It is often disheartening to see how many people of HN don't realise what is happening (and, frankly, has been happening for 8 years) and then read cold opinions devoid of empathy. What is the compromise when the other side's goal is extermination?
Control, integration, subjugation, colonization, there are a lot of other words that are more fitting without the "genocide" hyperbole.
The behaviour of the Russian army towards the non-combatants so far has been aligned to what you could expect of this concept — mass murder, rape as a weapon, "filtration" camps, forced deportations, burnt ground tactics. These are not singular cases, it's the pattern everywhere the Russian army is or has been active.
It's not even the first attempt in the history — the last one was less than a century ago.
[0]: https://twitter.com/sumlenny/status/1510910740261134338
"mass rape, mass murder etc".
Look, I don't think the Russians are innocent in this at all. Obviously they have economic incentive and don't mind killing some folks to get what they are after. They don't want to kill everyone though or they would act very differently.
It's not genocide. Very simple. Even by a stretch of the word to include removing Nazi elements from the armed services.
It's even worse.
Here is what I do know. As of last week less then 5,000 Ukrainian civilians have been killed so far in the campaign. Contrast that with the US did during Iraq, or even in Raqqa. Was that genocide? No, it was just we didn't care. Which is pretty disturbing especially now as we try to proclaim moral high ground and talk about atrocities.
This is not genocide either and false flags and exaggerations abound on all sides.
Edit: responding to the comment below because I'm obviously on a time out at this point:
`As delivered by Ambassador Michael Carpenter`
This is a guy, with a strategic national interest, who addressed the org you are talking about with some claims. Not an series of independently verified facts.
Have bad things happened? Yes. It's a war. Have Russian soldiers done some bad things? Almost certainly. Is there widespread or systemic murder of civilians and rape by Russian troops? No, that is not happening. And it makes sense as it would be counterproductive to Russia's aims.
In short. Unadulterated bullshit.
This is summary post from some ambassador. Read the original report at the OSCE website: https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/3/e/522616.pdf
These are independent verified facts.
They literally ask for permission to rape the Ukrainians from their partners.
https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-rape-russian-soldier-wife-by...
They literally executed civilians in Bucha.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bucha_massacre
If you want to learn more about the Russians armed forces sexual crimes in Ukraine you can find a depressingly large article here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_violence_in_the_2022_Ru...
> This is not genocide either and false flags and exaggerations abound on all sides.
It is literally genocide per the UN definition of the word.
https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
Killing members of the group;
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Russians are easily doing at least the last (forced transfer of children) and are arguably doing the first, and second based on the terrible conditions they leave the cities they level in leaving the Ukrainians to die in the street.
> No, that is not happening. And it makes sense as it would be counterproductive to Russia's aims.
The rape and deportation of locals to Russia is par for the course for the USSR's and Russia's conflicts. They did the exact same thing in Chechnya. If you want to learn more about the terrible crimes that Russia has committed in Ukraine and past wars (like Chechnya) look up what a 'filtration camp' is.
This isn't counterproductive to Russia's aims, it _is_ one of Russias aims.
> In short. Unadulterated bullshit.
In short, it's the Russian army doing Russian army things, at this point it seems they are incapable of conducting wars without committing a tonne of war crimes.
> That's unadulterated bullshit and I think both of us know it.
I think there's some pretty well documented cases of both of those things within the past few months alone. I'm not sure it's bullshit at all.
In this context the Russian soldiers are telling you that you're a "Nazi" because you're speaking Ukrainian, served in the army (no matter how long ago), or have a Ukrainian flag in your home, a tattoo or a haircut they don't like, or just camouflage-styled clothes and therefore don't deserve to live. A shot in the head usually comes after, sometimes worse than that.
This is a story of _each_ village in my area near Kyiv that came under the occupation for just a month. Probably would have been one for my family too if we hadn't fled to safety in time as we'd be considered, in your words, "Nazi elements" too.
