ADVERTISEMENT

This might be a little tougher than Putin thought...

Research indicates that bombing took place on Tuesday, May 24, 1999, with Summer yet to begin, limited to the Belgrade area, with the intent to knock out power for weeks, and not years.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/balkans/stories/belgrade052599.htm

In contrast, Russia is striking in November and December with winter looming, with the admitted goal of freezing an entire nation.
I’ve seen if firmly stated on this forum that attacks targeting civilian infrastructure are terrorism (setting aside that terrorism is non-state actor violence to achieve political aims…). Does it really just depend on the calendar?

I look on Russia bombing Ukraine infrastructure like Sherman burning Atlanta. I find ‘war crimes’ a kind of absurd notion, as the entire enterprise is essentially a criminal act.

My dad always told me the military was there to ‘break things and kill people until the enemy bent to your will’. I think he was right, and that’s why Hulagu Khan has a more successful track record than Petreus.
 
I’ve seen if firmly stated on this forum that attacks targeting civilian infrastructure are terrorism (setting aside that terrorism is non-state actor violence to achieve political aims…). Does it really just depend on the calendar?

I look on Russia bombing Ukraine infrastructure like Sherman burning Atlanta. I find ‘war crimes’ a kind of absurd notion, as the entire enterprise is essentially a criminal act.

My dad always told me the military was there to ‘break things and kill people until the enemy bent to your will’. I think he was right, and that’s why Hulagu Khan has a more successful track record than Petreus.
It’s an interesting discussion. I see no need to apologize for the Allied actions in WWII in bombing Germany and Japan and ultimately the two atomic bomb drops. I think we did what we needed to do and it was us vs. them. So if I don’t have an issue with that then I’m not sure how I reconcile the concepts of “war crimes” and rules of warfare generally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: seminole97
I’ve seen if firmly stated on this forum that attacks targeting civilian infrastructure are terrorism (setting aside that terrorism is non-state actor violence to achieve political aims…). Does it really just depend on the calendar?

I look on Russia bombing Ukraine infrastructure like Sherman burning Atlanta. I find ‘war crimes’ a kind of absurd notion, as the entire enterprise is essentially a criminal act.

My dad always told me the military was there to ‘break things and kill people until the enemy bent to your will’. I think he was right, and that’s why Hulagu Khan has a more successful track record than Petreus.
You find war crimes an absurd notion. Neat.
 
It’s an interesting discussion. I see no need to apologize for the Allied actions in WWII in bombing Germany and Japan and ultimately the two atomic bomb drops. I think we did what we needed to do and it was us vs. them. So if I don’t have an issue with that then I’m not sure how I reconcile the concepts of “war crimes” and rules of warfare generally.
A lot is proportionality and intent. If you only have a broad roller to paint with, you can’t paint a tiny speck, which needs to be covered with paint. The atomic bombs were paint rollers, while today we have micro paint brushes to paint the tiniest of dots. If we could use the micro paint brush but intentionally use the roller, there is a problem. If you use the paint roller on a wall that doesn’t even need paint, then we have even more of a problem.
 
I’ve seen if firmly stated on this forum that attacks targeting civilian infrastructure are terrorism (setting aside that terrorism is non-state actor violence to achieve political aims…). Does it really just depend on the calendar?

I look on Russia bombing Ukraine infrastructure like Sherman burning Atlanta. I find ‘war crimes’ a kind of absurd notion, as the entire enterprise is essentially a criminal act.

My dad always told me the military was there to ‘break things and kill people until the enemy bent to your will’. I think he was right, and that’s why Hulagu Khan has a more successful track record than Petreus.
JFC. You’re exhausting.
 
I’ve seen if firmly stated on this forum that attacks targeting civilian infrastructure are terrorism (setting aside that terrorism is non-state actor violence to achieve political aims…). Does it really just depend on the calendar?

I look on Russia bombing Ukraine infrastructure like Sherman burning Atlanta. I find ‘war crimes’ a kind of absurd notion, as the entire enterprise is essentially a criminal act.

My dad always told me the military was there to ‘break things and kill people until the enemy bent to your will’. I think he was right, and that’s why Hulagu Khan has a more successful track record than Petreus.
Your daddy done taught you wrong.
Might be part of the reason you’re so deeply confused.

Slava Ukraini
 
A lot is proportionality and intent. If you only have a broad roller to paint with, you can’t paint a tiny speck, which needs to be covered with paint. The atomic bombs were paint rollers, while today we have micro paint brushes to paint the tiniest of dots. If we could use the micro paint brush but intentionally use the roller, there is a problem. If you use the paint roller on a wall that doesn’t even need paint, then we have even more of a problem.
That’s a good point, too.
 
You find war crimes an absurd notion. Neat.
I don’t find it absurd, but as stated I do find it difficult to reconcile the concept with various real world historical examples.

To be crystal clear, I think the Russian government is 100% responsible for anything that happens in or to Ukraine. IMO, if Putin and any government leaders were captured I think they should just be executed, regardless of any war crimes charges. I suppose that in itself could be considered a war crime, which seems kinda silly to me given Ukraine is simply defending itself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VodkaSam
I don’t find it absurd, but as stated I do find it difficult to reconcile the concept with various real world historical examples.

To be crystal clear, I think the Russian government is 100% responsible for anything that happens in or to Ukraine. IMO, if Putin and any government leaders were captured I think they should just be executed, regardless of any war crimes charges. I suppose that in itself could be considered a war crime, which seems kinda silly to me given Ukraine is simply defending itself.
Google war crimes as defined by the UN and the Geneva convention. Start with the most black and white, such as using rape as a weapon, and work your way through the list. There are some that require analysis and balancing of interests and capability, and also intent. It’s like criminal law where you have involuntary manslaughter and all the way to first degree murder. It seems like a gray area is manslaughter where you did something on purpose knowing that it would kill innocent people, but you did it for another reason where the killing was incidental or collateral damage. Like droning ISIS commanders knowing you will also kill his family in the process. The war crime version would be torturing to death the leader’s family in front of him to extract information.
 
FjcdEmZXgAQUIG8
 
  • Like
Reactions: h-hawk
"A video a few days ago of the Russian TOR-2M air defense system working to intercept Ukrainian HIMRAS missiles." To try anyway.

 
  • Like
Reactions: HawkMD
This reminds me of my grandfather on my Mom's side who was rarely allowed in out house due to drinking.

 
  • Like
Reactions: HawkMD
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT