Russia's War Against Ukraine

[GroggyGrognard]

The UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine--formed in March-- found two occurrences of Russian soldiers being ill treated by Ukrainian soldiers. This is contrasted with the significantly higher number of war crimes committed by the Russian army. The Commission's work focused on investigations in Kyiv, Chernihiv, Kharkiv, and Sumy areas.

"Commission chairperson Erik Møse said that investigators visited 27 towns and settlements and interviewed more than 150 victims and witnesses. They also inspected "sites of destruction, graves, places of detention and torture", as well as remnants of weapons.
"Based on the evidence gathered so far during the Commission's existence, we found out after having carried out the investigations in these four areas just mentioned, we found that war crimes have been committed in Ukraine," he told journalists in Geneva.

That conclusion is in line with findings published earlier this year by the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU).
It documented unlawful killings - including summary executions of civilians - in more than 30 settlements in Kyiv, Chernihiv, Kharkiv and Sumy regions, by Russian armed forces while they controlled these areas in late February and March."
https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/09/1127691

It's not hard to comprehend this is a result of a fascist regime invading a sovereign country.


Groggy

[FarAway Sooner]

The fact that the Russians have been acting like total bastards doesn't mean that we should instinctively put the Ukrainians up on a pedestal.  And throwing labels like "Fascist" around in disagreements on this board just ain't appropriate.  We can scrutinize Ukrainian actions and emerging reports with a critical eye, but not be pro-Russian. 


We kinda learned that lesson with the mujahidin in Afghanistan, I think...   :arr:

[GroggyGrognard]

I'll stop throwing around the word "fascist" as soon as Putin falls out of a window.


Groggy

[FarAway Sooner]

I'll stop throwing around the word "fascist" as soon as Putin falls out of a window.
Groggy

Fair enough.  I wasn't directing that comment at you and have tried to clarify my point above.  I was referring to not suggesting that fellow Grog-heads are fascists! 

Putin, IMHO, is fair game.    <:-)

[Jarhead0331]

I really love this guy. Neither left nor right, just inquisitive in a search of the truth.

[al_infierno]

^ Thanks for posting.  I find his vague and clickbaity video titles off-putting, but he's extremely well spoken and, as you said, does an excellent job of simply laying out the facts and not pushing one narrative or the other.  I agree with everything he said.

My concern about Musk's proposal is that it sets a dangerous precedent that any nuclear-armed nation can simply cause wanton death and destruction, and be rewarded for it with a huge chunk of ostensibly stolen land, simply because said nation shouts about how it's gonna nuke everyone.  I am absolutely not saying that nuclear armageddon is preferable to this outcome, but it still worries me.  In my mind, the only thing preventing such a settlement from becoming a Czechoslovakia "This document guarantees peace in our time" situation is the fact that Russia's military is currently in shambles.  But give it 10 or 20 years and they'll be back at it, murdering and torturing some other poor smaller country's people (or heck, even Ukraine again) and threatening to nuke anyone if they lose.... again.

I'm sure you're fully aware of all this of course, and to reiterate I don't think nuclear armageddon is preferable to this situation.

That all said, what I find bizarre and a bit concerning about Musk's tweet is how he refers to Crimea belonging to Ukraine as "Krushchev's Mistake."  I mean, who the hell calls it that except Russians?  I'm not saying his proposal is wrong in any way, but that wording causes me to raise an eyebrow.

[Jarhead0331]

^ Thanks for posting.  I find his vague and clickbaity video titles off-putting, but he's extremely well spoken and, as you said, does an excellent job of simply laying out the facts and not pushing one narrative or the other.  I agree with everything he said.

My concern about Musk's proposal is that it sets a dangerous precedent that any nuclear-armed nation can simply cause wanton death and destruction, and be rewarded for it with a huge chunk of ostensibly stolen land, simply because said nation shouts about how it's gonna nuke everyone.  I am absolutely not saying that nuclear armageddon is preferable to this outcome, but it still worries me.  In my mind, the only thing preventing such a settlement from becoming a Czechoslovakia "This document guarantees peace in our time" situation is the fact that Russia's military is currently in shambles.  But give it 10 or 20 years and they'll be back at it, murdering and torturing some other poor smaller country's people (or heck, even Ukraine again) and threatening to nuke anyone if they lose.... again.

I'm sure you're fully aware of all this of course, and to reiterate I don't think nuclear armageddon is preferable to this situation.

That all said, what I find bizarre and a bit concerning about Musk's tweet is how he refers to Crimea belonging to Ukraine as "Krushchev's Mistake."  I mean, who the hell calls it that except Russians?  I'm not saying his proposal is wrong in any way, but that wording causes me to raise an eyebrow.

I agree with your concern over the precedent. However, is the risk of nuclear annihilation a risk that is less worrisome over the consequences of a diplomatic solution that would involve giving up some land to Russia? Like Brand, I'm fine if there are people in the world who are prepared to end civilized life on the planet as we know it as a preferable outcome to Ukraine giving ground. i get it. People are willing to die over different causes. My point is only that asking this question shouldn't be confused with supporting a Russian victory. Rather, it should be viewed as thinking critically and considering all possible outcomes and alternatives.

With respect to Musk's reference on Crimea, perhaps he used that language, in part, to justify a basis for Ukraine to cede the territory and for Russia to retain it? Let's face it, this was the biggest land grab in Europe since WWII, and other than imposing some sanctions that really had little impact, nobody did a thing about it for over 8 years.  Why draw a firm line in the sand on it now?

[al_infierno]

I agree with you 100%, and I think a LOT of people reacted very emotionally to Musk's tweet when he's really being very reasonable.  I think Zelensky himself can get a pass because his message is clearly intended for the Ukrainian audience (or that's what I assume), but Musk seems to be getting a lot of harassment where it's not deserved.

[GDS_Starfury]

the Ukrainians seem to have a problem with their dead civilians not being able to vote in Elons scheme.

[al_infierno]

Of course, and rightfully so. Naturally the problem with any post-war vote is that the dead can't speak.  I don't really see how pointing that out is constructive to the debate on whether or not Musk's idea is viable or desirable.

[GDS_Starfury]

the Ukrainians have already said that Elon's plan is a non-starter for them so whats to debate. 
its their country to defend and take back.

[GDS_Starfury]

Why draw a firm line in the sand on it now?

why not?  how many times do you not face the bully and stand up for yourself?

[al_infierno]

Why draw a firm line in the sand on it now?

why not?  how many times do you not face the bully deranged man with one gun fixed at his own head and another fixed at yours and stand up for yourself?

Fixed that for you.  The potential consequences are a lot more than a few bruises and broken bones on the playground.  This situation is more like a madman willing to take your life along with him while shouting, "Try me motherf#!@er, you think I won't!?"

[GDS_Starfury]

from all of the volumes of stuff Ive read about nuclear policy my take is that you can't give into nuclear blackmail.  once thats done it opens up so many more problems around the globe.
China has nukes, do we let Tiawan get invaded?
North Korea has nukes, do we let them have a go at South Korea?
India/Pakistan, Israel/Iran.... at what point does the world draw a line?

[al_infierno]

Yep and you may have noticed I echoed that exact point in my initial reply to JH's video O0  The question isn't "will there be consequences of giving concessions to Russia?" but "do those consequences outweigh the potential consequence of backing Russia into a corner, e.g. nuclear annihilation?"