Do I really need to link the photos of mass graves, bodies hastily burned to conceal the evidence and accounts of the survivors? Even this is a small fraction as we're not seeing what's happening in the currently occupied areas (there are only some accounts).
How different does it need to be? Does the pointless flattening of Mariupol fall under your definition? Or do we need to wait and see what happens if Russia wins this and there's no real visibility at all?
It is genocide, very simple; heck, Putin is pretty up front about the intent to destroy the Ukrainian people as a people, because he views the existence of that identity distinct from Russia as anathema.
And even without Putin’s statements the piles of evidence from the acts on the ground admit no other explanation.
Bucha, Irpin, Kharkiv, Mariupol etc... It's all there, anyone denying this is either utterly blind or a Russian apologist, these are all war crimes. And Putin's (convoluted) rhetoric has arrived at a single point: that Ukraine are not their own people or culture.
The latest Russian missile attack was on a civilian shopping center FFS! This isn't war conventional between militaries, this is terrorism on civilians when Ukraine attacks on Russian munition depots in Ukrainian territory or some other military target is successful.
Russia has bombed Lviv and Kyiv as well when similar successful military strikes took place with civilian casualties.
The truth is that this is really looking less like a proxy war and more like a hyper-localized World War, if Iran is really supplying UAVs to Russia and China and India is buying their energy to bypass sanctions than the BRICS alliance looks like the geo-political strata is shaking out; one cannot help but feel that if this isn't fought qnd won then Taiwan will be the CCPs next move as it is starting to crack under it's own myopic weight as the Zero COVID policy is taking it's toll and making internal civil war inevitable as the bank freezes/bail-ins are happening there.
The accepted definition is in Article 2 of
https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity-...
Russian propaganda amply demonstrates their intent. The physical part is also well-established. For example Russian filtration camps have been use to "process" then relocate over a million Ukrainians. Including over 250,000 children who will be raised with propaganda about not being Ukrainian.
You may prefer mealymouthed substitutes for calling a spade a spade. But I condemn you for normalizing genocide by refusing to use its proper name.
Maybe we in the west should stop being stupid. Just a thought.
The first condition is intent, specifically intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. Russia has provided ample evidence. For example https://uacrisis.org/en/justification-of-genocide-russia-has... is a translation into English of an article from Russian media laying out what "denazification" actually would entail. The following passage is typical and demonstrates intent:
Denazification will inevitably also be a de-Ukrainization – a rejection of the large-scale artificial inflation of the ethnic component of self-identification of the population of the territories of historical Little Russia (Malorossiya) and New Russia (Novorossiya), begun by the Soviet authorities.
There are many similar statements from all corners of Russian controlled media. Intent is abundantly clear.
As for the second component, we need to establish a physical element. Many Russian war crimes qualify. But I specifically pointed to https://www.state.gov/russias-filtration-operations-forced-d... because the forced relocation of children for the purpose of erasing their ethnic identity is directly listed in the treaty.
Do you still refuse to acknowledge that Russia has met the definition of genocide established in international law by treaty? If so, then on what grounds do you argue that this ISN'T genocide?
Let me clarify my motives for you.
I am not happy with the approach the West has taken in towards this conflict. Most particularly the coup in 2014 and the urging of non settlement early. It has cost the lives of thousands of young Ukrainian men. And for very little purpose. The formerly Russian/ high Russian population areas are going back to Russia. Full stop. This was extremely obvious from the beginning. There was an equitable path forward early, even the return of formerly Russian territories did not have to happen. But the West has become blind and stupid as well as belligerent. Reality is going to smack them squarely in the face soon I think and no amount of propaganda will prevent it.
It did not have to go down like this. A lot of lives could have been saved and suffering prevented. I don't control what Russia does (and I agree, they are looking for geo strategic and economic gain, not to "defend poor Russian speakers"), but anyway, I expect a whole let better from nominal liberal democracies. If you are going to be callous and continue with the murder and deception that has been the defining characteristic the Western order, at least be smart about it. But we have been both callous and stupid. I'm not happy about it. I'll be even less happy if it heats up even more killing millions.
