If your premise is that Russia is “obviously” is a fascist nazi state hellbent on genocide, there is obviously no solution but constant war. If that were the case I would obviously agree with you. But there is no evidence for your premise. Russia was an antagonist interfering in other countries before the Ukraine regime change, but they didn’t engage in conquest and genocide. Nor do I know of state sanctioned discrimination between the different ethnicity living in Russia.
So because Russia had other conflicts where they didn’t commit genocide, it’s impossible for them to commit genocide in the future? Or if they do start doing genocide them it’s actually someone else’s fault?
Weird amount of genocide denialism and victim blaming from a self processed passifist
Woah that is the most insane argument I’ve read so far. With that logic we should attack everyone because they could commit genocide. And if you disagree you’re a genocide denier lol.
Argument for what? I’m pointing out that you’re doing genocide denial and suddenly I’m saying someone should get attacked? Being against genocide denial doesn’t mean I think anyone should get attacked you goof.
Notice how I said absolutely nothing about whether I think the war is great or what anyone should be doing, and yet you projected all these views onto me, just because I said genocide denial is wrong. Rethink your life, friend.
No, no, you’re definitely in the wrong here. Let’s go through the play-by-play:
Famko said: “Let Ukraine put their weapons down so that Russia would annex and genocide them? Let’s not forget that Russia is a nazi state, hellbent on promoting Russian ethnic supremacy.”
AlteredEgo said: “But there is no evidence for your premise. Russia was an antagonist interfering in other countries before the Ukraine regime change, but they didn’t engage in conquest and genocide. Nor do I know of state sanctioned discrimination between the different ethnicity living in Russia.”
You said: “So because Russia had other conflicts where they didn’t commit genocide, it’s impossible for them to commit genocide in the future? Or if they do start doing genocide them it’s actually someone else’s fault?”
So here we see someone positing that Russia will genocide Ukraine if Ukraine surrenders and someone saying that there’s no evidence of this in the history of the RF for the last 30 years and there’s no evidence of it happening now. You said that just because Russia didn’t commit genocide previously doesn’t mean it’s impossible for them to commit genocide in the future.
So now we have AlteredEgo coming back to say, paraphrased “[wait, are you saying that if it’s possible that Russia might commit genocide against Ukraine in the future that this is sufficient for why we should fight a war of total domination against them?”]
Because that’s the context of the thread you jumped into
Yes, I read their posts just fine, nothing you said is news. I objected that “there’s no evidence Russia has ever done genocide before” is not a coherent argument against the allegations that Russian forces are committing genocide previously. I also disagree there’s no evidence it’s happening now, but the particular argument that “they didn’t do it in a different war, so they can’t be doing it in this one” is just absurd on its face and was the one I wanted to reply to the most.
That’s not what was said. What was said was that there is not evidence of a genocide happening now, and the response was that they COULD commit a genocide if Ukraine surrendered.
No, no, you’re definitely in the wrong here. Let’s go through the play-by-play;
But there is no evidence for your premise. Russia was an antagonist interfering in other countries before the Ukraine regime change, but they didn’t engage in conquest and genocide.
So this here is a post, from AlteredEgo. In it, they said that Russia doing things in the past that weren’t conquest and genocide meant that somehow genocide cannot be happening now.
Famko said: “Russia is a nazi state, hellbent on promoting Russian ethnic supremacy.”
and AlteredEgo said: “Russia was an antagonist interfering in other countries before the Ukraine regime change, but they didn’t engage in conquest and genocide. Nor do I know of state sanctioned discrimination between the different ethnicity living in Russia.”
So AlteredEgo is providing the evidence against the claim that Russia is a nazi state hellbent on promoting Russian ethnic supremacy. If this were the case, it would seem that we would see evidence for it in their other conflicts and we do not.
They’re literally taking children from Ukraine to give to Russian families so that they Russified, as part of their Russification programs. Which is classified as cultural genocide, if you didn’t know.
