• gnuhaut@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    33
    ·
    1 year ago

    And shelling civilians in the Donbas is presumably the equivalent of putting on a nice dress in your metaphor?

    Make extremely inappropriate and wrong rape comparison ⇒ Accuse anyone who disagrees of being a rape apologist ⇒ FUCK TANKIES!

    Extremely normal and sound logic there, definitely not just vibe-based emotional manipulation.

      • gnuhaut@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Countries/UA/OHCHRThematicReportUkraineJan2014-May2016_EN.pdf

        OHCHR estimates that between mid-April 2014 and 31 May 2016, at least 9,404 people, of which up to 2,000 are civilians, have been killed as a result of the conflict. The vast majority of civilian casualties, recorded on the territories controlled by the Government of Ukraine and on those controlled by armed groups, were caused by the indiscriminate shelling of residential areas, in violation of the international humanitarian law principle of distinction.

        Na better believe Prigozhin, that guy never told a lie or said anything that was totally wrong.

          • gnuhaut@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            18
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Yes it says that exactly, unless you think the “armed groups” shelled themselves.

              • gnuhaut@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                15
                arrow-down
                9
                ·
                1 year ago

                You do realize that direction of the shelling wouldn’t be hard to determine? If you look at the side of a shelled building you know roughly which direction the shells are coming from. In your worldview OHCHR was duped by some elaborate conspiracy of repeated false flag attacks. That doesn’t even pass the sniff test. Also, why bring MH-15 into this? You cannot discredit my OHCHR source by bringing this up, what’s the connection there?

                  • gnuhaut@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    15
                    arrow-down
                    7
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I don’t think I can go any more official than the OHCHR, and I don’t think I can convince you of your good vs evil narrative with any source. People got shelled, it’s obviously implied they got shelled by the other side, and no theory to the contrary is put forward in the report.

                    I’ll let you ponder this: This would be the first conflict in which one side commits all the war crimes. Even more curious, the side which commits no war crimes has a bunch of volunteer units literally using Nazi, SS and Bandera iconography. You know, the guys that marched hundreds of thousands of civilians into the woods and murdered them. Does that seem plausible to you?