Also, I don't really like extreme bullshit propaganda. I try to see the truth and proclaim the truth best as I can understand it.
Hopefully that clarifies my position.
All of Ukraine, will go back to Ukraine, this includes Crimea. The Russians will leave or die, the Ukrainians have only just started getting HIMARS and M270s and they are already slaughtering Russian ammo depots and command and control centres.
When the NASAMS turn up the Russian missiles and planes will start falling out of the sky at a much higher rate. Then the net that these two systems provide will expand out as the Ukrainians push back.
Russias army doctrine is setup in such a way that practically everything is centralised, its why they occupied the same airfield over 20 times, even though the Ukrainians kept attacking it. This centralised doctrine is highly suspect ile to weapons like HIMARs and M270s as they target the bases and depots that the Russians are working from.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Chornobaivka_attacks
The easiest way to save the most lives in this conflict is to get Russia to leave Ukraine as soon as possible.
The Russian speaking areas do not want to be part of Ukraine after the 2014 coup. The one that was full of Western intelligence and US politicians, including the wife of Iraq war proponent Robert Kagan who is currently serving under Biden.
Many of these areas were part of Russia up until the Soviet Union, most particularly Crimea which was part of Russia from the 1700s until 1954. The people there are Russian. And, there wasn't really an issue until the coup which outset a democratically elected president. After that Russia took Crimea back (with a vote by the locals for whatever that is worth). The other breakaway republics were indiscriminately shelled for over 8 years. Over 14,000 people were killed which is nearly 3 times the amount of civilian casualties Russia has inflicted to date.
Also, Russia has been invaded along this (open) route a few times over the past couple of hundred years. Hitler and Napoleon. Millions died. Putins older brother in fact died as an infant during the Nazi siege.
So when Ukraine starts talking about getting nukes, joining NATO, have literal Nazi brigades attacking the breakaway republics and amassing hundreds of thousands of troops in the East to attack the breakaway republics and "get Crimea back" the Russians will just sit there? No, they will not. Now, again, their other aim is to get exclusive control of the Black Sea and take the oil and agricultural rich areas of the east, as well as increase their population. And we handed them a figleaf like dummies. They have a lot of legal ground. Putin is actually a lawyer (a fact lots of people don't know).
Let the people chose their destiny. Like we did in Kosovo when we wanted to put an airbase there. But no, that doesn't apply in this case. So it has heated up to this. I hope it settles down but the longer it goes on the worse for Ukraine. We should be urging peaceful settlement, not adding fuel to the fire.
The President of Ukraine is one of those Russian speaking Ukrainians that you're talking about. Why don't you ask him whether he would prefer to be part of Ukraine or Russia?
According to polls, Russian speaking Ukrainians overwhelmingly want to be in an independent Ukraine. And the longer the fighting goes on, the stronger that support gets. Strip away Russian propaganda, and "Russian speaking Ukrainians want to be in Russia" turns out to be a fantasy.
It is likewise only in Russian propaganda that Ukraine was looking to get nukes, or was on a course to join NATO. The "breakaway republics" in fact were invaded by Russia in 2014. Yes, the "green men" weren't wearing their Russian military insignia, but nobody was actually fooled. And satellite photos confirmed that the artillery was being fired from Russian territory. See https://iphronline.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Joint-repo... if you doubt me.
I'm not happy with everything we did involving Euromaiden. But Russia had set a democratically elected leader on a course to take over and become a Russia-friendly dictator. Ukraine need look no farther than Belarus to see how that story turns out. Describing it as the overthrow of a democratic regime is at best a half-truth. Probably no more than a quarter truth.
When it comes to legal issues, Russia HAS no legal ground other than a military, a willingness to lie, and other people's unwillingness to confront them.
