Russian Invasion of Ukraine[In Progress]

[suchmoon]

Care to look up how many mixed Ukrainian/Russian families lived in Ukraine? How many held dual citizenship (even though Ukraine doesn't seem to allow it), how many of those predominately Russian speaking cities in east Ukraine on the boarder with Russia had family/relatives in Russia that can shelter them? Let me know what you find

I love your style, throwing out some "questions" instead of making a direct claim, which you would have to substantiate.

Just like you were asking "questions" as to why Ukrainians are not letting people evacuate even though it was obvious that Russian forces are controlling the checkpoints and throttling the evacuation and then there's this: https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2022-04-04/red-cross-says-its-team-travelling-to-mariupol-was-stopped-now-being-held

As for people from Mariupol "going" to Russia... when you have no food for a month and that's your only option... sure, you'll go to the totalitarian shithole and give up your phone and documents "voluntarily".

[Tash]

As per Wikipedia Major General Roger L. Cloutier died in Mariupol and was not captured.
https://halturnerradioshow.com/index.php/en/news-page/world/numerous-reports-u-s-army-general-captured-in-mariupol-with-azov-nazis

Wrong, theres no such info on wikipedia, you can check yourself

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Cloutier

Now, since there is information war going, too, everything is possible, so we can only wait

He vanished just like Tiffany Dover, disappeared from face of the earth.

[OutOfMemory]

As per Wikipedia Major General Roger L. Cloutier died in Mariupol and was not captured.
https://halturnerradioshow.com/index.php/en/news-page/world/numerous-reports-u-s-army-general-captured-in-mariupol-with-azov-nazis

Wrong, theres no such info on wikipedia, you can check yourself

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Cloutier

Now, since there is information war going, too, everything is possible, so we can only wait

Tash got a history of not checking his hyperlinked "facts", though.

[af_newbie]

...

...
Geneva convention uh?

While all 196 countries comply with the Geneva conventions, in 2019, Russia withdrew itself from Article 90 of protocol 1. This article expects the country to oblige and comply with any international fact-finding mission.

I wonder why. You see, the only proof of Putin following the Geneva convention is... your word.

Did US sign it? Or you holding Russia to higher standards than US? Big powers are fighting, war is hell, innocent people that are stuck in the middle die. So far civilian deaths are relatively low for the war this size.

One side dominates control of the media, so huge efforts are extended to keep up the moral and try to manage surrenders. Top generals are sacked for treason, mayors declared traitors, videos of military police roughing up alleged saboteurs in civilian clothes, 500k Ukrainian refugees went to Russia etc... Who really cares what's proven true/false in few months, when you need to survive today. Ukraine needs more Russian Warship Go Fuck Yourself moments, just as Russia needs more videos of tictoc battalion doing cool things

I do not hold anyone to a particular standard other than not providing misleading information. It Putin is saying there are no crimes, I, with the information I have currently, disagree.

In so far as I am concern, US presidents and troops have committed war crimes and crimes against humanity and denied it. That does not give others the right to do the same.

Ok so Russia doing the same shit US and NATO did. Big powers do what big powers do, wage wars for sphere of influence. All are shit. I'm assuming you're a logical person, and addressing the issue starting with the biggest offenders? And being objective you covered demolition of Raqqa the city about the size of Mariupol, how many children, women, elderly died? How many maternity wards, hospitals, kindergartens were bombed there, what percentage of infrastructure was left standing? How does it compare to Mariupol, in term of civilian casualties?

From a practical perspective, the US is not threating Europe and, for me, Attacking a democracy is not the same as attacking a despotic regime.

Oh boy, really hoping you didn't mean that. So gov just needs to convince average TV watching population that the regime is despotic, and that somehow makes killing their children better? Dehumanizing opponent is part of every warfare, and we're watching unprecedented levels of this here, i expect lots of books written about psy ops, and media coverage of this war after this is all over. Do you not see the irony in your own words, by your logic Russians are justified because they're fighting Nazis, a despotic regime. Is DPRK, Democratic Republic of the Congo are democracies (after all, it's in their name), Uzbekistan, Hungry a democracy, where is a cutoff? Care to rate democracy in Ukraine? If you can judge school bombings by their level of "democracisness" would you be able to rate a bunch of them if i provide examples?

500k Ukrainian refugees went to Russia etc...

Sure, and millions of people "went" to Siberia and other exciting places during Stalin's "pacкyлaчивaниe".

