Should Putin be Considered a War Criminal?

[code1211]

I know that in the past, while war is war and war is Hell, it is apparently generally considered to be only a very violent form of diplomacy. Simply starting a war is not usually considered to be a war crime.

However, in this case, Putin has started, and is waging, a war against a country that has not done anything to provoke warfare. As such, the war itself seems to be criminal in the same way that trespass or murder would be in civilian terms.

Isn't it time that we considered Putin and others who capriciously and unilaterally initiate war to be War Criminals? There are real life people dying as the direct result of Putin's aggressor actions. These deaths are obviously Putins fault and Putin's fault alone.

In civil society, crime bosses who send thugs to kill, destroy and create mayhem are considered to be civil criminals. In the international community, it seems appropriate to extend the same condemnation.

This Russian invasion of Ukraine seems to be war and also seems to be criminal as it violates international law. Why should Putin, the prime mover in this, NOT be cited as a war criminal?

 

[Cameron]

Yes, I think if you are a leader and you start a war without any provocation whatsoever that is just murder.

 

[trixare4kids]

I know that in the past, while war is war and war is Hell, it is apparently generally considered to be only a very violent form of diplomacy. Simply starting a war is not usually considered to be a war crime.

However, in this case, Putin has started, and is waging, a war against a country that has not done anything to provoke warfare. As such, the war itself seems to be criminal in the same way that trespass or murder would be in civilian terms.

Isn't it time that we considered Putin and others who capriciously and unilaterally initiate war to be War Criminals? There are real life people dying as the direct result of Putin's aggressor actions. These deaths are obviously Putins fault and Putin's fault alone.

In civil society, crime bosses who send thugs to kill, destroy and create mayhem are considered to be civil criminals. In the international community, it seems appropriate to extend the same condemnation.

This Russian invasion of Ukraine seems to be war and also seems to be criminal as it violates international law. Why should Putin, the prime mover in this, NOT be cited as a war criminal?

Putin is committing genocide, and threatening nukes.
Of course, he is unequivocally the very definition of a war criminal.

 

[Felis Leo]

I know that in the past, while war is war and war is Hell, it is apparently generally considered to be only a very violent form of diplomacy. Simply starting a war is not usually considered to be a war crime.

However, in this case, Putin has started, and is waging, a war against a country that has not done anything to provoke warfare. As such, the war itself seems to be criminal in the same way that trespass or murder would be in civilian terms.

Isn't it time that we considered Putin and others who capriciously and unilaterally initiate war to be War Criminals? There are real life people dying as the direct result of Putin's aggressor actions. These deaths are obviously Putins fault and Putin's fault alone.

In civil society, crime bosses who send thugs to kill, destroy and create mayhem are considered to be civil criminals. In the international community, it seems appropriate to extend the same condemnation.

This Russian invasion of Ukraine seems to be war and also seems to be criminal as it violates international law. Why should Putin, the prime mover in this, NOT be cited as a war criminal?

Yes. Right up there with Slobodan Milosevic.

 

[Roadvirus]

Yes.

 

[RetiredUSN]

Screw all the war criminal trial bullshit.

One of his countrymen needs to kill him right ****ing now.

 

[Mach]

Trump on Putin: He's savvy. He's a genius.
Tucker Carlson #1 with conservative viewers: Why does anyone have a reason to hate Putin?
They seem to disagree that's a criminal, hell, they praise him.

The right wing is lost and is suddenly finding that they are stranded without a compass. It's such a hard choice...continue to bash Biden for Putin's actions, or condemn Putin...the one doing it, despite their party leader. Such a dilemma!

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

I know that in the past, while war is war and war is Hell, it is apparently generally considered to be only a very violent form of diplomacy. Simply starting a war is not usually considered to be a war crime.

However, in this case, Putin has started, and is waging, a war against a country that has not done anything to provoke warfare. As such, the war itself seems to be criminal in the same way that trespass or murder would be in civilian terms.

