy.
For fuck's sake, I wish you leftists would read a damn dictionary even a fraction as often as you check your ActBlue directives.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/genocide
Whoa, whoa, wait for independent verification of events? This is 2022, left-leaning goodthinkers have social media and the 'news' media to tell them what to believe. No need to wait for that messy truth bullshit, facts needlessly cloud the narrative.
"Putin's stated goal is genocide and subjugation"
Fuck off Shrike, and take your neocon wardrums with you.
The Russians were sold this war on Putin's ideas of Ruthenian-Russian solidarity and liberating them from the West's grasp. Not lebensraum.
If you want to play warmonger don't give us lying horseshit that everyone already knows isn't true.
Really, who do you imagine you're tricking?
The Ukrainians rejected Putin's "love". That language of brotherhood was an instrument to subjugate. Now that it's clear to even these monsters that Ukrainian want nothing to do with Russia the monsters have adjusted their language but the goal remains the same.
And that goal is to absorb Ukraine back into Russian sphere of influence, not to kill them all. Look up the definition of genocide. And cultural genocide isn't even really a possibility, as the Ukrainian culture and Russian culture are virtually identical, which makes sense, given Russian culture descended from Ukrainian culture.
How about I absorb your house and your fucking wife? She can be my wife and take my name.
So, you realize you're full of shit but are too progressive to ever admit fault in your thoughtless actions?
I think I'm finally learning how to speak leftist!
Did I fucking say it was okay for Russia to absorb Ukraine? Find where I said that dipshit. I simply stated what he called for isn't genocide. Fuck, you are fucking stupid.
Using the correct terminology and using your brain and following the facts rather than emotion doesn't make me a Russia supporter. Fuck, I don't know how many times I've been accused the past week of being to pro-Ukrainian for debating against Nardz, now here you are fucking attacking my family because I don't 100% agree with your loaded and wrong terminology. Buy a fucking clue. One can point out you're wrong without fucking being for Russia.
" I don't know how many times I've been accused the past week of being to pro-Ukrainian for debating against Nardz"
Umm, you are pro Ukrainian. You keep saying you hope they win.
Ummm, I don't want them to win because I support them, but because I don't believe Russia was justified in invading. Just like I don't think the US was justified in invading Iraq.
Just because I cheer for the Red Sox when they're playing the Yankees doesn't mean I am pro Red Sox, but because I hate the Yankees.
"Just because I cheer for the Red Sox when they're playing the Yankees doesn't mean I am pro Red Sox, but because I hate the Yankees."
Ok, so you're just pro Ukraine at the moment, not in general?
It's immaterial, soldiermedic, I'm just a stickler for accuracy.
Also, I think the only logical pro Ukrainian position is immediate peace, based on the conditions Russia is, and has been, asking for.
As you talk about above, this war hurts the Ukrainian people.
You can be mad at whomever you want for that, be it Putin and/or NATO/globalist totalitarians, but it is what it is.
The longer this war lasts, the worse and more dangerous it is.
I do not think Russia losing would be good for you, me, or 99.9% of the world.
"How about I absorb your house and your fucking wife? She can be my wife and take my name."
What a retarded analogy. Explain how the invasion of the Ukraine will steal people's houses and wives.
You can't even put a couple of seconds thought into your retorts, can you.
"How about I absorb your house and your fucking wife? She can be my wife and take my name."
"What a retarded analogy. Explain how the invasion of the Ukraine will steal people's houses and wives.
You can't even put a couple of seconds thought into your retorts, can you."
And in this case, the wife divorced him and got married to someone else. The ex then spent the next 8 years beating and trying to kidnap her. Now her current husband brought the fight to her ex.
“How about I absorb your house and your fucking wife? She can be my wife and take my name.”
That wouldn’t be genocide either retard.
By soldier's pro-Putin ruling, Hitler never committed genocide either since he never gave that speech.
The left-leaning/progressive horseshit works exceptionally well when the repeat it ad infinitum in their stupid little klatches. Everybody is impressed at how clever they all are.
Is it? I'm sure that in his mind he thinks he's doing the right thing. A lot of it is about language and culture. In the eastern parts where Putin is focusing, a good part of the population speaks Russian not Ukrainian. He's constantly talking about fascists running Ukraine. So he sees himself as a liberator. I wonder if he believes his talk. I wonder if some of it might be grounded in truth.
He's certainly not a cartoon villain.
Nah man, you just dont know. Mission 1 was decapitating the Ukrainian govt. Putin put his best troops in the north and expected it to take five days. They packed the war metals and the victory parade outfits.
That failed spectacularly so they're trying to salvage something in the east but that'll be even harder now that Ukraine is mobilized and well armed. Putin lost thousands and his best troops trying to complete mission 1. That failure completely shattered the image of the Russian military. His attempt at complete subjugation shocked and rallied the best of us to the defense of Ukraine. Had Putin "focused on the east", as you put it (you're actually regugtating Russian propaganda), and limited his conquest to the "Russian cultural areas" it would have been more difficult to arm Ukraine and sanction Russia.
Based on their armaments, and what Russia actually produces, they weren't his best troops. And taking over a country isn't genocide. Was it genocide when Sweden took over Norway after the Napoleonic wars?
And this is an apt analogy. The Swedish and Norwegian people had a similar language, culture, religion etc, the same as the Russians and Ukrainians. They even were part of the same country at one time, and also enemies at other times, just like the Russians and Ukrainians. Initially the Swedish Government did ban Norwegian nobility, and self governance, that they had enjoyed under the Danish-Noreegian union.
And massacring civilians isn't exactly a rare occurrence in war, certainly much less so than faking or false flagging a massacre.
They probably think they will have cover from the fact that the Ukrainian government handed out weapons to civilians, so they can claim anyone they killed was a combatant
Ukranian's literally just got caught trying to pin the killing of a man with a NY Times press badge (he turned it to no longer be an active reporter for the times) on the Russians. When it occurred at a Ukrainian check point and there weren't any Russians for a 100 miles.
This is why not blowing your credibility is so important.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10687627/Drone-video-shows-Russian-tank-opening-fire-cyclist-Bucha.html
Link speaks for itself.
It's wartime. Being on a bicycle doesn't make you a peaceful sustainable commuter. It merely means you were "on a bike". Full stop. You might be an enemy combatant on a bike. You might be a forward artillery observer... on a bike, you might be carrying a panzerfaust... on a bike.
"But... he was on a bicycle" doesn't automatically mean he/she was a civilian just going out for a quiet afternoon constitutional. I know we love bicycles in the west, but bicycles have often been used by combatants because they're a cheap, efficient, easily maintainable form of transportation.
It's all propaganda. Literally every picture is chosen to support an agenda. I was just responding to Ukrainians did blah blah blah. It was a snark.
I hear you. It's very possible he was an innocent civilian killed by russian tanks. But it's a fucking war. You're in a tank, you get a callout "Commander, I see movement between the houses, 400 meters and closing".
"Da, Vasily, it is too badsky ve don't have any areal coverage of the area for better context... ze vest is sending in anti-tank weapons, better safe zan sorry!"
Maybe the tank commander had a bad break-up w/ a chick who really liked bikes...
2 kilometers, not 100 miles, but you're correct that it was a Ukrainian checkpoint and Russians weren't in range.
And who'd have guessed something like that would happen when you shove automatic weapons into every alcoholic's and teenager's hands, constantly terrify them with stories of "saboteurs" around every corner, then have them man check points with less training than a mall cop?
By the way, I've seen that story referenced as recently as yesterday on FoxNews (who I'm told are way pro Putin) still saying he was shot by Russians, despite the truth known for weeks.
Hyperbole is bad. Propaganda is bad. Implausible speculation is bad. Rumors are bad. Errors are bad.
But these things happen.
What pisses me off to no end is the outright lying. Weeks after the truth has been discovered, our media/politicians are still repeating the false stories and telling us determinations and decisions need to be made based on things they know to be fucking lies.
That shit is evil.
Thank you for the correction.
2 kM is a big difference than 200 kM. Many modern weapons can easily hit a target at 2 kM, the number that can hit at 200 is much smaller. The longest confirmed sniper kill was over 3 kM, in fact the top nine were all over 2 kM, and number ten was just under that distance. Also, the US doesn't make the list until number 6, the top five are held by 3 Canadians, an English and an Australian sniper. The US does have three in the top ten. Almost all of the top ten occurred in Afghanistan also, two in Iraq (including the longest, held by a Canadian) one in the UN mission in the Congo (a South African) and one in Vietnam (by Halfcock, with a M-2 BMG set on semi automatic, all the other top ten were with specialized sniper rifles).
Not saying the reporting is or isn't false, just saying 2 kM makes the claim much more plausible.
I don't think Russians are shooting up one car from over a mile away. Does a typical AK have that kind of range?
My quick search shows that confirmed kills at or above 2 km is... 9 (10 if you want to round up) in world history. Don't know how accurate that is, again it was a quick search, but those all seem to be dedicated snipers. Russian attribution remains highly implausible, which is why the story was suddenly dropped after being heavily publicized.
But yes, 2 km is very different from 100 miles.
Additionally, with today's weapons and vehicles, 2 km away is effectively on the front lines. Of course soldiers are going to get jumpy and make more mistakes when the enemy is so close.
We can admit it for what it almost certainly was. A mistake in war. They didn't intend to kill any innocents, but it's a war. People are getting killed, and anyone close to the fighting is at risk. Trying to read more into it without more information is asking for trouble.
But a mistake doesn't push the narrative, so it's to be buried under fiction
"Does a typical AK have that kind of range?"
