4 ms·

> There is no systematic rape and torture involved in America's wars Please.. https://capl.army.mil/case-studies/wcs-single.php?id=78&title=black-hearts-yusuf

> There is no systematic rape and torture involved in America's wars Please.. https://capl.army.mil/case-studies/wcs-single.php?id=78&title=black-hearts-yusufiyah-iraq https://capl.army.mil/case-studies/wcs-single.php?id=78&titl... Read about the My Lai massacre about torture in Abu Ghraib About the bombing of Kunduz Hospital https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/oct/22/iraq-checkpoint-killings-american-troops https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/oct/22/iraq-checkpoin... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes Of course, your reaction might be: "these are only one-off cases, it's not systematic!" It's always unreported. Or reported several years after the fact (when there's nothing that can be done about it). Or it's always "excusable", "accidental"... But when the other side does it, it's always proof of their barbaric attitudes. There's a comic about this: https://twitter.com/tomgauld/status/571994690289061888 https://twitter.com/tomgauld/status/571994690289061888

_kbh_ 3y ago
> https://capl.army.mil/case-studies/wcs-single.php?id=78&titl https://capl.army.mil/case-studies/wcs-single.php?id=78&titl... A single case is hardly systematic. > My Lai massacre >> 16 March 1968 Whilst Russia is still stuck in the 1960's the rest of the world has come a long way since then and generally agrees that the atrocities committed then where quite bad. But honestly, if you have to go back 55 years to find a comparable event I dare say the Russians are brutal. > Of course, your reaction might be: "these are only one-off cases, it's not systematic!" It is. > It's always unreported. Or reported several years after the fact (when there's nothing that can be done about it). Or it's always "excusable", "accidental"... I agree!. Just think about how many more civilians have been raped and tortured in Ukraine that haven't been reported, we have seen so much reported smoke the fire must be bigger than any other fire recent memory. > But when the other side does it, it's always proof of their barbaric attitudes. I think its terrible what the US did. Do you think its terrible that Russia rapes and tortures civilians in Ukraine?.
- berdario 3y ago
  > Do you think its terrible that Russia rapes and tortures civilians in Ukraine?. I think it's terrible, just as much as it's terrible that the US rapes and torture civilians in the middle east. But that's inflammatory language, which I don't like to use. I prefer to say that some US soldiers rape and torture civilians, and some Russian soldiers rape and torture civilians. That's not to excuse the soldiers. And even if they join the military as destitute teenagers (be they US or Russians), they should put effort in atoning for their contribution to large scale suffering. Basically, we shouldn't treat all soldiers the same: they aren't all war criminals, and they aren't all veterans worthy of respect. It's a career choice. Of course, most of the responsibility lies with people like Colin Powell, George Bush, Sergei Shoigu, Vladimir Putin, etc... That's the thing that is left unsaid often: If the conflict is big enough, there are always war crimes (on either side). That was inevitable once the invasion started, and this should've factored in the decision: it was evidently considered an acceptable cost. That's the monstruous thing, and yet it's pretty banal: monstruous bureacrauts or accountants decided that the benefits outweighed the cost in human lives (and some of these lives would be innocent civilians, victims of rape or torture). But considering that is useful only if you're inside the country that is engaged in the military effort. If you're outside, focusing on that doesn't help to de-escalate while the war is still raging. The material conditions guide everyone's decisions, and war is no different.
  - _kbh_ 3y ago
    > I think it's terrible, just as much as it's terrible that the US rapes and torture civilians in the middle east. But the scale is different, that's what people like you are refusing to see. Just because one US soldier rapes one person in 10 20 years, doesn't make them the same as the Russian armed forces who regularly use sexual violence in warfare. One is a once off horrible tragedy, the other is a clear systematic issue that the Russian army cannot seem to stop if they even want to. > Basically, we shouldn't treat all soldiers the same: they aren't all war criminals, and they aren't all veterans worthy of respect. It's a career choice. Yes but clearly the Russian army has more soldiers who are happy to use the Geneva convention as a checklist more than as a list of things to avoid. > That's the thing that is left unsaid often: If the conflict is big enough, there are always war crimes (on either side). That was inevitable once the invasion started, and this should've factored in the decision: it was evidently considered an acceptable cost. Yes but I haven't seen a conflict in probably close to 40 years with war crimes, especially the sexual violence and genocide that anywhere near the scale of what Russia is doing in Ukraine.

