4 ms·

> 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 peop

by _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).
- _kbh_ 3y ago
  You must of missed the part where I was specifically talking about sexual violence. I know that civilian causalities are high for both sides. The difference as I said before is that Russia and uses much more sexual violence and torture. Russia rate of sexual violence and torture is off the charts. You had to go back decades just to find a single case of something close to comparable in the US army. > 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". Russia specifically targets civilian targets, when a PGM levels a shopping mall or a cafe it’s not an accident. The truth is exactly the opposite of what you’re claiming. > (it could even be as high as, or slightly worse than in Iraq). It’s likely much worse than Iraq with Russia the cruelty is the point.
  - boffinAudio 3y ago
    The US specifically targets civilians, too. The moral authority you claim doesn't exist. Mosul, Raqqa, Damascus. Just a few easily-remembered examples. Did you not pay attention?
    - berdario 3y ago
      Exactly, moreover... His comment > I was specifically talking about sexual violence. Makes it clear that he tried to move the discussion away from recognizing civilian suffering and opposing the countries which oppressed most of the world with their military force first... Towards just trying to make a case for Russia to be "more brutal", regardless of factual accuracy. For some people, stoking outrage takes priority. It's not the first time that the propaganda is trying to scaremonger about a "horde from the east": https://redsails.org/hordes-of-rapists https://redsails.org/hordes-of-rapists
      - _kbh_ 3y ago
        > Makes it clear that he tried to move the discussion away from recognizing civilian suffering and opposing the countries which oppressed most of the world with their military force first... Towards just trying to make a case for Russia to be "more brutal", regardless of factual accuracy. For some people, stoking outrage takes priority. More so that im trying to concentrate the discussion on the brutality of the Russian army instead of the abject apathy that the Americans have for civilians causalities. > It's not the first time that the propaganda is trying to scaremonger about a "horde from the east": If you want to keep defending a country that rapes and tortures children go ahead, but know that you're aligning yourself with the new monsters of Europe and I hope you're okay with that. I guess people supported nazis in WW2 so I shouldn't be surprised that people are supporting the Russians now.

by _kbh_ 3y ago

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).

_kbh_ 3y ago
You must of missed the part where I was specifically talking about sexual violence. I know that civilian causalities are high for both sides. The difference as I said before is that Russia and uses much more sexual violence and torture. Russia rate of sexual violence and torture is off the charts. You had to go back decades just to find a single case of something close to comparable in the US army. > 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". Russia specifically targets civilian targets, when a PGM levels a shopping mall or a cafe it’s not an accident. The truth is exactly the opposite of what you’re claiming. > (it could even be as high as, or slightly worse than in Iraq). It’s likely much worse than Iraq with Russia the cruelty is the point.
- boffinAudio 3y ago
  The US specifically targets civilians, too. The moral authority you claim doesn't exist. Mosul, Raqqa, Damascus. Just a few easily-remembered examples. Did you not pay attention?
  - berdario 3y ago
    Exactly, moreover... His comment > I was specifically talking about sexual violence. Makes it clear that he tried to move the discussion away from recognizing civilian suffering and opposing the countries which oppressed most of the world with their military force first... Towards just trying to make a case for Russia to be "more brutal", regardless of factual accuracy. For some people, stoking outrage takes priority. It's not the first time that the propaganda is trying to scaremonger about a "horde from the east": https://redsails.org/hordes-of-rapists https://redsails.org/hordes-of-rapists
    - _kbh_ 3y ago
      > Makes it clear that he tried to move the discussion away from recognizing civilian suffering and opposing the countries which oppressed most of the world with their military force first... Towards just trying to make a case for Russia to be "more brutal", regardless of factual accuracy. For some people, stoking outrage takes priority. More so that im trying to concentrate the discussion on the brutality of the Russian army instead of the abject apathy that the Americans have for civilians causalities. > It's not the first time that the propaganda is trying to scaremonger about a "horde from the east": If you want to keep defending a country that rapes and tortures children go ahead, but know that you're aligning yourself with the new monsters of Europe and I hope you're okay with that. I guess people supported nazis in WW2 so I shouldn't be surprised that people are supporting the Russians now.