Not in any sort of aimed manner. Fired artillery style, 30 - 45 degrees to the horizon, the rounds can easily travel 2000 meters. On the receiving end they will be coming down near vertical.
I'll say there's a good chance that most of the reporting is false, or heavily colored (racist!) with intent to use as propaganda. Getting facts from people on the ground, versus hyperbolic claims and the typical bullshit dualist thinking would be a good place to start.
I think 1 because the Russian army is mostly conscripts blundering about
Even that is a fact which is in dispute.
If they've got well trained and equipped troops, the Ukrainians haven't met them yet. At least according to the Daily Mail.
Seriously though. The only and I mean only reason Ukraine hasn't been stomped is lightweight anti-tank and anti-airplane missiles.
Warfare has changed. Can't just roll in with a column of tanks and take a city. And you don't need an A-10 to fight them off.
The Russians are completely shit though.
If the bodies first showed up a month ago during the Russian occupation, it's hard to see how Ukraine could fake that.
And there are commercial satellite images as well as those from various militaries. But the apologists aren't going to let things like facts and reality interefere with their beliefs.
Diane literally said that she doesn't believe anything American media tells her. Granted, they don't have the stellar reputation for honesty, integrity, and accuracy that Alex Jones, The Gateway Pundit, and Project Veritas do.
However, if you say that nothing coming from American media is trustable and that Russian propaganda might be, you can see where you'll end up. Best case scenario is a 'useful idiot'. Worst case is Russian propagandist.
It is possible that some of those were Russian infiltrators caught and summarily executed by retreating Ukrainian forces.
1. Russians massacred civilians.
2. Ukrainians massacred civilians and blamed it on the Russians.
3. The whole thing was made up and nobody actually died (like the Iraqis throwing babies out of incubators story).
4. Civilians were killed in some sort of conflict, and someone came through, dragged the bodies into the street and bound their hands after-the-fact in hopes to inflame western passions and join the fight against the Russians on the ground, like Sean Penn wants.
If the bodies were on the ground for several weeks during the Russian occupation, why didn't the Russians remove them?
I have no idea. I really don't know what the conditions on the ground were... or are.
I still hang on to the possibility this is exactly what it appears to be: A clumsy massacre by Russian forces that does in fact amount to a War Crime and should be investigated.
If it turns out that the facts show it was in fact a massacre by Russian forces, then we should have a trial for Lyndon Johnson as a war criminal-- if we're holding to the principle that Putin is personally responsible for this act.
LBJ is not within the jurisdiction of the court. Henry Kissinger is still around, though.
Au contraire
The idea that the jackass who just lost the war in Afghanistsn and handed the country back to the Taliban has the will or the capacity to carry out this absurd bluster doesn't pass the laugh test. Absokutely nobody fears or respects you old man, not our allies, and especially not our enemies. You have no fucking credibility, period.
I don't know why the biggest, weakest, most gutless cowards in life always seem to have the biggest mouths, but they do. The next time Sleepy Joe opens his, someone should ahove a giant tablespoon of tapioca pudding or Turkey Hill ice cream in it.
Interesting. Is he going to call for a war crimes trial for Obama too?
Let's not get ahead of ourselves. We're talking about the guy who got Trump elected. That's the real war crime here.
Well, I wouldn’t say that Obama got trump elected on his own, but he certainly was a factor.
You talking about the guy who blew up a civilian aid worker with water jugs in his hatchback, his 6 children, and his neighbors and called it a truck bomb on the way to the Kabul airport?
C'mon man, everyone knows that kids are little terrorists, right?
The bigger and OUR problem is the idiots mouth. He can only make things worse. I will be eternally grateful if this war subsides without significant escalation from Biden blundering into it.
Biden's 4 decades of lying, bullying, and grift. Trump's 4 years of abrasive tweeting. Seems like the fans of the current group in power have a problem with scope and scale.
How does Biden expect that would ever happen? Is he proposing to go to war with Russia unless they hand Putin over for trial?
Russia can put his head on a pike and leave it at border with Ukraine.
Sure. And when they don't?
Shrike hasn't received the narrative for that part yet.
According to polling (which the US intelligence agencies rated as highly reliable) Putin has the highest approval rating of his rule, and 74% of Russians support the war. Additionally, the ruble has recovered all it's losses since the start of the war, and any shortcomings that they experienced at the start, the Russian has already replaced with alternatives and they are making Europe buy oil and gas from a state run bank, so they worked around the embargoes already. Putin isn't losing power any time soon. But calling him a war criminal, especially after calling for regime change (and then walking it back) makes it less likely Putin will seek peace any time soon. And it raises the chance he may choose to attack the west, because he has very little to lose at this point.
A dead cat bounce if I've ever seen one. Putin can't attack shit. He's losing to Ukraine. Fuck him. No peace for Putin ever. If Russia wants peace they can send Ukraine Putin's head and reparations.
You are a fucking idiot. Really. you are really to fucking stupid even to be worth debating. Ukraine can't beat Russia, they may stop the invasion but they can't launch an offensive that will beat Russia into peace. That means there'll have to be a negotiated peace. Besides, Russia hasn't even come close to even deploying half it's active duty, and has hundreds of thousands of reserve troops they still haven't activated, and they've only launched a little over a thousand air launched munitions (less than the US used alone in the first day of Iraqi Freedom). They have thousands of tanks, and have only deployed a small percentage of them. 760+ fighter aircraft but have flown just a couple hundred sorties. I want Putin to lose but Russia isn't defeated and there will be a negotiated peace. Ukraine knows they can't defeat Russia. They can maybe stop their aggression but they can't drive on Moscow and without that, they need to negotiate if they want peace. Which they understand, unlike your juvenile take. You really do lack anything close to intelligent thought. BTW, have you enlisted yet? Or still wanting others to die for you and your beliefs but too chicken shit to do it yourself? There are plenty of Americans fighting in Ukraine. Why don't you go fight if you believe it's so easy and worth it (sending money is the most callow, cowardly thing you can do BTW)?
“Really. you are really to fucking stupid even to be worth debating.”
Some people really are only worthy of ridicule. Sir Strudel is one of them.
We are already at, and have been at proxy war. The idiot is just shooting off his bullying asshat mouth, again.
"Evidence mounts in Bucha, Ukraine, indicating that Russian troops killed civilians arbitrarily and mercilessly."
This is less than truthful.
Maxar, DoD/State Department organ, published photos showing bodies in the street... 2 weeks ago.
Being generous that it's even a legitimate satellite image, it also shows mortar craters in vicinity of the bodies. I do not find it difficult to believe civilians were killed by (probably Ukrainian, if Russia held the town at that time) shelling. But what bearing does that have on the current Bucha massacre story? It seems the NYT is trying to imply that those are the same bodies from the April 2 video. If so, those bodies were left just laying there for 2 weeks? Implausible.
Bucha is a town of 25k-30k people. The mayor has been there the whole time. Cell phone and internet service hasn't been disrupted.
Russian forces left March 30th/31st. The mayor broadcast a celebratory address March 31st that the town had been retaken, no mention of bodies in the street or a massacre.
The bodies we see in the video don't appear to have been left out in the open, decomposing, for 2 weeks. There is little/no blood visible. Some of the bodies have their hands bound behind their backs. Many have white arm bands, signifying sympathy to Russia.
The story we're being asked to believe is that the Russians left the evidence of their war crimes just lying where they dropped, for up to 2 weeks, with nobody, no friends or family members or neighbors, attending to them for days on end. Further, Ukrainian forces occupied the town March 31, yet didn't discover the atrocity until 2 days later. Again, it's not a large town or sprawling city - but the massacre wasn't known for days?
My initial impression was that the posture and position of the bodies looked like a human turkey shoot. Hands bound behind backs is consistent with this. Gather prisoners, tell them to run, shoot them as they flee in various directions.
We also have announcements from Ukraine's special police, called SAFARI, that they'd be conducting a purge of "spies/saboteurs" April 1st and 2nd. Corpses adorned by white arm bands make sense.
But I've seen other videos of Ukrainians executing POWs, and there is much, much more blood. The scene in Bucha appears staged, so I'm now leaning towards the scenario that these people were killed elsewhere, by various perpetrators and methods, then their bodies were arranged to create a "massacre" story. Based on all available evidence, this seems the most probable case.
Russia has called for a UN investigation.
Why is the UK blocking it?
Probably because the UK knows their story is bullshit.
You have the right to remain silent Ivan.
I don't agree with Nardz but his questions also worth asking. If it did happen, it should be investigated by a neutral, outside source, and why would Ukraine be opposed to that?
Ukraine isn't opposed to that. There's a massive investigation taking place right now. What made you think Ukraine was against an investigation? You unfortunately seem to have fallen for Russian propaganda.
I didn't buy anything, I said his question was pertinent and you should have answered it that he was wrong rather than the stupid answer you gave. It does appear the ICC is in country, but most of the investigation at this point is being conducted by the Ukrainian government. So far no one has actually established that Putin ordered these killings, or if they were the individual acts of soldiers frustrated with the war. The ICC is investigating them but has not established any evidence that this was a coordinated effort directed by the Kremlin. At this point the evidence is not there to establish if Putin is guilty of war crimes, or who is to blame for them. It may turn out that it was Putin, but without the evidence, it's stupid and counterproductive to label Putin a war criminal. If this turns out to be a wide spread occurrence, if the ICC finds supporting evidence, then and only then can we make any conclusions. Being rationale isn't the same as being pro-Russian. I blame Russia for the invasion and for the civilian deaths, but am waiting to make any decisions until the investigation is completed and the evidence is presented by someone other than just Ukrainian sources. Both sides use propaganda, fuck everyone uses propaganda, that's why we need an independent investigation. If you knew there was an independent investigation, instead of calling Nardz Ivan and telling him to shut up, you should have provided that information. Otherwise you look to be as autocratic as you accuse Putin of being. In fact, if you had provided that evidence of the investigation rather than telling him to shut up, you would have made him look foolish. Instead you made yourself look like a sycophant parroting talking points.