_kbh_ 3y ago

> https://capl.army.mil/case-studies/wcs-single.php?id=78&titl https://capl.army.mil/case-studies/wcs-single.php?id=78&titl... A single case is hardly systematic. > My Lai massacre >> 16 March 1968 Whilst Russia is still stuck in the 1960's the rest of the world has come a long way since then and generally agrees that the atrocities committed then where quite bad. But honestly, if you have to go back 55 years to find a comparable event I dare say the Russians are brutal. > Of course, your reaction might be: "these are only one-off cases, it's not systematic!" It is. > It's always unreported. Or reported several years after the fact (when there's nothing that can be done about it). Or it's always "excusable", "accidental"... I agree!. Just think about how many more civilians have been raped and tortured in Ukraine that haven't been reported, we have seen so much reported smoke the fire must be bigger than any other fire recent memory. > But when the other side does it, it's always proof of their barbaric attitudes. I think its terrible what the US did. Do you think its terrible that Russia rapes and tortures civilians in Ukraine?.

berdario 3y ago
> Do you think its terrible that Russia rapes and tortures civilians in Ukraine?. I think it's terrible, just as much as it's terrible that the US rapes and torture civilians in the middle east. But that's inflammatory language, which I don't like to use. I prefer to say that some US soldiers rape and torture civilians, and some Russian soldiers rape and torture civilians. That's not to excuse the soldiers. And even if they join the military as destitute teenagers (be they US or Russians), they should put effort in atoning for their contribution to large scale suffering. Basically, we shouldn't treat all soldiers the same: they aren't all war criminals, and they aren't all veterans worthy of respect. It's a career choice. Of course, most of the responsibility lies with people like Colin Powell, George Bush, Sergei Shoigu, Vladimir Putin, etc... That's the thing that is left unsaid often: If the conflict is big enough, there are always war crimes (on either side). That was inevitable once the invasion started, and this should've factored in the decision: it was evidently considered an acceptable cost. That's the monstruous thing, and yet it's pretty banal: monstruous bureacrauts or accountants decided that the benefits outweighed the cost in human lives (and some of these lives would be innocent civilians, victims of rape or torture). But considering that is useful only if you're inside the country that is engaged in the military effort. If you're outside, focusing on that doesn't help to de-escalate while the war is still raging. The material conditions guide everyone's decisions, and war is no different.
- _kbh_ 3y ago
  > I think it's terrible, just as much as it's terrible that the US rapes and torture civilians in the middle east. But the scale is different, that's what people like you are refusing to see. Just because one US soldier rapes one person in 10 20 years, doesn't make them the same as the Russian armed forces who regularly use sexual violence in warfare. One is a once off horrible tragedy, the other is a clear systematic issue that the Russian army cannot seem to stop if they even want to. > Basically, we shouldn't treat all soldiers the same: they aren't all war criminals, and they aren't all veterans worthy of respect. It's a career choice. Yes but clearly the Russian army has more soldiers who are happy to use the Geneva convention as a checklist more than as a list of things to avoid. > That's the thing that is left unsaid often: If the conflict is big enough, there are always war crimes (on either side). That was inevitable once the invasion started, and this should've factored in the decision: it was evidently considered an acceptable cost. Yes but I haven't seen a conflict in probably close to 40 years with war crimes, especially the sexual violence and genocide that anywhere near the scale of what Russia is doing in Ukraine.