Care to look up how many mixed Ukrainian/Russian families lived in Ukraine? How many held dual citizenship (even though Ukraine doesn't seem to allow it), how many of those predominately Russian speaking cities in east Ukraine on the boarder with Russia had family/relatives in Russia that can shelter them? Let me know what you find

...
I've seen (can't find the source, sorry) a more insane variation of this with regards to Mariupol:

"This is not genocide against Ukrainians because Russian forces are killing Russian (or Russian-speaking) civilians".

Well one of the main units assaulting Mariupol is from Donbass, lots of Units (navy) is from Crimea, which Ukraine and majority of the world still considers to be part of Ukraine, so how could it be genocide??? Surely you're not just parroting talking points by mass media, and can explain which category of people is being targeted for you to think it's a genocide?

500k Ukrainian refugees went to Russia etc...

Like going to Russia was free choice for most of them... And when there is war and your life is at question, going to Russia is probably better option than die.

There's always a choice. Unlike Bandera, I think my grandparents would have higher chances staying in a war zone than trying to go to Nazi Germany. It's an oxymoron to claim genocide when hundreds of thousands of people go to the country supposedly committing said genocide.

Russians have a solution to the Ukrainian question. The 'solution' was openly posted on the RIA website.

https://ria.ru/20220403/ukraina-1781469605.html

https://archive.ph/kRSt3#selection-4189.0-4208.0

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/kremlin-editorial-ukraine-identity-1.6407921

[paxmao]

Oh boy, really hoping you didn't mean that. So gov just needs to convince average TV watching population that the regime is despotic, and that somehow makes killing their children better? Dehumanizing opponent is part of every warfare, and we're watching unprecedented levels of this here, i expect lots of books written about psy ops, and media coverage of this war after this is all over. Do you not see the irony in your own words, by your logic Russians are justified because they're fighting Nazis, a despotic regime. Is DPRK, Democratic Republic of the Congo are democracies (after all, it's in their name), Uzbekistan, Hungry a democracy, where is a cutoff? Care to rate democracy in Ukraine? If you can judge school bombings by their level of "democracisness" would you be able to rate a bunch of them if i provide examples?

He is probably trying to rationalize UK involvement in bringing democracy to Libya
and Iraq...western media is using that excuse since WW2 when they come after
other countries natural resources

Already answered (yes I do answer, you should try, I may give your claims some sense).

I meant what I said: A despotic regime with nuclear weapons attacking an (imperfect, yet incipient) democracy is a problem for me personally and for most of the West. As imperfect as democracies are (and the US is getting worse IMHO) are still a step ahead of Tzars and Emperors on freedom. When Putin attacks Ukraine, I feel attacked. This is unrelated to whether they use or not terror tactics or their criminal actions.

...

I am not happy with anyone committing crimes. You cannot say the same, can you? Are you ok with Putin killing civilians yes or no? Or maybe... your are just trying to rationalise supporting an assassin?

It cannot be more clear, I have a rationale for my stance on the conflict and is not based on mere coercion or pure force, but on the type of regimes that I would rather live in. If a despot attacks a country that wishes to rule his own destinies, I know where I am.

I do get that your view of the world is different. You are all right with the Tzar invading Ukraine, I am not and, as you can see Ukrainians are not either and the more Putin's army vandalises their country the more they will be against. You cannot grasp this concept because your conception of life is about force and fear.

I do not think that any foreign intervention has made any serious effort to implement democracy in any country in particular because one of the requisites of democracy is education and knowledge of history and that is not something you can force. Again, you cannot understand any of these concepts, from your perspective, the world is no more than a jungle and people are beasts.

I urge you to open a thread on Madeleine, Libia, Syria... You will find plenty of people in the forum to agree with.

[Branko]

I urge you to open a thread on Madeleine, Libia, Syria... You will find plenty of people in the forum to agree with.

I know, you guys are great at acknowledging facts post festum, but you don't return stolen goods
or money or pay reparations

United Kingdom Parliament Investigation
An in depth investigation into the Libyan intervention and its aftermath was conducted by the U.K. Parliament's House of Commons' cross-party Foreign Affairs Committee, the final conclusions of which were released on 14 September 2016 in a report titled Libya: Examination of intervention and collapse and the UK's future policy options.] The report was strongly critical of the British government's role in the intervention. The report concluded that the government "failed to identify that the threat to civilians was overstated and that the rebels included a significant Islamist element." In particular, the committee concluded that Gaddafi was not planning to massacre civilians, and that reports to the contrary were propagated by rebels and Western governments. Western leaders trumpeted the threat of the massacre of civilians without factual basis, according to the parliamentary report, for example, it had been reported to Western leaders that on 17 March 2011 Gaddafi had given Benghazi rebels the offer of peaceful surrender and also that when Gaddafi had earlier retaken other rebel cities there were no massacres of non-combatants.

