TrueScotsman
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“What’s that skippy?”
And here I was thinking I could have an actual adult conversation with one of you dolts. Well, I tried.
“He’s moving the goalposts again? That played no part in Moscow’s causus belli”
Young Master Smeg,the casus belli was halting the crimes of the illegitimate, Washington installed, fascist coup government. De-Nazification. A stated Kremlin goal.
“there has been no mention from Moscow that their intention is to remove the illegitimate government.”
Shall I say it more slowly so you can understand child? D-e-N-a-z-i-f-c-a-t-i-o-n.
“That would also be incompatible with annexation, since the point of the war would, Shirley”
Who’s Shirley?
“be to remove the installed government and allow a genuinely Ukrainian government to be formed, within it’s existing territory.”
The people of the regions exercised their right to self determination. Would you deny them that right?
“No ultimatums were issued”
Shows how little you know. The adults are talking here, the child’s table is over there. But since you’ve interrupted…The Kremlin most certainly did issue an ultimatum. It said that if its security concerns were not met it would take “military technical measures” in response.
https://tass.com/defense/1388331
“no attempt to go through the UN for a peace keeping force”
The Minsk 2 Agreements were done through the Security Council Young Master Smeg. There was an imminent invasion threat, the US, France and UK can all veto at the Security Council. Any time spent dithering there would have benefited the Nazis in their ethnic cleansing operation. They had their chance with Minsk 2 and blew it.
“That Putin only decided at the last minute only compounds the crime not exonerating him.”
It was done in response to an imminent Ukrainian invasion of Donbass and in accordance with pre-emptive war doctrine which is legal.
“Anyway, I don’t know if the Amnesty report on Russian action in occupied zones has landed here before, apologies if it has: but it’s worth a read, especially to see the faces of the victims of this war”
No, it isn’t. Amnesty is not an impartial human rights organisation but an arm of the empire’s regime change apparatus. There is copious evidence in support of this view which I have linked to previously on this thread.
“Just cause: The reason for going to war needs to be just and cannot, therefore, be solely for recapturing things taken or punishing people who have done wrong; innocent life must be in imminent danger and intervention must be to protect life. A contemporary view of just cause was expressed in 1993 when the US Catholic Conference said: “Force may be used only to correct a grave, public evil, i.e., aggression or massive violation of the basic human rights of whole populations.”
Russia has an arguable case here, claiming that they acted to protect the populations of Donetsk and Lugansk from shelling and further depredations by Kyiv (also, the later claim that Kyiv was organising for a massive onslaught to pacify those reasons).”
With you so far.
“Now, the doctrine of national sovereignty would apply here, as Kyiv was putting down an internal revolt”
OK, we’ve a problem here. Ukraine was no longer a sovereign country. Its legitimate government had been overthrown in a US funded coup. Victoria Nuland publicly admitted to spending $5 billion on the overthrow of the government. She personally chose the new cabinet. This government launched the war in the Donbass which caused a massive refugee exodus and disenfranchised similar numbers of voters with sympathies toward Russia. This disenfranchisement ensured that all future governments, including the current one, are not legitimate. Kiev is Washington’s pawn. Washington scuttled peace talks with Russia and entirely funds its government and military apparatus. Ukraine, therefore, is not sovereign. So, an appeal to sovereignty is moot.
“so Moscow would need to rely on a case of grave violations of human rights (of which, see more below). This justification fails if it could be shown that Moscow had instigated the uprisings in those reasons to engineer a justification for war.”
Russia didn’t instigate the uprisings. The Washinton and its hand picked fascist coup plotters did when they overthrow a legitimately elected government, massacresd their opponents and banned the speaking of Russian.
“Competent authority: Only duly constituted public authorities may wage war. “A just war must be initiated by a political authority within a political system that allows distinctions of justice. Dictatorships (e.g. Hitler’s Regime) or deceptive military actions (e.g. the 1968 US bombing of Cambodia) are typically considered as violations of this criterion. The importance of this condition is key. Plainly, we cannot have a genuine process of judging a just war within a system that represses the process of genuine justice. A just war must be initiated by a political authority within a political system that allows distinctions of justice”.
This is interesting: Russia’s denial that it was going to invade, right up until the moment it did vitiates this criterion”
The Kremlin had no intention of intervening in the civil war until the last minute. At least if US officials are to be believed.
U.S. Intelligence Says Putin Made a Last-Minute Decision to Invade Ukraine
“that Moscow made no international appeals, or bilateral moves or publicly stated it had to act.”
It did all these things. Russia strenuously argued for the implementation of the Minsk 2 Agreement which former Ukrainian and German presidents both recently agreed was a ruse to re-arm Ukraine and prepare it for war with Russia. Russia also proposed a security agreement halting NATO’s eastern expansion which was summarily ignored by the west.
“Likewise, the shifting goalposts, from defending the Russian minority in Ukraine”
These goal posts have never shifted.
“to the annexation of territory”
Kiev lost its right to rule over ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine once it attempted to ethnically cleanse them from the region. The people there exercised their right to self determination and chose the Russian Federation over rule by a death cult of suicidal Nazis.
“means that Russia does seem to be delinquent in this regard.”
If you base your reasoning on faulty assumptions you’ll reach faulty conclusions.
“Probability of success: Arms may not be used in a futile cause or in a case where disproportionate measures are required to achieve success”
Says who? Sounds awfully arbitrary to me. In a war against Nazis you’re going to give them a “fair fight” are you? Why would you do that when instead you can deploy overwhelming might to crush them as they deserve and thereby shorten the conflict?
“Herein is Moscow’s gravest sin, plainly, the probability of success was low”
Erm, newsflash, the Kremlin’s initial plan almost succeeded. It would have left Ukraine a functioning polity. But Ukraine is not sovereign so the puppets in Kiev followed NATO orders and remained belligerent. This forced Russia’s plan B. Pulverising Ukraine’s military. It is close to achieving this end and forcing unconditional surrender. It doesn’t matter whether or not you believe this to be true because reality does not conform to your personal beliefs. It is as it is. Ukraine is losing catastrophically and soon even Guardian Brahs will have to admit the fact.
“their initial gamble didn’t pay off”
Plan A failed in part though it succeeded in much of the east. As for the conflict writ large you’ve fallen in to the same trap as All-in; calling the match at the half time whistle after one team has accrued 6 red cards.
“and confrontation with a large military force that was going to require destruction and bloodshed far greater than the ill they were professing to address.”
You’ve no way of knowing how destructive the ethnic cleansing of Donbass would have been. Nor of the repercussions of a nuclear armed Ukraine on Russia’s border and the consequent possibility of nuclear conflagration.The supreme war crime is starting a war. Kiev started the war. Russia is finishing it.
“Now, whether their conduct in the war is within the realms of just war theory is a matter for another time, my point here is that their justification for war in the first place is sufficiently weak that it is plausible that even without atrocity their actions constitute war crimes.”
That’s your opinion. Scott Ritter has argued there is a legal case supporting Russia’s actions. Putin is a trained lawyer and surely has legal advisers who’ve crafted a similar opinion. Perhaps these justifications will be interrogated one day. Until then, the Nazis will get the shellacing they deserve.
“You are your own expert and nobody can convince you otherwise of your own facts.”
It doesn’t take an expert to notice no decomposition or animal predation. And I’ve linked to an expert.
Tell me All-in as you continue to noticeably avoid the question. Why no animal predation? Why, why, why?
“You are your own expert and nobody can convince you otherwise of your own facts.”
It doesn’t take an expert to notice no decomposition or animal predation. And I’ve linked to an expert.
Tell me All-in as you continue to noticeably avoid the question. Why no animal predation? Why, why, why?
“So you have x-ray vision now, able to detect the state of the body beneath clothes”
Lol, I don’t need x-ray vision. I can clearly see the faces and hands in the press photos as can you. No noticeable putrification or signs of animal predation. And there’s the small matter of the forensic expert I quoted giving his professional opinion. He concludes they were killed very recentlty.
“Who is the fool?”
His name is Alan.
“Once again, where is your forensic evidence?”
Right before you in the photos. Magic bodies that don’t decompose or succumb to animal predation. Hallelujah, it’s a miracle!
“The UN investigators did have access to medical examinations. French experts were called in also to help determine cause and time of deaths.”
The investigation was a sham. Just like many other UN “investigations”.
“I repeat
“A white armband merely signified that you were an unarmed civilian, not your politics.””So why murder them? What did the Russian army gain by executing friendly civilians? Why didn’t their bodies decompose? Why was there no animal predation? The bodies were supposedly out in the open for weeks!
“And the whole point is that unarmed civilians were murdered in a war crime.”
Duh, no shit Sherlock. But it was the Nazis that killed ’em.
“Why would the woman interviewed in the ABC news still be wearing her white armband when the Ukrainians were in charge if it depicted a pro-Russian sympathiser”
Maybe she was unaware of the Russian withdrawal. She leaves her basement to collect food and water and stumbles upon a gaggle of reporters. Hardly improbable.
“But here is another story
“After the Russian forces took control of Bucha, doctors were required to wear a white bandage in order to leave the hospital, and only during daylight hours and on foot. They were warned that any vehicle could come under fire — even an ambulance.”
It’s called a curfew. Standard practice in war zones. And there is video evidence of Ukrainian troops moving around in ambulances.
youtube.com
https://m.youtube.com › watch
Ukrainian soldiers using an Ambulance for transport“You of course are required to debunk the satellite images that showed bodies while the Russian were occupying Bucha that later matched up with later pictures taken when Bucha was retaken by Ukraine.”
The bodies that didn’t decompose? Were magically resistant to animal predation? Lol. I already have provided multiple links refuting the entire Bucha narrative.
“And the witness accounts? All lies?”
Lol, Azov fighters have been caught numerous times posing as civilians in interviews. Moreover, how would the Nazis treat a witness telling the truth?
“As with other supposed “proof” of a hoax, the Russian supposed scenarios have been shown to be false such as the moving corpses.”
Why weren’t the corpses decomposed? Why no animal predation? What motivation would Russian troops have had to murder friendly civilians? Ones holding Russian aid packages for God’s sake!
Admit it All-in, the Nazis have duped you. You’re a conduit for Nazi oropaganda. A useful idiot. Bravo! Or should I say Zieg Heil?!
“Russian troops, while they were in Bucha, required that local residents wear the armbands to identify themselves, according to one woman who was still wearing hers.”
To identify themselves as what All-in? As friendly. So the Russian troops, for no apparent reason just decided to slaughter a bunch of friendlies? Why? The bodies then lie there for 2 weeks and miraculously show no signs of decomposition or animal feeding?
Then you have to ignore the announced Nazi cleansing operation, the fact the mayor said nothing of a massacre, the fact the Nazis have executed umpteen numbers of “collaborators” since. The fact the Nazis could use the incident to rally global sympathy and support and derail peace negotiations.
Well, I gotta hand it to you All-in, when you’re wrong, you really commit to the process.
“those pictures and videos don’t really allow us to judge the state of the bodies since they are dressed in warm clothes”
Lol, warm clothes would’ve made things worse. The weather was warm too. What happens to a warm dead body All-in? It decomposes! Moreover, hands and faces are clearly visible and not in advanced stages of decomposition. That’s obvious to anyone with two eyes. The bodies shouldn’t even have faces. After 2 weeks in the elements animals would have picked them clean to the bone as you can see in Patrick Lancaster’s footage around Azovstal.
But what do I know, here’s an expert’s view…
““On the 2nd or 3rd day, the so-called “cadaveric green” appears on the surface of the skin. By the end of the first day, first or beginning of the second week this cadaveric green covers essentially all the skin of the corpse. Then, after about 1-2 weeks, areas of “green” can change to brown and black. That is, the corpse may even turn black. By the 3rd-4th day the so-called “putrefactive venous network” appears and by the end of the second week the so-called “putrefactive gases” appear which give increased volume to the corpse”, – he says.
According to the expert, the photo and video evidence (drying of the skin in some areas) suggest that the death occurred a few hours, maybe a day ago.
That is, the bodies could not have been lying on the streets from March 11 until the Russian troops were withdrawn from Bucha.”
All-in, you’re looking the fool yet again.
“Once you refer me to the post-mortems and autopsy reports that you appear privy to?”
You don’t need post mortem reports you can find the photographs yourself on the internet. These photos aren’t of bodies that have been outdoors rotting away for 2 weeks being pecked at by crows and scavenged by dogs. And notice the white ribbons? Shows they’re friendly to Russian troops. Why would Russian troops be shooting friendlies? Nazis on the other hand…You’ve been had All-in with the imperialists.
https://elpais.com/elpais/2022/04/04/album/1649068530_946039.amp.html
The BBC is spreading Russian propaganda?!