"So far no one has actually established that Putin ordered these killings, or if they were the individual acts of soldiers frustrated with the war. The ICC is investigating them but has not established any evidence that this was a coordinated effort directed by the Kremlin. At this point the evidence is not there to establish if Putin is guilty of war crimes, or who is to blame for them."
Nor have they established that Russian soldiers, rather than Ukrainians, killed them...
Occam's razor applies, here as in most things, 300 civilians killed in a city occupied by Russians, and the bodies discovered by Ukrainian troops accompanied by outside press, after the Russians leave the city, the chances are that the Russians did the killings. It's circumstantial evidence, granted, but stronger than the evidence Zelensky had Ukrainian troops kill its own citizens to frame Russia. The ICC has been in Ukraine since early March, and are investigating this, among other accusations. I did find several sources that state that. The UN has already formed its own separate investigation. If Ukraine did do the killings, it would be extremely stupid, as they are relying on Western support, and that would destroy that support if it came out.
Would it? I see no evidence that the investigation wouldn't just be quietly dropped from the news if the Ukranian's turned out to be responsible. The people doing the reporting want to go to war.
Occam's razor would lead to the supposition that a few hundred people in the middle of a war died at the hands of both Russian and Ukrainian soldiers, in either combat or as collateral damage.
It does not at all support the allegation that a dozen or so of those bodies were simply left in the streets but weren't noticed until 24-48 hours after the Russians withdrew.
When considering behavioral patterns, motive, and circumstances... Ukraine as the culprit is at least as likely as Russia, if not more.
https://twitter.com/JovanaXYZ/status/1510720165025046535?t=6DbX4p0NaLeZfdhAJ-TMag&s=19
Ukraine military were reportedly going after people in Bucha they suspected as having "cooperated with the Russian forces". Some sort of punitive expedition.
[Link]
https://twitter.com/JovanaXYZ/status/1510969360810131456?t=qvPKpyHmmn1KqtLABwEnFg&s=19
In the same article, it is stated that UKR forces conduct house-by-house search & interrogate residents ("talk to")
Being in possession of a RUS mil. ration (distrib. elsewhere to civilians as food aid) may have been sufficient to get incriminated for "collaboration" and executed
[Link]
https://twitter.com/antiwar_soldier/status/1511163378110287874?t=14lBROwUaOqtk0RQ-R6bpQ&s=19
One of the Ukrainian fighters "Botsman" (Sergey Korotkih) posted this video from Bucha.
The discussion in background:
- There are guys without blue ribbons (ukrainian marking) can I shoot them?
- #### (inaudible either "sure yeah" or "try")
[Video]
It's possible at least some were collateral damage, but I don't buy the idea that it is some form of conspiracy. So you're right that Occam's razor could be they're collateral casualties, but I still believe if that is the case, it's a huge risk for Ukraine to be labeling them as victims of war crimes. From other sources, besides the US media, I've read that there are several witnesses who have already come forward.
Ukrainian paramilitaries, even soldiers now, put out videos of themselves cutting out prisoners' eyeballs.
Hasn't changed a damn thing. They have full impunity to run amok committing war crimes and alleging whatever they want because the media will cover for them and the money+guns keeps flowing.
The most likely truth of the matter is that those people died elsewhere (possibly the mass grace) - some in combat w/Russians, some in the wrong place at the wrong time from mortar strikes, and yes, some at the hands of vengeful Ukrainian soldiers/paramilitaries - then their bodies were staged as props for a propaganda video.
It really doesn't make sense for the Russians to simply leave bodies lying around on their way out, nor for community and family members to completely neglect them. Nor is there an explanation for why it took a day or more for the scene to be discovered, and for the mayor being completely unaware of it.
We'll see I guess, if there is a real investigation done. The UN sec general is now calling for one
https://unric.org/en/un-calls-for-an-independent-investigation-on-bucha/
but I haven't found anything saying the ICC is investigating Bucha, just that a month ago they opened an investigation into "the situation" in Ukraine.
Hopefully, some legitimate truth will find its way through the propaganda and lies, whatever it may be.
*The most likely truth of the matter is that those people died elsewhere ([and their bodies were possibly retrieved from] the mass grace)
I don't always agree w/ Nardz, bu he is correct in that the evidence is only mounting if one buys into the view that one should not wait. The evidence provided is not exactly damning. There's a reason why the Pentagon will not confirm nor refute at this point.
But not the right to speak and ask questions, huh?
I'm trying to think why this take seems much more reliable than the one given in the article, and part of it is probably biases, I'm against intervening in foreign wars, so I'm more likely to believe information that would support us not intervening.
But I think it also has to do with this take bothering to do fact checking. Reason has a bad habit of uncritically repeating things they read on other media sources, without doubt their own fact checking. When they do so, they invariably get critical information wrong, that the contentious catch with about two minutes research...... guess it's a long way of saying, Reason ought to consider hiring a fact checker or two.
"Reason has a bad habit of uncritically repeating things they read on other media sources"
Usually Twitter. Subscribe to the same Twitter feeds as KMW if you want to see the magazine's direction for the week.
History doesn't repeat itself, but is sure does rhyme. The Nazi sank a British passanger ship, the SS Athenia, and blamed it on Churchill. Make sure you aren't falling for the same bullshit.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Athenia_(1922)
Found the neocon pussy, slave to CNN
Seriously...
"This false flag totes proves that this isn't a false flag"
-spiritus mundi
Great reasoning. Real substantive post there.
Keep shilling for the mass murdering Putin. It is a good look for you. Tell me more how your boy friend loves all the little people of Ukraine and wouldn't hurt a hair on their head. You are either full on Putin stooge or brain dead at this point. Suck start a glock faggot.
I'm in Jacksonville if you'd like to meet up, you media worshipping pussy.
Lol, has Ken kicked your ass yet?
No, Ken apparently dropped off the face of the planet.
Invite's open, boomer.
Shortly after the Bucha video was published, Ukraine officials posted another story: elsewhere, a woman was killed and a swastika was burned/carved on her stomach. They said the Russians did it, and our media/politicians dutifully repeated and amplified their claims as true.
Fortunately, we had video of this woman's body that was shared a week earlier. Patrick Lancaster, an American journalist working in Donetsk for years, shot video while accompanying Russian forces as they went through a captured Azov base/hideout.
Will our media/politicians correct their "mistake"?
We have western media/politicians not just covering up Ukrainian atrocities, but actively using them to frame Russia.
Do you see the likely consequences of this?
Western media/politicians are now providing incentive to Ukraine to commit atrocities, as the Ukrainians will not simply escape accountability, but will gain PR/propaganda success each time they do it.
Authors like the above, and publications like Reason, are complicit in war crimes when they provide cover for and encourage Ukrainian war crimes.
Fortunately, we had video of this woman's body that was shared a week earlier. Patrick Lancaster, an American journalist working in Donetsk for years, shot video while accompanying Russian forces as they went through a captured Azov base/hideout.
Will our media/politicians correct their "mistake"?
Lancaster has already been accused of being a puppet for Putin.
So has FoxNews, and they're beating the idiotic war drums and repeating pro Ukraine/russiamanbad lies as loudly and frequently as anybody else.
Give us more Ukrainemanbad lies Putin fluffer
Die, sqrlvo2.
You have absolutely no value.
But Zelensky is Fauci!!!!!!
+Cuomo, you narrative worshipping simp.
Tucker Carlson is pro-Ukraine?
You found the one person on their network who is not rabidly anti Russia, and is insulated from being pulled off the air because his show is the highest rated in cable news.
I've cited several of their routine lies they use while "covering" the conflict.
FN's opposition to the rest of the msm is much more theoretical than actual.
They too had a constant covid counter...
I did note that Biden called for due process in regards to Putin’s alleged war crimes. Too bad he doesn’t have the same standard for American citizens. You know, like Kyle Rittenhouse.
What war did Kyle Rittenhouse participate in that allowed him to commit war crimes?
The 2020 color revolution?
"like Kyle Rittenhouse"
Geez, you shouldn't huff DNC agitprop right out of the can like that, cut it with cornstarch or something first.
I think you might be misreading the comment.
Biden declared KR a murderer and white supremacist before any trial, thus rejecting due process for him.
I did misread the comment.
Sorry weibullguy. Mea Culpa.
The charitable view is that Biden was perfectly fine with condemning Kyle without evidence.
"You know, like Kyle Rittenhouse."
I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure that being acquitted of a crime requires due process first.
You’re also not an historian or you’d remember that candidate Biden called Rittenhouse a murderer and white supremacist with no evidence of either. One would expect a candidate for President of the United States to say something like, “This is America folks and in America a bedrock principle of our justice system is the presumption of innocence. While we’re all rightfully upset by the tragic events in Kenosha, Mr. Rittenhouse is innocent until the government is able to investigate, gather the facts, and prove to a jury of Mr. Rittenhouse’s peers beyond reasonable doubt that he’s guilty of a crime. While the court of public opinion may have convicted Mr. Rittenhouse, as Americans we should never compromise or abandon our commitment to due process for the accused. Because when we do that, we cease to be America and find ourselves in the company of Neanderthal thinking countries like China, North Korea, Iran, and Russia.” But, apparently, taking the time to gather facts and present a case is reserved for foreign leaders.
so, Ukrainian Collusion?
