Posts by crimsoncyclist71

Matthew Young35 said:I don't see it that way at all.
My position is simple: if Ukrainians station armored vehicles inside a shopping mall, then that mall becomes a legitimate target.
I am specifically mentioning shopping malls because there are actual photos out there—published by the Ukrainian side itself—showing armored vehicles positioned within them.

That doesn't change the reality that Russia is the aggressor, nor does it diminish the fact that the Russian army commits atrocities and kills civilians.

But you clearly missed the point—Amnesty didn't actually say that! 🤦

Matthew Young35 said:I wouldn't, but then again, we shouldn't be complaining either when Russia strikes a shopping mall if there happen to be armored vehicles stationed inside.
War is a dirty business, but facts are facts.
I completely agree that the Russians need to be pushed back as hard as possible and driven out of Ukraine, but accusing someone of being pro-Russian simply because they state a difficult truth is wrong.

What AI is doing is wrong. Civilians aren't being put at risk by the actions of the Ukrainian military; they are at risk solely because of the Russian invasion. Hopefully, that explanation is simple enough for you to grasp.

Matthew Young35 said:No, I simply trust the reports from Amnesty International stating that Ukrainians have used civilian sites for military purposes.
It is 99.99% certain that the Russians do the same.
I realize many people would love to believe in a world where lies are told and stories are spun about how Ukrainians fight without breaking a single "rule," but that isn't reality.
And yes, I believe the Russians would target civilian sites even if they didn't. But why attack Amnesty International if they are telling the truth?

The AI report is nonsense and absurd. Its only real effect is providing ammunition to apologists for the Russian invasion. We're in the middle of brutal urban warfare, and now someone wants to highlight that those defending themselves are using civilian structures for cover? What exactly are they supposed to do? Walk out into an open field and wait to be hit? 🤦

Matthew Young35 said:Do you honestly believe their report is fabricated?
Weren't photos released a while back showing Ukrainians using shopping malls to house armored vehicles?
The point isn't that people are lying or being deceptive.
If the Ukrainians are using civilian infrastructure for military purposes—which they likely are—it doesn't change the fact that Russia is the aggressor, nor does it make them right.

Without organizations like these, without the UN, Doctors Without Borders, and similar groups, war would be even more devastating than it already is.
Whether you like them or not is irrelevant.
Just because Russia is the clear aggressor, clearly in the wrong, and has clearly unleashed a wave of atrocities, doesn't mean we should turn a blind eye to everything else.

No one can convince me that Russia wouldn't target civilian sites regardless of where Ukrainians park their hardware. That logic is for children. They systematically level everything in their path. By that reasoning, Ukrainians would have to keep an armored vehicle in every single backyard on the Russian fascists' route. You actually believe that?

Russian forces are using civilian buildings as cover to launch their projectiles.

https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/...22609843556353

I’m certain all those pro-Putin moralists will be quick to condemn this behavior.

Donna Harris11 said:Well, it was Prince Potemkin himself who founded those cities along the Black Sea that those evil communists shoved into Ukraine.

It’s truly impressive how those wonderful communists operated... 🤦

According to certain studies and available evidence, between 3 and 7 million people died in Ukraine alone. Some experts suggest up to 10 million were killed in total, placing the Holodomor among the greatest crimes of the 20th century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor

Yeah, communists are evil. To the core.

rowdyraven112 said:I'd give my entire yearly salary if this guy was actually charged with ☕. Conviction based on a confession during wartime. Smells like that joke of a legal system back in '91 when our guys were sentenced "based on confessions"—though let's be real, they used other ways to make them talk. I thought we learned from those experiences. I thought we wouldn't fall for this kind of propaganda again. Clearly, we haven't. ☕

Reminds me of this:
"Just admit it to me, we'll hop in the car, drive down to the police station, and you'll stand before justice and say, 'Yes, I'm guilty, I was blind and stupid.' Punish me so I can atone for my sins and feel human again..."

☕

Do you even know what crime he was actually convicted of?

rowdyraven112 said:My point is he's way too young to grasp what "we'll let you go home if you confess" actually means☕. I'd bet money he's being subjected to some serious psychological pressure just to squeeze out a confession.
I just watched a documentary about how the Japanese police operate—they condemn basically everyone based on confessions they easily manufacture in their "democratic" prisons☕

So now you're trying to convince us that out of all the captured fascists, they specifically picked him just to frame him for a war crime? This guy, who couldn't even count to ten? Sure, sounds totally believable. Go ahead, drop another coffee emoji so we can all pretend you're being serious.

Mark Carter14 said:And here we were, thinking the Orcs were just picking out civilian targets on purpose. 🤣

Ukraine Violates War Laws, Endangers Civilians: Amnesty International

While digging into Russian strikes across the Kharkiv, Donbas, and Mykolaiv regions from April to July, Amnesty International investigators found that the Ukrainian military was operating out of civilian buildings in at least 19 different towns and villages. Satellite imagery apparently backs this up, according to their report.

The organization claims that Ukraine committed a "clear violation of international humanitarian law" by placing at least five military sites inside civilian hospitals. Of course, the World Health Organization has noted that Russian airstrikes on medical facilities have caused a massive number of civilian casualties and deaths throughout the war.

Amnesty International also found that Ukraine set up military bases in 22 out of the 29 schools they visited during their investigation in the Donbas and Mykolaiv regions. According to the release, Russia then started hitting many of those exact same schools between April and late June, leading to a high number of deaths and injuries.

After schools in at least three cities were leveled, the Ukrainian military was accused of simply moving their bases into other schools in different areas, essentially putting whatever community lived near the new sites right back in the line of fire.

Now, technically, having bases in schools might not be a direct violation of international humanitarian law if the schools weren't being used for anything else, but the organization pointed out that Ukraine set up these bases in schools near homes and apartment buildings without ever warning the residents or helping them evacuate.

In certain situations, the laws of war dictate that schools and hospitals can become legitimate military targets, per the International Committee of the Red Cross.

Are you seriously suggesting that every single building hit in a completely destroyed city was occupied by soldiers? 🤦

Robin Fisher53 said:Based on the terms they laid out back when they were in Turkey...
No matter what kind of nonsense people try to feed you—it’s all just noise. They have barely any capacity left, and they can keep pushing this agenda as far as they want. Honestly, those EU sanctions haven't even made a dent; it’s like they’ve completely lost sight of that dream of theirs.
In the end, they’re going to get exactly what they set out to achieve in Ukraine, one way or another...

They aren't getting everything until Ukrainians agree to it.
What does it actually mean for them to seize a city after leveling it first?
Ukraine can use a few missiles to sabotage any attempt to steal oil, gas, or any other resources from that area, and I expect they will if the front lines freeze. As for the idea that sanctions don't affect them—that's a fairy tale for anyone who thinks Russia is a superpower. No country exists today that is entirely self-sufficient, especially not one that relies almost exclusively on exporting raw materials. I honestly don't know if people realize we live in the 21st century; unilateral border changes won't be permitted because that would essentially give a green light for more aggression down the road.
We'll see how Russia manages being backed by the most developed nations in the world.

Christian Torres3 said:Satellite imagery and those Red Cross denials? It's all just pure speculation. Fine.

Exactly. It’s perfectly logical that the Ukrainians mistook the site for a military base and targeted that single small building within the complex. Are you actually questioning that?

Richard Wells5 said:Like, sure, maybe they wanted to trigger some big reaction from the EU, or the Ukrainians, or everyone else, or maybe they were trying to stop some sensitive info from leaking, whatever... honestly, these excuses sound just as ridiculous as the reasons given for why the Russians hit that same shack...

That would imply this wasn't a mistake, but rather targeted friendly fire.
The first reason doesn't hold water. Everyone has already made up their minds about who the fascists are and who the victims of aggression are; there's no need for a false flag to paint the Russian aggressors as criminals. They've already proven themselves to be exactly that based on everything we know.
The second reason falls apart too. Those people could have extracted whatever they wanted from the "fascists" by now.

brightheron64 said:Ever since I watched Rashomon—which was honestly a lifetime ago—I’ve maintained a healthy dose of skepticism regarding the concept of "truth," especially when it comes to people trying to manufacture a single, indisputable version of reality on the fly. If I even dare to bring up WMDs as a side note, I suppose I'll just be accused of falling into the whataboutism trap again...

I am not out here defending anyone, and once it is undeniably proven that the Russians did it, rest assured, they will have my full condemnation...

I’m still waiting for you to explain the logic of why Ukrainians would target one tiny little building within that entire complex...
We aren't talking about truth or facts right now; we're talking about pure logic.

brightheron64 said:Now, there’s the sentence I’ve been waiting for...

Is there any chance this massacre was just a massive error?

From what I’ve managed to dig up in the media, the timeline looks something like this:

- Russian forces arrive at the site, clear out the local militia, bring in their own troops, and hoist their flag...
- Work is being done, things are being set up, beds and equipment are being moved in... right up until two days before the strike
- Just before the attack itself, you see crowds of people in uniform milling about the area...
- And then, in the dead of night, Ka-boom. A massacre.

It’s a very simple question—could someone on the Ukrainian side have misread the situation and thought they were hitting a new Russian camp that needed to be leveled?

Of course, if that really happened, no one on the Ukrainian side is going to step forward and say, "Oops, our bad." That’s just not how war works.

There are plenty of precedents from WWII, and these two are particularly striking:
The Laconia Incident - where a German U-boat sank a British ship carrying 1,400 Italian prisoners.
The Rakuyo mar incident - when an American submarine sank a Japanese vessel holding 1,500 British and Australian prisoners.

Strangely enough, neither the German nor the American media ran headlines saying "Sorry, shit happens.".

On the other hand, I have to ask again: why would the Russians want to eliminate the National Guard when they could trade any one of them for at least two of their own prisoners?
Or even just stage a media circus with a trial?

And if they really did intend to liquidate them, why go through all these complications? Throughout history, those kinds of things have always been handled in a much more straightforward way. Honestly, if they wanted to pin this on the Ukrainians, they could have just loaded them onto military trucks marked with a large Z one night, left them on some roadside, and waited for the fallout...

I don't believe him, and I never have. But truthfully, I didn't think they would actually launch the attack.

By the way, that article you mentioned is from The New York Times, not RT, so please don't view this as being pro-Russian; it's just an attempt to solve a puzzle...

Looking at this stretched-out timeline, it's obvious how hard you're working to defend Russian fascists. Even if we play along with your fantasy and assume you're right, explain the logic: why would Ukrainians target one single, specific facility and nothing else if they truly believed it was a fascist military outpost? 🤦

brightheron64 said:Now, there’s the sentence I’ve been waiting for...

Is there any chance this massacre was just a massive error?

From what I’ve managed to dig up in the media, the timeline looks something like this:

- Russian forces arrive at the site, clear out the local militia, bring in their own troops, and hoist their flag...
- Work is being done, things are being set up, beds and equipment are being moved in... right up until two days before the strike
- Just before the attack itself, you see crowds of people in uniform milling about the area...
- And then, in the dead of night, Ka-boom. A massacre.

It’s a very simple question—could someone on the Ukrainian side have misread the situation and thought they were hitting a new Russian camp that needed to be leveled?

Of course, if that really happened, no one on the Ukrainian side is going to step forward and say, "Oops, our bad." That’s just not how war works.

There are plenty of precedents from WWII, and these two are particularly striking:
The Laconia Incident - where a German U-boat sank a British ship carrying 1,400 Italian prisoners.
The Rakuyo mar incident - when an American submarine sank a Japanese vessel holding 1,500 British and Australian prisoners.

Strangely enough, neither the German nor the American media ran headlines saying "Sorry, shit happens.".

On the other hand, I have to ask again: why would the Russians want to eliminate the National Guard when they could trade any one of them for at least two of their own prisoners?
Or even just stage a media circus with a trial?

And if they really did intend to liquidate them, why go through all these complications? Throughout history, those kinds of things have always been handled in a much more straightforward way. Honestly, if they wanted to pin this on the Ukrainians, they could have just loaded them onto military trucks marked with a large Z one night, left them on some roadside, and waited for the fallout...

I don't believe him, and I never have. But truthfully, I didn't think they would actually launch the attack.

By the way, that article you mentioned is from The New York Times, not RT, so please don't view this as being pro-Russian; it's just an attempt to solve a puzzle...

Not a chance. Not even close.
That facility has been used as a prison for a long time; everyone knew that.
It didn't turn into a prison or a camp overnight.

Donna Harris11 said:Look, the guy went there, did his job, and that's that. He wasn't out there crying to the press, posting depressing status updates on Facebook, or acting all high and mighty like those German liberal types, Habeck or von Linden and the rest of them.

Are you following him through Canadian media and Facebook, or are you actually sure about what you're claiming?
Mind dropping his Facebook profile link here so we can see for ourselves?
Thanks.

Donna Harris11 said:don't forget about skipping meals and barely showering every other day, too. 😁

So, nothing changes on your end then.🤣

Nathan Evans78 said:So, what happened back in 2008 when Russia invaded Georgia? Did we suddenly lose our ability to care then? I’m just curious to see if we’re actually being consistent with this moral grandstanding we do all over social media. ☕

Look, we have a moral compass appearing here... 🤣 😵

slysurfer14 said:If you think you're actually getting warm this winter through central heating, just buy some thick blankets and long pants now. You're gonna need them.

At the end of the day, freezing is a smaller evil than funding an aggressor.

gFlores said:They clearly have zero clue about war strategy, yet they keep talking nonsense. Where exactly is this supposed Ukrainian offensive on Crimea?

Tamerlane said:The forum's little Stepan Bandera fanboys are impatiently waiting for that legendary offensive while their moms cook them lunch.🤣

It’s always a pleasure reading these inspired posts of yours, brimming with useful information, a complete disregard for facts, and especially helpful links. Based on your forum contributions, it's obvious you both are top-tier experts in every field you touch. I actually feel sorry for Russia that such brilliant forum users are siding with them. We should all just stop posting so there's more room for your gems.
☕