Ukraine told critics of the pace of its three-month-old counteroffensive to "shut up" on Thursday, the sharpest signal yet of Kyiv's frustration at leaks from Western officials that say its forces are advancing too slowly.
“We shouldn’t help the rape victim and they should hope that it’s over quickly. Also, it’s actually not rape, it’s a special sexual operation and they deserved it.” - Tankies
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.
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?
The OHCHR report you linked doesn’t state who bombed, from what I skimmed. But I’m sure you read it and can point me to such a finding?
Speaking of MH-15, who slaughtered people in Bucha? Which side is bombing shopping centres during the day and apartment buildings in the night? We all know that. And now you come with a source which does not establish that Ukraine bombed civilians and you want me to believe it wasn’t the Russian side which has a well-established pattern of doing the exact thing? In Chechnya, in Syria, in Afghanistan?
I’m not saying that you can’t – if the evidence is there, go ahead, post it. But actually post evidence and not what you decided was evidence without even reading half-way through the thing.
Funny how if you’re against another endless war you’re a tankie and support Putin…
I’m neither a tankie nor I support Putin. But I also don’t support NATO and the Empire.
But just as a note, most “tankies” don’t support Russia and know Putin is a conservative capitalist. I mean he is the direct result of the dismantling of the USSR by internal revisionists (tsarists and capitalists) and the CIA.
But again, it’s the Iraq war all over again. And you libs are doing THE SAME THING. It’s hilarious.
There’s a load of things I could say, but they would all be pointless, so I’m going to say this. It would be less depressing if you were actually being paid by the Russians.
EDIT: Which, you know, is not actually out of the question.
“We shouldn’t help the rape victim and they should hope that it’s over quickly. Also, it’s actually not rape, it’s a special sexual operation and they deserved it.” - Tankies
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.
Ask Prigozhin whether that shelling actually happened. You swallowed Russian propaganda hook, line, and sinker.
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Countries/UA/OHCHRThematicReportUkraineJan2014-May2016_EN.pdf
Na better believe Prigozhin, that guy never told a lie or said anything that was totally wrong.
What do you believe your source to say, exactly? That Ukraine shelled indiscriminately? If so, you should read it again.
Yes it says that exactly, unless you think the “armed groups” shelled themselves.
Maybe the armed groups headed by known criminals (look at who ran those “people’s republics”) shelled the civilians? They also shot down MH-15.
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?
The OHCHR report you linked doesn’t state who bombed, from what I skimmed. But I’m sure you read it and can point me to such a finding?
Speaking of MH-15, who slaughtered people in Bucha? Which side is bombing shopping centres during the day and apartment buildings in the night? We all know that. And now you come with a source which does not establish that Ukraine bombed civilians and you want me to believe it wasn’t the Russian side which has a well-established pattern of doing the exact thing? In Chechnya, in Syria, in Afghanistan?
I’m not saying that you can’t – if the evidence is there, go ahead, post it. But actually post evidence and not what you decided was evidence without even reading half-way through the thing.
Funny how if you’re against another endless war you’re a tankie and support Putin…
I’m neither a tankie nor I support Putin. But I also don’t support NATO and the Empire.
But just as a note, most “tankies” don’t support Russia and know Putin is a conservative capitalist. I mean he is the direct result of the dismantling of the USSR by internal revisionists (tsarists and capitalists) and the CIA.
But again, it’s the Iraq war all over again. And you libs are doing THE SAME THING. It’s hilarious.
There’s a load of things I could say, but they would all be pointless, so I’m going to say this. It would be less depressing if you were actually being paid by the Russians.
EDIT: Which, you know, is not actually out of the question.
“Being against war means you are our enemy!” - the “pacifist”, “anti-war”, liberal.
Funny how pacifists are the first to cry when someone hits them.
Let’s not ruin pacifism, self-defense can be a form of it
pacifism /ˈpasɪfɪz(ə)m/ noun the belief that war and violence are unjustifiable and that all disputes should be settled by peaceful means.
How is that funny