Isn't it time that we considered Putin and others who capriciously and unilaterally initiate war to be War Criminals? There are real life people dying as the direct result of Putin's aggressor actions. These deaths are obviously Putins fault and Putin's fault alone.

In civil society, crime bosses who send thugs to kill, destroy and create mayhem are considered to be civil criminals. In the international community, it seems appropriate to extend the same condemnation.

This Russian invasion of Ukraine seems to be war and also seems to be criminal as it violates international law. Why should Putin, the prime mover in this, NOT be cited as a war criminal?

Only if GWB and Tony Blair would be considered war criminals for invading Iraq

 

[oneworld2]

Yes. Right up there with Slobodan Milosevic.

You can add G W Bush and Tony Blair. Can't just be the criminals of official state enemies otherwise the laws lose any validity

 

[oneworld2]

Only if GWB and Tony Blair would be considered war criminals for invading Iraq

Beat me to it, just

 

[Common Sense 1]

Should Putin be Considered a War Criminal?​

Yes!

 

[oneworld2]

Should Putin be Considered a War Criminal?​

Yes!

I agree, what do you think about Bush and Blair?

 

[Common Sense 1]

I agree, what do you think about Bush and Blair?

Different topic and thread.

 

[trixare4kids]

Yes. Right up there with Slobodan Milosevic.

Just like that guy! Great example.

 

[CharisRose]

Trump on Putin: He's savvy. He's a genius.
Tucker Carlson #1 with conservative viewers: Why does anyone have a reason to hate Putin?
They seem to disagree that's a criminal, hell, they praise him.

The right wing is lost and is suddenly finding that they are stranded without a compass. It's such a hard choice...continue to bash Biden for Putin's actions, or condemn Putin...the one doing it, despite their party leader. Such a dilemma!

🤥

 

[vesper]

Yes he should be charged but I wonder if he will be around much longer to be charged.

 

[oneworld2]

Different topic and thread.

How convenient for you, you know, after you liking a post mentioning Slobodan Milosevic.

Funny how nobody picked that up and nobody objected to the tangent ? Maybe you too are just happy to like posts mentioning other none related persons who just so happen to be other official state enemies. You aren't on your own in this btw and the companions are interesting too.

 

[poweRob]

Screw all the war criminal trial bullshit.

One of his countrymen needs to kill him right ****ing now.

I'd rather him live in Navalny's spot so pooty can watch while Navalny get sworn into his.

 

[TheParser]

Why should Putin, the prime mover in this, NOT be cited as a war criminal?

He should be.

Of course, he would never allow himself to be arrested and flown to The Hague.

He is like those top Nazis who were too chicken to face the music, so they (along with their children) left this world.

 

[Common Sense 1]

How convenient for you, you know, after you liking a post mentioning Slobodan Milosevic.

Funny how nobody picked that up and nobody objected to the tangent ? Maybe you too are just happy to like posts mentioning other none related persons who just so happen to be other official state enemies. You aren't on your own in this btw and the companions are interesting too.

Here is the thread:

Should Putin be Considered a War Criminal?​

Why all the silly babble that does not belong here?

FYI Slobodan Milosevic

Obituary: Slobodan Milosevic

Obituary: Ruthless manipulator of Serbian nationalism who became the most dangerous man in Europe.

www.theguardian.com

 

[oneworld2]

Here is the thread:

Should Putin be Considered a War Criminal?​

Why all the silly babble that does not belong here?

FYI Slobodan Milosevic

Obituary: Slobodan Milosevic

Obituary: Ruthless manipulator of Serbian nationalism who became the most dangerous man in Europe.

www.theguardian.com

Yes I get it. The thread is about war criminals and whether they should be held to account for their crimes. And before you cry foul for me mentioning the war criminals, Bush and Blair, remember that you and others liked a post that was about some other criminal who just so happens to be another official enemy of the state.

That none related tangent obviously isn't classed as " silly babble" by yourself and others who created/liked the post

It is okay I know who Milosovic is and what he was charged with but it is obvious that tangents about other official state enemies are out of the realm of "silly babble" and are to be encouraged/endorsed with the like button.

