Kremlin Rejects Top UN Court's Order to Halt Ukraine Invasion

[Juin]

And the Russian Federation is supposed to wait until Nato places nukes in Ukraine? Ukrainian acession to Nato means its territory is available for Nato nukes. It is the responsibility of the Russian Federation to preempt that situation.

NATO had no plans of placing nukes in Ukraine.

That may be so. Where and when Nato places its nukes is a matter of concern to Nato. As far as the Russian Federation is concerned what is pertinent is that a Ukraine in Nato opens up Ukraine to Nato nuke deployment. The responsible thing for a Russian government to do is act to preempt that situation, not wait until it is too late to act.

Preemptive strikes by Russia are not defense. That crosses the line. The Russians transitioned from creating a defense system to attacking another country. Initiating an attack on another country is not a defense. Ukraine did not build up 150K troops on the border. Russia did. Ukraine did not provoke Russia. Russia attacked with no reason. Russia should have stuck to diplomacy. Putin simply launched an unjustified land-grab attempt. Putin has lost virtually all credibility all over the world. Most nations rightfully now want nothing to do with Russia. That shows how wrong what Russia did was and is.

Well, Nato's tough guy declared that it was not Russia's business whether Ukraine was in Nato or not. I called that the Jens Stoltenberg Doctrine. A most dangerous Doctrine. What happens close to Russia is Russia's concern. The rational thing to do was for the two powers to sit down and reach some kind of settlement as in 1962 between the US and the Soviet Union. Jens Stoltenberg left no room for that with his declaration that Nato's right to expand was a core Nato principle

 

[NWRatCon]

Obviously, the NATO defense system is now completely justified. Russia is a threat to other nations. No nation threatens Russia. No nation has ambitions of invading Russia. Russia had nothing to fear from NATO. The threat is to NATO by Russia. That's where the threat is.

Some peaceful nations (NATO, Ukraine) are like: "Live and let live." Other aggressive nations (Russia) are like: "I want to conquer you and force you to submit."

Peaceful nations have every right to defend themselves from aggressor nations like Russia.

Putin has abrogated every treaty and norm of international law, including the UN charter. He doesn't feel bound by any restrictions committed to by his predecessors on behalf of the nation, and for more than a decade has expressed, out loud, his territorial ambitions.

He wants to create a new Russian Empire. He's destabilized his neighbors, and seeks the subjugation of all of the former Soviet states. They recognize that. He's engaged in a series of ever more blatant invasions in Georgia, Ukraine, Moldova, and would have in Belarus had he not gained a partner there. His thirst will not be slaked, his megalomania will not be curbed.

So long as Putin is in power, the world is in peril.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Why are Russia and Iran still members of the United Nations.

There is no mechanism to expell nations from the UN.

 

[Juin]

There is a profound difference between "defensive systems" and "offensive systems".

Either you are not versed in military terninology, or you are being purposefully and painfully disingenuous.

You are correct, I totally disagree with the concept of "defensive weapons". Offense and defense are parts of the same whole.. Defense is always a component of offense, and offense is also always a component of defense.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Offense and defense are parts of the same whole..

I disagree. Example. The Aegis SM-3 Block IIA Interceptors placed in Poland and Romania are purely defensive systems.

Their only task is to intercept fired ballistic missiles at their apogee (highest point in space).

By their very composition, they are incapable of posing an offensive threat.

 

[Juin]

I disagree. Example. The Aegis SM-3 Block IIA Interceptors placed in Poland and Romania are purely defensive systems.

Their only task is to intercept fired ballistic missiles at their apogee (highest point in space).

By their very composition, they are incapable of posing an offensive threat.

Correct. But without them Romania say finds itself vulnerable to ballistic missiles fired at her. And is unlikely to strike with its own offensive weapons if she considers herself vulnerable to counter strikes. But with them Romania is more confident in launching strikes given that she can now shoot down missiles aimed at her in counter strikes.

So called defensive weapons can enable offense.

 

[MaryP]

Targeting hospitals and civilian infrastructure is certainly genocide

I don't agree with that. Targeting hospitals, schools and apartments is snake belly-low down behavior, but not genocide. It is war played dirty, with no consideration for the established rules of decency. But war is, at its heart, an indecent act, and we have had few wars lately where soldiers met on a secluded battlefield somewhere and slugged it out, leaving innocent civilians alone. Maybe Zelensky made a mistake arming civilians and teaching them to make molotov cocktails. The Russians are using it as an excuse to shoot anything that moves. But maybe Putin would have gone ahead and trashed the place, anyway. Who knows.

Genocide involves killing everyone; Russia just wants them to submit. There's a difference.

 

[jaypatriot]

There is no mechanism to expell nations from the UN.