“Wikileaks performed as a conduit for confidential government information and e-mails, that were forwarded and published by the MSM, including the Guardian.”
Yes, and when Wikileaks published information damaging to neo-liberal darling of Guardian brahs, Hilary Clinton, it suddenly becomes a Putin mouthpiece.
This, in one Guardian hitpiece…
“All of which raises the question: do Assange, Putin and Trump form a triangle? Are they in communication with each other or merely exploiting a coincidence of interests?
“…he sees US hegemony in the international world order as the biggest problem facing us today. In his attempt to bring ‘transparency’, he ends up siding with the very regimes that deny transparency and human rights. That’s the irony of my enemy’s enemy is my friend.”
So, All-in with the deep state, what’s the answer to the Guardian’s question? Was Wikileaks “in a triangle” with Putin?
And answer me this. How had the bodies of the civilians in Bucha remained miraculously free of decomposition for over 2 weeks despite the warm weather?
All-in with the deep state, you’re as predictable as the sunrise. You poison the well with MSM propaganda hit pieces doing the propagandists job for them. On a “socialist” website of all places! Lol. What’s the saying? “The flak is heaviest when you’re over the target”? War on Fakes is upsetting “the narrative” so the MSM presstitutes dutifully smear the site’s authors. If the MSM weren’t doing such I’d have to question WOF’s reputability. But WOF is in good company; Wikileaks, The Grayzone, Consortium News and Counterpunch have received similar treatment. So All-in, is Wikileaks credible? Lol
“And its source – the Venezuelan Orinoco Tribune from April 5th that in turn uses Venezualan Mision Verdad as its source
and Intel Slava Z – an official Russian news agency as its source, and a pro-Russian Russia in Spain April 4 source. Also used is a Russian fact-checker site.”Poisoning the well ad hominem fallacy. Used by the smooth brained to soothe their confirmation bias. The only thing that matters is is the information true not where it comes from.
“Sorry but I prefer sources who actually conducted on-the-ground investigations by professional UN inspectors, not political hacks.”
Like the sham UN investigation into “human rights abuses” in Xinjiang? The OHCHR is yet one more UN body, like the OPCW and many others, wholly captured by NATOstan.
“The mayor drove through the streets and reported no corpses. Did you actually click the link given and read the Telegram post where AFP says the streets were littered with corpses?”
Days after the Russians had left and the Nazi death squads had swept through on their “cleansing” operation looking for “collaborators”. All those killed had white arm bands or bindings, showing they were friendly to Russian troops. The poor sods hadn’t realised the Russians had left already when they bumped into the Nazis.
“It claims Azov troops arrived on 1st April yet satellite pictures already showed corpses in the street prior to their alleged arrival.”
The photos are as clear as mud but probably fakes.
Fake: bodies of civilians have been lying on the streets of Bucha since March 11
“Did you click on the link and read the NYT report? Corpses in the streets.”
If the bodies photographed by AFP were the ones supposedly shown in the satellite pics they’d have been putrified. They weren’t though because they were freshly killed by the Nazi death squads.
See above link. So what really happened in Bucha…
What happened in Bucha? A full analysis of the Ukrainian provocation
“You can ignore the evidence of witnesses”
Yeah, and Iraqi troops threw babies out of incubators too, right? Lol
“Likewise the Russian massacres in Bucha.”
Bucha was carried out by Ukrainian Nazis.
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2022/04/the-bucha-provocation.html
“We are talking about two corrupt authoritarian repressive right-wing capitalist regimes at war with each other”
Erm, you’re forgetting NATOstan. This is a war waged by NATOstan and its proxy Nazis against Russia.
“By the questionable logic of True Imperialist’s own argument, that makes him a Nazi supporter. TS is merely supporting one Nazi regime fighting another….”
Being anti-Nazi is actually Nazi? Priceless. Lol
“The Soviet Union provided Nazi Germany with a secret naval base, Basis Nord, east of Murmansk, that was planned to be used for U-Boats. The fact that it wasn’t needed because of the occupation of Norway does not matter.”
That all you got as “evidence” of an “alliance”. A base that never was? Lol. What a clown.