The evident double standards are clear and reflect badly imo on those that support them, So you can shout and cry foul but you are being hypocritical, as are all the others that cannot hack the SAME standards being applied to the criminals abroad and the criminals at home.

And you know what it smacks of? An unwillingness to actually support the prosecutions of war criminals if they just so happen to be from your own state. That's why you people cannot be taken seriously imo supporting the selective application of laws undermines those laws themselves and strips them of any legitimacy. That's what you are doing here and seem just fine in doing it.

 

[Juin]

I know that in the past, while war is war and war is Hell, it is apparently generally considered to be only a very violent form of diplomacy. Simply starting a war is not usually considered to be a war crime.

However, in this case, Putin has started, and is waging, a war against a country that has not done anything to provoke warfare. As such, the war itself seems to be criminal in the same way that trespass or murder would be in civilian terms.

Isn't it time that we considered Putin and others who capriciously and unilaterally initiate war to be War Criminals? There are real life people dying as the direct result of Putin's aggressor actions. These deaths are obviously Putins fault and Putin's fault alone.

In civil society, crime bosses who send thugs to kill, destroy and create mayhem are considered to be civil criminals. In the international community, it seems appropriate to extend the same condemnation.

This Russian invasion of Ukraine seems to be war and also seems to be criminal as it violates international law. Why should Putin, the prime mover in this, NOT be cited as a war criminal?

It really boils down to whether Russia is militarily defeated. It is not an academic matter. To only the victor is the privilege to declare war criminals.

 

[trouble13]

I know that in the past, while war is war and war is Hell, it is apparently generally considered to be only a very violent form of diplomacy. Simply starting a war is not usually considered to be a war crime.

However, in this case, Putin has started, and is waging, a war against a country that has not done anything to provoke warfare. As such, the war itself seems to be criminal in the same way that trespass or murder would be in civilian terms.

Isn't it time that we considered Putin and others who capriciously and unilaterally initiate war to be War Criminals? There are real life people dying as the direct result of Putin's aggressor actions. These deaths are obviously Putins fault and Putin's fault alone.

In civil society, crime bosses who send thugs to kill, destroy and create mayhem are considered to be civil criminals. In the international community, it seems appropriate to extend the same condemnation.

This Russian invasion of Ukraine seems to be war and also seems to be criminal as it violates international law. Why should Putin, the prime mover in this, NOT be cited as a war criminal?

This is an interesting question. While what he is doing is clearly wrong, it opens the question of what the standard is to be classified as a war criminal.

I think we should be careful with that term or else it become another watered down term.

Does him crossing an established border with the intent to annex it meet the standard of war criminal or has he crossed another barrier that would qualify him as one?

 

[JMR]

You can add G W Bush and Tony Blair. Can't just be the criminals of official state enemies otherwise the laws lose any validity

I'm no fan of G W Bush or Tony Blair or Dick Cheney's lying ....but Saddam Hussein WAS a war criminal. That is not the current situation.

 

[oneworld2]

I'm no fan of G W Bush or Tony Blair or Dick Cheney's lying ....but Saddam Hussein WAS a war criminal. That is not the current situation.

Being a " fan" has FA to do with anything. They are both liars AND both war criminals

What you do is that you apply the same standards ,wrt the laws governing warfare etc, to everyone of them.

Putin has illegally attacked another nation so as to install a more pro Russian government.

Bush and Blair illegally invaded another nation so as to install a more pro West government,

In both cases they used the idea of threats to justify their actions.

I would argue that Putins case is stronger than Bush and Blairs .

If you are not prepared to apply the same standards to all parties it is highly questionable as to whether you actually believe in the laws you wish to see people held to at all..

We have seen thumbs up voting for the application of the law to Putin and Milosovic and BS/excuses/evasions to requests that those same laws be applied to Bush and Blair.

It's pathetic and the people who go along with it are pathetic and are actually undermining the laws they are asking be applied here.

Putins not the only crazy in town as these ongoing debates are confirming