• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W:#42]Evidence of Ukrainian war crimes

phoenyx

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 5, 2012
Messages
2,495
Reaction score
457
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I've seen some threads here accusing Russia of war crimes. I've also seen evidence that much of these charges are fabricated. However, I haven't seen any threads here laying out evidence of Ukrainian war crimes and I thought it was time that changed.

Some here may have heard of the Amnesty International report that stated that Ukraine was using schools and hospitals as military bases, heightening the risk of civilians deaths:


For this relatively mild criticism, Amnesty was lambasted and ultimately pressured into apologizing for disturbing the favoured narrative that Ukraine wasn't doing anything wrong.

Meanwhile, there was no mention of Ukraine's offensive military actions against civilians in the Donbass region that is now being annexed by Russia. This wasn't always the case. Back in 2014, Amnesty International did write a report on this, at least in regards to Ukraine's volunteer forces at the time:

I recently came across the following video from Canadian Journalist Eva Bartlett and I thought some here might like to see it. Youtube has age restricted the video and makes you go through several clicks to see the video, but it does show up after that...

 
I've seen some threads here accusing Russia of war crimes. I've also seen evidence that much of these charges are fabricated. However, I haven't seen any threads here laying out evidence of Ukrainian war crimes and I thought it was time that changed.

Some here may have heard of the Amnesty International report that stated that Ukraine was using schools and hospitals as military bases, heightening the risk of civilians deaths:


For this relatively mild criticism, Amnesty was lambasted and ultimately pressured into apologizing for disturbing the favoured narrative that Ukraine wasn't doing anything wrong.

Meanwhile, there was no mention of Ukraine's offensive military actions against civilians in the Donbass region that is now being annexed by Russia. This wasn't always the case. Back in 2014, Amnesty International did write a report on this, at least in regards to Ukraine's volunteer forces at the time:

I recently came across the following video from Canadian Journalist Eva Bartlett and I thought some here might like to see it. Youtube has you go through several clicks to see the video, but it does show up after that...



Pro Putin propagandist parrots Putin's propaganda profusely..
 
If I recall, Amnesty International was criticized for posting an article lacking actual evidence.



But I would be shocked if Ukrainian soldiers did not commit war crimes. Even the Allies committed war crimes during World War 2 and there wasn't a clearer division of 'good vs. evil' in the modern day.
 
I've seen some threads here accusing Russia of war crimes. I've also seen evidence that much of these charges are fabricated. However, I haven't seen any threads here laying out evidence of Ukrainian war crimes and I thought it was time that changed.

Some here may have heard of the Amnesty International report that stated that Ukraine was using schools and hospitals as military bases, heightening the risk of civilians deaths:


For this relatively mild criticism, Amnesty was lambasted and ultimately pressured into apologizing for disturbing the favoured narrative that Ukraine wasn't doing anything wrong.

Meanwhile, there was no mention of Ukraine's offensive military actions against civilians in the Donbass region that is now being annexed by Russia. This wasn't always the case. Back in 2014, Amnesty International did write a report on this, at least in regards to Ukraine's volunteer forces at the time:

I recently came across the following video from Canadian Journalist Eva Bartlett and I thought some here might like to see it. Youtube has age restricted the video and makes you go through several clicks to see the video, but it does show up after that...



We in the west get western propaganda.

It is just how it is.
 
If I recall, Amnesty International was criticized for posting an article lacking actual evidence.



But I would be shocked if Ukrainian soldiers did not commit war crimes. Even the Allies committed war crimes during World War 2 and there wasn't a clearer division of 'good vs. evil' in the modern day.


All wars are good vs evil and the side you are on is called the good.
 
If I recall, Amnesty International was criticized for posting an article lacking actual evidence.

No, the evidence was there, they just couldn't take the pressure and so essentially apologized for disturbing the western elites' narrative. Donbass Insider has an article that I think is too harsh on Amnesty International, but it does make some good points:

 
No, the evidence was there, they just couldn't take the pressure and so essentially apologized for disturbing the western elites' narrative. Donbass Insider has an article that I think is too harsh on Amnesty International, but it does make some good points:


I know only about the article that got heat about the 'Ukrainian tactics'. The criticisms clearly come from someone who knows nothing about warfare, let alone urban warfare.
 