Judging by how this war started, and by both sides’ behaviour, I don’t think it’d be ruled as genocide in any international court or tribunal. Cases formally ruled as genocide are rare, precisely because it’s not easy to prove the intent.
And frankly, it’s rarely present. In almost all cases governments are after leverage, power, or resources, and could not care less about the nations or ethnic groups.
Even in Israel’s case it took a long time to produce enough evidence for the UN and ICC to formally declare a genocide is ongoing. And look how obvious that one is.
I am however doubting the numbers since there are no independent observers in this war. You can’t just unquestionably take one sides word for things. Anyone in any western dominated institution that questions the narrative about the Ukraine war gets fired. There are plenty of stories about Ukrainian war crimes as well, but unlike OP makes it sound I do not believe Russia propaganda either.
Also whenever there is war, there are war crimes and atrocities. That is why war should be prevented at all costs.
Also “cultural genocide” is a made up word invented to be used against China. It is literally imperialist propaganda, part of the more than 1.6 billion dollar the US spend on this.
So I do not see how this justifies endless war. A diplomatic peace treaty should obviously see a return of these children.
Okay so, if you’re a pacifist, then clearly you believe that Russia should leave the currently occupied Ukrainian territories, including Crimea, since Russia obviously started this war first and all hostilities should cease between the two nations.
Sure, that would be nice. I doubt however Russia is going to go for that.
Russia made their demands pretty clear at the beginning and they weren’t unreasonable. These demands have never been discussed in mainstream media and are always dismissed. By now it is much harder to get to a reasonable diplomatic solution.
I am however doubting the numbers since there are no independent observers in this war. You can’t just unquestionably take one sides word for things.
The ICC has accused Maria Lvova Belova of being the person in charge of the child abductions/ethnic cleansing. They are neutral and independent enough for me.
A diplomatic peace treaty should obviously see a return of these children.
If your premise is that Russia is “obviously” is a fascist nazi state hellbent on genocide, there is obviously no solution but constant war. If that were the case I would obviously agree with you. But there is no evidence for your premise. Russia was an antagonist interfering in other countries before the Ukraine regime change, but they didn’t engage in conquest and genocide. Nor do I know of state sanctioned discrimination between the different ethnicity living in Russia.
Did you forget about Crimea?
So because Russia had other conflicts where they didn’t commit genocide, it’s impossible for them to commit genocide in the future? Or if they do start doing genocide them it’s actually someone else’s fault?
Weird amount of genocide denialism and victim blaming from a self processed passifist
Woah that is the most insane argument I’ve read so far. With that logic we should attack everyone because they could commit genocide. And if you disagree you’re a genocide denier lol.
Argument for what? I’m pointing out that you’re doing genocide denial and suddenly I’m saying someone should get attacked? Being against genocide denial doesn’t mean I think anyone should get attacked you goof.
Notice how I said absolutely nothing about whether I think the war is great or what anyone should be doing, and yet you projected all these views onto me, just because I said genocide denial is wrong. Rethink your life, friend.
No, no, you’re definitely in the wrong here. Let’s go through the play-by-play:
Famko said: “Let Ukraine put their weapons down so that Russia would annex and genocide them? Let’s not forget that Russia is a nazi state, hellbent on promoting Russian ethnic supremacy.”
AlteredEgo said: “But there is no evidence for your premise. Russia was an antagonist interfering in other countries before the Ukraine regime change, but they didn’t engage in conquest and genocide. Nor do I know of state sanctioned discrimination between the different ethnicity living in Russia.”
You said: “So because Russia had other conflicts where they didn’t commit genocide, it’s impossible for them to commit genocide in the future? Or if they do start doing genocide them it’s actually someone else’s fault?”
So here we see someone positing that Russia will genocide Ukraine if Ukraine surrenders and someone saying that there’s no evidence of this in the history of the RF for the last 30 years and there’s no evidence of it happening now. You said that just because Russia didn’t commit genocide previously doesn’t mean it’s impossible for them to commit genocide in the future.
