Eurotrash
Full Member
If you still get the harshest possible punishment, why would any of the following hundreds of POWs awaiting trial do the same?Why?
If you still get the harshest possible punishment, why would any of the following hundreds of POWs awaiting trial do the same?Why?
This is what they’re going to do anyway, at least according to how the things look at the moment. Although there haven’t been any open trials yet (Azov’s soldiers are probably going to be the first).I meant ukranians of course. My point is that they may now say these aren't pows, they're war criminals and give them heavy sentences instead of being exchanged or released at the end of the war.
But why does it matter if they express remorse? They committed the war crime. They’re remorseful because they got caught.If you still get the harshest possible punishment, why would any of the following hundreds of POWs awaiting trial do the same?
I wouldn't. Surely at the end of the war a distinction would be made between pows and criminals. But handing out life sentences while the war is ongoing, russians will probably start doing the same in retaliation.And why would you let that guy go?
Considering what we know the Russians have done to captured civilians, I’m not so sure I’d worry about this leading to a change in policy towards captured Ukrainian soldiers.I wouldn't. Surely at the end of the war a distinction would be made between pows and criminals. But handing out life sentences while the war is ongoing, russians will probably start doing the same in retaliation.
Again, I have nothing against the whole thing (if he did it, lock him up) except the timing, which might bring unnecessary trouble for captured ukranians.
Fair enough. I guess civilians also need to see that something is being done to the criminals.Considering what we know the Russians have done to captured civilians, I’m not so sure I’d worry about this leading to a change in policy towards captured Ukrainian soldiers.
I would have thought when the Ukrainian counter attacks come they likely won't go directly for the cities, they'd be more likely to target the open ground between settlements using any new advanced weaponry / aerial kit they might have and try to encircle the cities. Same as the Russians but without ploughing troops into the meat grinder to score political points. Once the cities are surrounded they will be aiming to cut off their supply lines and force them to give up. Won't be pretty whatever happens - a lot of civilians will likely die anyway sadly.Like father like son. Soldiers are stealing washing machines, their superiors are stealing tons of grain.
The grim thing is that both armies seem to be doing much, much better at defending than they are at offensive actions. And it looks like Russia is doing much better tactically now than they did at the very beginning (although it's hard not to). My only hope at this point is that the internal system will eventually crumble under the immense pressure — when common folk will recognise just how costly this war had been to them, both financially and in terms of very literal human lives.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Here is an excellent interview of Prof. Timothy Snyder from March. He basically answers all the questions one might have about this war. I really don't see how anyone could disagree with anything he says.
Why on Earth would a major general fly in risky areas (although if I am not mistaken, MG is just one star general in Russian military, unlike in the US when they hold two stars)?Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Regardless, he should be coordinating ops from the ground not flying. Some desperate stuff.Why on Earth would a major general fly in risky areas (although if I am not mistaken, MG is just one star general in Russian military, unlike in the US when they hold two stars)?
Aye. I would have thought that even a colonel is too high to do such things. An 1-star ranking general, in the US, is someone who assists a higher-ranking general. I think that in the US, even a two-star general commands 10K or so people.Regardless, he should be coordinating ops from the ground not flying. Some desperate stuff.
I think in the airforces it is a bit different than the army , it is usual for top pilots to be eg. colonels. Still, general is a bit too high. Except for places like Andrews AFB.Aye. I would have thought that even a colonel is too high to do such things. An 1-star ranking general, in the US, is someone who assists a higher-ranking general. I think that in the US, even a two-star general commands 10K or so people.
Even a colonel commands a thousand or so people. So why was this guy flying aircrafts?
Can't take him too seriously given his resemblance to Phil ThompsonHere is an excellent interview of Prof. Timothy Snyder from March. He basically answers all the questions one might have about this war. I really don't see how anyone could disagree with anything he says.
He could fly around all he wants if Russia had air superiority. The fact that they don't (which is a massive fail on their part, but that's for another topic) suggests a combination of bravado and desperation.Why on Earth would a major general fly in risky areas (although if I am not mistaken, MG is just one star general in Russian military, unlike in the US when they hold two stars)?
It depends on who owns the skies. For instance in Iraq, US Generals flew around the country at will, in what would appear to civilians as private jets. Not having a SAM threat is a massive factor on whether or not high level people fly in war zones.I think in the airforces it is a bit different than the army , it is usual for top pilots to be eg. colonels. Still, general is a bit too high. Except for places like Andrews AFB.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
He wasn’t “retired”, he was dismissed without honors after crashing a plane he didn’t even have a required expertise to fly on in an attempt to perform some showboating trick.Why on Earth would a major general fly in risky areas (although if I am not mistaken, MG is just one star general in Russian military, unlike in the US when they hold two stars)?
Maybe somebody should recommend them Francesco Schettino as the captain of their new blacksea flagship.He wasn’t “retired”, he was dismissed without honors after crashing a plane he didn’t even have a required expertise to fly on in an attempt to perform some showboating trick.
So, most likely, he was recruited by some private military company like Wagner, although, as you can imagine, there’s not a lot of information open to the public.
Was not aware contractors had jets.He wasn’t “retired”, he was dismissed without honors after crashing a plane he didn’t even have a required expertise to fly on in an attempt to perform some showboating trick.
So, most likely, he was recruited by some private military company like Wagner, although, as you can imagine, there’s not a lot of information open to the public.
You have to understand that they’re very much intertwined with the Army (and Putin’s elite). In the BBC podcast that discussed this general they’ve talked about it as well, apparently they have an option to “lease” them.Was not aware contractors had jets.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
If anyone has means to chip in feel free. Since the morning we have collected 1 MEUR out of the 5 MEUR necessary to buy a Bayraktar for Ukraine. Lithuanian and Turkish defense ministries together with manufacturer have green lighted it. Paypal money guarantee is available.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
So, if Ukraine hires some western private company like Blackwater, and they "lease" a few dozen F-35 aircraft for operation inside Ukraine, will that be something similar?You have to understand that they’re very much intertwined with the Army (and Putin’s elite). In the BBC podcast that discussed this general they’ve talked about it as well, apparently they have an option to “lease” them.
I’m not sure. Wagner is essentially just another part of Putin’s enormous and complicated enforcer apparatus — they aren’t much different than the army itself but they’re more experienced, they get paid better and you can claim that any of their involvement in different conflicts abroad (like in CAR or in Syria) has nothing to do with Russia. Which is why they can, although I’m sure that it’s not done through legit sources, “lease” Russian planes and vehicles, use military airports etc.So, if Ukraine hires some western private company like Blackwater, and they "lease" a few dozen F-35 aircraft for operation inside Ukraine, will that be something similar?