RE: Russian lawmakers authorize Putin to use military force outside the country
08-06-2022, 03:44 AM
08-06-2022, 03:44 AM
Honestly the last couple of days in Ukraine news has been really weird. And no, not because a Russian intercontinental ballistic missile totally liberated the shit out of a Toyota Camry. Nor is it Aeroflot pilots being told to go light on the brakes to preserve parts. Or even that Bulgaria has denied sending military aid to Ukraine that has already been delivered to Ukraine.
No, the real topic has been the Amnesty International report on Ukrainian war crimes. Let's get a hot take on it from Russia 1 channel, Russia's news leader:
This is an accurate summary of the report! Amnesty decided to just hand a propaganda win to Russia because they "started to suspect" Ukrainian soldiers are around schools, without much evidence. You know what else are around schools? Russian invaders. If you've been following the war with more than a passing interest, you've definitely seen photos of UXO in playgrounds, craters in schoolyards, and hospitals struck by missiles. Amnesty International put a passing mention in the report that Russians are also doing war crimes, maybe.
The internet has not been happy about this, to put it mildly. There are people that are talking about how many more people would be killed or tortured because of AI's report -- which is probably overblown but not completely implausible -- and that's certainly not the kind of thing a human rights organization would want people to be saying about it. The US Ambassador felt she had to (indirectly) deny the claims in the report. The Ukrainian branch of AI had been fighting the release of the report -- and even after the release, they hoped it would be retracted. It was not. So yesterday, the head of Amnesty's Ukraine branch resigned in protest after seven year's service, because the report was so one-sided -- her resignation letter is pretty good.
So why is it that Amnesty International has produced whataboutist propaganda that protects the invaders? It might just be that they don't understand the necessities of war, and don't want to understand it because they don't like war. Ukraine needs to be in the cities for two important reasons: to protect civilians, and to protect themselves. There's no fortifications, and no air superiority that would cover them elsewhere. It's apparently AI's policy not to investigate crimes of states that ignore their work, so they just didn't investigate Russia as a matter of corporate policy, not realizing the political implications. But on the other hand, AI is a political organization, full of a lot of socialists and far leftists. As I said one post back, both the far left and far right seem especially vulnerable to Russian manipulation.
Not sure how related it is, but it lines up with the Russian diplomatic effort that has been going around in the past week.
No, the real topic has been the Amnesty International report on Ukrainian war crimes. Let's get a hot take on it from Russia 1 channel, Russia's news leader:
Quote:Even the international crooks and scoundrels of the so-called human rights organization Amnesty International have accused Ukraine of violating the laws of war by placing military equipment in educational and medical facilities, thus endangering civilians. If even they say that the rules of warfare have been violated, then Ukrainians should reflect on it. Western analysts have started to suspect that hospitals and schools in Ukraine are not being used for their intended purpose.
This is an accurate summary of the report! Amnesty decided to just hand a propaganda win to Russia because they "started to suspect" Ukrainian soldiers are around schools, without much evidence. You know what else are around schools? Russian invaders. If you've been following the war with more than a passing interest, you've definitely seen photos of UXO in playgrounds, craters in schoolyards, and hospitals struck by missiles. Amnesty International put a passing mention in the report that Russians are also doing war crimes, maybe.
The internet has not been happy about this, to put it mildly. There are people that are talking about how many more people would be killed or tortured because of AI's report -- which is probably overblown but not completely implausible -- and that's certainly not the kind of thing a human rights organization would want people to be saying about it. The US Ambassador felt she had to (indirectly) deny the claims in the report. The Ukrainian branch of AI had been fighting the release of the report -- and even after the release, they hoped it would be retracted. It was not. So yesterday, the head of Amnesty's Ukraine branch resigned in protest after seven year's service, because the report was so one-sided -- her resignation letter is pretty good.
So why is it that Amnesty International has produced whataboutist propaganda that protects the invaders? It might just be that they don't understand the necessities of war, and don't want to understand it because they don't like war. Ukraine needs to be in the cities for two important reasons: to protect civilians, and to protect themselves. There's no fortifications, and no air superiority that would cover them elsewhere. It's apparently AI's policy not to investigate crimes of states that ignore their work, so they just didn't investigate Russia as a matter of corporate policy, not realizing the political implications. But on the other hand, AI is a political organization, full of a lot of socialists and far leftists. As I said one post back, both the far left and far right seem especially vulnerable to Russian manipulation.
Not sure how related it is, but it lines up with the Russian diplomatic effort that has been going around in the past week.
"Kitto daijoubu da yo." - Sakura Kinomoto