So now we have AlteredEgo coming back to say, paraphrased “[wait, are you saying that if it’s possible that Russia might commit genocide against Ukraine in the future that this is sufficient for why we should fight a war of total domination against them?”]
Because that’s the context of the thread you jumped into
Yes, I read their posts just fine, nothing you said is news. I objected that “there’s no evidence Russia has ever done genocide before” is not a coherent argument against the allegations that Russian forces are committing genocide previously. I also disagree there’s no evidence it’s happening now, but the particular argument that “they didn’t do it in a different war, so they can’t be doing it in this one” is just absurd on its face and was the one I wanted to reply to the most.
That’s not what was said. What was said was that there is not evidence of a genocide happening now, and the response was that they COULD commit a genocide if Ukraine surrendered.
No, no, you’re definitely in the wrong here. Let’s go through the play-by-play;
So this here is a post, from AlteredEgo. In it, they said that Russia doing things in the past that weren’t conquest and genocide meant that somehow genocide cannot be happening now.
Nope. You’re skipping over the important bits.
Famko said: “Russia is a nazi state, hellbent on promoting Russian ethnic supremacy.”
and AlteredEgo said: “Russia was an antagonist interfering in other countries before the Ukraine regime change, but they didn’t engage in conquest and genocide. Nor do I know of state sanctioned discrimination between the different ethnicity living in Russia.”
So AlteredEgo is providing the evidence against the claim that Russia is a nazi state hellbent on promoting Russian ethnic supremacy. If this were the case, it would seem that we would see evidence for it in their other conflicts and we do not.
This is a perfectly reasonable argument to make.
They’re literally taking children from Ukraine to give to Russian families so that they Russified, as part of their Russification programs. Which is classified as cultural genocide, if you didn’t know.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_abductions_in_the_Russo-Ukrainian_war
While it’s true that it classifies as a genocidal act under Article II of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, it’s not the only criteria. To be technically classified as genocide, you need to prove the clear intent of destroying a specific group, either in part or fully.
Judging by how this war started, and by both sides’ behaviour, I don’t think it’d be ruled as genocide in any international court or tribunal. Cases formally ruled as genocide are rare, precisely because it’s not easy to prove the intent.
And frankly, it’s rarely present. In almost all cases governments are after leverage, power, or resources, and could not care less about the nations or ethnic groups.
Even in Israel’s case it took a long time to produce enough evidence for the UN and ICC to formally declare a genocide is ongoing. And look how obvious that one is.
Cool story kiddo
It is a war crime and rises to ethnic cleansing.
I am however doubting the numbers since there are no independent observers in this war. You can’t just unquestionably take one sides word for things. Anyone in any western dominated institution that questions the narrative about the Ukraine war gets fired. There are plenty of stories about Ukrainian war crimes as well, but unlike OP makes it sound I do not believe Russia propaganda either.
Also whenever there is war, there are war crimes and atrocities. That is why war should be prevented at all costs.
Also “cultural genocide” is a made up word invented to be used against China. It is literally imperialist propaganda, part of the more than 1.6 billion dollar the US spend on this.
So I do not see how this justifies endless war. A diplomatic peace treaty should obviously see a return of these children.
Okay so, if you’re a pacifist, then clearly you believe that Russia should leave the currently occupied Ukrainian territories, including Crimea, since Russia obviously started this war first and all hostilities should cease between the two nations.
Sure, that would be nice. I doubt however Russia is going to go for that.
Russia made their demands pretty clear at the beginning and they weren’t unreasonable. These demands have never been discussed in mainstream media and are always dismissed. By now it is much harder to get to a reasonable diplomatic solution.
The ICC has accused Maria Lvova Belova of being the person in charge of the child abductions/ethnic cleansing. They are neutral and independent enough for me.
I fully agree.
“There’s no evidence”… Except for the damn war they started and continue to this day with the explicit intent of conquest.
No no komrade, is special 3 day operation, Ukraine totally attacked first, Russia is just bro, trust us.