"oooops, sorry, we bombed you back to stone age, that sucks. We wont return those billions we owe you for oil or those frozen assets, though"

[LTU_btc]

Though Ukraine is not an official member of alliance, but according to the NATO Secretary General, their block have trained tens of thousands of Ukrainian troops who are now at war with Russia, NATO supplies Ukraine with various types of weapons. I suppose no one will dispute the fact that the alliance forces are taking part in this military conflict on the side of Ukraine. Although the alliance doesn't want to enter into a direct confrontation with Russia, what is happening now is more like NATO fights against Russia to the last Ukrainian.

Not giving asurance to Russia that Ukraine won't join NATO is just polite way to say no without closing doors completely. But now even Zelensky aren't making false illusions that Ukraine will be accepted into NATO one day. Same stuff applies to Gerorgia too probably.
NATO didn't got involved into this war directly. Training troops isn't something significant. NATO did same thing in Afghanistan and some other countries. And all these trainers already left country since start of war. Sending weapons is another question, but it's not direct involvement. Not just NATO are doing it, but also neutral countries like Finland.

Even taking into account military actions, I believe that in the civilized world it is unacceptable to talk about "low deaths" among civilians. Need to constantly keep in mind that these are not just numbers but human pain, injuries and broken destinies.

Actually, nobody knows real number of victims and I doubt that numbers can be called low. Just in Bucha there was hundreds of dead civilians. We can only imagine how many people were killed in Mariupol.
And we aren't talking about accidentally killed civilians. From what we can see that Russians are killing civilians intentionally.

[paxmao]

I urge you to open a thread on Madeleine, Libia, Syria... You will find plenty of people in the forum to agree with.

I know, you guys are great at acknowledging facts post festum, but you don't return stolen goods
or money or pay reparations
...
"oooops, sorry, we bombed you back to stone age, that sucks. We wont return those billions we owe you for oil or those frozen assets, though"

Again, talking about rationalisation to justify an assassin, there is yours.

By the way, I am not sure who is "you" in your mind. I am myself, and have my own views.

Though Ukraine is not an official member of alliance, but according to the NATO Secretary General, their block have trained tens of thousands of Ukrainian troops who are now at war with Russia, NATO supplies Ukraine with various types of weapons. I suppose no one will dispute the fact that the alliance forces are taking part in this military conflict on the side of Ukraine. Although the alliance doesn't want to enter into a direct confrontation with Russia, what is happening now is more like NATO fights against Russia to the last Ukrainian.

As per the rules of war, any non-belligerent country can sell weapons to whoever they decide. As per the rules of international trade, any country can choose the terms in which they decide to trade with others. Some NATO countries are selling supplies to Ukraine and, to be honest, they could be selling much more dangerous equipment and are restraining from it.

About training "thousands of soldiers", that is a claim that would need substantiation, but still, the neutral countries can do so within their rights.

[TwitchySeal]

Something to ponder on. We know that Russia did not expect the Ukrainians to put up such stiff and determined resistance; this explains why units went in unprepared (many buoys were under the impression that they would be welcome and where only told they were going in 48-72 hours prior); why Russia limited the number of targets it hit, etc but now that things are obviously going ratshit why aren't the Russians deploying some of the capabilities they have but so appeared to have held back?

Seems like there's a decent chance one of the cliffs notes for this chapter of the Global History books will be about what corruption did to Russias Military and Putins miscalculation in relying on the reputation of his army rather than his actual army.

Maybe Putin will be the new Potemkin. 

[suchmoon]

why aren't the Russians deploying some of the capabilities they have but so appeared to have held back?

Sounds like a rhetorical question... obviously they don't "have" any such super-capabilities. The retreat from Kyiv, mobilization in DNR/LNR, and a few thousand troops from Karabakh and Osetia is all they can afford to throw at one last push in Donbas.

Other than that there's just nukes.

[be.open]

why aren't the Russians deploying some of the capabilities they have but so appeared to have held back?