"In a more symbolic move, the U.S. and the U.K. have called to remove Russia from the U.N. Human Rights Council, with Biden calling for Putin to be put on trial for war crimes committed during the Bucha massacre."
The U.N. Yep. that'll fix it.
The entirety of this "article" is just copy pasting MSM links. Hard hitting commentary from reason as always.
All these comments left make me realize why Holocaust Deniers exist.
You could literally show them the pictures.
Take them right up to the bodies.
Show them actual undoctored footage of Russians killing all these people.
They'll still say it was all just a Ukraine/Western fabrication.
They will LITERALLY rather believe Ukraine and the West put together this gigantic, elaborate, planned fabrication of killing civilians, somehow plan it out ahead of time of the Russian invasion AND set it all up right after they were kicked out, and NO ONE over there offering proof of claims that it was faked.
Do any of you seriously understand HOW MANY PEOPLE would have to keep this secret it was faked? The more people who would know, the less likely it is to keep it secret.
And ALL of this, ALL OF THIS conspiracy ranting is somehow more plausible... than the Russian soldiers being sadistic monsters. The mere suggestion that the Russians being at fault for base, human sadism is somehow IMPOSSIBLE at being the answer.
Never mind there's been plenty of proof of the Russian army doing this EXACT. SAME. SHIT. starting from all the way during WW2.
None of the commenters are deniers (well, aside from one, possibly). Most of the commenters are skeptics. And skepticism is a GOOD thing. It means you don't jump to conclusions just because the alleged crime is atrocious or unconscionable. Skepticism means belief follows the evidence, it doesn't precede it.
I am skeptical because this plays so well for propaganda. It doesn't mean I couldn't be convinced, it means I am not yet convinced.
Perhaps the Russians will keep meticulous records like the Germans did.
Unfortunately you're trying to compare a bunch of bodies recently discovered on the battlefield to the industrial systemized killing of millions of Jews, performed behind enemy lines by an enemy that kept meticulous records of the very act, corroborated by hundreds of thousands of survivor accounts and millions... billions(?) possibly trillions of carefully culled points of evidence discovered by different and varying sources which have all become part of the historical record.
This situation is very hot on the ground and clamoring for WWIII to avenge this possible war crime is exactly what we should be avoiding.
I only see one or two people outright denying it, most are simply questioning the details and wanting more verification. That isn't denial, it may be skepticism, but that is different than denial. The facts are rather fantastic (in it's original and literal definition), and thus difficult to accept at face value. Russia occupied the city for weeks, and is supposed to have kept these bodies out in the open during that whole period. Have you ever been around a body a day old, let alone three weeks? People within the city were able to communicate with the Ukrainian government, even during the occupation, so why are we first hearing about this now? There may be good explanations, and we may well learn them soon. We should have an outside source investigate and determine the truth. At this point we simply have dead bodies, one side claiming the other killed them, and the other side denying it. That isn't denying anything. It is simply the facts, and I'm sure there would be more reporting, and either independent verification or not. Asking questions is not denial, but the only way to ascertain facts. If Russia did commit these authorities, the next question is what can be done about it? Is calling Putin a war criminal by the President of the US, more or less likely to result in this war ending? Collect evidence, and when and if, you get a chance to prosecute, do so, but in the mean time, you need to negotiate with Putin to end this war. That should be our first goal, ending the war. Anything that makes that harder is counter productive.
Folk like Melon Peel is why the holocaust happened.
He/she/it will support the exact same thing when it happens again, just like the Nazi era Germans.
"Melon Peel" reads like Shrike, who's been sockpuppeting more than usual lately.
Naah. turd is incapable of composing a multi-paragraph comment.
Same kind of jackassery, though. Maybe one of the voices in his head became an English tutor.
"You could literally show them the pictures.
Take them right up to the bodies.
Show them actual undoctored footage of Russians killing all these people.
They'll still say it was all just a Ukraine/Western fabrication."
You could but you'd need those bodies and footage first.
Here's 30 seconds of "actual undoctored footage" of the Russians bombing Paris last week.
https://twitter.com/KyivPost/status/1502366157675941889
Can you tell the difference between that and what you gobble up on CNN?
No Rob Misek yet?
He's probably busy Slava Ukraini-ing
People like to lie, like you like to use all-caps. Get it through your ignorant skull, the facts of the killings are not known yet. And, your bias is showing. Ukrainians are every bit as capable of committing atrocities, particularly if they think it will bring support from abroad, as are Russians. Try to get that into your thick little head as well. Copy and paste it, change it to all caps with a period after every word if it helps, jackass.
Any action requires a pro/con analysis.
For the Ukrainians, they already have large-scale support around the world, a massive influx of modern weapons, the moral high ground, and momentum. Faking a massacre wouldn't gain them anything new, since the West has been united and clear that they aren't going to risk a no-fly zone. On the other hand, if they fake a massacre and get caught, they would lose everything they already have. There is no advantage in it for the Ukrainians.
The Russians have already shown they are willing to make war on civilians to win. They bomb food distribution facilities and attack aid convoys in humanitarian corridors. They have decimated civilian housing. They are losing, so their chiices are to double down on brutality to break the Ukrainians' will or go home with theor tail between their legs. Putin's regime has a well-documented history of brutal repression of dissent, free press, and using fear to control a populace. This is completely par for the course for this regime. A massacre of hundreds civilians doesn't even move the needle for them. And they have nothing to lose.
The only way the Russians NOT being the guilty party is possible is if you assume that every incentive for each party is inverted and the Russians suddenly aren't the country and regime thatbthey have been for decades.
Skepticism is one thing. Assuming unrealistic things in order to assert an equal possibility of Russian or Ukrainian responsibility isn't skepticism.
What a moron. How exactly are you going to bring Putin to a war crimes trial? LOL. He has 5000 nukes dumbass
Even if he didn't, is the US gonna lead another coalition of the willing to topple a dictatorship and create another failing democracy?
Fuck that noise.
"wE'll iNvaDE rUsSia"
The current crop of neocon armchair warriors are even dumber than the last.
The new bunch believes that Putin cost them the the election. Ain’t no greater crime than that.
Subtract one “the”.
I don't think that's true.
They are liars. They've known they were lying the whole time.
The anti-Russian push is a deliberate psyop they've been running ever since Putin took over and wasn't the puppet Yeltsin was, and they've really dialed it up since 2014.
Now, if you're talking about their lemming base, sure. That was the whole point of the psyop.
"is the US gonna lead another coalition of the willing to topple a dictatorship and create another failing democracy?"
I prefer to believe that we have learned our lessons from Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. But I have no confidence in that belief.
Neocons keep getting listened to, regardless of how often they are shown to be disastrously wrong.
Calling him a war criminal, especially after calling for regime change and other "gaffes", just makes it less likely that Putin will seek peace. There is no upside to him seeking peace short of victory. And he isn't about to loose power. Polls, which even the US intelligence agencies ruled are likely reliable, shows Putin with his highest approval rating of his political career (it's increased dramatically since the war began), 74% of Russians support the war, the vast majority of Russians blame any economic pains on the west and the US in particular, not Putin. And as for economic pains, they've mostly abated, as the ruble has recovered all it's losses, any items that they have lost access to are either now being made domestically or alternatives are being made domestically, or imported from China and India. The loss of access to international banking isn't hurting their natural resources industry, as Russia has set up their own bank, and is forcing customers to utilize it to purchase Russian natural resources. India has set up an exchange for rubles, which gives the Russians access to foreign currency. Even the oligarchs that once opposed Putin (and there were a number of them) now feel they are tied to Putin and blame the west. So, those waiting on a palace coup will likely be waiting quite some time.
"Calling him a war criminal... just makes it less likely that Putin will seek peace"
This.
Instead of trying to reduce tensions and negotiate a resolution and a peaceful withdrawal, they seem to be actively trying to inflame the situation and make it worse.
I've never seen anything like it.
Easily the stupidest group of world leaders in human history. They make the WW1 bumblefucks look like strategic and diplomatic geniuses.
You assume they're bungling. I think they want a war. Or, at least, Biden Inc does. They fucked up Afghanistan and they can't get the stink off them. The US economy is in shambles and they can't save it, they're starting to take a beating in the "culture wars" issues, and Biden is such a weak laughing stock that OPEC won't even answer his calls. They've been trying to position him as a war time president since the first Russian toe crossed the Ukranian border and it's failed miserably. Sanctions haven't done shit, Zelensky is getting all the glory, and Biden and NATO look weak and pathetic.
Biden needs something to pull this out of the shitter before midterms, or it's all lost. The GOP gets the house and senate, and their grand global socialist dream is over. Biden is a bungling idiot, but his handlers aren't and they're also scumbags who have no problem killing a bunch of people "for the greater good."
Agreed, but I meant the Western leadership as a whole not just Biden.
Yeah, they're pretty stupid.
Under the current circumstances, Putin is ultimately going to get what he wants out of this- he'll get Donbas, a neutral Ukraine with a friendly president, and no NATO on his doorstep. He's got no incentive at this point to stop anywhere short of that, and no incentive to go any further than that. He doesn't want a war with NATO. He gains nothing from that and has everything to lose.
