I don’t know if the stories of Russian execution of Ukrainian civilians and dumping their bodies in the streets are true or are propaganda. But if this report is accurate that civilians have been armed to join the battle it should come as no surprise that the Russian military would respond in kind.
Yes, I watched it and it was a perfect example of the horror of war. The man dressed in battle fatigues while showing the reporter around claiming to be a civilian using drones to target Russian tanks kinda makes my point. When civilians interject themselves into the battle, and the opposing army cannot know for sure which civilian is innocent and which is hostile we should assume the opposing army will put its own survival as top priority. That’s the only point I’m making. I do not condone the slaughter of fellow human beings under any circumstances.
Couple things. If civilians are becoming part of the fight then when they get killed they are no longer civilians but combatants. For the purposes of determining war crimes that is a distinction that will be heard. Next our own troops did the same thing that was shown shooting cars that got to close. This is because again civilians became combatants and used car bombs to blow up our troops. How do you make the distinction once it happens?
No...the man with his hands up was killed and the couple in the car was allowed to leave. Something definitely wrong there.
This is definitely the case. I would have high suspicions of Russians committing "war crimes" but I want actual war crimes. If you take Russia to task and can't prove it, then you have cheapened something that doesn't and shouldn't be cheapened. It must be correct. Case in point, the way racism has been used has cheapened the claim. War crimes cannot have that happen to it, too many lives would be on the line. If the Russians did it, prove it or stop claiming it until you can.The PROOF Russia and Wagner mercenaries carried out Bucha killings
Germany's foreign intelligence service, the BND, has heard messages from Putin's forces discussing the brutal murder of civilians in the city of horrors outside Kyiv.www.dailymail.co.uk
Lots of info out there about the rapping, torture and killing on non-combatants, if you want to look. Be different if this is the first time it has happened via russia or russian connected troops, but cook in the end of WWII, Chechnya and Syria among other places and it shouldn't be that hard to believe.
I bought a DJI 2S drone last year and it is so dam cool to fly around, that said not sure I would try to run around and find hidden tanks or emplacements. Would rather be kitted out with a weapon and gear to fight the fight face to face, not run around behind lines and run the chance of being summarily shot.
Remember the russians claimed for years the germans killed the 20K+ polish intellects and military officers in the Katyn forest, only to later have the Red Cross verify it was the russians/NKVD that did the deed. Terrorizing the civilian population is part and parcel of their gig.
The other problem I can see with the claims is that it will make Putin less inclined to give up. There is nothing to lose if Russians believe they will not get a fair shake. It will ensure they are all in.
For what reason at this time would Finland and Sweden deire to join NATO? What would they see as the "upside" and what would be the "downside?"
I believe shooting surrendering combatants happen in every war. If that is your standard, then how many Americans have been convicted of this?
Safe money is it's the Nazi Azovs- sources have said for years they kill their own- and don't even try speaking Russian in public there.
How many have been caught red-handed? zer0 did prosecute several for actions that may or may not have been justified. The accused claimed self defense and the combatants were terrorist fighting out of uniform. This removes their Geneva status.
I will agree somewhat with that.
Don't believe everything you hear- if it's Fox and CNN pushing war - it's a 99.97 percent chance of being fake news. Man that number sounds familiar....
Ukraine didn't join NATO and look at whats happening to them.........that's all the upside I would need to see.
Not sure armbands will replace uniforms as means to distinguish combatants. Medics wear armbands, and yet they are killed regardless. The Geneva conventions say a lot of things, but how many armies abide by them and who do they apply to. Does breaking a rule of the Geneva conventions in and of itself constitute a war crime? Answer no. War crime convictions have held up best when dealing with crimes against humanity. The holocaust being the primary example everyone will point to. In the Nuremberg trials defendants were charged with waging aggressive war, which has issues as both sides waged aggressive war. Taking this meaning then who wins determines who has committed the war crimes. It is important to point out that Crimes against humanity stood up best, in which case the prosecution was able to prove the indiscriminate killing of prisoners of war or selective civilian populations, or in other words the actual holocaust. Since then how many wars have been waged in which war crimes where charged and upheld after the war was over? I can think of one, but that is it. The one case I can think of was a crime against humanity and Serbians were the criminals.
He murdered surrendering soldiers. He was Mexico and the head of the snake as well as of state. Execution would occur after a trial. He was guilty as sin and conviction would be easy.
He also signed the treaty making Texas a country, giving the Texans credibility. Not sure a show trial with an execution at the end would help your case. Was he guilty of atrocities? Sure, but he also kept his men from worse. Kill him, and the soldiers would have been enraged, with no strong-willed officer to stop them those atrocities mount.
