Russia invades Ukraine

[Itse]

...as a general comment:

This whole Amnesty story is a great example of how a rather low-quality report can get picked from among hundred others and get tons of media attention, just because it very predictably causes a backlash.

Media sells anger, not news, and they have once again been successful.

I'm not a huge fan of Amnesty, but it's still getting a very raw deal out of this. It's an organization with tons of good people with good intentions.

[Mull]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1557245782318792704

[Mull]

Originally Posted by scorch

https://twitter.com/user/status/1557025471178702849

https://twitter.com/user/status/1557302846596562944

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by Itse

For the record, while I think Amnesty as an organizations has to some extent lost its way, it's simply unfair to claim they were somehow pro-Russian.

Behind the link you can see a quock collection of the most recent Russia-related reports. Only one of them got news coverage.

https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/...an-federation/

Amnesty is using the 'both sides are bad in war' rhetoric and hides behind the claim of impartiality in doing so. It also did so without consulting Amnesty Ukraine or local sources on the validity of the reports (resulting in the head quitting) and drew immediate applause from Russia. It was effectively a propaganda piece for Russia.

Amnesty International also curiously removed Alexei Navalny as a prisoner of conscience in February

This article in particular shows why AI's article and AI as a whole due to their conduct and actions after the article was released deserved such harsh criticism.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...ia-war-crimes/

https://twitter.com/user/status/1555234095982149632

https://twitter.com/user/status/1555237165281562624

[CliffFletcher]

Is it so hard to believe both sides are endangering civilians?

Or is the fault with AI for giving Russian propaganda ammunition by publicizing it?

[Huntingwhale]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Is it so hard to believe both sides are endangering civilians?

Or is the fault with AI for giving Russian propaganda ammunition by publicizing it?

Given my in-laws situation in their village, Kozacha Lopan, I can indeed confirm from my wife's family that both sides have endangered and killed civilians. But the big difference that anyone with half a functioning brain can see (not you in particular, but people in general) is that the Russians are 100% targeting civilians on purpose and with the purposeful intention of murdering and causing terror with their actions.

The deaths of civilians in KL by the Ukrainian side has not been due to the UA's using civilians as shields or any other nonsense like that. It is due to the Russians using people there are human shields and storing their ammo and other stuff directly beside civilian infrastructure such as schools, stores and shops, or in close proximity to civilians apartments. Because this village is directly on the highway towards Kharkiv and is also used as a supply route to supply the Izyum front, the Ukrainians have very little choice but to target those storage locations. Unfortunately that puts innocent like my in-laws in constant danger.

A few weeks ago my MIL told us that an ammo depot was set up 50 meters from their apartment. People who lived close by, including MIL, went over to the soldiers and asked them to move that stuff away from them. They refused. In between this ammo depot and their apartment was a small building that used to be a concrete electrical housing unit. One day the UA's hit that ammo depot and it exploded for 5 hours straight. MIL said that without that housing unit acting as a shield, their apartment would have been hit repeatedly by exploding ammo.

I know for a fact, as in any war, that civilian casualties are unavoidable in this war and it ####ing sucks. But I also know that there is a massive difference between purposely using and targeting civilians in order to advance your military's objectives, versus trying to hit at your enemy's supply depots that have purposely been placed a few meters from civilian's residences. AI seems to have entirely missed that point.

Further more no a single benefit of a doubt should be given to the Russians that they haven't played any kind of role in this report being released at this time, with these talking points. AI does some good work for sure. They are also heavily influenced by Russian money and influence. Reminds me of the WHO being a mostly solid organization, but spreading their cheeks when the Chinese started influencing them to change their tone.

Frankly, it's just so dumb that this entire report is now being published or discussed at all. It plays right into the Russians hands to have some focus taken off of their atrocities and now slightly focused on the UA side, the side that is defending their homeland from an invasion that is 110% the Russians fault and every single atrocity can be traced back to them and them only.

[Fuzz]

You know how to avoid all civilian casualties? Don't invade a country that isn't yours. Only one side is at fault here.

[calumniate]

Cliff taking the edgy position.. what a brave lad

[burn_this_city]

First satellite shots of the bombed Russian airbase. Wowzers.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1557440576806608897

[Firebot]

That is utter and total destruction, and that's just the airport strip alone. That is a massive massive massive loss Russia just took. Just those 2 pictures could mean over 15 planes lost.

I love how the only blip of a video we saw was that one 1 second Su-24 clip, when the entire row of planes was destroyed, just in that row alone.

Even the odd planes that are seemingly intact are likely swiss cheese.

And that is just the planes.

This could easily be over 1 billion dollars of irreplaceable military losses.

The traffic jam line out of Crimea is seemingly over 100km long.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Firebot

That is utter and total destruction, and that's just the airport strip alone. That is a massive massive massive loss Russia just took. Just those 2 pictures could mean over 15 planes lost.

I love how the only blip of a video we saw was that one 1 second Su-24 clip, when the entire row of planes was destroyed, just in that row alone.

Even the odd planes that are seemingly intact are likely swiss cheese.

And that is just the planes.

This could easily be over 1 billion dollars of irreplaceable military losses.

The traffic jam line out of Crimea is seemingly over 100km long.

The Ukrainian estimate of 9 must be a count of something else. We can clearly see more than 9 planes destroyed there. Can anyone here identify the types of planes those are? Is this Russia's modern stuff or left overs?

[Mull]

Originally Posted by blankall

The Ukrainian estimate of 9 must be a count of something else. We can clearly see more than 9 planes destroyed there. Can anyone here identify the types of planes those are? Is this Russia's modern stuff or left overs?

Unsure but found this guess

https://twitter.com/user/status/1557447325341057032

Also this:

https://twitter.com/user/status/1557446473398337537

https://twitter.com/user/status/1557447134538088448

[Firebot]

UA also hit a pilot barrack, estimate over 60 killed mainly pilots, and over 100 injured.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by Firebot

UA also hit a pilot barrack, estimate over 60 killed mainly pilots, and over 100 injured.

Awesome, the more dead Russian soldiers the better

[blankall]

If you take a look at historical air force losses, this is big:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post%E..._combat_losses

The USA lost 128-266 aircraft in the entire Vietnam war, which lasted 16 years.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by blankall

If you take a look at historical air force losses, this is big:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post%E..._combat_losses

The USA lost 128-266 aircraft in the entire Vietnam war, which lasted 16 years.

That was a very cool list, thanks! That would make this single event the biggest loss of airpower in the world since the Gulf war. In one strike.

Slava Ukraini!

[Itse]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Is it so hard to believe both sides are endangering civilians?

Or is the fault with AI for giving Russian propaganda ammunition by publicizing it?

Yes, it's hard to believe, because there's tons and tons of evidence (footage, pictures, eyewitness reports) of UA troops evacuating civilians all through the war.

Reporters on the field also have some things to say about this.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1557372417386881026

https://twitter.com/user/status/1557373353689743360

https://twitter.com/user/status/1557375658203955207

https://twitter.com/user/status/1557374047100583938

https://twitter.com/user/status/1556755189960523777

https://twitter.com/user/status/1556988163456999424

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

You know how to avoid all civilian casualties? Don't invade a country that isn't yours. Only one side is at fault here.

The war is obviously Russia’s fault, and they’re ultimately responsible for the death and suffering caused by it.

But AI’s role isn’t to determine who the aggressor is in a conflict. Their role is to investigate and publicize abuses of human rights. And in war - all wars - those abuses aren’t confined to one side. AI would forfeit their credibility if at the outset of every conflict they chose to investigate allegations against only one side.

Originally Posted by Firebot

Russia invaded Chechnya in 1994. The world sat and did nothing. Chechnya won a victory humiliating Russia in the process.

Amnesty International condemned Chechnya for holding Russian POWs

…Amnesty International condemned Chechnya a 2nd time for their endemic torture of Russians.

…Guess who decided to blame Georgia for failing to protect civilians and commiting genocide (effectively taking Russia's word)?

…Russia invaded Crimea and the Donetsk region in 2014. The world sent some strongly worded comments, gave a slap on the wrist and laughed with Putin at the G20 meeting.

Do you know who again condemned the side that Russia was invading?

In all of those cases AI also condemned Russia. As they’ve also levelled charges of war crimes against Russia in Ukraine in recent months.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/amn...ence-1.6443704

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/...mes-in-kharkiv

https://apnews.com/article/russia-uk...e820aa97444535

They investigate all claims of abuses of human rights, and publicize those they determine to be credible. War being what it is, they find abuses carried out by every side in every conflict. The causes and righteousness of the parties in the conflict don’t enter into it.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Itse

Yes, it's hard to believe, because there's tons and tons of evidence (footage, pictures, eyewitness reports) of UA troops evacuating civilians all through the war.

The fact the UA typically take care not to put civilians in harm’s way doesn’t mean they always do.

Early in the war, Ukrainian soldiers broke into a flat on the fifth floor of the block to use the balcony as a firing position. Residents begged them not to, but the soldiers ignored them. The shooting inevitably drew fire from the Russians. The block was hit and began to burn downwards from the roof. Locals battled the flames for several hours. By some miraculous intervention, the wind blew the fire away from the Balabas’s flat. The fighting grew ever closer. Jets screamed overhead and the air was filled with sparks and smoke.

https://www.economist.com/1843/2022/...fled-to-russia

[Itse]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The fact the UA typically take care not to put civilians in harm’s way doesn’t mean they always do.

That anecdote says absolutely nothing about putting civilians unnecessarily in harms way, and it doesn't say anything about reportworthy things, such as patterns of behavior or an atrocity of notable scale. It doesn't even say if that particular soldier was acting according to orders.

I'm aware a of a LOT worse stuff that some individual members of the UA have done somewhere in Ukraine than anything in these reports, but it's all very small scale and nothing that gives an impression that the UA generally speaking would approve of such behavior.

Some soldier somewhere doing something questionable during a war isn't worth the world's attention. If you can't show patterns and you don't have incidents of significant scale in itself, then you have nothing.

Other than a perfect way to muddy the waters over Russia clearly targeting civilians.