Russian invasion of Ukraine

[PACOX]

There were mentions of this report...elsewhere on MMO-C recently.

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/ne...ger-civilians/

While that can be true, let's not forget Russia as well uses nuclear reactors as shields from counter-fire. And to me, Ukraine is defending its existence from a genocidal opponent, using similar tactics to gain all advantage against the orcish attacker. If Russia can use such shit to genocide Ukraine easier, I don't see why Ukraine shouldn't - aren't places like schools supposed to be evacuated during this war given Russia has proved they care not who they kill?

But am sure some may use this as a weapon against Ukraine. To be honest calling Ukraine violating the laws of war is just plain trolling by Amnesty at this point, fighting for survival against an enemy that is willing to wipe out every sign of life from a nation hardly gives one time to follow the rules by the book...And we're not talking about systemical murder of POWs and other Russian normal things, we're talking about ukrainian troops using whatever terrain they can, to ensure they can launch offensives to re-capture occupied areas.

That's a reality of war, especially when you are defending your home. It was something brought up at the beginning of the war.

The only thing that can be said in Russia's favor about it is "you can't claim Russia targeting schools when those buildings are no longer being used as schools but housing soldiers".

That excuse falls apart when:

a) Russia shouldn't have invaded.
b) Russia started hitting civilian buildings that were commandeered by Ukrainian soldiers.

So Russia's behavior cancels out any argument that Ukraine is putting its civilians in danger unless you're looking at things through KGB blinders. You can when debate points if you throw replace Russia with 'US' and Ukraine with 'Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, etc' when a US warhawk complains about the targets Russia hits. No one really wins at the end of the day, though.

- - - Updated - - -

Eh, Amnesty's whole thing is to point out and fight human rights violations no matter who commits them or under what circumstance. It's obviously tone deaf considering Ukraine's desperate situation, but tone has never really been high on Amnesty's list of priorities. Usually that's a good thing, but clearly not always.

I don't know much about Amnesty but it seems like they are trying to be objective? But as you said it comes off as extremely tone deaf.

[Corvus]

At times Amnesty seems to prefer to go after the soft targets. But in this case it is just a stupid take - Ukraine is fighting to prevent genocide. What are they meant to do, just hand over population centres and the people living there to an enemy intent on genocide?

Elsewhere, in the last week, Schroeder, Trump, Le Pen, Orban and Corbyn have all come out and said that Ukraine needs to negotiate a surrender. (Possibly others that might have been missed from the list as well.) its almost as if marching orders have been sent out - Putin needs this over as his army has completely bogged down and has barely moved in weeks and his supply lines are being hit. The longer it goes on, the worse it will get for him. So he needs a 'peace in our time' Sudetenland surrender of Ukraine to give him time to rebuild and get ready for round three.

[Voidism]

God, Amnesty is a fucking joke.

"Just die quickly and efficiently, you stupid Ukrainians. We don't want to know how you already tell civilians to evacuate nor do we care that Putin is invading you and can leave at any time"
- Amnesty

Unfortunately, Swedish media is running with their shit as gospel saying Ukrainians are committing war crimes. Jesus we're such a shit country.

[Saradain]

God, Amnesty is a fucking joke.

"Just die quickly and efficiently, you stupid Ukrainians. We don't want to know how you already tell civilians to evacuate nor do we care that Putin is invading you and can leave at any time"
- Amnesty

Unfortunately, Swedish media is running with their shit as gospel saying Ukrainians are committing war crimes. Jesus we're such a shit country.

Shoot back at russians, hit a nuclear reactor, get blamed for war crimes and a radioactive catastrophe.

Defend your country from an enemy that wants every last ukrainian dead, "missing" and relocated, get blamed for war crimes.

An ideal russian world, where they can do no wrong and the truth is a falsehood, and falsehood a truth.

[Elenos]

God, Amnesty is a fucking joke.

"Just die quickly and efficiently, you stupid Ukrainians. We don't want to know how you already tell civilians to evacuate nor do we care that Putin is invading you and can leave at any time"
- Amnesty

Unfortunately, Swedish media is running with their shit as gospel saying Ukrainians are committing war crimes. Jesus we're such a shit country.

Amensty is not a fucking joke because they document all the horrible things every side in war does to hold them all to account. What you think they're saying anything but terrible things about Russia?

Using schools and hospitals as military areas is a serious matter in any war zone and creates a situation in which those become legitimate military targets.

[Dezerte]

Amnesty is probably technically correct but the context of the situation would arguably put it into another light. According to the Geneva Conventions a country that is defending itself has some leeway in what it can do in such a situation, and it could be argued that Ukraine had no choice.

[Kaleredar]

Using schools and hospitals as military areas is a serious matter in any war zone and creates a situation in which those become legitimate military targets.

There's nothing "legitimate" about Russia's actions. Every target they hit in Ukraine is illegitimate.

