Russian Troop Movements Reported Near Ukraine

When Will Russia Invade Ukraine

  • Wed 16th Feb

    Votes: 20 6.9%
  • Before 22nd Feb

    Votes: 54 18.7%
  • By St David's Day (1 March)

    Votes: 93 32.2%
  • By St Georges Day (23 April)

    Votes: 22 7.6%
  • By August

    Votes: 9 3.1%
  • By Christmas

    Votes: 6 2.1%
  • Some time in 2023

    Votes: 17 5.9%
  • Before Hell Freezes Over

    Votes: 68 23.5%

  • Total voters
    289
silly statement. a war crime is a war crime regardless who did it.
I very much doubt that any army in any significant war since the beginning of civilisation has been without what we would now categorise as a war crime. The difference is in the response of the nation whose military are accused of such crimes.

The Ukraine announced that any war crime committed by its forces would be investigated and prosecuted. Russia has given honours to units accused of war crimes, and has refused to cooperate with the ICC.

It is not the war crimes that divide the two sides but the reaction of the respective governments. Ukraine promises to prosecute, setting down a marker that it will not tolerate war crimes by its forces. Russia, meanwhile appears to be encouraging its military to act against international law.
 
I thought they were going to try to liberate it, If this is correct now I think they are just trying to sink the f**ker. ;)

When there was no official confirmation people thought the first reported attack might have not happened, I saw one mention from a Ukrainian saying the Ukraine MOD doesn't talk about ongoing operations, that was about 36 hours later so I guess it is a work in progress.



71fem2ZY+mL._AC_SL1500_.jpg
 
Last edited:
I thought they were going to try to liberate it, now I think they are just trying to sink the f**ker. ;)

When there was no official confirmation people thought the first reported attack might have not happened, I saw one mention from a Ukrainian saying the Ukraine MOD doesn't talk about ongoing operations, that was about 36 hours later so I guess it is a work in progress.


A posting to Snake Island must be the modern Russian equivalent of the Wehrmacht's posting to the Eastern Front.
 
A posting to Snake Island must be the modern Russian equivalent of the Wehrmacht's posting to the Eastern Front.
Umm., by all accounts a combat posting to the Ukraine is.
 
no i was talking in general, it´sf unny because some on here take tantrums.
I don't think I've noticed any poster on this thread 'take tantrums' (whatever that means - it's not a common English phrase). I've seen a few who go off-topic at the drop of a hat, some who are frighteningly intense in their opinions, and others who type complete excrement.

No tantrums though, taken or otherwise.
 

BuggerAll

LE
Kit Reviewer
no i was talking in general, it´sf unny because some on here take tantrums.
Funny old thing but many posters on here have a military background and are disgusted by your attempt to excuse Russian systematic war crimes.

I’m not sure if you are a troll or just a useful idiot but unless you have a useful contribution to make do please Foxtrot Oscar.
 

XXLBelly

On ROPS
On ROPs
I don't think I've noticed any poster on this thread 'take tantrums' (whatever that means - it's not a common English phrase). I've seen a few who go off-topic at the drop of a hat, some who are frighteningly intense in their opinions, and others who type complete excrement.

No tantrums though, taken or otherwise.
really ..well i even had one lunatic come over to another thread about computers making comments related to this thread & saying piss off. he definetly was taking a tantrum.
 

XXLBelly

On ROPS
On ROPs
Funny old thing but many posters on here have a military background and are disgusted by your attempt to excuse Russian systematic war crimes.

I’m not sure if you are a troll or just a useful idiot but unless you have a useful contribution to make do please Foxtrot Oscar.
see a tantrum... i have a right to say my opinions.
maybe you should just stop being a mellon.
 

NSP

LE
Hmmm...

Didn't the boxheeds in the second global unpleasantness have suicide boats they could run into a harbour, aim at a target and bail off the rear to await pick up by friendlies? Never really took off but there were some trials as I recall.
Them and the Italians:-


Not sure about the viability of getting amongst the contents of Sevastopol in the same manner, though - much more sophisticated sensor suites in place than were available in the early 1940s.
 
really ..well i even had one lunatic come over to another thread about computers making comments related to this thread & saying piss off. he definetly was taking a tantrum.
English is not your first language, is it?

You joined 12 March and have managed to annoy posters and accumulate a good bucketful of negative reactions in a fairly short space of time. If you believe that other posters are 'taking tantrums' because of you, then you may wish to indulge in some introspection. This is not the area to be combative or indulge in willy-waving; there are other places on the forum for that.

I realise the irony in the circumstances, but if someone upsets you in CA then it is best to ignore (or Ignore) them and carry on. You do not accumulate medals for 'winning' arguments on the internet.
 
silly statement. a war crime is a war crime regardless who did it.
You get a 'like' because, perhaps inadvertently, you raise a valid contemporary point regarding what a 'war crime' might be. The problem with your statement is that you haven't put much thought into your claim 'a war crime is a war crime' - it might be, but it depends.

Recent (as in modern) scholars suggest that we should make a distinction between combatants on the just side and those on the unjust side of war; the just side being the one who met the requirements to wage war according to the traditional principle of jus ad bellum (the principle of the justness of resorting to war). According to this stance soldiers fighting on the side who did not meet the requirements of jus ad bellum are unjust warriors, who do not possess a claim to a right to life. Hence should they attack opposing combatants they are liable to defensive harm and can therefore be killed justly (Lazar 2009: 701). It is an established principle that 'self-defence' provides a legal defence against unjust killing. The taking of prisoners of war does not usually commence until a hostile situation is completely subdued. And it is the task of all soldiers to kill enemy combatants.

My point is thus: A war crime is indeed a 'war crime' as defined in the various statutes, but conviction of persons for such an event will depend on the circumstances (including mens rae and actus reus) - unless the crime is defined as 'absolute' in law.
 

Latest Threads

Top