123
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org 41 points 2 months ago

I hate Putin and any Russian war sympathizer as much as the next guy, but...

My grandfather got a white phosphorus burn during WW2. He told me it was the most terrible pain he ever felt in his entire life, you can't extinguish it, and he wouldn't wish it on his worst enemy. I heard the same kind of stories from people who got napalm burns in Vietnam.

I'm pretty sure thermite munitions are in the same category of basically inhumane weapons regardless of the circumstances, right up there with NBCs, mines, napalm and white phosphorus, and I can't say I fully side with the Ukrainians on this one. I mean I understand why they do it, but I also remember my grandfather's leg and the horror of what he told me.

[-] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 58 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Russia is welcome to withdraw from its genocidal, imperialist, unilateral invasion at any time.

[-] metaStatic@kbin.earth 7 points 2 months ago

"it's not a war crime if we're defending ourselves"

[-] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 24 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Do you put "sitting in the comfort of the first world trying to be the moral arbiter of a people desperately defending themselves from a fascist war of extermination" as one of your hobbies on your dating profile?

Edit: This reply was so ridiculous that I actually completely forgot to mention that this isn't a war crime under international law.

[-] Takios@discuss.tchncs.de 12 points 2 months ago

It's not even a war crime. It's only a war crime specifically if it's used where civilians are.

[-] skye@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

It's also a war crime if it's a weapon inflicting excessively injurious or having indiscriminate effects. Like flamethrowers, landmines and blinding lased weapons.

All of these weapons are banned under Geneva Convention, and by using them in a war you would be committing a war crime

[-] Vilian@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 months ago

Are you being stupid because you're just that stupid or Russia is paying you to be stupid?, at least the money is a good excuse

[-] skye@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago

Why are you so pressed? What part of what I said is somehow in support of Russia?

Do you then not think that U.S. using Agent Orange wouldnt count as a war crime? or any flamethrower use in WW1? or White Phosphorus?

What would using a banned weapon during war be called if not a war crime?

Clearly these weapons are banned because they are overly cruel, meaning it gets the job too well done.

Last time I checked if someone used banned substances that counts as a crime. And if someone were to break the same rules for war, it would qualify as a crime during wartime (war crime for short).

But no you just think that every hint of criticism against anyone good means that you're against that fully? Have you heard of the word 'nuance' before?

[-] bradorsomething@ttrpg.network 8 points 2 months ago

Honestly the Ukrainian brutality has been pretty constrained over time compared to the civil war. Russia started full 1865.

[-] hoch@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago

After seeing countless attacks on Ukrainian civilians, I really don't care what happens to the invading forces anymore. Remove them from Ukrainian territory however you want, I really don't care.

[-] nandeEbisu@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

It does sound borderline war crime, but then again the US buried thousands of Iraqi soldiers alive in the first gulf war, but our lawyers also did the mental gymnastics to justify it not being one beforehand so presumably they have some justification so its just barely legal. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-09-12-mn-2959-story.html

That being said, its not like Russia is being super careful about its rules of engagement.

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 4 points 2 months ago

Don't want to get war crimed, don't do war crimes first.

[-] Donebrach@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

No device made to kill a human is humane. Russia started this. They can stop this whenever they want and go back to their shitty ice-hell.

[-] ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 2 months ago

No device made to kill a human is humane

Yes but some are more inhumane than others. That's why the United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons exists, which lists the following protocols:

  1. Non-detectable fragments: weapons specially designed to shatter into tiny pieces, which aren’t detectable in the human body. Examples are fragmented bullets or projectiles filled with broken glass.
  2. Mines, booby traps, and other devices: This includes anti-personnel mines, which are mines specially designed to target humans rather than tanks.
  3. Incendiary weapons: Weapons that cause fires aren’t permitted for use on on civilian populations or in forested areas.
  4. Blinding lasers: Laser weapons specifically designed to cause permanent blindness.
  5. Explosive remnants of war: Parties that have used cluster bombs in combat are required to help clear any unexploded remains.

Thermite is a protocol 3 weapon. So again, while I understand that Ukraine is desperate to defend itself, using that stuff is not great.

this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2024
123 points (85.1% liked)

A Boring Dystopia

9756 readers
1509 users here now

Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.

Rules (Subject to Change)

--Be a Decent Human Being

--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title

--Posts must have something to do with the topic

--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.

--No NSFW content

--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS