News Forum - Russia’s FM Sergei Lavrov warns US not to supply Ukraine with arms

[Fanta]

9 minutes ago, Poolie said:

US rebuild anywhere? You're having a laugh. Half of America itself is tatty and old.

For a price of course 

[oldschooler]

8 minutes ago, Fanta said:

What is also known statistically is that Ukraine stations troops and equipment in residential areas. That’s what the Washington Post said so, according to some, it must be true. They didn’t call it a violation of international law or imply use of human shields though. Bully for them! 

Indeed. War Zone is …..War Zone. Russia can openly play military card here whilst achieving their higher psychological wrecking goal. 

[Marble-eye]

14 minutes ago, oldschooler said:

He’s asking how do we know it was specifically targeted or hit accidentally or indiscriminately. I suppose that can never be known for sure unless three schools hit or same school hit three times.
 

What IS known statistically is that Russia targets civilian residential areas as terror warfare to get those ten million civilian refugees moving to disrupt & wreck the country. 

You from my aging memory have said, and I paraphrase, the the Russians couldn't hit a barn door from 3 foot, yet they think it's ok to fire rockets, missiles or whatever into towns with schools in close proximity. That is no accident, it was deliberate. Are they bothered they hit a school, and I don't really know why we are even debating again the massacre of civilians and children. It is no accident the Russians are in Ukraine. 

You have the right to reply but please don't start beating me over the head with your education, it is not becoming of one so scholarly.

[JamesR]

2 minutes ago, oldschooler said:

Well my above 1st para covers the “ general” I.e. media or govt coverage of incidents you refer to. 2nd para. is the “specific” outcome from which the intent is readily concluded.

That is, the certainty of Russian Terror Bombardment of Civilians, also stated by UK , UK, EU etc. So no need to appear completely baffled and “even -handed” ! Russians ARE obviously the Bad Guys here. 

The opinions we form are base based on what we are told by the news.

The "bad guy" is dependent on how things affect us, we are all biased.

I wonder what we would have done if the Russians had for decades slowly crept up to our borders as we "the West" have done to them.

As it is in our interest to defeat the Russians in this conflict then I agree we should do everything in our power to defeat them in our proxy war but I don't thing we are without fault. 

If you look at the Vietnam war most Westerners for the first few years believed the Americans to be the good guys even though it was them who attacked Vietnam without provocation.

 

[oldschooler]

13 minutes ago, Poolie said:

US rebuild anywhere? You're having a laugh. Half of America itself is tatty and old.

US Marshall Plan Money rebuilt Germany & Japan etc after WW2. This time the money will need to come from Russia as Reparations. Actual re building by Ukrainians of course. 

[Smithydog]

11 minutes ago, Fanta said:

What is also known statistically is that Ukraine stations troops and equipment in residential areas. That’s what the Washington Post said so, according to some, it must be true. They didn’t call it a violation of international law or imply use of human shields though. Bully for them! 

It doesn't excuse the Russians from the actions taken in mass bombardments etc. It is expected close fighting will happen in residential areas.

"This means that when you plan or carry out operations you are not allowed to engage in disproportionate attacks even with regard to combatants and military objectives. You have to take into account the likely effect on civilians and their property."

But the Russians, as they have demonstrated before, carried out a systematic, indiscriminate bombardment from afar, using both artillery and missiles.

"Incidental damage must not be excessive in relation to the direct and concrete military advantage you anticipate from your operation. Such use of excessive force quite clearly violates the law of armed conflict and is a war crime."

https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/assets/files/other/law3_final.pdf

The scenes from Mariupol of the city and the indiscriminate missile and bomb attacks that have killed numbers of civilians, including attacks on agreed humanitarian evacuation corridors, theatres and schools, reveals the excessive nature and something the Russian military must be held accountable for.

I won't hold my breath waiting for Russia to take responsibility for something. 

[JamesR]

9 minutes ago, Smithydog said:

It doesn't excuse the Russians from the actions taken in mass bombardments etc. It is expected close fighting will happen in residential areas.

"This means that when you plan or carry out operations you are not allowed to engage in disproportionate attacks even with regard to combatants and military objectives. You have to take into account the likely effect on civilians and their property."

But the Russians, as they have demonstrated before, carried out a systematic, indiscriminate bombardment from afar, using both artillery and missiles.

"Incidental damage must not be excessive in relation to the direct and concrete military advantage you anticipate from your operation. Such use of excessive force quite clearly violates the law of armed conflict and is a war crime."

https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/assets/files/other/law3_final.pdf

The scenes from Mariupol of the city and the indiscriminate missile and bomb attacks that have killed numbers of civilians, including attacks on agreed humanitarian evacuation corridors, theatres and schools, reveals the excessive nature and something the Russian military must be held accountable for.

