Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-23 and Invasion

[Josquius]

Nice snipping.

Or maybe they're just being truly unbiased and reporting things as they see them?
I don't doubt they're speaking the truth. I also believe Ukraine when they say there's valid excuses what with the war for national survival.

It's notable that Russia won't even let them in on their side.

Amnesty has decided to be enablers of Russian war crimes. I think they are weirdos, I don't think they are stupid. They know perfectly well what they're doing. "-Yeah the bruises look bad, but she did talk back to him..."

This makes no sense.
Being honest about what they saw on the Ukranian says says nothing about Russian war crimes.

[Tamas]

It seems Amnesty is criticizing the Ukrainian military strategy which was withdraw to urban areas and fight the Russians inch by inch there, where there were not very strong defensive fortifications available, negating local Russian superiority.      The civilian casualties Ukrainians are inflicting today seem to be mostly tied to the fighting in Kherson. It was an enormous fuckup on the Ukrainian part to concede Kherson as easily as they did, a part of the failure to mobilize earlier than they did in the runup to the invasion.

Less they conceded it as an active military decision and more had the wrong people in charge there who berated them no?


As I say, what Ukraine is doing in forcing city fighting IS wrong morally (purely looked at in isolation) . Amnesty is right to call it out. But given the situation ukraine is in they don't really have the luxury of being paragons of virtue.
Russia on the other hand has zero excuse. They choose to be cunts.

No it is not morally wrong to fight in cities if that's the best option available to protect yourself and your people from an enemy openly talking about eradicating you.

[Razgovory]

Taking shelter in civilian buildings is against international law.  Everyone does it, but it is still technically illegal.

[Tamas]

Taking shelter in civilian buildings is against international law.  Everyone does it, but it is still technically illegal.

I have not spotted a single case mentioned where Ukrainians took shelter in occupied civilian buildings during a firefight (not even unoccupied ones). All the examples seem to cite cases where Ukrainian soldiers were in areas close enough to civilians so that indiscriminate Russian shelling (for which there was no proof provided that said shelling was specifically targeting those soldiers) ran the risk of injuring civilians.

[Josquius]

]

No it is not morally wrong to fight in cities if that's the best option available to protect yourself and your people from an enemy openly talking about eradicating you.

That's the big picture, Ukraines explanations that make why they did the bad thing ok.
It's still wrong and worth noting as such.

[Tamas]

]

No it is not morally wrong to fight in cities if that's the best option available to protect yourself and your people from an enemy openly talking about eradicating you.

That's the big picture, Ukraines explanations that make why they did the bad thing ok.
It's still wrong and worth noting as such.

How is it wrong, if its wrong what is the right course of action? Ignoring Russian avenues of advance and military objectives and deploying where there is no chance of Russians hurting civilians? Why not just surrender then?

[Tamas]

Also I am having issues with the military-civilian distinction in such cases. It is the entire country and population under Russian attack, not just the Ukrainian military. And most (I'd wager at this stage almost all) of the Ukrainian military is made of voluntary and conscripted former civilians, NOT professional soldiers. The only difference between a "civilian" and "military" Ukrainian is that the latter has been armed by their collective community to defend the life and independence of the community.

[The Brain]

Nice snipping.

Or maybe they're just being truly unbiased and reporting things as they see them?
I don't doubt they're speaking the truth. I also believe Ukraine when they say there's valid excuses what with the war for national survival.

It's notable that Russia won't even let them in on their side.

Amnesty has decided to be enablers of Russian war crimes. I think they are weirdos, I don't think they are stupid. They know perfectly well what they're doing. "-Yeah the bruises look bad, but she did talk back to him..."

This makes no sense.
Being honest about what they saw on the Ukranian says says nothing about Russian war crimes.

Yeah I know. They saw the victim dressing slutty, so what's wrong with bringing it up? They're just being honest.

[DGuller]

I think Amnesty openly said a while back that they focus on criticizing the countries that may respond to their criticism, rather than the countries that commit the acts that can be criticized most often.  It's a selfish and idiotic stance, but this mindset is hardly unique in the West.  The unintentional outcome of this mindset is that the truly worst actors have a cart blanche to do their bad acts precisely because they're bad actors, while the good actors get penalized for literally being good actors.

[The Brain]

My guess is that the head of Ukrainian Amnesty told them in no uncertain terms that publishing the report would be a bad idea, since she resigned in disgust when they did.

[Iormlund]

I have known that Amnesty are weirdos for a long time, but have they gone even more nutjobby in recent decades?

They've always been like this. They're infamous in Spain for refusing to call ETA a terrorist group and giving credence to their allegations of torture while in custody.

[Jacob]

Not very impressed with Amnesty International here.

[Malthus]

Or maybe they're just being truly unbiased and reporting things as they see them?
I don't doubt they're speaking the truth. I also believe Ukraine when they say there's valid excuses what with the war for national survival.

It's notable that Russia won't even let them in on their side.

The problems with this Amnesty report go deep.

Allegedly, the local head of AI has resigned in protest. The article I read raised two objections by the local AI head:

- AI ignored the local staff on the ground, who asked that the Report be reworked to include local context and get rid of factual inaccuracies.

- AI refused to allow the Ukrainian government to comment, prior to publishing.

[Jacob]

Apparently AI is also involved in a CBS documentary about how weapons to Ukraine "disappear" before reaching the front.

On a related, is there an Amnesty International report on Russian actions?

[Admiral Yi]

On a related, is there an Amnesty International report on Russian actions?

I heard on NPR the AI person who did the report defending it by saying "we publish one 4 page release on Ukraine and we have published 200 releases on Russia."