If they wanted gruesome footage of Russian soldiers being slaughtered, why wouldn't they just show the real footage of Russian soldiers exploding while trying to run and hide from drones?
this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2024
48 points (94.4% liked)
Ukraine
8310 readers
547 users here now
News and discussion related to Ukraine
*Sympathy for enemy combatants is prohibited.
*No content depicting extreme violence or gore.
*Posts containing combat footage should include [Combat] in title
*Combat videos containing any footage of a visible human must be flagged NSFW
Server Rules
- Remember the human! (no harassment, threats, etc.)
- No racism or other discrimination
- No Nazis, QAnon or similar
- No porn
- No ads or spam
- No content against Finnish law
Donate to support Ukraine's Defense
Donate to support Humanitarian Aid
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Killing POW is against Geneva convention, killing enemy soldiers (not POW) using drones is not. These videos possibly have two audiences: 1. russian soldiers who have the idea of deserting to be taken as POW. 2. Present 'evidence' to the general public for Ukraine committing war crimes and provoke dropping support of Ukraine.
Russia creating its ticket to justify torturing POWs
Unfortunately there are credible reports of exactly this happening by soldiers from other countries fighting in Ukraine. Doesn't mean it's widespread, but it is happening.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/06/world/europe/ukraine-russia-killings-us.html
Above article is pay-walled, here is an archived link: https://archive.md/gfEFy
The article refers to a claim made for an event that allegedly occurred almost a year ago (last August) and yet can only argue the claim is 'believable', not proven, or at least strongly substantiated. Nor does it provide any context for the event such as whether they had to do it as a mercy due to a lack of medical resources and/or a definitely lethal wound, while at the same time hinting at this very possibility: front line, low on medical supplies (had to scrounge for bandages), during a crisis (medic witness too busy to actually be working on the Russian).
Frankly, I expected better from the NYT.
There was more than one incident reported in the article, and more than one soldier spoke to the reporters and provided proof. I don't think it's widespread, but pretending it doesn't happen instead of facing it and creating policies and procedures to handle it gives legitimacy to the enemies' claims.
No, they never provided proof. They provided 'text conversations' and video of DBs. There's a reason the accusations are extremely limited to a couple specific individuals almost a year ago with dubious 'evidence', and not widespread proven allegations to the point the ICC would get involved. Ukraine already has policies and procedures in place because it is absolutely in their best interest to support the safety of surrendering to encourage enemy forces to do so. Suggesting they don't is Russian propaganda.
Posting an article with sources and saying that this sort of thing is happening is not Russian propaganda. I and my family stand with Ukraine, your straw man argument is ridiculous and inflammatory.
These things happen in war, every day. Refusing to look at them, picking and choosing your facts to suit your opinions, and accusing others of being Russian propagandists is not a good look.
I appreciate that we all want peace and victory in Ukraine, and that any voice pointing out their flaws draws immediate downvotes.
Have a good day.
Happened, not happening. Almost a year ago. In a foreign volunteer group. With poor evidence and zero investigation into whether the inquiry was started or who was involved with the cover-up. I didn't say it doesn't happen. I said the support for this accusation is extremely limited otherwise the article would have been written more strongly than 'we think he's believable'. More importantly, I'm making it clear there absolutely are rules and consequences long ago put in place to prevent it so even if it did occur this is a failure of individuals not reporting the crime or handling the reports of it improperly rather than a systemic one.
Being almost a year old this should have been written far more concretely than it was. Ie: 'These individuals witnessed a warcrime and provided the following proof to this Ukrainian officer overseeing their operations. We questioned the officer, or their superiors, and they either refused comment or provided an explanation which follows...'. You should be asking yourself why journalists didn't investigate far deeper than this surface level trite.
War brings out the worst in everyone. Even "the good guys".