I won't hold my breath waiting for Russia to take responsibility for something. 

"But the Russians, as they have demonstrated before, carried out a systematic, indiscriminate bombardment from afar, using both artillery and missiles."

That may be true, or it could be the case the Ukrainians are using civilians as shields, who knows, we are not there, or it could be a mixture of both.

Remember, "...the people of Crays Hill are living in fear.....", a load of made up nonsense. 

[Fanta]

10 minutes ago, Smithydog said:

It doesn't excuse the Russians from the actions taken in mass bombardments etc. It is expected close fighting will happen in residential areas.

Not trying to excuse the inexcusable. Close fighting draws fire as does deployment of troops and equipment inside urban areas. Let’s not get off track here. The statement was “targeted” the school and that is at best a claim and, imo, dubious. “Ivan, target the school!” Ivan says “ WTF?” 

[oldschooler]

13 minutes ago, JamesR said:

The opinions we form are base based on what we are told by the news.

The "bad guy" is dependent on how things affect us, we are all biased.

I wonder what we would have done if the Russians had for decades slowly crept up to our borders as we "the West" have done to them.

As it is in our interest to defeat the Russians in this conflict then I agree we should do everything in our power to defeat them in our proxy war but I don't thing we are without fault. 

If you look at the Vietnam war most Westerners for the first few years believed the Americans to be the good guys even though it was them who attacked Vietnam without provocation.

Free Nations bordering NATO have individually joined NATO for protection against Unfree Aggressor Russia. That is not “ creeping up” on anyone. Caused by Russias Bad Actions. 
 

“Fault” irrelevant in geopolitics, only intl. law, often trumped by perceived national interest matters. NATO of course “ provoked” Russia into this invasion. Try proving that though

By modern western / UN norms a nation must first be attacked physically before entering enemy lands. Not so Russia whose false threat “perception” was sufficient pretext. 
 

US supported South Vietnam in war against North Vietnam. US later took over the actual direct running of that war, under nominal “ control” of South. 

[Fanta]

This is gold! I bet money Anonymous did this.

”The photographs showed Moscow satellite television menus on Victory Day, when Russia celebrated the 77th anniversary of Soviet Union's victory over Nazi Germany, with every channel showing anti-war slogans.

 

“You have the blood of thousands of Ukrainians and hundreds of dead children on your hands," said one slogan.

"The TV and the authorities are lying. No to war."

 

[oldschooler]

5 minutes ago, JamesR said:

"But the Russians, as they have demonstrated before, carried out a systematic, indiscriminate bombardment from afar, using both artillery and missiles."

That may be true, or it could be the case the Ukrainians are using civilians as shields, who knows, we are not there, or it could be a mixture of both.

Remember, "...the people of Crays Hill are living in fear.....", a load of made up nonsense. 

Suggest you cease mixing military and legal facts with media reports. Get Rational & Real. Ditch your muddled confused thinking & excuses. Ten million refugees are not “ human shields”.

Remember some 5,000 civilians have died, mixed in with military or not, Russians could not know that anyway, enough dead to get those 10 million civilians moving out. The true goal.

The Russian actions & outcome, including illegal invasion,  clearly removes all doubt that Russia has clearly committed major war crimes for which no clever lawyer in court can prevent ultimate legal conviction. 

[Smithydog]

10 minutes ago, JamesR said:

"But the Russians, as they have demonstrated before, carried out a systematic, indiscriminate bombardment from afar, using both artillery and missiles."

That may be true, or it could be the case the Ukrainians are using civilians as shields, who knows, we are not there, or it could be a mixture of both.

Remember, "...the people of Crays Hill are living in fear.....", a load of made up nonsense. 

Are you really suggesting the images of Mariupol, a city clearly bombarded to extent beyond any suggestion of military targets only, is influenced because human shields were being used?

Indiscriminate bombing doesn't care what it hits or what is happening at the target. Regardless the responsibility is on the attacker in such circumstances.

But, then I suppose, they are just carrying out normal Russian military tactics by the look of it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/18/world/europe/russia-military-strategy-bombing-cities.html

 

[oldschooler]

1 minute ago, Fanta said:

This is gold! I bet money Anonymous did this.

”The photographs showed Moscow satellite television menus on Victory Day, when Russia celebrated the 77th anniversary of Soviet Union's victory over Nazi Germany, with every channel showing anti-war slogans.

“You have the blood of thousands of Ukrainians and hundreds of dead children on your hands," said one slogan.

"The TV and the authorities are lying. No to war."

Soviet Union exclusive WW2 victory of course. Entered war in Europe 21 months after it started and only after their Nazi “ ally” , with whom they had divided Poland, attacked them. The West clearly played no significant part in WW2 ! Japan capitulated in sheer fear of SU of course.

[Fanta]

3 minutes ago, oldschooler said:

The Russian actions & outcome, including illegal invasion,  clearly removes all doubt that Russia has clearly committed major war crimes for which no clever lawyer in court can prevent ultimate legal conviction

Proving a war crime is much more difficult than leveling accusations. When you get into the legalese what constitutes a war crime all gets rather blurry and open to interpretation. The Holocaust was a slam dunk, Mariupol will be not so easy at all. 

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/10/23/explainer-what-is-a-war-crime 

[Fanta]

7 minutes ago, Smithydog said:

Are you really suggesting the images of Mariupol, a city clearly bombarded to extent beyond any suggestion of military targets only, is influenced because human shields were being used?

As people we can judge and condemn it. In the International Criminal Court it is a whole different story. Don’t kid yourself that Russia will even stand trial for any war crimes let alone be convicted. 

https://www.vox.com/23017838/international-criminal-court-icc-putin-war-crimes

[Smithydog]

16 minutes ago, Fanta said:

Not trying to excuse the inexcusable. Close fighting draws fire as does deployment of troops and equipment inside urban areas. Let’s not get off track here. The statement was “targeted” the school and that is at best a claim and, imo, dubious. “Ivan, target the school!” Ivan says “ WTF?” 

My whole point is that they are not targeting anything. They are just indiscriminately bombing and shelling and anything that happens to be in the way when they hit the ground, militarily or civilian, is the result!

In that itself, that is a war crime.  Protocol 1 to the Geneva Conventions states:

"Articles 51 and 54 outlaw indiscriminate attacks on civilian populations, and destruction of food, water, and other materials needed for survival. Indiscriminate attacks include directly attacking civilian (non-military) targets, but also using technology such as biological weapons, nuclear weapons and land mines, whose scope of destruction cannot be limited. A total war that does not distinguish between civilian and military targets is considered a war crime."

But then why should we be surprised. Putin decided to withdraw from Russia's ratification of the protocol in 2019 saying:

"Exceptional circumstances affect the interests of the Russian Federation and require urgent action.... In the current international environment, the risks of abuse of the commission's powers for political purposes by unscrupulous states who act in bad faith have increased significantly."

Perhaps he already knew they could not meet the obligations due to Russian war doctrine.

 

But then it seems it is more important to them to have their "Victory Day" marches, something I must say that looks eerily similar to the Nazi goosestepping marches at Nuremburg, than spend the time planning attacks on military targets to minimalise any civilian collateral damage.

After all, why use all that expensive technology the say they have and brag about. Much easier it seems to just bomb away with no warning and hell to all the collateral damage.

[Fester]

52 minutes ago, JamesR said:

"But the Russians, as they have demonstrated before, carried out a systematic, indiscriminate bombardment from afar, using both artillery and missiles."

That may be true, or it could be the case the Ukrainians are using civilians as shields, who knows, we are not there, or it could be a mixture of both.

Remember, "...the people of Crays Hill are living in fear.....", a load of made up nonsense. 

I don't remember Crays Hill, I don't want to remember Crays Hill and I'm bored hearing about Crays Hill. Did it suffer a bloody invasion, or what? Crays Hill is nothing to do with this topic, so why not start a bloody Crays Hill thread?

[Fester]

33 minutes ago, Fanta said:

Proving a war crime is much more difficult than leveling accusations. When you get into the legalese what constitutes a war crime all gets rather blurry and open to interpretation. The Holocaust was a slam dunk, Mariupol will be not so easy at all. 

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/10/23/explainer-what-is-a-war-crime 

Yes, yer honor.

[Smithydog]

27 minutes ago, Fanta said:

As people we can judge and condemn it. In the International Criminal Court it is a whole different story. Don’t kid yourself that Russia will even stand trial for any war crimes let alone be convicted. 

https://www.vox.com/23017838/international-criminal-court-icc-putin-war-crimes

I don't think Putin will stand at the ICC. It will have internally being taken care of before such happens. As to Russia itself, the vast majority of Russians have no say in it whatsoever. Economic cost will be the only likely short term punishment and sadly that will be hard on many innocent people in Russia as well.

It is quite interesting to read about the comparisons with what Russia is doing and the attack by Nazi Germany on Russia in WW2. Putin is making many of the same mistakes it seems. Hitler and his cronies also thought they were invincible and untouchable, as did their supporters and as have many dictators since.

https://www.scoopearth.com/putin-is-making-the-same-mistake-as-hitler/

Life has a reoccurring theme of thankfully removing them from our present consciousness despite all of their rhetoric and that of their supporters.

[Fanta]

12 minutes ago, Smithydog said:

My whole point is that they are not targeting anything. They are just indiscriminately bombing and shelling and anything that happens to be in the way when they hit the ground, militarily or civilian, is the result!

The Russians and their lawyers will say different. And it all doesn’t mean Jack squat in an international court when the accused doesn’t even show up. That is how it is and it is what it is. The poster of the “targeted and attacked” statement must be chuffed to have his war crimes lament back in the top 10 again to derail the discussion. 

[JamesR]

1 hour ago, oldschooler said:

Free Nations bordering NATO have individually joined NATO for protection against Unfree Aggressor Russia. That is not “ creeping up” on anyone. Caused by Russias Bad Actions. 
 

“Fault” irrelevant in geopolitics, only intl. law, often trumped by perceived national interest matters. NATO of course “ provoked” Russia into this invasion. Try proving that though

By modern western / UN norms a nation must first be attacked physically before entering enemy lands. Not so Russia whose false threat “perception” was sufficient pretext. 
 

US supported South Vietnam in war against North Vietnam. US later took over the actual direct running of that war, under nominal “ control” of South. 

"Free Nations bordering NATO have individually joined NATO for protection..."

I don't think the Russians will see it as that.

"US supported South Vietnam in war against North Vietnam. US later took over the actual direct running of that war, under nominal “ control” of South. "

That sounds like good biased speak, not at all partial. 

[JamesR]

1 hour ago, Fanta said:

Not trying to excuse the inexcusable. Close fighting draws fire as does deployment of troops and equipment inside urban areas. Let’s not get off track here. The statement was “targeted” the school and that is at best a claim and, imo, dubious. “Ivan, target the school!” Ivan says “ WTF?” 

If you are the West then the school was targeted, if you are Russian then it was unavoidable I am guessing. 

[JamesR]

1 hour ago, oldschooler said:

Suggest you cease mixing military and legal facts with media reports. Get Rational & Real. Ditch your muddled confused thinking & excuses. Ten million refugees are not “ human shields”.

Remember some 5,000 civilians have died, mixed in with military or not, Russians could not know that anyway, enough dead to get those 10 million civilians moving out. The true goal.

The Russian actions & outcome, including illegal invasion,  clearly removes all doubt that Russia has clearly committed major war crimes for which no clever lawyer in court can prevent ultimate legal conviction. 

"Suggest you cease mixing military and legal facts with media reports. Get Rational & Real. Ditch your muddled confused thinking & excuses. Ten million refugees are not “ human shields”."

I have not mentioned any legal facts just biased media reports claims about civilians being targeted by the Russians so what have refugees got to do with this?

I do not know what the rest of your comment has to do with proof civilians were targeted, do you have an insight or secret information the rest of us do not have or are you basing all of your 'facts' on the same media biased reports?

Or a crystal ball?

[JamesR]

1 hour ago, Smithydog said:

Are you really suggesting the images of Mariupol, a city clearly bombarded to extent beyond any suggestion of military targets only, is influenced because human shields were being used?

Indiscriminate bombing doesn't care what it hits or what is happening at the target. Regardless the responsibility is on the attacker in such circumstances.

But, then I suppose, they are just carrying out normal Russian military tactics by the look of it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/18/world/europe/russia-military-strategy-bombing-cities.html

No soldiers hiding in those towns?

I seemed to remember at the start of conflict there was a lot of publicity stating hundreds of thousands of civilians were going to be armed, they were also making boxes of petrol bombs etc and said they will fight to the death etc, so many of them were not completely civilians then.

 

[JamesR]

36 minutes ago, Fester said:

I don't remember Crays Hill, I don't want to remember Crays Hill and I'm bored hearing about Crays Hill. Did it suffer a bloody invasion, or what? Crays Hill is nothing to do with this topic, so why not start a bloody Crays Hill thread?

So bored you have to reply. 

It was an example of how the media make things up, that applies to this war as well.

And yes, we were supposed to be living in fear as the BBC said we had been 'invaded' by dangerous 'travellers'.

All untrue. 

Unless of course you believe everything you read in the press.