And they certainly didn't care previously about whether they were blowing up civilian targets, unintentionally or otherwise.

"We know you're defending your country from a band of low-life miscreant thugs from a lying tin-pot country run by a megalomaniacal madman whose forces are bent on raping, pillaging, and killing anyone and everything they can, but do you really have to defend it that way?" is a damn hollow sentiment. I assume that whatever reason Ukraine is positioning their forces and resources the way they are they have a damn good reason for doing so.

[Elenos]

I assume that whatever reason Ukraine is positioning their forces and resources the way they are they have a damn good reason for doing so.

The reason is that they'd be annihilated in open country outside of heavy residential areas. There are sound military reasons for it.

But it gets civilians killed and hospitals/schools blown up.

[Kaleredar]

The reason is that they'd be annihilated in open country outside of heavy residential areas. There are sound military reasons for it.

But it gets civilians killed and hospitals/schools blown up.

And like I said, Russia seems content to blow up hospitals and schools either way.

[Joszef Kiprich]

Doesn't matter if the Ukrainians hide in residential areas. Russia really doesn't need to bomb them. They can fuck off back to where they came from

[Gabriel]

Waaaaah, the Ukrainian soldiers are hiding in schools so poor russia is forced to kill them as well when they try to hit civilians.

Another day, another low.

[Nymrohd]

There's nothing "legitimate" about Russia's actions. Every target they hit in Ukraine is illegitimate.

This is obvious but Amnesty's concerns go beyond one war but rather on how the perception of each battle affects the conduct of war at large. What the Ukrainians do is both tactically sound and the only reasonable option. It doesn't change the fact that it is problematic to normalize using civilians as cover. For Amnesty to have any value they need to report on all sides. There is more to this planet than the West and Amnesty needs to be considered unbiased and thus persuasive by as many states as possible, including states that have a very low opinion of the West and its allies.

[Barzotti]

This is obvious but Amnesty's concerns go beyond one war but rather on how the perception of each battle affects the conduct of war at large. What the Ukrainians do is both tactically sound and the only reasonable option. It doesn't change the fact that it is problematic to normalize using civilians as cover. For Amnesty to have any value they need to report on all sides. There is more to this planet than the West and Amnesty needs to be considered unbiased and thus persuasive by as many states as possible, including states that have a very low opinion of the West and its allies.

I respectfully disagree with your point: Amnesty's reports are only aimed towards Western people. The states having a very low opinion of the West don't give two shits about human rights anyway and consider them as a form of weakness. Look at the number of countries in Asia or Africa perfectly willing to suck Putin or Xinping's dicks at every occasion. Amnesty's reports are made for internal consumption because the values they defend are pretty much really respected in the Western countries.

[Corvus]

Authoritarian states couldn't give a damn about anything Amnesty says. This is merely a cheap stunt aimed at keeping up fund-raising and merely serves to fuel whataboutism.

[Voidism]

This is obvious but Amnesty's concerns go beyond one war but rather on how the perception of each battle affects the conduct of war at large. What the Ukrainians do is both tactically sound and the only reasonable option. It doesn't change the fact that it is problematic to normalize using civilians as cover. For Amnesty to have any value they need to report on all sides. There is more to this planet than the West and Amnesty needs to be considered unbiased and thus persuasive by as many states as possible, including states that have a very low opinion of the West and its allies.

Putin can stop it ANY time. He doesn't "have" to target hospitals. In fact, why don't Putin and Amnesty go fuck themselves. How about that. Why isn't that the focus? Why is the falsehood, that Putin claims, there were military targets there the sole focus on these "war crimes"? DO NOT BOMB THEM. EASY!

How the hell are you supposed to protect a city if you can't stay in it?

[jonnysensible]

Russian modus operandi in syria was to bomb civilian infrastructure in an area until it was unlivable (water,schools,hospitals etc) and then move syrain forces in to the ruins when it had been all but abandoned.

Lets not forget mariupol theatre as well.

[Gorsameth]

Because fighting in cities is actually horrid, especially if the civilian population is against you.
The absolute last place you want to be fighting is in a city, so if you are not burdened by humanitarian concerns its easier to remove the city then conquer it.

[Corvus]

I guess it was bound to happen, with Russia stuck in a quagmire and pulling in troops from everywhere it can - fighting between Azerbaijan and Armenia has broken out again.

[Joszef Kiprich]

While Russia is in no state to respond to it, it will be "interesting" how Turkey reacts.

[Iphie]

I guess it was bound to happen, with Russia stuck in a quagmire and pulling in troops from everywhere it can - fighting between Azerbaijan and Armenia has broken out again.

That's rich, russia calling for "restraint", sounds like they know they can't actually do anything there unless they weaken their effort in Ukraine. Which has seen an interesting turn in recent days anyway as russia apparently has moved troops from the east towards Kherson. I don't think weakening one area to reinforce another is the best idea...especially if that area was already difficult.