The real danger comes in when you factor in the fact that this whole thing is making a mockery of NATO. Sanctions did nothing, Europe is still dependent on Russian oil, and every day this grinds on is another slap in the face to NATO, especially with Zelensky being an international hero and it becoming clearer and clearer every day that, no matter how much he begs, NATO isn't coming and he can only hold out for so long without direct help from other countries. He's going to have to give Putin what he wants and the optics will be terrible for the US and NATO. We abandoned the brave freedom fighters of Ukraine, and Putin will have shat all over us. It'll make two spectacular international failures for the Biden administration, and there are midterms coming up.
I don't put it past any of those immoral fucks to manufacture an incident that will pave the way for the US to get involved, and I think they are all evil enough to throw the country into war in order to preserve their own power.
no NATO on his doorstep.
So he is going to invade the Blatics too? This line is the obvious tell of Putin stooges. Like it is a legitimate justification for invading a peaceful, sovereign neighbor, then forgets the fact NATO is already on Russia's border.
And your comment is straight WEF cock sucking of a globalist stooge.
Try the NYT or WaPo comments, they're probably more your style.
We could say the same thing about you lately Nardz. The majority of opinions by most posters is Putin was wrong to invade a sovereign country, and while the west acted badly for the last three decades, that doesn't excuse Putin for invading a sovereign country. And spiritus makes a good point, the Baltics, and Poland are already NATO members (rather you agree with that or not is immaterial) and they freely chose to join and remain committed to being members. Putin can complain all he wants, and yes, NATO didn't live up to earlier security agreements, but Putin was not in power when those agreements were made, and neither were any of the current western leaders (at least not in an executive position). Putin no more gets to dictate to a sovereign country what it does, than we should. It's wrong for us to interfere and invade sovereign countries to make them do what we want, it's just as wrong for Putin and Russia. You can list all the wrongs Putin blames on the west (although I would note, Russia was also playing those same games in Ukraine and Georgia, just not as well as the west appears to have, including arming and training revolt, not only in Ukraine, but Georgia and Moldova as well).
Except Putin IS dictating terms to another nation by force. Classic diplomacy needs no excuses, and it's been quite the shocker to the genteel plutocrats.
Nardz is full on Russia bot at this point.
Everyone can have their opinion, but brainless lying faggots calling other people names for not falling in line with totalitarian globalist propaganda are going to get called our.
Spiritus is repeating a talking point, like a good little lemming, without providing any reasoning or argument.
People that enthusiastically support globalist warmongering based on outright lies make the world less free.
It's pretty fucking easy to shit up threads with "putinmanbad, you're a Russian stooge" takes. Spiritus has the entire msm and establishment government on his side, and it's their goals the piece of shit seeks to advance by attacking me.
None of that helps resist the growing totalitarianism we face.
Everything you post is a pro putin talking point from his twitter army.
The bodies moved! Zelensky is Fauci! The pregnant woman is a crisis actor! You're a neocon msm shill!
Zero self awareness. What a fucking looser.
I didn't post about bodies moving, you mindless neocon shill, nor did I say anything about crisis actors.
Zelensky is Fauci+Cuomo, but I'm sure you'd love to suck his dick all the same.
You have no ability to analyze, just virtue signal by repeating TV talking points and toss out NPC programmed insults. Your confusion and error regarding arguments I've made is proof enough of this.
You're an enemy of free peoples. Let's hope for not much longer.
Turkey, of NATO fame, has been on Russia's doorstep for how long?
Maybe Russia can set some nukes up in Cuba to counter that...
Some of yall really need to listen to what foreign policy people have been saying for 20 fucking years.
Yes, Russia has its own munitions and armaments industry (almost as large as ours) Ukraine doesn't. If and when the US (and western Europe to a lesser degree) gets tired of spending billions of dollars sending weapons to Ukraine, Ukraine is done. Both Zelensky and Putin realize this.
Ukraine is hoping to negotiate an end to this before that happens. Putin, he can wait it out. He isn't going to lose power, and Ukraine isn't capable of fully defeating Russia.
Russia still has hundreds of thousands of trained active duty troops, and hundreds of thousands of trained but not yet activated reservists, he can call on. Ukraine is so desperate that they are sending troops in with only days of basic training, most of it in classrooms, according to American veterans who have volunteered to serve in Ukraine.
Neither North Vietnam or North Korea could have resisted the US for as long as they did, if the Soviets and China weren't arming them. The Taliban was getting weapons and support from Pakistani intelligence and from private Muslims (as well as eventually taking over the opium trade, which originally they were opposed to). The Iraqi insurgents were being supplied by the Syrians and Iranians. Fuck, even in our Revolution, we needed the French.
Ukraine without outside support would be in the same boat as the CSA was in the Civil War. As soon as the Union completed the blockade of southern ports and the Mississippi, cutting the south off from outside resources, the South was finished. All it took was Grant and Sherman grinding them down. Grant's 1864-65 campaign wasn't some grand strategy, other than to trap the Confederate forces and destroy them. Sherman's march to the sea wasn't about anything more than showing that the CSA army was no longer capable of stopping the Union from bringing the war to wherever they wanted to.
If the US and NATO stopped arms shipments, Ukraine would be incapable of fighting on much longer. It doesn't matter how good your soldiers are, or how motivated they are, if they don't have bullets (and anti-tank missiles and SAM). It should also be noted anti-tank missiles and SAM are well suited for the defensive, but not so well suited for offensive. If Russia is going into more of a consolidation mode, that doesn't bode well for continued Ukrainian success.
Ukraine lack the aircraft, armor and artillery they would need to launch major offensive operations (and even if we gave them to Ukraine, operating those takes a lot more training than firing a javelin or an AK).
They didn't liberate this city, so much as Russia stopped occupying it. If Russia is ending offensive actions outside a narrow area that they mostly already control, it's really a stalemate at that point. And for Russia, a stalemate is more beneficial for them, than it is for the Ukrainians. It would take years for Ukraine to develop the offensive capabilities needed to eject Russia. Russia could reorganize it's command and control, and logistics in a much shorter time. It only took a couple weeks for the allies to reorganize after the debacle at Kassarine Pass. Eisenhower replaced a few commanders, and the allies went back on the offensive. And German and Italian troops. Without western supplies, Ukraine would be in the same boat as Rommel and his successor where in after February of 1943. Outnumbered, and running out of supplies, reduced to a defensive war, in which the enemy can just grind it out. The allied advances in Spring of 1943 weren't due to some strategic or tactical brilliance, but were mainly due to they could replace lost men and equipment, while their foes couldn't. Eventually, their foes broke. In the grand scheme and long term picture, strategically, I would much rather be in Russia's shoes than Ukraine, and I am saying this despite the fact I want Russia to lose, and I blame Putin for this war. Russia can resupply, Ukraine can't without outside assistance.
Agreed. I also blame Putin for this war, and I would like him to lose. But I think he has the upper hand here, for all the reasons above. All of the propaganda is designed to make it feasible for the US to continue to spend billions on arming Ukraine, but that's going to wear off eventually and then Ukraine is done.
I still maintain, the propaganda on the US side is also designed to prop up a disasterous Biden administration by trying to position him as a war-time president, and also deflect blame for his domestic failures to Putin. The issue that worries me is, it's not working. They're botching this like they've botched everything else, and I truly wonder how far they're willing to take it to salvage Biden's dumpster fire of a presidency.
I think Biden's mistake was to declare that we wouldn't send troops to help Ukraine. It's debatable whether we would or should (I'm on the "don't" side) but keeping Putin guessing would have been better than confirming to him that we'd sit this out. Reminds me of when the Soviets invaded Hungary after Eisenhower gave his "we don't support armed aggression on the borders of the Soviet Union" speech.
I think it's pretty fucking smart to not put US forces in a country bordering Russia. If you're rabidly anti-Putin (not saying you, just generally) then you don't think much of his mental capability, perhaps thinks he's mentally ill. At the very least, and aside from typical internet foreign policy expert's opinions, Russian would certainly view US forces in Ukraine as a threat. Ike knew it, biden at some level still understands it.
I don't think it's Putin that will have a harder time making peace, it's the US/NATO/globalist cabal.
Putin wants Ukraine to acknowledge that Crimea is part of Russia, to renounce claims to the Donbas since they voted for independence, to stop waging war on the Donbas, to commit to neutrality and kick NATO out, and to de-fang the extremist literal-nazis in the military and government.
When Russia gets that, the war can end. Overwrought western rhetoric doesn't change that: Putin's perspective is the same.
You think he's surprised they're calling him names, that they want his head on a platter?
I doubt he's surprised at all by the globalist reaction. He may be surprised by Zelensky's stubbornness and willingness to sacrifice Ukrainian lives though.
Russia does not need the west (nor does America btw). They self-sustainable with resources, and have BRICS partners, Africa, South America, the Middle East, and Asia to trade with. The west offers fiat capital and... that's about it these days. Russia does not need the west to be friendly, just contained.
Putin will make a peace deal as soon as Ukrainian leaders, be they Zelensky or otherwise, agree to the terms mentioned above.
Calling Putin a war criminal doesn't make his position more difficult, it makes Biden's and the yapping globalist leaders' position more difficult. Our economies are getting crushed, and Europe's worse off than we are. Agreeing to Putin's terms are the only way this fiasco ends short of world/nuclear war.
But it's much tougher to sell that as an acceptable result to the domestic audience when you've made "legal" allegations and cast your opponent as literally Hitler×Satan.
The globalist cabal, if they cared at all about their own people and weren't the most evil pieces of shit alive, would have left Ukraine alone, or at the very least told Zelensky he's on his own and should probably cut a deal asap.
Instead they've portrayed the best possible outcome, and inevitable outcome if we dont escalate to full catastrophe, as capitulation to the forces of darkness.
Their handling of the situation is an absolute betrayal of the European and American people whom they are supposed to represent.
You kind of missed my point. Putin has less motivation to seek peace, as a result of these charges, and other statements. That was the point. It is stupid to attack the very people you need to negotiate with, verbally, before negotiations even start.
Agree that it's really stupid to call Putin a war criminal.
I do not think it changes his calculus at all. It will not affect his goals in Ukraine. Russia either achieves those goals, or there's world/nuclear war.
There is no scenario where Russia just gives up.
I think it motivates him more to stick to his guns, and to resist any chance he'd lose power, because as long as he's in power, he is untouchable, even if he is guilty. T. Roosevelt was wrong about many things, but he was right about diplomacy being speak softly and carry a big stick.
This is why the Libya invasion in 2011 was the worst single geopolitical decision, if not rver, then at least since entering WWI.
Not only did it kill any possibility of non-proliferation from then on, but it also reinforced the idea that the only way to deal with the globalists when they designate you an enemy is to go all out, and never ever surrender.
Bad news for future conflicts, real or manufactured.
It's a corner they've backed themselves into. They spent 4 years calling Trump a Russian asset, and the year and a half pretending Biden is tough on Putin. How do they negotiate with the boogey man they created?
Not that Putin isn't a bad actor on many, MANY fronts. He is. But they left themselves no political wiggle room here.
He could get out of it, but that takes some humility and nothing Biden has done shows he is capable of being humble. But then again, most politicians lack humility.
Add the ignorance and the stupidity to biden's glaring lack of humility. These are characteristic of the white collar classes, but the political class is rife with the traits.
Thing is, the only party in Ukraine that was anti-EU and anti-NATO was also the same anti-Russia party behind the Azov Battalion (~900 "Nazi" cosplayers) that gave Putin Operation: Barbarossa flashbacks.
Given that Biden has led an unprecedented united resistance against Russia and it's invasion by the democracies of the west, who are also the wealthiest countries in the world, as well as support from the world in the UN - votes against Russia's action had 140 supporting nations - one might guess a strategy is at hand in his latest accusations. That strategy would be the complete poisoning of the international waters against Russia, as publicly supporting a war criminal is a different act than just choosing sides. China is watching this as well, so the audience for this attempt at rebranding is large and influential. Of course soldier is a knee jerk critic of Biden no matter what, so his success in organizing and leading the resistance from early on is not mentioned and leaves him unable to objectively consider what might be going on. Soldier also told us how advanced and powerful Russia's military was before this started. He wasn't alone in that assessment, but I haven't seen him edited those thoughts.
It isn't even close to unprecedented. The resolution against Iraq in 1990 had more supporting nations. Several nations have abstained, others have outright refused to go along. And I stand by the assessment of Russia's military. They haven't fully committed even half of their troops and haven't called up their reserves yet. You fucking don't understand what the fuck you're talking about. Also, you don't know history. Hitler did call for the elimination, e.g. genocide, of the Jewish people multiple times, he even wrote so in his fucking book. So, you are wrong on everything you have asserted, once again. This is why I mute you 99% of the time. You aren't even informed about what you're talking about, and just repeat fucking talking points. You never once have posted an original thought and your reaction is almost always knee jerk defense of Biden and the Democrats. Once again your accusations against me are actually far more applicable to you than to myself. It's a pattern you follow every single fucking issue, with one exception the other day.
"less likely that Putin will seek peace."
Nothing Biden says will have any impact on Putin's willingness to seek peace. He can't afford to seek peace. At this point he would have to give up Crimea and the Donbass and he can't be seen to fail like that. It would weaken him too much internally. His desperation might be a good explanation of the increasing brutality of the Russians.
The manipulation of the Ruble that the Russians are engaged in will only work for a short time. The mechanisms are unsustainable, long term. The contracts that they are taking for their oil and gas are for significantly less value than the business they lost because the purchasers have all the leverage. Nothing makes the bottom drop out of your price like a lack of alternative buyers. They are getting raped by the Chinese and Indians because they are the only games in town.
I have no idea if Putin will be forced out of power. But he can't afford to lose because his whole house of cards will come tumbling down if he does.
What Biden does or doesn't say has no impact. What he has already done (and what he could do in the future, sanctions-wise) has a hige impact. Actions, not words, matter.
I can't wait for the US to join the ground war and have our forces kill some Russian speaking civilians in the Donbas.
If that were to happen, I say we enter Biden and Putin into a Triathalon consisting of:
1. A world history trivia contest
2. An oxford-style debate on Ukraine entering NATO
3. An MMA cage match (with proper rules and a referee)
Events one and two are worth one point, even three only worth 1/2 a point to give Biden an edge.
#3 is probably not fair, as Putin is trained in Judo, and Biden doesn't even write his own speeches.
None of them are fair, but they are grown men and leaders of their countries. Let ol' joe put his money where his mouth is.
Keep in mind, the news media are not independent; they are a sort of bulletin board and public relations firm for the ruling class-the people who run things. Those who decide what news you will or will not hear are paid by, and tolerated purely at the whim of, those who hold economic power. If the parent corporation doesn't want you to know something, it won't be on the news. Period. Or, at the very least, it will be slanted to suit them, and then rarely followed up.
George Carlin
Oh yeah, I'm sure all the news media back in 1945 just made up the Holocaust for the ratings/economic power of the West while the ruling class killed and arranged all the bodies.
Go fuck yourself.
That's a quote from George Carlin, someone who used to be a bit of a folk-hero on the left but would probably be considered 'alt-right' today.
The allied high command had evidence of the Holocaust long before the first camps were liberated, yet none of them mentioned it at the time. It also wasn't a single camp, but literally hundreds of camps allies liberated. With hundreds of thousands of eye witnesses, plus meticulous records, millions of survivors, hell a number of charged Nazis didn't even deny it but boasted of it. We also had to evidence of several other Nazi atrocities, such as the murder of civilians and POWs before the first camps were liberated, dating back to the very beginning of the war. Also, the Nazis had never kept quiet of their desire to end the "Jewish problem", as they labeled it, dating back to before they even took power. The camps weren't the first indication something was happening, but culmination of years of evidence. Your post is utter horseshit, and ahistorical to boot.
Also, just another point, the Soviets liberated the first camps in late summer, early fall of 1944, and a number of people did wonder if it may not have been Soviet propaganda until the western leaders verified the validity, and even then, it wasn't until US and English troops liberated camps in 1945, that the truth became wide spread.
"...the Soviets liberated the first camps in late summer, early fall of 1944, and a number of people did wonder if it may not have been Soviet propaganda..."
Similarities here: The Nazis and the Soviets were neither known for honesty, and both had an ax to grind.
Too many alternatives remain possible to take a stand on this issue, now.
Exactly. I will wait until the outside investigation is completed.
Hitler gave an interview in the late 1920s stating that if / when he had power he would set up a massive system of gallows to hang Jews. The Nazis just implemented a more efficient realization of Hitler's sick vision.
Yes. Neither Russia nor Putin has stated anything close to that. Is it possible someone committed a war crime? Yes, it is. And I think right now the circumstantial evidence is supporting that Russian troops may have done exactly that. Is it genocide? Not at this time. Do we have evidence, that if Russian troops executed innocent civilians, that they did it at Putin's orders? Not yet. It is possible we will, but labeling him a war crime isn't helpful, especially without evidence. Let the investigation play out. Hell, if they find evidence of his culpability, charge him, but it doesn't change anything, even if convicted in absentia, it wouldn't change anything. It doesn't end the war. It doesn't bring those people back, and it's unlikely to lead to regime change (which hardly has a good track record of replacing one bad government with a better government). It's entirely possible that Russia would choose someone even worse than Putin. Lenin was bad, Stalin was worse. The Tsar was bad, Lenin was worse. King Louis was bad, Robespierre was worse, and Napoleon arguably even worse.
Anyone who is thinking regime change is the answer should read Terry Pratchett's Interesting Times. To the peasant in the field, it didn't matter who was in charge, but he would have liked a longer rope to control his water buffalo.
For every American Revolution you have at least one French and Russian revolution.
"I'm sure all the news media back in 1945 just made up the Holocaust"
They knew about it in '43 and '44 and didn't report it.
Also, that's not what Carlin was talking about, but you ran there anyway. Disgusting.
They also knew about the Holodomor, and not only did they not report it, the New York Times actively suppressed news about it and knowing lied to the public saying that it wasn't happening.
For deliberately concealing a holocaust the Times won a Pulitzer.
If only they had done so before 1945.
The US ruling class and the US media aided and abetted the Holocaust, many of them were on board with fascism, and many of them were vehemently anti-Semitic. After the war, they turned the Holocaust into a propaganda tool to advance their agenda.
Chances are that you are one of those manipulative anti-Semitic pricks yourself.
If only FDR hadn't turned away Jewish refugees and sent them back to Germany.
British reports of Nazi atrocities against Jews in Poland would send FDR wheeling to the bathroom to masturbate, so they stopped bringing it up.
"Oh yeah, I'm sure all the news media back in 1945 just made up the Holocaust for the ratings/economic power of the West while the ruling class killed and arranged all the bodies.
Go fuck yourself."
It's possible someone wrote this to be clever, but simple stupidity is far more likely.
Did you take classes on being an ignorant putz, work hard at it, or did it simply come naturally? You may be the single most stupid and ignorant commenter that has cropped up here in a while. Reading comprehension is typically poor in your in-group, but you are an over-achiever, congratulations.
Carlin is not giving you permission to only believe the things that confirm your preconceived notions.