If you have lived very long at all, you know that war crimes come with warfare, and as long as two sides engage in war, attrocities will inevitably follow both. Four things determine when we hear about them. 1. Access by troops and weaponry to local civilian targets. Access of civilians to 'collaborators' Access of media/ journalism to both sets of stories. The eventual pendulum swing from popular biases in the media markets. It often takes time for historians to get 'equal time' but they always end up getting it. The Ukrainian war crimes are there, and will grow if they continue to gain territory and they will be uncovered. It says nothing about Ukrainians except they act like everyother population during times of great cruelty. they respond with their own cruelty.
 
I've seen some threads here accusing Russia of war crimes. I've also seen evidence that much of these charges are fabricated. However, I haven't seen any threads here laying out evidence of Ukrainian war crimes and I thought it was time that changed.

Some here may have heard of the Amnesty International report that stated that Ukraine was using schools and hospitals as military bases, heightening the risk of civilians deaths:


For this relatively mild criticism, Amnesty was lambasted and ultimately pressured into apologizing for disturbing the favoured narrative that Ukraine wasn't doing anything wrong.

Meanwhile, there was no mention of Ukraine's offensive military actions against civilians in the Donbass region that is now being annexed by Russia. This wasn't always the case. Back in 2014, Amnesty International did write a report on this, at least in regards to Ukraine's volunteer forces at the time:

I recently came across the following video from Canadian Journalist Eva Bartlett and I thought some here might like to see it. Youtube has age restricted the video and makes you go through several clicks to see the video, but it does show up after that...


Russia can easily withdraw completely from Ukraine and no further “crimes” will be committed.


See how easy it is?
 
All wars are good vs evil and the side you are on is called the good.
It's a moral standard, judgement, set of values.

Which is as old as civilization, the good guys v. the bad guys with confused people in between.

Confused people are confused because they fail to see the radical difference between good v. evil. You grant moral equivalency of each side instead. This is wrong in every respect.
 
Russia can easily withdraw completely from Ukraine and no further “crimes” will be committed.

Ukraine was committing war crimes against Donbass citizens long before Russia put boots on the ground in Ukraine. Even Amnesty International recognized this, as I pointed out in one of the linked articles in the OP:


As a matter of fact, there's strong evidence that Ukraine had just started a new assault on the Donbass days prior to Russia starting its military operation:

**
On February 17, President Joe Biden announces that Russia will attack Ukraine in the coming days. How does he know? Mystery… But since the 16th, the artillery shelling of the populations of Donbass has increased dramatically, as shown by the daily reports of OSCE observers. Naturally, neither the media, nor the European Union, nor NATO, nor any Western government reacts and intervenes. We will say later that this is Russian disinformation. In fact, it seems that the European Union and some countries purposely glossed over the massacre of the people of Donbass, knowing that it would provoke Russian intervention.

[snip]

Number-of-Explosions-in-Donbass-19-20-February-2022.jpg


Capture-decran-2022-03-13-a-22.46.36-214x300-1.png


In fact, as early as February 16, Joe Biden knows that the Ukrainians began to shell the civilian populations of Donbass, putting Vladimir Putin in front of a difficult choice: to help Donbass militarily and create an international problem or to sit idle and watch Russian speakers. from the Donbass being run over.

If he decides to intervene, Vladimir Putin can invoke the international obligation of “ Responsibility To Protect ” (R2P). But he knows that whatever its nature or scale, the intervention will trigger a shower of sanctions. Therefore, whether its intervention is limited to the Donbass or whether it goes further to put pressure on the West for the status of Ukraine, the price to be paid will be the same. This is what he explains in his speech on February 21.
**

Source:

Now here's the thing- Putin had to make a tough call back then. We all know what he chose. But to back out at -this- point would now mean abandoning an area that voted to join Russia and has now literally become part of Russia. I don't see it happening, and I seriously doubt that would change even if Putin were replaced by another Russian. One only has to look at the fact that both the lower and upper house of Russian parliament ratified the four unification treaties unanimously to see how strongly Russia's politicians back this:


 
Ukraine was committing war crimes against Donbass citizens long before Russia put boots on the ground in Ukraine. Even Amnesty International recognized this, as I pointed out in one of the linked articles in the OP:


As a matter of fact, there's strong evidence that Ukraine had just started a new assault on the Donbass days prior to Russia starting its military operation:

**
On February 17, President Joe Biden announces that Russia will attack Ukraine in the coming days. How does he know? Mystery… But since the 16th, the artillery shelling of the populations of Donbass has increased dramatically, as shown by the daily reports of OSCE observers. Naturally, neither the media, nor the European Union, nor NATO, nor any Western government reacts and intervenes. We will say later that this is Russian disinformation. In fact, it seems that the European Union and some countries purposely glossed over the massacre of the people of Donbass, knowing that it would provoke Russian intervention.

[snip]

Number-of-Explosions-in-Donbass-19-20-February-2022.jpg


Capture-decran-2022-03-13-a-22.46.36-214x300-1.png


In fact, as early as February 16, Joe Biden knows that the Ukrainians began to shell the civilian populations of Donbass, putting Vladimir Putin in front of a difficult choice: to help Donbass militarily and create an international problem or to sit idle and watch Russian speakers. from the Donbass being run over.

If he decides to intervene, Vladimir Putin can invoke the international obligation of “ Responsibility To Protect ” (R2P). But he knows that whatever its nature or scale, the intervention will trigger a shower of sanctions. Therefore, whether its intervention is limited to the Donbass or whether it goes further to put pressure on the West for the status of Ukraine, the price to be paid will be the same. This is what he explains in his speech on February 21.
**

Source:

Now here's the thing- Putin had to make a tough call back then. We all know what he chose. But to back out at -this- point would now mean abandoning an area that voted to join Russia and has now literally become part of Russia. I don't see it happening, and I seriously doubt that would change even if Putin were replaced by another Russian. One only has to look at the fact that both the lower and upper house of Russian parliament ratified the four unification treaties unanimously to see how strongly Russia's politicians back this:


Russia invaded a sovereign nation.

The “vote” was bullshit. Just like the “vote” in Crimea.
 
As a matter of fact, there's strong evidence that Ukraine had just started a new assault on the Donbass days prior to Russia starting its military operation:

The Donbas is Ukrainian territory. They have every right to expel the Russian invader.


RT is a Kremlin-owned propaganda entity.
 
Ukraine was committing war crimes against Donbass citizens long before Russia put boots on the ground in Ukraine. Even Amnesty International recognized this, as I pointed out in one of the linked articles in the OP

[snip]

People were dying in the proxy war Russia started?

Imagine that.

Oh, the word you refuse to use.... Invasion.
 
I've seen some threads here accusing Russia of war crimes. I've also seen evidence that much of these charges are fabricated. However, I haven't seen any threads here laying out evidence of Ukrainian war crimes and I thought it was time that changed.

Some here may have heard of the Amnesty International report that stated that Ukraine was using schools and hospitals as military bases, heightening the risk of civilians deaths:


For this relatively mild criticism, Amnesty was lambasted and ultimately pressured into apologizing for disturbing the favoured narrative that Ukraine wasn't doing anything wrong.

Meanwhile, there was no mention of Ukraine's offensive military actions against civilians in the Donbass region that is now being annexed by Russia. This wasn't always the case. Back in 2014, Amnesty International did write a report on this, at least in regards to Ukraine's volunteer forces at the time:

I recently came across the following video from Canadian Journalist Eva Bartlett and I thought some here might like to see it. Youtube has age restricted the video and makes you go through several clicks to see the video, but it does show up after that...


Whatever Putin's paying you for this train wreck isnt much I hope, because he's not getting his money's worth.
 
I've seen some threads here accusing Russia of war crimes. I've also seen evidence that much of these charges are fabricated.
Well, post that evidence then and use more credible sources than Russian state propaganda.
However, I haven't seen any threads here laying out evidence of Ukrainian war crimes and I thought it was time that changed...................~
With the bullshit you consistently attempt to peddle on here, it's safe to say that nobody cares what you think in this respect.
 
