4 ms·

Not exactly true. From what I've seen, upon investigation, targeted facilities were being used for military purposes. Again, if they were fine just killing civi

Not exactly true. From what I've seen, upon investigation, targeted facilities were being used for military purposes. Again, if they were fine just killing civilians, they'd have just flattened a couple of cities to make an example of them and we'd have millions of dead civilians. The war has become complicated because Ukraine has been arming people en masse (totally legitimate) and operating out of civilian infrastructure (also legitimate in specific circumstances, but it makes that infrastructure a legitimate military target). I'm sure there's been some bungled strikes, and possibly some malicious ones, but that's clearly not the general thrust of the Russian strategy here. Do you really think Russia doesn't have the capability to just bomb central Kiev out of existence? [1] https://www.newsweek.com/putins-bombers-could-devastate-ukraine-hes-holding-back-heres-why-1690494 https://www.newsweek.com/putins-bombers-could-devastate-ukra...

jhgb 5y ago
> Again, if they were fine just killing civilians, they'd have just flattened a couple of cities to make an example of them and we'd have millions of dead civilians. That's what they're heading to now that their maskirovka of "liberating oppressed Russians" has failed.
dragontamer 5y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovmPJ01m_jk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovmPJ01m_jk You're gonna have to explain to me how that TV station in central Kyiv was killing Russian soldiers. Explain to me nice and slow. Or are Russian troops so incompetent that they mistake a TV tower for another target? We know where the Russian troops are, maybe 50km north of Kyiv. None of them are in downtown Kyiv yet, and they certainly weren't there on March 1st (when this video was posted). The Russian troops at the time were trying to take Hostomel Airport, a few dozen miles north of Kyiv at this time. So there's no military reason to destroy the TV station. It was clearly an attack on civilian infrastructure. (Military communications don't use TV Towers)
- pydry 5y ago
  It's not uncommon. It was one of NATO'S first targets in Belgrade too. “Our military leaders at NATO believe … that the Serb television is an essential instrument of Mr. Milosevic’s command and control. … It is not, in a conventional sense, therefore, a media outlet. That was a decision they made, and I did not reverse it.” - Clinton The US and NATO were lavished with praise for their part in that war.
  - throwawaycities 5y ago
    > The US and NATO were lavished with praise for their part in that war. Because Slobodan Milosevic was committing genocide. If you are suggesting Putin deserves similar praise for illegally using force in Ukraine, I’d like to ask why?
  - dragontamer 5y ago
    You're missing out on the key context to my central question. What was the Kyiv TV Tower broadcasting, that made it a legitimate military target?
    - pydry 5y ago
      Propaganda, presumably. Same reason Bill killed 30 employees of a Serbian TV channel and then patted himself on the back.
      - dragontamer 5y ago
        Please explain the Ukrainian propaganda to me that was deserving of this strike. Capt. America punching Hitler is propaganda. I happen to agree with it. You'll need to be specific with me. Not all propaganda is bad, and it takes particularly bad propaganda before I think that military action is required. Would you support say, hypothetical German Bombers attacking Marvel Comics over their depiction of Capt. America?
        pydry 5y ago
fabian2k 5y ago
Russia still does not have air superiority, so they actually might be afraid to commit bombers here as there is still working Ukrainian air defence. And Russia is very obviously shelling entire cities indiscriminately, there is no possible way to claim this has a direct military purpose. Bombarding an entire city with artillery is a war crime.
xioxox 5y ago
It certainly looks like they're trying to flatten cities and kill civilians: https://twitter.com/Polk_Azov/status/1506585227069689861 https://twitter.com/Polk_Azov/status/1506585227069689861 - it's certainly not targeted on the military
throwawaycities 5y ago
> but it makes that infrastructure a legitimate target It’s an illegal armed conflict, thus all use of force is illegal, even use of force on legitimate military targets is illegal. > Do you really think Russia doesn't have the capability to just bomb central Kiev out of existence? Capability? Maybe. The will? Absolutely not. Putin is no doubt a war criminal and despot, but: 1) he rightly fears potentially military response from the international community; 2) he has very practical considerations due to the close ties of the Russian and Ukrainian people, which goes directly to Putin’s propaganda that this isn’t war but a special military operation against a Nazi regime, he must at least try to balance his acts with his propaganda or lose support of his people and possibly his troops.

jhgb 5y ago

> Again, if they were fine just killing civilians, they'd have just flattened a couple of cities to make an example of them and we'd have millions of dead civilians. That's what they're heading to now that their maskirovka of "liberating oppressed Russians" has failed.

dragontamer 5y ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovmPJ01m_jk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovmPJ01m_jk You're gonna have to explain to me how that TV station in central Kyiv was killing Russian soldiers. Explain to me nice and slow. Or are Russian troops so incompetent that they mistake a TV tower for another target? We know where the Russian troops are, maybe 50km north of Kyiv. None of them are in downtown Kyiv yet, and they certainly weren't there on March 1st (when this video was posted). The Russian troops at the time were trying to take Hostomel Airport, a few dozen miles north of Kyiv at this time. So there's no military reason to destroy the TV station. It was clearly an attack on civilian infrastructure. (Military communications don't use TV Towers)

pydry 5y ago
It's not uncommon. It was one of NATO'S first targets in Belgrade too. “Our military leaders at NATO believe … that the Serb television is an essential instrument of Mr. Milosevic’s command and control. … It is not, in a conventional sense, therefore, a media outlet. That was a decision they made, and I did not reverse it.” - Clinton The US and NATO were lavished with praise for their part in that war.
- throwawaycities 5y ago
  > The US and NATO were lavished with praise for their part in that war. Because Slobodan Milosevic was committing genocide. If you are suggesting Putin deserves similar praise for illegally using force in Ukraine, I’d like to ask why?
- dragontamer 5y ago
  You're missing out on the key context to my central question. What was the Kyiv TV Tower broadcasting, that made it a legitimate military target?
  - pydry 5y ago
    Propaganda, presumably. Same reason Bill killed 30 employees of a Serbian TV channel and then patted himself on the back.
    - dragontamer 5y ago
      Please explain the Ukrainian propaganda to me that was deserving of this strike. Capt. America punching Hitler is propaganda. I happen to agree with it. You'll need to be specific with me. Not all propaganda is bad, and it takes particularly bad propaganda before I think that military action is required. Would you support say, hypothetical German Bombers attacking Marvel Comics over their depiction of Capt. America?
      - pydry 5y ago

fabian2k 5y ago

Russia still does not have air superiority, so they actually might be afraid to commit bombers here as there is still working Ukrainian air defence. And Russia is very obviously shelling entire cities indiscriminately, there is no possible way to claim this has a direct military purpose. Bombarding an entire city with artillery is a war crime.

xioxox 5y ago

It certainly looks like they're trying to flatten cities and kill civilians: https://twitter.com/Polk_Azov/status/1506585227069689861 https://twitter.com/Polk_Azov/status/1506585227069689861 - it's certainly not targeted on the military

throwawaycities 5y ago

> but it makes that infrastructure a legitimate target It’s an illegal armed conflict, thus all use of force is illegal, even use of force on legitimate military targets is illegal. > Do you really think Russia doesn't have the capability to just bomb central Kiev out of existence? Capability? Maybe. The will? Absolutely not. Putin is no doubt a war criminal and despot, but: 1) he rightly fears potentially military response from the international community; 2) he has very practical considerations due to the close ties of the Russian and Ukrainian people, which goes directly to Putin’s propaganda that this isn’t war but a special military operation against a Nazi regime, he must at least try to balance his acts with his propaganda or lose support of his people and possibly his troops.