|
Vahakyla posted:They are when we are talking about shooting prisoners of war. There's a bit of a difference between calling invaders orcs and gunning down POWs, or did I miss context
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 18:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 15:51 |
|
|
The invaded have more of a reason to be upset, angry and not entirely rational. The invader has no such excuse.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 18:28
|
|
|
Vengarr posted:The invader and the invaded are not on the same moral level even if they steal each others’ tweets It happens even on things far less life and death. You'll often see the same RWM news clip shared as "look at this clown's incoherent arguments" by normal people but then Boomer Facebook has the same clip as "Real Patriot DESTROYS liberal!"
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 18:28
|
|
|
Vengarr posted:The invaded have more of a reason to be upset, angry and not entirely rational. The invader has no such excuse. That explains such behavior, it does not excuse it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 18:34
|
|
|
Your favorite war criminal reminding you that there are instances where it is more than OK to kill prisoners, so unfortunately, often, context does matter. The video in question is not one of those, but just it bears weight in the conversation to remind that even those who give a gently caress about war crimes and doing right can do some heinous poo poo under guise of law.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 18:37
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:It’s a brutal video, not really wanting to link it to avoid mode ire, but I reckon it will soon become a meme for defiance similar to snake island. I can’t believe the Russians are also posting it, but I guess it’s the mentality of having no accountability. There were some claims after WW2 that Japanese commanders sometimes ordered the torture, execution and display of Allied POWs to intentionally create an atrocity feedback loop. It was meant to get the conscripts thinking about what sort of treatment they could expect should they attempt to surrender, to encourage them to keep fighting rather than give up. Given reports of how many Russians have surrendered, this and other incidents (sledgehammer-related) make me wonder if there isn’t a similar dynamic. Intentionally creating a “war to the death” situation only helps the less-motivated side. Vengarr fucked around with this message at 18:44 on Mar 6, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 18:37
|
|
|
McNally posted:That explains such behavior, it does not excuse it. War itself has no excuse, that’s why we put to death leaders who start aggressive wars for “crimes against peace”. The instigator bears special responsibility for all the evils that flow from it. To be clear though, I’m talking about overheated Twitter posts and calling people orcs, not war crimes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 18:42
|
|
|
Vengarr posted:War itself has no excuse, that’s why we put to death leaders who start aggressive wars for “crimes against peace”. The instigator bears special responsibility for all the evils that flow from it. Who’s we here and when did this last happen?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 18:44
|
|
|
bulletsponge13 posted:Your favorite war criminal reminding you that there are instances where it is more than OK to kill prisoners, so unfortunately, often, context does matter… What does this even mean? You and I were in the same wars. I never found myself in an instance where it was a morally correct decision to start offing EPWs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 18:47
|
|
|
Hekk posted:What does this even mean? You and I were in the same wars. I never found myself in an instance where it was a morally correct decision to start offing EPWs. I don't think the issue is whether or not it's morally correct, but whether or not it's legally permissible.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 19:06
|
|
|
Hekk posted:What does this even mean? You and I were in the same wars. I never found myself in an instance where it was a morally correct decision to start offing EPWs. Neither did I- that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. And nowhere did I claim morality, and morality is removed from law. They are separate things. The simple example is when your unit doesn't have the means or ability to secure or safeguard EPWs- an example everyone knows is from Saving Private Ryan, the Nazi that they let go. Legally, they were completely in the right to execute him. If you cannot secure and safeguard them, what would you expect them to do? This isn't the movies, you don't just bring them along to complete your mission. You cannot leave them. Law of War recognizes the exigencies of war like that. There are legal instances like perfidy, where if committed, you are no longer required to recognize the protections afforded to surrendering units in that operational area. No where did I say it was morally or ethically right- I'm happy to discuss those topics related to it, but we all need to remember laws do not reflect the moral or ethical right.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 19:11
|
|
|
Yeah in no way do I mean to equate name-calling and literal war crimes. Just saying dehumanization of the enemy isn’t a uniquely Russian trait.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 19:15
|
|
|
Where in the convention does Perfidy nullify protections? There’s generally nothing in the convention that nullify much of anything for any group. The conventions were remarkable because they tried to steer clear from ”but they did it first”-type loopholes. Same with red cross. If one ambulance is made into a gun truck, it nullifies the protection of that ambulance’s crosses. But it does not give free range to shoot other ambulances. The loss of protection generally refers to the person committing the violation, and even then in only the loss of the protection given by the falsehood. You can’t gun down dudes who surrender in their ambulance gun truck, for example. Vahakyla fucked around with this message at 19:18 on Mar 6, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 19:16
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:Where in the convention does Perfidy nullify protections? There’s generally nothing in the convention that nullify much of anything for any group. The conventions were remarkable because they tried to steer clear from ”but they did it first”-type loopholes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 19:23
|
|
|
bulletsponge13 posted:Neither did I- that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I am on my phone and at work so it’s a lot harder to selectively quote. The comment I was mostly responding to was the one you made about there being times where it’s more than OK to execute POWs. I am not a lawyer. I am not an expert on the laws of armed conflict anymore than anyone who received same briefings we all got when in Iraq and Afghanistan. That said, I am unaware of any times it’s lawful to execute EPWs. You can elect to not take prisoners if you have no way of handling them but you can’t convince the enemy to lay down their arms and then just execute them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 19:25
|
|
|
The line between "not accepting a surrender" and "shooting someone who just surrendered" is extremely thin.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 19:34
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:Who’s we here and when did this last happen? The Western Allies, Nurnberg, 1945 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_of_aggression
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 19:47
|
|
|
Vengarr posted:The Western Allies, Nurnberg, 1945 So… once. Cool.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 19:49
|
|
|
unfortunately it only takes the existence of the 50 most batshit weird Fox News Website Comment Grandpas (Russia Edition) out of millions of potential commenters to create a constant presence of bloodlust comment threads like that basically unmoderated forum.jpg
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 19:51
|
|
|
Hekk posted:I am on my phone and at work so it’s a lot harder to selectively quote. I didn't say entice them- but there are a lot of Grey areas in the Laws, purposely, because they tried to account for circumstances. That's if anyone is paying attention, which honestly comes down to the individual and/or unit, along with publicity. Every army violates the Laws of War, and we only care when the combination is right. And I hate to be the one who just says it, but we were taught to expect the unfortunate scenario, because it does happen with some frequency under legit circumstances. E- FrozenVent posted:So… once. Cool. Once, and half assed. bulletsponge13 fucked around with this message at 19:59 on Mar 6, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 19:57
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:So… once. Cool. The small and isolated incident of World War 2, foundation of modern international criminal law. It was formally added to the International Criminal Courts’ jurisdiction in 2010. The difficulty of prosecution should not disguise the fact that it considered a crime by modern jurisprudence. I’m certain that Saddam Hussein would have been charged for invading Kuwait if there wasn’t already so much rope to hang him with. Vengarr fucked around with this message at 20:09 on Mar 6, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 20:04
|
|
|
The Wehrmacht was the only army who printed the Geneva Conventions in every soldier's paybook. Irony! Source: my old copy of https://www.amazon.com/Wehrmacht-War-Crimes-Bureau-1939-1945/dp/0803299087
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 20:06
|
|
|
Rust Martialis posted:The Wehrmacht was the only army who printed the Geneva Conventions in every soldier's paybook. Was it prefaced with “List of Things to Avoid:”?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 20:10
|
|
|
Vengarr posted:Was it prefaced with “List of Things to Avoid:”? Probably came with checkboxes. Collect them all!
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 20:18
|
|
|
No, the irony is that the Wehrmacht was on paper the armed force that drilled the law of war into soldiers the most. The main issue was on the Eastern Front, the Soviets were not signatories so the Germans didn't feel they needed to follow them either. The book covers the work of the German Army's War Crimes Bureau - collecting evidence of Allied and Soviet warcrimes, but also incidentally punishing Germans convicted of them as well - IIRC the first German soldier executed for war crimes was by the Germans themselves. It was an interesting view to the other side, mostly. I mean Keegan talked about the Irish Guards bayonetting surrendering Germans in The Face of Battle (IIRC) with "you had your chance, Fritz" or something like that and how officers had to threaten to shoot their own men to take prisoners.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 20:27
|
|
|
Rust Martialis posted:No, the irony is that the Wehrmacht was on paper the armed force that drilled the law of war into soldiers the most. The main issue was on the Eastern Front, the Soviets were not signatories so the Germans didn't feel they needed to follow them either. The book covers the work of the German Army's War Crimes Bureau - collecting evidence of Allied and Soviet warcrimes, but also incidentally punishing Germans convicted of them as well - IIRC the first German soldier executed for war crimes was by the Germans themselves. Yeah the Wehrmacht has a surprising amount of punishments handed out in early war for war crimes by themselves. It's the Eastern Front that starts the vicious loop and has the Army just ratcheting themselves into progressively more horrible poo poo with prisoners.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 20:36
|
|
|
The SS and the luftwaffe were enthusiastically war crimey from day one though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 20:43
|
|
|