Sounds like a rhetorical question... obviously they don't "have" any such super-capabilities. The retreat from Kyiv, mobilization in DNR/LNR, and a few thousand troops from Karabakh and Osetia is all they can afford to throw at one last push in Donbas.

I think Russia plans to conduct this operation with limited personnel, emphasizing the dominant superiority in military equipment. For the Russian army, there are no problems with logistics, military plants are operating normally, the state defense order has been 100% stable for many years, Russia is well prepared not only for economic sanctions, but also for military operations on the territory of Ukraine. It is naive to believe that Russia will run out of money when Europe alone buys gas from Russia for a billion dollars a day. It is even more naive to believe that Russia will run out of food and weapons. Ukraine has not even really been bombed yet. I think the blow in the Donbass will not be the last, but rather the first really strong one.

Other than that there's just nukes.

Putin has an unlimited mandate for this operation, including the ability to make the entire territory of Ukraine west of the Dnieper uninhabitable for the next hundred years. The people of Russia will not forgive him only for abandoning his originally declared goals, and Putin knows this. But the mass genocide of Ukrainians due to a nuclear strike is not consistent with the current strategy of minimizing civilian casualties, so this alignment will be a technical victory for Russia, but an actual defeat for Putin, with long-term reputational losses in the eyes of history.

I see. Look, you have to put "tactical" before saying that type of stuff but it sound better. For example "Putin's army made a tactical retreat from Kyiv". See... that does not sound like a defeat now.

There is a saying in Russia, "war is bullshit, maneuvers are the main thing." The Ukrainian army is actually immobilized by the lack of fuel and air control, and is deprived of the ability to freely maneuver, while the Russian army is mobile and can create a local numerical advantage in different parts of the front. I think the tactics of the Russian generals is to deprive the army of the Armed Forces of Ukraine of general coordination and divide it into separate groups, this elephant needs to be eaten in parts.

Ukraine will be rebuilt. Who will rebuild Putin's Russia prestige and stance in the world?

Your concern for the prestige of Russia is very touching, thank you.

[Branko]

Interesting confusion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbXx6Hcxejg

[TwitchySeal]

I think Russia plans to conduct this operation with limited personnel, emphasizing the dominant superiority in military equipment.

Ukraines army is about 240,000.  Russia already has 160,000 in Ukraine and they're rotating in new conscripts.

They have had to scale down their priorities and retreat from the west after losing several times more soldiers in just a month than the last Chechen war, which lasted 10 years.

Maybe Putin wasn't paying attention in "How to invade a country" class when they covered overwhelming force.  Russia is really good at fucking up and making what should be a quick invasion and turning it into a long drawn out blood bath.

[Cryptmuster]

Something to ponder on. We know that Russia did not expect the Ukrainians to put up such stiff and determined resistance; this explains why units went in unprepared (many buoys were under the impression that they would be welcome and where only told they were going in 48-72 hours prior); why Russia limited the number of targets it hit, etc but now that things are obviously going ratshit why aren't the Russians deploying some of the capabilities they have but so appeared to have held back?

The Russian troops suffered heavy losses in the direction of Kiev and Chernihiv, so they withdrew the remnants of their troops, but of course they did not forget to embellish everything, as if it was a good gesture related to the negotiations in Turkey. Now they are concentrating all possible troops to the eastern border of Ukraine in order to attack with everything they have. They are mobilizing the population in Donetsk, people don't want that. They mobilized my uncle from Debaltseve, he is a simple builder, he does not know how to fight and there are a lot of people like that. It looks like some sort of madness. The only thing the Russian army is capable of is to fire long-range missiles on the entire territory of Ukraine...

[cornhodlr]

The Ukrainian forces don't seem to be too bothered by the Geneva convention either.Is this not classed as a "war crime"?
https://twitter.com/Rolando02660530/status/1511949674676035586
https://twitter.com/evanhill/status/1511760338743545858

[tvbcof]

The Ukrainian forces don't seem to be too bothered by the Geneva convention either.Is this not classed as a "war crime"?
https://twitter.com/Rolando02660530/status/1511949674676035586

We (professional U.S. soldiers in the late 1980's) were instructed that the Geneva Conventions prohibited shooting 50 cal rounds at enemy soldiers in combat.  Thus, we were to aim at their BDU and LBE gear.  (Battle Dress Uniform and Load Bearing Equipment (e.g., suspenders.))  Honestly, some of the Geneva Convention stuff was a little on the ridiculous side.

I was in uniform at the tail end of the 'Reagan buildup' since it was a good way for college drop-outs to make up for their lost scholarships and grants.  Based on my various observations since that time, I suspect that it was one of the most professional militaries in the history of the world.  That would be in 'peacetime' of course.  I don't doubt that the professionalism waned pretty quickly in combat conditions, or at least as fast as the civilian leadership wished it to.  Iraq-I was over so quickly that I don't think the troops really had time to turn characteristically evil, and in most segments that I (in a combat arms unit) was exposed to it just wouldn't have been very cool to most people to rape and murder civilians and that kind of thing.

From what I could determine, moral, spending, etc were way down for a good decade after Vietnam.  As much as I (might seem to) shit-talk the American military and more generally the American power structures, I have to say that the U.S. Army really did a fairly good job on a difficult task of getting things turned around in the 80's.  Could be that the Vietnam war damaged psychos were exiting by the early 80's enough to help, and it is also the case that the military could be (and generally were) at least a little bit selective about who they allowed in.

Later things got a little more 'Jewy' with the neocons infusing the upper policy ranks, and they seem to delight in goy performing atrocities against one another.  I doubt that professionalism is as much of a training target in today's U.S. military as it was when I was in.  I could be wrong, of course, because I have almost no exposure to these things now.

[suchmoon]

The Ukrainian forces don't seem to be too bothered by the Geneva convention either.Is this not classed as a "war crime"?

It probably is. They shouldn't have bothered taking prisoners just to kill them unarmed.

[Branko]

We (professional U.S. soldiers in the late 1980's) were instructed that the Geneva Conventions prohibited shooting 50 cal rounds at enemy soldiers in combat.  Thus, we were to aim at their BDU and LBE gear.  (Battle Dress Uniform and Load Bearing Equipment (e.g., suspenders.))  Honestly, some of the Geneva Convention stuff was a little on the ridiculous side.

"Marines are trained that as we go past bodies on the ground we put a controlled pair into them to make sure they are dead.
Unless needed for interrogation, wounded enemies are just hassle."

Comment about some filmed incident from battle of Fallujah

[suchmoon]

Ukraine has not even really been bombed yet. I think the blow in the Donbass will not be the last, but rather the first really strong one.

If only the glorious Russian army could man up and fight the real Ukrainian forces instead of killing unarmed civilians:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-61036740

More than 1,000 people were crowded into a railway station in eastern Ukraine when it was hit by rockets on Friday, an eyewitness has told the BBC.

At least 39 people died and dozens more were wounded when missiles exploded at Kramatorsk station as civilians were queuing to evacuate, according to the regional governor.

Images from the scene show bodies and abandoned bags lying on the platform.

Ukraine said Russia targeted civilians. Russia has denied the attack.

[tvbcof]

We (professional U.S. soldiers in the late 1980's) were instructed that the Geneva Conventions prohibited shooting 50 cal rounds at enemy soldiers in combat.  Thus, we were to aim at their BDU and LBE gear.  (Battle Dress Uniform and Load Bearing Equipment (e.g., suspenders.))  Honestly, some of the Geneva Convention stuff was a little on the ridiculous side.

"Marines are trained that as we go past bodies on the ground we put a controlled pair into them to make sure they are dead.
Unless needed for interrogation, wounded enemies are just hassle."

Comment about some filmed incident from battle of Fallujah

Fallujah was another 'marker point' for me on the road to complete demoralization about the state of 'my country'.  The 'enemy' made the mistake of hummiliating some of Rumsfeld's beloved Blackwater mercenaries.  If the enemy would have just stuck with killing plain old uniformed soldiers they would probably have been OK.

Again, to be perfectly honest, killing wounded POW's (or soon to be) is not tasteful, but also fairly typical in war-time, and for the functional reasons described if nothing else.  I would estimate that only the very top-of-the-line professional militaries would NOT do such a thing, and then only when they were winning handily and flush with resources (including fresh and motivated troops.)  So, not that big a deal in the scheme of things.

As I see it, the real war crimes which happened in Fallujah (and many other places to the point where they became more-or-less SOP) would be 'shake-n-bake' using WP (white phosphorous or 'willie pete') in areas with civilians, and 'double tap' operations where first responders are targeted.  The use of double-tap when one has just targeted a wedding party is pretty obscene.

Abu Ghraib was another such marker point.  I do blame (in part) 'thinkers' like the Neocons for the adoption of these methods mainly because they seem to have grown with the growth of the influence of the Neocon strategists and 'advisors'.