3 ms·

> 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 systemat

by _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.
  - berdario 3y ago
    > But the scale is different, that's what people like you are refusing to see. Our main disagreement seems to be the scale of the civilian casualties (and other war crimes, which is of course in proportion to that). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War#IBC_table_of_violent_civilian_deaths https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War#IBC... lists 12,152 for 2003 and 11,737 for 2004. With the caveat that: > Gaps in recording and reporting suggest that even our highest totals to date may be missing many civilian deaths from violence So, for first year and a half of hostilities, we can expect that the lower bound to be between 17k and 18k. The confirmed civilian casualties in Ukraine since February 2022 are around 9k: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine#Casualties https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine#Ca... (and of these, only ~4100 are due to Russian attacks. Compare with the Iraq war, were US civilians were thousands of km away from the frontlines) https://www.ohchr.org/en/news/2023/06/ukraine-civilian-casualty-update-19-june-2023 https://www.ohchr.org/en/news/2023/06/ukraine-civilian-casua... The actual numbers are of course higher than the confirmed numbers (again: lower bounds in both cases), but it's within the same order of magnitude. Moreover, take into account the fact that Iraq had a population of 25M in 2003, vs Ukraine that has a population of 45M. You might not be aware of it, but I've seen people genuinely argue that Russia has been exceedingly careful in trying to only strike military targets, and that's why the "civilian casualties rate is so low, compared to other conflicts". I hope that's true, but I think that it's premature to draw any conclusions about that, because the fog of war still means that there's huge uncertainty in the actual numbers (it could even be as high as, or slightly worse than in Iraq).

by _kbh_ 3y ago

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.
- berdario 3y ago
  > But the scale is different, that's what people like you are refusing to see. Our main disagreement seems to be the scale of the civilian casualties (and other war crimes, which is of course in proportion to that). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War#IBC_table_of_violent_civilian_deaths https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War#IBC... lists 12,152 for 2003 and 11,737 for 2004. With the caveat that: > Gaps in recording and reporting suggest that even our highest totals to date may be missing many civilian deaths from violence So, for first year and a half of hostilities, we can expect that the lower bound to be between 17k and 18k. The confirmed civilian casualties in Ukraine since February 2022 are around 9k: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine#Casualties https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine#Ca... (and of these, only ~4100 are due to Russian attacks. Compare with the Iraq war, were US civilians were thousands of km away from the frontlines) https://www.ohchr.org/en/news/2023/06/ukraine-civilian-casualty-update-19-june-2023 https://www.ohchr.org/en/news/2023/06/ukraine-civilian-casua... The actual numbers are of course higher than the confirmed numbers (again: lower bounds in both cases), but it's within the same order of magnitude. Moreover, take into account the fact that Iraq had a population of 25M in 2003, vs Ukraine that has a population of 45M. You might not be aware of it, but I've seen people genuinely argue that Russia has been exceedingly careful in trying to only strike military targets, and that's why the "civilian casualties rate is so low, compared to other conflicts". I hope that's true, but I think that it's premature to draw any conclusions about that, because the fog of war still means that there's huge uncertainty in the actual numbers (it could even be as high as, or slightly worse than in Iraq).