Poo tin... Put@in...
Comments
-
...
we did in ww ii, kenya, afghanistan, might not be 'right' but it happensdavidof said:
so you are advocating shooting prisoners ?john80 said:
Given we are completely unable to charge Russia with the crimes they are committing. Who really cares if the POWs all go back without working legs. It might not be politically correct but then do Ukrainians care after watching Russians shell their towns to destruction.DeVlaeminck said:Video doing the rounds of captured prisoners being shot in the legs to disable them - purportedly Ukrainians on Russian POWs.
I suppose these are the realities of war.
the russians are no better than the nazis, they had a choice, they chose to invade and slaughter innocents, i'm not going to shed a tear for themmy bike - faster than god's and twice as shiny0 -
Your ‘proper’ armies have done it in both World Wars, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. Have a read of Allied war crimes in WWII on Wikipedia for starters.davidof said:
which is why proper armies don't do it.surrey_commuter said:
Will make them fight harder as surrender ceases to be an option
0 -
I'm with the person who recommended taking the moral high ground, although easy enough for me to say.
Shooting prisoners is the sort of thing that would likely leave longer term mental issues.0 -
There but for the grace of god go I.
I’m not going to judge somebody using excessive force in the heat of the moment in horrific circumstances.
However, that’s why killing is outlawed by people making cold rational decisions away from the heat of battle.
It should be recognised as illegal and actively discouraged.
Condoning it or encouraging it is a world away from recognising a war zone is going to be an uncivilised place and some horrific stuff that stretches boundaries and laws is going to happen.0 -
I'm guessing that not all those with guns in Ukraine at the moment are part of regular army units either so might not be acting under an official chain of command.0
-
Yes and if you are in a besieged city you might not be in a position to take POWs but also not want to say to captured troops off you go to rejoin the front line.Pross said:I'm guessing that not all those with guns in Ukraine at the moment are part of regular army units either so might not be acting under an official chain of command.
But at the same time it's sickening to see (defenceless) people being shot.[Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]0 -
Daughter has a work associate who yesterday was driving across Germany so now may be, if this is possible, in Ukraine. Deems role is to fight the foe. Difficult.
Made more difficult as when she was over here last night the guy released a message to the world saying a friend of his already in the war zone had been declared deceased.
'effing politicians of all genres. Xxxx them.0 -
we condoned it "away from the heat of battle" at the war crimes trials and eagerly killed the guilty losers (fine with me)morstar said:There but for the grace of god go I.
I’m not going to judge somebody using excessive force in the heat of the moment in horrific circumstances.
However, that’s why killing is outlawed by people making cold rational decisions away from the heat of battle.
It should be recognised as illegal and actively discouraged.
Condoning it or encouraging it is a world away from recognising a war zone is going to be an uncivilised place and some horrific stuff that stretches boundaries and laws is going to happen.
how about the civilians intentionally killed in firestorms as result of "cold rational decisions away from the heat of battle"? they were on the wrong side
history show there are no rules/laws of war, there is only victor's justice
whoever wins will declare themselves innocent/justified, perhaps with a few token sacrifices, whoever loses will be judged
my bike - faster than god's and twice as shiny0 -
I am indifferent to it based on the atrocities committed by the soldiers now in the firing line.davidof said:
so you are advocating shooting prisoners ?john80 said:
Given we are completely unable to charge Russia with the crimes they are committing. Who really cares if the POWs all go back without working legs. It might not be politically correct but then do Ukrainians care after watching Russians shell their towns to destruction.DeVlaeminck said:Video doing the rounds of captured prisoners being shot in the legs to disable them - purportedly Ukrainians on Russian POWs.
I suppose these are the realities of war.0 -
Bit of an "all cyclists jump red lights" vibe.john80 said:
I am indifferent to it based on the atrocities committed by the soldiers now in the firing line.davidof said:
so you are advocating shooting prisoners ?john80 said:
Given we are completely unable to charge Russia with the crimes they are committing. Who really cares if the POWs all go back without working legs. It might not be politically correct but then do Ukrainians care after watching Russians shell their towns to destruction.DeVlaeminck said:Video doing the rounds of captured prisoners being shot in the legs to disable them - purportedly Ukrainians on Russian POWs.
I suppose these are the realities of war.- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
Unless I have missed something, we're not talking about executions, we're talking about disabling troops.
If so, let's not get carried away here.seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
Compelling evidence doing the rounds (on Twitter, from reliable analysis) that these 'shooting prisoners' videos are actually fake and of Russian origin.
I don't know how to link to Twitter here, but the posts are easy enough to find...0 -
You can do a copy link if you click on share at the bottom of the tweet.
I did wonder if it was genuine - it's one of those things so alien to my personal experience it's very hard to judge if it looks real.
You are aware there is a huge amount of propaganda on twitter but also that there are probably some pretty horrible things happening and in 2022 that some will end up on social media via a phone camera.[Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]0 -
pinno said:
Unless I have missed something, we're not talking about executions, we're talking about disabling troops.
If so, let's not get carried away here.
Is disabling prisoners the new definition of liberal?0 -
-
(If it were true) I was simply pointing out that there is a difference between killing a POW and shooting a POW (in the leg) in the face of comments spiralling into allied war crimes.surrey_commuter said:pinno said:Unless I have missed something, we're not talking about executions, we're talking about disabling troops.
If so, let's not get carried away here.
Is disabling prisoners the new definition of liberal?
Plus, at no point did I condone either action.
#pedantry sucks.
To put it into context, there's plenty of state orchestrated executions going on globally to get uppity about and very little mentioned on here regarding Uighurs and those unfortunates in Saudi Arabia.
Surely by Biden's moral yardstick, Xingy Pingy should be wanted for crimes against humanity as well as Pootin?seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
The obvious thing to do is round up the POWs and hold them in hospitals, childrens nurseries and schools.1
-
Story going around from Bellingcat (so you can decide if it's true or not). Apparently, the FSB paid vast amounts of money ($billions) to ensure a pro-Russian political class would help stage a coup after the invasion.
Turns out they just gave the money to a bunch of people who took the money and ran.0 -
I still think you are dancing on a pinhead if you think it is OK to shoot prisoners with the intention of disabling them.pinno said:
(If it were true) I was simply pointing out that there is a difference between killing a POW and shooting a POW (in the leg) in the face of comments spiralling into allied war crimes.surrey_commuter said:pinno said:Unless I have missed something, we're not talking about executions, we're talking about disabling troops.
If so, let's not get carried away here.
Is disabling prisoners the new definition of liberal?
Plus, at no point did I condone either action.
#pedantry sucks.
To put it into context, there's plenty of state orchestrated executions going on globally to get uppity about and very little mentioned on here regarding Uighurs and those unfortunates in Saudi Arabia.
Surely by Biden's moral yardstick, Xingy Pingy should be wanted for crimes against humanity as well as Pootin?
Your second point holds more water as I have not even heard of Xingy Pingy let alone what they have done0 -
-
in the context of a debate about what is the acceptable level of violence to inflict upon a prisoner of war that is irrelevantrick_chasey said:It’s a fake video anyway!
0 -
Please go over my previous posts and see the bits where I stated very clearly that I did not condone the action of shooting a POW.surrey_commuter said:
I still think you are dancing on a pinhead if you think it is OK to shoot prisoners with the intention of disabling them.pinno said:
(If it were true) I was simply pointing out that there is a difference between killing a POW and shooting a POW (in the leg) in the face of comments spiralling into allied war crimes.surrey_commuter said:pinno said:Unless I have missed something, we're not talking about executions, we're talking about disabling troops.
If so, let's not get carried away here.
Is disabling prisoners the new definition of liberal?
Plus, at no point did I condone either action.
#pedantry sucks.
To put it into context, there's plenty of state orchestrated executions going on globally to get uppity about and very little mentioned on here regarding Uighurs and those unfortunates in Saudi Arabia.
Surely by Biden's moral yardstick, Xingy Pingy should be wanted for crimes against humanity as well as Pootin?
condone
(kəndoʊn)
Word forms: 3rd person singular present tense condones, present participle condoning, past tense, past participle condoned
VERB
If someone condones behaviour that is morally wrong, they accept it and allow it to happen.
seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
Is there really a debate?surrey_commuter said:
in the context of a debate about what is the acceptable level of violence to inflict upon a prisoner of war that is irrelevantrick_chasey said:It’s a fake video anyway!
Stick to “no war crimes” is a good yardstick1 -
If we lived in a world where everybody exercised such morality, there would be no wars.rick_chasey said:
Is there really a debate?surrey_commuter said:
in the context of a debate about what is the acceptable level of violence to inflict upon a prisoner of war that is irrelevantrick_chasey said:It’s a fake video anyway!
Stick to “no war crimes” is a good yardstickseanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
Ukrainians have released videos of PoWs speaking which I don't think is allowed.0
-
Why?TheBigBean said:Ukrainians have released videos of PoWs speaking which I don't think is allowed.
seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
Not sure but I don't think invading a neighbouring country and bombarding civilian areas is "allowed" either.TheBigBean said:Ukrainians have released videos of PoWs speaking which I don't think is allowed.
0 -
I think invasions are. Deliberating bombing civilian probably isn't.orraloon said:
Not sure but I don't think invading a neighbouring country and bombarding civilian areas is "allowed" either.TheBigBean said:Ukrainians have released videos of PoWs speaking which I don't think is allowed.
0 -
The Geneva Convention is your friend here. Filming them and allowing them to speak on camera is allowed. What is not allowed is forcing them to denounce or denigrate their own side - such as the Iraqis did with Adrian Nichol/John Peters and others in Gulf War 1...TheBigBean said:Ukrainians have released videos of PoWs speaking which I don't think is allowed.
0