It's a moral standard, judgement, set of values.

Which is as old as civilization, the good guys v. the bad guys with confused people in between.

Confused people are confused because they fail to see the radical difference between good v. evil. You grant moral equivalency of each side instead. This is wrong in every respect.

LOL

There is no universality in morals. It is the winners morals that are moral.

It is what it is. Sorry.
 
LOL

There is no universality in morals. It is the winners morals that are moral.

It is what it is. Sorry.
I never said there was universality.

Right v. wrong has proved to be true in peace and war no matter who the winner is. Being cynical and defeatist does not prevail. Then again maybe you're not defeatist -- that you're just cheerfully wrong.

Because occupation of others lands by barbarians seldom exists for an appreciable time. Soviet Russia squeezed about 70 years out of it while Hitler's empire barely managed 15 or so. In the new age democracy prevails. Because it matters to be prosperous, moral and strong. So you're missing the whole thing with no hope of recovery. Zilch.
 
If you're dedicated to pushing Kremlin propaganda then these would be "special military operation crimes" not war crimes.
 
Ukraine was committing war crimes against Donbass citizens long before Russia put boots on the ground in Ukraine. Even Amnesty International recognized this, as I pointed out in one of the linked articles in the OP:


As a matter of fact, there's strong evidence that Ukraine had just started a new assault on the Donbass days prior to Russia starting its military operation:

**
On February 17, President Joe Biden announces that Russia will attack Ukraine in the coming days. How does he know? Mystery… But since the 16th, the artillery shelling of the populations of Donbass has increased dramatically, as shown by the daily reports of OSCE observers. Naturally, neither the media, nor the European Union, nor NATO, nor any Western government reacts and intervenes. We will say later that this is Russian disinformation. In fact, it seems that the European Union and some countries purposely glossed over the massacre of the people of Donbass, knowing that it would provoke Russian intervention.

[snip]

Number-of-Explosions-in-Donbass-19-20-February-2022.jpg


Capture-decran-2022-03-13-a-22.46.36-214x300-1.png


In fact, as early as February 16, Joe Biden knows that the Ukrainians began to shell the civilian populations of Donbass, putting Vladimir Putin in front of a difficult choice: to help Donbass militarily and create an international problem or to sit idle and watch Russian speakers. from the Donbass being run over.

If he decides to intervene, Vladimir Putin can invoke the international obligation of “ Responsibility To Protect ” (R2P). But he knows that whatever its nature or scale, the intervention will trigger a shower of sanctions. Therefore, whether its intervention is limited to the Donbass or whether it goes further to put pressure on the West for the status of Ukraine, the price to be paid will be the same. This is what he explains in his speech on February 21.
**

Source:

Now here's the thing- Putin had to make a tough call back then. We all know what he chose. But to back out at -this- point would now mean abandoning an area that voted to join Russia and has now literally become part of Russia. I don't see it happening, and I seriously doubt that would change even if Putin were replaced by another Russian. One only has to look at the fact that both the lower and upper house of Russian parliament ratified the four unification treaties unanimously to see how strongly Russia's politicians back this:


Russia invaded a sovereign nation.

The “vote” was bullshit. Just like the “vote” in Crimea.

As you may know, I believe that calling Russia's military operation in Ukraine an invasion can be misleading, for the reasons I just cited in the post you're responding to.

I'm not sure why you believe that the votes in the Eastern Ukrainian republics to join Russia weren't valid, though I imagine the western corporate media played a part in forming your opinion. I actually made a thread on the work of of Canadian journalist I've found to be quite reliable over the years on these referendums if you're interested:


This same journalist wrote an article on the Crimean referendum back in 2019 that I thought was quite good as well. It's here:

 
The Donbas is Ukrainian territory.

That depends on who you ask at this point. What isn't in dispute is that Russia ran referendums in the 4 regions where it has territory, asking the citizens if they wanted to join Russia. The people voted heavily in favour of doing so and Putin has now officially made them part of Russia.
 
Back
Top Bottom