1. That's an apt description of you.
2. You don't speak for Carlin.
3. Looking at interviews, performance, writings, it seems pretty likely Carlin would not have pissed on Tony if Tony was on fire. The modern progressive movement is much like the far right and big government that he hated.
Tony thinks many murderous permissions are granted by standup comics.
FYI, for the record, it's possible that the invasion of Ukraine itself is a war crime. I think getting bogged down in a "this exit wound looks suspiciously like it was fired from a gun at point blank range" fight is probably going to go nowhere.
War crimes are a stupid debate anyway.
Winners are heroes, losers are criminals.
The idea of war crimes is moralistic, globalist, totalitarian bullshit.
Which is not to say there is no code of conduct in war, just that politicians/pundits are the last people to have any credibility on ethics.
And "war crimes" are an irrational reason to get in the middle of a conflict that is none of the American people's business.
https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/1511387956648583169?t=fO5Ub4xxZIUjLWrqSfgRyQ&s=19
I will try not to swear with abandon as I explain what happened in DC District Court today.
Ethan Nordean has been in jail for 14 months. He is not charged with any violent crime related to Jan 6--he didn't assault anyone or carry a weapon. His only "crime" is being a Proud Boy
Judge Timothy Kelly--A TRUMP APPOINTEE--has denied release for Nordean and other Proud Boys also not charged with crimes of violence.
(His contact information is here)
Today, Judge Kelly...
ONCE AGAIN caved to this abusive DOJ and VACATED Nordean's May 18 trial date.
Why?
Because DOJ AGAIN admits it doesn't have all its evidence ready--15 MONTHS AFTER THE FBI STARTED ARRESTING AMERICANS FOR JANUARY 6.
As I noted the other day, defendants have no choice but to...
concur bc attorneys haven't seen all evidence incl exculpatory evidence to defend their clients.
LOOK AT THIS: @USAO_DC doesn't want Judge Kelly to be "distracted" by the fact Nordean and his co-defendants have BEEN IN JAIL FOR OVER A YEAR WITHOUT BEING CONVICTED OF A CRIME:
Here is Matthew Graves, a Biden campaign advisor whose wife is a leftwing activist in DC, mocking their ongoing detention status and, of course, the law.
Everyone shut your f*cking piehole about Putin.
Political prisoners.
[Links]
Local story. Although, I am local, and it's not being reported here either.
I believe all those dead bodies in Bucha were COVID victims. During wartime, the vaccination efforts of the government are sure to slip and a lot of the pictures I've seen from Ukraine show they're not very good about following mask and social distancing protocols.
Do you have a credible news source for this? Because the NYT doesn't count.
Credible like twitter?
Doing this while trying to negotiate an end to the war with a huge nuclear power is utter lunacy.
"Don't underestimate Joe's ability to fuck things up." And he is fucking up royally.
Without promoting any narrative or tale told by people on the ground as unvarnished truth, here's a video of citizens of Mariupol reporting Azov battalion (Ukraine) snipers are targeting civilians on purpose.
All of my life, the establishment media has used reporters on the ground and broadcasted individual stories of civilians interviewed in war-torn areas as a way to broadcast their experiences.
This example is no different. So the question becomes, do we accept the "lived experience" of everyone that shows up in front of a camera to give a personal testimony, or do we wave them off as the ravings of confused, paranoid people who have an axe to grind?
It's a war zone. My guess is this will all take years to sort out.
What an absolute moral cesspit this war is. Fuck.
https://twitter.com/Theo_TJ_Jordan/status/1511457189688492049?t=AercjhDAtoAYTpNpiOjcJg&s=19
Our society reached such a perverted place that people were faking hate crimes in order to bask in the attention and positive-reward it brought. Same mechanism as Munchausen. And not one person, but lots of people did this.
Just chew on that. Really think about what it means.
https://twitter.com/BH_Friedman/status/1511442864164769795?t=0gV5Fzo0l1ntmzsW6o7cLQ&s=19
"For some in NATO, it’s better for the Ukrainians to keep fighting, and dying, than to achieve a peace that comes too early." At least the Post is reporting on this sentiment, which prominent people assured me doesn't exist when I recently criticized it.
[Link]
It is sad how I am not surprised anymore how many commentators are pro war crimes.
List who is pro war crimes? Because I don't see a single comment to that effect. A number have questioned the circumstances, and are waiting for independent verification. That isn't even close to being pro-war crime. That's just a stupid statement on your part (which isn't at all surprising given how stupid most of your posts are). I hope they didn't pay you the whole $0.50 for that post, because it definitely wasn't worth it.
"List who is pro war crimes? "
To be fair, this is the same logic that cultural conservatives use to call pro-choice advocates 'pro-abortion', 'pro-murder', and 'baby killers'.
Being an apologist for Russia doesn't make someone pro-war crimes. It is irrational and dishonest, but unfortunately it is a common hyperbolic trope.
They are "skeptics" who want more evidence. And if you belive the evidence you are a pro war neocon msm shill.
That isn't true either. One has accused you of that. The rest haven't. I even defended you, while stating my skepticism. While I disagree with Nardz, after this post, I am starting to wonder if he doesn't have a point in regards to you. Attacking the majority of posters, who have simply asked questions and are waiting for evidence, by the actions of a single over the top individual is just dishonest. Many of the posters you just libeled have been criticizing Nardz for weeks for his rhetoric. Your post is both dishonest and dishonorable, and discredits any credibility you may have had. You're just as bad as Nardz, maybe worse.
Sorry, I didn't know Nardz's pronoun and went with 'they.'
Nardz is a "skeptic" who wants more evidence. And if you belive the evidence you are a pro war neocon msm shill.
Is that better? I wouldn't want to be lumped in with 'them' either.
I'd be more skeptical of the belief that Ukrainians that have seen hospitals and schools bombed already somehow need to fabricate Russian war crimes.
There isn't a limit to skepticism. It also isn't excusing Russian behavior to point out the damage reported to the hospitals and such, was likely not from a guided munitions but from artillery fire, which is less accurate (especially the Russian stuff, it has better range and can throw heavier shells than ours currently can, but ours is magnitudes more accurate). The Russians, from almost all reports I've read, have been utilizing artillery rather than guided munitions for the most part. Indiscriminate shelling isn't better than targeted munitions, but it also is true that Ukraine has misrepresented some of the evidence. If it was guided munitions it's much more likely it was targeted, but since it was likely artillery, the chances are it wasn't targeted, like Zelensky claimed, but rather the result of either inaccuracy or indiscriminate shelling. I lean towards the latter. And in my opinion, using artillery in this day and age, indiscriminately in an urban environment is worse than using guided munitions against prohibited targets.
Also, not to excuse Russian behavior, but even if it was guided munitions, there is always the possibility that someone was using the hospital as a shield. Hezbollah and Hamas do this to Israel all the time, locate rocket launchers on hospitals or schools, then when Israel hits them, the world condemns Israel for it. I'm not saying that actually occurred here, just there is lots of possibilities, and we're basically only getting the Ukrainians side of the story, as we've gone out of our way to cut Russia off completely from communicating their story.
I do believe Ukraine is the injured party, but that also doesn't preclude me from recognizing they have a vested interest in presenting evidence in a certain light. They can't fight this war without western aid, and likely can't win it unless the west intervenes, so yes of course they have a plausible interest in fabricating evidence and hope it doesn't come out until after everything is done. Does that make it likely in this case? That isn't clear. Waiting for more evidence from a third party isn't anything more than admitting that both combatants have a vested interest in presenting the evidence in a certain light, and those interests don't overlap.
Given the track record of our media the past decade (actually several decades, but I'm feeling generous) trusting them is a gamble. How many times have they've presented a certain spin, sided with one narrative, only to have that narrative be proven completely wrong once the evidence comes out? I can list several without even stopping to think about it. As someone said above, the total loss of trust the media has created makes even true reporting doubted. What is even worse, is they almost never admit they were wrong (see the WP and NYT defend the suppression of the Hunter Biden Lab top story, even after they now admit the information was verified for a perfect example). This makes trusting them even more difficult. It really is a dangerous place to be for our country. Furthermore, anyone who dares raise questions about the narrative, even if the questions are legitimate and pertinent, is derided and shunned by the rest of the media, which makes trusting the narrative even more difficult. And just like Tony, LoS, Spiritus, Molly and now you, are doing. You are deriding people who have listed reasons for skepticism, or have asked legitimate questions, and lumped all of us into the same category as Nardz who is unabashed in his support for Russia. And the funny thing is, most of us have argued at length with Nardz or even ridiculed him, for his stance. But we dare step outside the narrative a little, and suddenly we all get treated the same way, as pariahs.
Here's a hint, my skepticism works both ways. I'm skeptical of the Ukrainians' narrative, while also skeptical that they're making it up. Skepticism doesn't equal rejection. Once more evidence becomes available, and that evidence is verified by someone who is likely unbiased, I'll trust the evidence. At this point, I'm not exactly sure. I've seen the evidence, and what our media, Ukraine and our political elites have stated the evidence means, but I realize none of those sources are neutral, or even pretend to be neutral (our media doesn't even pretend to be neutral anymore). I'll see what the UN and ICC find, not that I'm certain they're any better, but they have less interest in tilting the playing field in this case. I'll also read from the foreign press, especially those outside either the west or Russians spheres of influence. I'm not going to jump to conclusions, especially in a matter that is this serious, and isn't time sensitive. Even if the evidence shows Putin ordered the massacre of innocent civilians, there isn't much we can really do about it, short of using military force to overthrow Putin. Which is the last thing anyone who cares about more than scoring political points, should be opposed to (war with Russia will not be beneficial for the US, or the world). War with Russia though will solve population and climate change, as anyone left alive will be to busy trying to survive nuclear winter to care about global warming, and even conservative estimates put casualties worldwide at a billion people minimum.
So instead of making a snap judgement, waiting on the evidence seems the most prudent thing to do, unless you want a war with Russia, that very likely will go nuclear. In reality, unless Putin loses power, which seems unlikely, barring a miracle, and his successor agrees to turn him over, even if he is guilty, there really isn't anything we can really do other than charge him and possibly convict him in absentia, but that is more symbolic because there isn't a mechanism to enforce that decision.
Soldier struggles to find justification to write:
"I do believe Ukraine is the injured party..."
What a breakthrough from the Sherlock of this board! For a guy who was in the military, he somehow misses the point that you don't always have the time to remain "skeptical" and you have to s..t or get off the pot. Events are running while you consider the near infinite folds of your navel. and the obvious does not need your endorsement.
So, Russian troops on a training exercise accidentally invaded Ukraine... Accidentally started wiping out civilians with artillery fire... Accidentally tried to capture the capital city....
Skepticism isn't supposed to be delusional devotion to unlikely conclusions.
It goes without saying that most here are not surprised that you have once again simply made up 'facts' to fit your worldview. This and lying are your modi operandi. Why read what is said, or learn, when there is a narrative and one can simply interpret to fit that, right molly?
I'm amazed at how okay some of you are with the amount of straight up lying the regime is doing.
If nothing else, it should make you really damn suspicious of the anti Putin/Russia position.
But maybe everyone eventually does truly love big brother.
Ever heard of the horseshoe theory? I don't think it's quite right. I think it's a straight spectrum of smart to stupid, personally.
But you've been saying exactly the same things as some self-described Marxist-Leninists on the internets. Looks like you all got suckered by the same Moscow-based stream of bullshit.
Such as?
There's a whole segment of the online left who is peddling the same pro-Russian horseshit you are. But it's not surprising, because, if you'd read the Mueller report or any reporting around the 2016 election, you'd know that the Russians targeted both right and left for propaganda. You are one of their victims. Now run along and deprogram yourself.
Then you should be able to point out what the propaganda is
That Ukraine is a non-country that the Russian Federation accidentally granted independence to and recognized the sovereignty of even later when they sat down with the US to work out disarming them of 1700 nuclear warheads and 176 ICBMs and after their corrupt boy Yanuchovych was run out of the country by his own political party somehow neo-Nazis who can't even get enough votes to seat anyone in the government put a Jewish comedian in power.
(Run-on sentence without punctuation and grammar intentional to preserve the smell of breathless blustering bullshit)
"That Ukraine is a non-country that the Russian Federation accidentally granted independence to and recognized the sovereignty of even later when they sat down with the US to work out disarming them of 1700 nuclear warheads and 176 ICBMs"
...Weird, because I've never said that. It's almost like you've been trained to respond to certain arguments and didn't notice their absence.
"and after their corrupt boy Yanuchovych was run out of the country by his own political party somehow neo-Nazis who can't even get enough votes to seat anyone in the government put a Jewish comedian in power."
...Yea, there's that training- mention the "seats in parliament" and "Jewish president" canards, failing to acknowledge the course of the Maidan, the security and bureaucratic state, or copious documentation of Ukraine's "nazi problem" prior to 2022. US congress even passed a bill to stop funding Ukraine's literal nazis.
That Putin's GRU-backed mercenaries in the Wagner Group needed saving in the Donbas region due to 900 Nazi cosplayers kicking their asses on the regular and wasting 12,000 Chechen conscripts in a failed attempt to take Kyiv was a distraction from the real effort of taking out said Nazi cosplayers...
LOL
That the Soviet Union controlled Ukraine again for decades after World War 2 and never de-Nazified it
LOL
This is truly pathetic.
Fucking State Department bots getting sent to even the niche websites.
Or maybe I'm giving you too much credit, and you're just a typical leftist with the Ukraine flag in all your social media profiles.
Give us a twitter feed, asshiole, so we know you've 'researched' it!
Binary thinking is for light switches. It's possible to be anti-Putin and anti-Biden simultaneously.
I'm not saying it isn't.
I'm commenting about what is pro you, and how one assesses information.
https://twitter.com/blackintheempir/status/1511486797028675592?t=XVUleCP92kZJvvZF6U8INA&s=19
Iraqi soldiers didn't throw babies out of incubators, Libyan soldiers didn't take viagra to commit rapes, Iraq didn't have WMD's, Russia didn't hack the DNC, Syria didn't use chemical weapons, Russia didn't put bounties on our soldiers heads and our Gov'ts playing you again now
LOL. Iraq was like the known arsonist that had bottles, rags, gasoline, and cigarette lighters, but no Molotov cocktails.
Interesting.
Yet, when Russia has the same perspective on Ukraine, they're wrong?
Same perspective? Iraq had tons and tons of pesticides and oodles of binary chemical artillery shells to fill with said pesticides that when fired would mix in flight into sarin gas when it exploded. They had a record of doing exactly that to the Iranians and the Kurds. Iraq had WMDs ready to mix. UNSC resolutions demanded they disclose these stockpiles, and they did not, and they got they ass beat for it.
When did Putin go to the UN about Ukraine?
Not to mention the fact that of all the terms of the cease fire (besides the WMD) they broke all but two of them. That still doesn't excuse our invasion, but it is a valid distinction.
Right. Going to the UN to make the case for toppling Saddam is a very important distinction.
Putin's Operation: Barbarossa flashbacks about less than 900 guys with Nazi-esque patches on their sleeves giving the Wagner Group in Donbas trouble would have been laughed out of the UNSC. Which is why he didn't take that route.
nardz is not gonna be happy with someone dissing his BFF Putin! Watch out! nardz will make up a 'clever' name for you, right, asshole?
Go to hell with the Iraq war bullshit soldier. That wasn't what the war was sold to us on.
You missed the Clinton airstrike on the al-Shifa pharmaceutical plant / chemical weapons lab in the Sudan? The '96 federal indictment of Osama bin Laden containing material support from Iraq? The Iraqi Liberation Act? Them clocks were ticking well before 9/11.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2022/02/25/fact-check-claim-us-biolabs-ukraine-disinformation/6937923001/
The U.S. Embassy in Ukraine sought to "set the record straight" on the biolabs claim in a statement in April 2020, calling the theories "disinformation spreading in some circles in Ukraine that mirrors Russian disinformation regarding the strong U.S.-Ukrainian partnership to reduce biological threats."
Coda, a nonprofit media company, reported in 2018 that the claim is part of a broader disinformation campaign by the Kremlin to discredit the United States in the eyes of Russia's pro-Western neighbors, Ukraine and Georgia.
When the COVID-19 pandemic hit, Russia teamed up with China to further amplify the false claim of U.S. labs in Ukraine. The goal was to call into question whether the coronavirus originated in one of the supposed "U.S.-controlled" labs, according to a report in April 2021 from the Daily Beast.
What bullshit Metonymy. That was not what Condeleeza was selling, she was selling missiles and nuclear war, and there was no way the American public was supporting a war about mustard gas 1/2 way around the world. We were all there then and you can't fool us twice. I was never fooled once by that nonsense.
Let's skip the foreplay and screw this one down. Why did the US build a case and a coalition of UN members to take out Saddam Hussein's government (and leave them with a sovereign government) and why didn't go to the UN about Ukraine?
*why didn't Russia go to the UN about Ukraine?
This doesn't refute the argument, and as an aside, under liberal justice, conviction on charges due to circumstantial evidence, such as possession of items as you've listed, is frowned upon. Perhaps you've noticed, there are folks who have an interest in individual rights around here? Extrapolate it to the bigger picture.
"I'm amazed at how okay some of you are with the amount of straight up lying the regime is doing."
That might be interesting if you weren't doing the same, asshole.
Nardz, go fuck yourself. No, not tomorrow, right now.
https://babylonbee.com/news/putins-army-flies-planned-parenthood-flag-so-no-one-will-criticize-them-for-genocide
Looks like Ukraine is going to have to change its pronouns and obtain Democratic Party membership to top that, or they're fucked.
Cui bono?
https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/1511476184592236546?t=kWa1kvxyhuG8csVM4nCVOA&s=19
Top-ranking US officials virtually never express any interest in resolving the war diplomatically. But they constantly express determination to engage in a “protracted conflict”
[Link]
Only proving, for the 4,826th time that Biden is a demented idiot. There is no possible way for Putin to be put on trial for war crimes, so what is the point of talking about it? Putin could only be put on trial if he were to be captured after being disposed as leader, which is highly unlikely (he'd probably fight to the death), or by being taken prisoner after a war with Russia, which is even less likely.
A smarter person than Biden (i.e. some 80% of the adult population), would have talked about the criminality of the actions and called on Putin to put a stop to this standard Russian practice, in the way Reagan told Gorbachev to tear down the wall.
As it is, Biden's worthless dotard drivel is just invective from an impotent idiot.
Insisting on a war crimes trial is the best way to put Putin's back to a wall. The best case scenario has always been that Russia pulls out, tail between their legs, abandoning the invasion due to its costs.
By insisting he be arrested, you either have Putin fighting to the death to protect his own skin, or you end up looking stupid for accepting any surrender that includes his freedom as condition. There is no upside to this.
Nobody's named the price on his wanted dead or alive poster yet. Private Military Companies should probably start bidding.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l91ISfcuzDw