In a book I can't recall anymore, it talked how Josef Gangl was doing courts martial on his soldiers war criming as late as 1944 and 1945. Not surprising that he'd go on to help french prisoners and even fought alongside the US Army with his Heer troops at Battle of Castle Itter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josef_Gangl Another name I remember from having war crime courts martial against his own men as late as 1944 and 1945 was Wichard von Alvensleben, and lmao I check him out on wikipedia and dude ALSO raided against the SS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wichard_von_Alvensleben Though, not sure how much of that poo poo is about ethics and morality, and instead about strict enforcement of military discipline to maintain cohesion. Vahakyla fucked around with this message at 20:48 on Mar 6, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 20:43
|
|
|
Holy fudge that video literally popped up on imgur front page of all the places. I’d bet money this is on mainstream news today / tmr aswell.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 21:07
|
|
|
Valtonen posted:Holy fudge that video literally popped up on imgur front page of all the places. I’d bet money this is on mainstream news today / tmr aswell. It already is: https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/russian-soldiers-execute-ukrainian-pow-135000255.html
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 21:13
|
|
|
Karma Comedian posted:It already is: A brave man. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 21:25
|
|
|
Been reading a lot about how Russia won't be able to go much farther than Bakhmut and that Ukraine will be able to turn that into a counter offensive. Someone good with land fighting please explain to this Bubblehead how that works. I assume that the thinking is that Russia has used a lot of troops to take it and won't be able to hold it, but why were they able to take it then?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 21:27
|
|
|
Flyinglemur posted:Been reading a lot about how Russia won't be able to go much farther than Bakhmut and that Ukraine will be able to turn that into a counter offensive. Someone good with land fighting please explain to this Bubblehead how that works. I assume that the thinking is that Russia has used a lot of troops to take it and won't be able to hold it, but why were they able to take it then? I think generally the assumption is that the counteroffensive will be aimed somewhere other than Bakhmut, the idea being that if they've spent months concentrating (and losing) forces against Bakhmut then they have fewer forces to defend elsewhere. If Bakhmut is to be retaken eventually it will likely be a matter of bypassing it and cutting off supply routes from behind, not by mirroring the Russian advance and driving directly into the strength of the Russian army.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 21:37
|
|
|
They are bleeding the Russian forces for every block, then they are going to fall back to the other side of the river. This will force the Russians to commit to a extremely difficult tactical problem, a river crossing- something Russia has not demonstrated great skill in. To my thinking, this seems like that was the strategy- basically absorb the attacks as well as you can, because you are still costing the enemy at least 3 dead to every 1 of yours. Russia can't make up the material losses in IFVs and Tanks. Ukraine can somewhat afford the expenditure in munitions and material, since they have allies who can quickly replace the losses. Bahkmut is now Ukrainian Stalingrad, with the river becoming the Volga. Russia has been pushing as hard as they can, but their gains have been tiny in relation to cost. I've seen OSINT analysts say that the entirety of the operational military is tied into the war, with a great most in theater. I can't say. It just looks like the Ukrainians are going for a strategy some fighters adopt- let your opponent tire themselves out beating on your guard.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 21:40
|
|
|
Thanks guys. I totally spaced on "The counteroffensive will come somewhere else".
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 21:46
|
|
|
Flyinglemur posted:Thanks guys. I totally spaced on "The counteroffensive will come somewhere else". If Ukranians are correct and Russia really is running out of gas and unable to take Bakhmut, I would expect a limited counterattack north and south of town to smooth out the line again, at most. So there may be something, but not the big one everyone is anticipating.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 21:50
|
|
|
Also, unless I’m mistaken, this speculation about a counterattack is still just speculation: It’s a thing that makes sense and would explain Ukraine’s recent activity, but I don’t think anyone has any hard evidence that it’s going to happen. I’m unaware of anything we know that precludes the meatgrinder being a Ukrainian strategic mistake. They’ve just been pretty competent up until now. The people who actually know what’s going to happen obviously aren’t going to share.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 21:50
|
|
|
i can not emphasize enough how much of a mystery everyone's plans in and around bakhmut currently are and the schrodinger's withdrawal that is currently taking place. I wouldn't expect to have any real clarity about that situation for a while.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 21:53
|
|
|
Also as I understand, the Ukrainian High Command does not freely share its plans with NATO. They do definitely talk, and have already shown to have liaison officers, but based on the OSINT and Muhlump's quotes on the SECDEF briefings, they don't just tell NATO what they're doing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 21:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 15:51 |
|
|
I'm seeing some speculation in Dutch media that the ammunition delivery to Wagner PMC has been halted again to create an "offramp" for Putin. If Wagner is forced to retreat they can be accused of betraying the war effort and the Russian army needs to withdraw "to protect Russia." Maximum scapegoating Wagner. Source Nu.nl https://www.nu.nl/spanningen-oekraine/6254203/weer-ruzie-tussen-wagner-en-kremlin-front-stort-in-als-wij-ons-terugtrekken.html
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2023 21:58
|
|