Let's talk about the whole Nazi thing. It is true that the Azov battalion started as white supremacists, and got absorbed into Ukraine's military. (Then toned down the whole white supremacist thing a lot.) However this problem exists on both sides, and there are likely more white supremacists fighting on the Russian side than the Ukrainian. If this comes as a surprise to you, start with https://www.rferl.org/a/russian-neo-nazis-fighting-ukraine/3... for some of the basics. Worse yet, Russia has actively solicited, and received, international support from white supremacist organizations. Supporters like Steve Bannon opened doors, and are part of how we have Russian propaganda being spewed over Fox News by people like Steve Hannity.
Despite Russian rhetoric about "denazification", it is Russia that has sought out and obtained support from neo-Nazis and those sympathetic to them.
And so we see that again and again, you are consistently misinformed. You've swallowed Russian propaganda on issue after issue. This is in addition to your unwillingness to call a spade a spade and recognize Russian genocide as what it is.
I would advise against compounded the many many bad moves that have been made so far but it's free world.
What I stated is historical and geopolitical fact. Without (near as I can tell) much bias. It's not propaganda, it's the truth. Yes, Russia has traditionally been an expansionist power. Yes, they are looking for advantage.
But a whole lot of ethnic hatred and stupidity and Western involvement has made this even easier for them.
You can read https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/193514/Nuclear%20Backed%20%E2%... for a Polish report on the same, and how Russia used nuclear posturing to keep the world from more emphatically calling Russia on its brazen lies.
Apparently the conclusions of multiple organizations, ranging from widely respected NGOs to national governments, seem ridiculous to you. That does not mean that they are ridiculous. It merely means that you've accepted a dose of Russian disinformation. Which they've been very competent at packaging.
But no, you just keep repeating propaganda lines and claiming that sourced statements are ridiculous. While offering no sources for your claims, and ignoring a variety of sources that you have been provided.
Lies do not become fact merely by being repeated enough. And Russian lies about spontaneous uprisings and Ukrainian atrocities do not become fact simply because you can't accept that those uprisings were conducted by Russian soldiers, and the shelling of Ukrainian civilians in 2014 began with Russian artillery operating on Russian territory. Confirmed by ballistics, satellite photos, and testimony from the people who were shelled.
Sources that you currently believe which say otherwise should be viewed with suspicion. Because they are lying to you.
If not, what exactly of my point do you take issue with? The claims on Russia geo strategical intent? The history of invasions into Russia through Ukraine in fairly recent times? That Crimea is not historically Russian?
These are all facts my friend. Not propaganda.
I wish you would take a more rational and less emotional view of the situation but I can't say I'd do differently in your circumstance. I am concerned where the irrationality leads however. It has so far caused nothing but trouble for Ukraine. And the trouble is spreading.
There are Russian backed terrorists that are temporarily occupying Ukrainian territory, these terrorists shot down a civilian airliner and killed hundreds.
> The majority of people in Crimea did not wish to rejoin Russia?
Theres no been no real referendums so we will never, but the partisan posters that keep appearing in Crimea would suggest that no the majority dont want to join Russia.
> All people on what is (formerly now) Ukraine territory were happy with the post coup Ukrainian government? Is that what you are saying?
All the people on occupied Ukrainian territory may not be happy with the government they may also not be happy be conscripted by the FSB backed terrorist occupiers either to fight against their brothers. But it doesn't matter because not everyone needs to support a government for it to be legitimate.
> These are all facts my friend. Not propaganda.
None of these are facts.
> I wish you would take a more rational and less emotional view of the situation but I can't say I'd do differently in your circumstance. I am concerned where the irrationality leads however. It has so far caused nothing but trouble for Ukraine. And the trouble is spreading.
The most rational view of this situation is to send the heaviest weapons possible to Ukraine, because the only rational way this ends is with a lot of dead Russian soldiers, and that needs to happen as soon as possible.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Crimean_status_referendum... for more.
Examples.
- Offering well-sourced factual claims is not craziness.
- I'm not Ukrainian. I assure you that the California coast is not under any current threat.
- The military facts on the ground say that Russia cannot successfully take much more territory than it already has, and is extremely unlikely to be able to sustain what it has already taken.
- You are continuing to ignore the very real issues that I raised about genocide, etc.
Here is a fact for you to consider. Russia lost the Cold War in part because they didn't have the economy to be a counterweight to the USA. And economic trends have not gone in their favor. By GDP, Russia last year was only slightly more important than Florida. Thanks to sanctions, they are rapidly reducing in geopolitical importance. Not fast enough, I grant. But they aren't in a sustainable position.
Also I would not be so sure the coast of California is safe if this keeps going.
"By GDP". Ya ya ya. Debt based scripts being passed around from VCs and overpriced healthcare are actually the same as resources in hand. That scheme totally isn't going to blow up and there are perpetual motion machines.
"Thanks to sanctions". More denial of reality.
Keep in mind Kyiv is only 50km from the border with Russia, and Russia failed to take it. This was has less been about a denial of reality and really been about seeing just how much a paper tiger the Russian armed forces are, turns out they are worse then pretty much anyone expected.
If Russia is doing so well why are there own propagandist and military complaining about how well Ukraine is striking there C&C and ammo depots?.
Why has Russia made so little gains in the past two weeks?.
Russia has already failed the only question is how badly there loses get before they leave.
That’s the question, how many dead Russian soldiers, how many more ships from the Black Sea fleet have to sink, how many more helicopters and planes have to crash and how many more tanks need to cook off?.
> Or will it take millions in big urban centers and widespread starvation?
The intentional starvation of urban centres certainly sounds like genocide to me, and you really have to ask yourself what kind of capable military acts like this?. Russian threatens because it’s there only option, if they could they would of taken Ukraine already.
This compounded the general fact that logistical troubles are one of the great weaknesses of the Russian military machine.
Meanwhile you continue to avoid calling Russian genocide by its proper name. You continue to claim that Russia had legal justification. You continue to deny the truth of Russian actions, and continue to blame Ukraine's situation on the West rather than on the country doing the invading.
The truth is that it is a tragedy that Ukrainians are faced with the choice of fighting for their sovereignty or submitting to a genocidal Russian oppression. The record of Russian rule being terrible is supported by extensive history, current events, and ongoing Russian policy. By contrast the specter of Germany launching another invasion through Ukraine is rather ridiculous given the current culture of the German people and government. And Russia wore that excuse rather thin after using it to justify decades of tyranny over the Eastern Bloc during the cold war.
I wish you would portray my position honestly, engage with the truth of Russian crimes, and start accepting facts. I also wish you wouldn't support a genocidal dictatorship.
But from what I see they might be in even worse trouble then I had thought. We might be as well.
There is no genocide (yet anyway and hopefully ever). Please stop using hyperbole. It does your point no favors.
Whilst it’s obviously not all rainbows and sunshine for the Ukrainians you really refuse to admit that it only took 4 HIMARS to slam Russian logistics. 30 ammo depots and command and control points have been vaporised in a couple of weeks, and Russia has no counter.
> There is no genocide (yet anyway and hopefully ever). Please stop using hyperbole. It does your point no favors.
You can try and redefine the word genocide all you want, but that does not change the fact that the Russians are committing genocide in Ukraine per them UN definition of the word.
That said, I agree that further conversation is useless. At this point it should be obvious to anyone reading the thread that I try to source my facts, and report on what is true whether or not I like said facts. It should also be clear that you fail to engage with either facts or sources which do not agree with your world view. And your world view has been heavily shaped by Russian disinformation campaigns.
My final word is that I condemn you for believing and then wanting to appease a genocidal dictator. While refusing to engage with documented evidence of the many crimes that he is lying about.
Feel free to respond however you like. I'm done with this conversation.
On top of the rhetoric that Ukrainians as a people shouldn't exist.
There is no doubt that it is genocide and termination.
I’m not sure why these distinctions are relevant. In my mind, if an army is indiscriminately bombing and shelling my city, it sure feels like a genocidal act.