Good point. I guess you need to resort to sanctioning foreigners we do not want in this country.
That would really piss off the Russian diplomats, wouldn't it?

 

[iguanaman]

I don't agree with that. Targeting hospitals, schools and apartments is snake belly-low down behavior, but not genocide. It is war played dirty, with no consideration for the established rules of decency. But war is, at its heart, an indecent act, and we have had few wars lately where soldiers met on a secluded battlefield somewhere and slugged it out, leaving innocent civilians alone. Maybe Zelensky made a mistake arming civilians and teaching them to make molotov cocktails. The Russians are using it as an excuse to shoot anything that moves. But maybe Putin would have gone ahead and trashed the place, anyway. Who knows.

Genocide involves killing everyone; Russia just wants them to submit. There's a difference.

So you have to build ovens to be guilty of genocide? War against unarmed women and children is no different than building ovens. Putin made the mistake that Ukrainians would go peacefully into enslavement after experiencing freedom for decades. That is on him but it does not excuse him from committing genocide against the Ukrainian people.

 

[MaryP]

So you have to build ovens to be guilty of genocide? War against unarmed women and children is no different than building ovens. Putin made the mistake that Ukrainians would go peacefully into enslavement after experiencing freedom for decades. That is on him but it does not excuse him from committing genocide against the Ukrainian people.

We'll just have to disagree on this one.

 

[iguanaman]

gen·o·cide
/ˈjenəˌsīd/
https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1...2ahUKEwjlvPy1ptP2AhUDyIsBHTO0CCsQ3eEDegQICxAK
noun
noun: genocide; plural noun: genocides

1. the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group
   "a campaign of genocide".
   
   Putin's actions fit the definition of genocide perfectly. You don't get to make up your own definitions, sorry.

 

[NWRatCon]

There is no mechanism to expell nations from the UN.

Technically, there is, but effectively, it's impossible to expel Russia.

Can a Member State be expelled from the United Nations?​

Article 6 of the Charter reads as follows:

"A Member of the United Nations which has persistently violated the Principles contained in the present Charter may be expelled from the Organization by the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council."

This has never happened, because the highlighted phrase explains. Russia, as a permanent member of the security council, would veto any effort to sanction it, as it has on numerous occasions, notwithstanding its serial violations of the Charter. That's a defect in the Charter.

 

[NWRatCon]

I don't agree with that. Targeting hospitals, schools and apartments is snake belly-low down behavior, but not genocide. It is war played dirty, with no consideration for the established rules of decency. But war is, at its heart, an indecent act, and we have had few wars lately where soldiers met on a secluded battlefield somewhere and slugged it out, leaving innocent civilians alone. Maybe Zelensky made a mistake arming civilians and teaching them to make molotov cocktails. The Russians are using it as an excuse to shoot anything that moves. But maybe Putin would have gone ahead and trashed the place, anyway. Who knows.

Genocide involves killing everyone; Russia just wants them to submit. There's a difference.

Not much. Submit or die is not a choice. Putin has denied that Ukrainians are a people. That attitude begets genocide. His methods are aimed at destroying the people of Ukraine, just as Stalin did. That, by definition, is genocide.

genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

1. Killing members of the group;
2. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
3. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
4. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
5. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Rome Statute, Article 6.

Seems to me to fit the bill.

​

 

[MaryP]

gen·o·cide
/ˈjenəˌsīd/
https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1...2ahUKEwjlvPy1ptP2AhUDyIsBHTO0CCsQ3eEDegQICxAK
noun
noun: genocide; plural noun: genocides

1. the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group
   "a campaign of genocide".
   
   Putin's actions fit the definition of genocide perfectly. You don't get to make up your own definitions, sorry.

I think of genocide as more a systematic, planned policy over time to eradicate a group. Like Hitler did the Jews, like America did the Native Americans. When civilians are killed in bombings to get them to surrender, it sucks, but it's not planned genocide. Putin doesn't want them dead, he wants them to agree to his terms.

 

[iguanaman]

I think of genocide as more a systematic, planned policy over time to eradicate a group. Like Hitler did the Jews, like America did the Native Americans. When civilians are killed in bombings to get them to surrender, it sucks, but it's not planned genocide. Putin doesn't want them dead, he wants them to agree to his terms.

What if he has to kill them all because they will never be his slaves? That is the definition of genocide.

 

[iguanaman]

Technically, there is, but effectively, it's impossible to expel Russia.

Can a Member State be expelled from the United Nations?​

Article 6 of the Charter reads as follows:

"A Member of the United Nations which has persistently violated the Principles contained in the present Charter may be expelled from the Organization by the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council."

This has never happened, because the highlighted phrase explains. Russia, as a permanent member of the security council, would veto any effort to sanction it, as it has on numerous occasions, notwithstanding its serial violations of the Charter. That's a defect in the Charter.

Yes it is a defect but one that at least got the evil empires to join the U.N. in the first place. That is the reality.

 

[NWRatCon]

I think of genocide as more a systematic, planned policy over time to eradicate a group. Like Hitler did the Jews, like America did the Native Americans. When civilians are killed in bombings to get them to surrender, it sucks, but it's not planned genocide. Putin doesn't want them dead, he wants them to agree to his terms.

Personally, I think you're taking too narrow a view of the concept. Putin wants to eliminate Ukraine as a concept and any Ukrainians who want to maintain a separate cultural viewpoint. That is the core of genocide - you're just discussing methodology.

The destruction of Ukraine's infrastructure, and targeting of civilians specifically, is the means to that end. He does want them dead. He wants to eliminating their nationhood, nationality and culture entirely. He considers the Russian speakers who have sided with Ukraine as race traitors and has explicitly said so.

I'm starting a separate thread on this, but I recommend Putin Made a Profound Miscalculation on Ukraine (Opinion, NYT) for insight into his thinking. "President Vladimir Putin likes to invoke history as part of the reason for his bloody invasion. Ukraine and Russia, he asserts, are in fact one country: Ukraine, in effect, doesn’t exist. This, of course, is entirely wrong."

His intent is very much genocidal, and we, as a world, need to understand that.

 

[MaryP]

Personally, I think you're taking too narrow a view of the concept. Putin wants to eliminate Ukraine as a concept and any Ukrainians who want to maintain a separate cultural viewpoint. That is the core of genocide - you're just discussing methodology.

The destruction of Ukraine's infrastructure, and targeting of civilians specifically, is the means to that end. He does want them dead. He wants to eliminating their nationhood, nationality and culture entirely. He considers the Russian speakers who have sided with Ukraine as race traitors and has explicitly said so.

I'm starting a separate thread on this, but I recommend Putin Made a Profound Miscalculation on Ukraine (Opinion, NYT) for insight into his thinking. "President Vladimir Putin likes to invoke history as part of the reason for his bloody invasion. Ukraine and Russia, he asserts, are in fact one country: Ukraine, in effect, doesn’t exist. This, of course, is entirely wrong."

His intent is very much genocidal, and we, as a world, need to understand that.

Thanks for the viewpoint. You may be right, I'm hung up on methodology, but just like 'racist' and 'Nazi,' genocide is a term that gets flung around a lot, and maybe not accurately. Maybe it is our recent sensitivity to racial and ethnic issues that makes us more prone to see genocide when a group is being attacked. I don't know.

Anyway, food for thought. Thanks again.

 

[Rogue Valley]

What Russia is doing by targeting civilians certainly meets the criteria of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

 

[NWRatCon]

What Russia is doing by targeting civilians certainly meets the criteria of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Going back to the source for my genocide definitions:

Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court​

Article 7
Crimes Against Humanity

1. For the purpose of this Statute, ‘crime against humanity’ means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack:
   1. Murder;
   2. Extermination;
   3. Enslavement;
   4. Deportation or forcible transfer of population;
   5. Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law;
   6. Torture;
   7. Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity;
   8. Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;
   9. Enforced disappearance of persons;
   10. The crime of apartheid;
   11. Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health
2. For the purpose of paragraph 1:
   1. ‘Attack directed against any civilian population’ means a course of conduct involving the multiple commission of acts referred to in paragraph 1 against any civilian population, pursuant to or in furtherance of a State or organizational policy to commit such attack[.]

"The contextual element determines that crimes against humanity involve either large-scale violence in relation to the number of victims or its extension over a broad geographic area (widespread), or a methodical type of violence (systematic). This excludes random, accidental or isolated acts of violence. In addition, Article 7(2)(a) of the Rome Statute determines that crimes against humanity must be committed in furtherance of a State or organizational policy to commit an attack. The plan or policy does not need to be explicitly stipulated or formally adopted and can, therefore, be inferred from the totality of the circumstances.

In contrast with genocide, crimes against humanity do not need to target a specific group. Instead, the victim of the attack can be any civilian population, regardless of its affiliation or identity. Another important distinction is that in the case of crimes against humanity, it is not necessary to prove that there is an overall specific intent. It suffices for there to be a simple intent to commit any of the acts listed, with the exception of the act of persecution, which requires additional discriminatory intent. The perpetrator must also act with knowledge of the attack against the civilian population and that his/her action is part of that attack."

Again, seems to specifically meet the definitions.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Again, seems to specifically meet the definitions.

Such a decision is above my pay grade, so to speak.