I will just always disagree with that sense. You're calling for self-censoring, for the suppression of anything negative about Ukraine. And even more, you're suggesting that anyone who isn't doing that is intending to help Russia (as your last sentence says). I find that attitude (which is not just you, obviously; many people on here seem to think the same) deeply troubling. Orwellian.By giving a helping hand to Russian propaganda during the actual war is quite clear contribution to the genocide? This attempt at false equivalence when it comes to the civilian victims is just morally wrong on every level all it does it helps Russia to create an illusion that both sides are to blame and many peoples will for it = less support in the west in terms or donations or military assistance. I mean Russian embassy in uk that publicly called for execution of Ukrainian POWs just a few days ago now shares the report proudly and that’s all you need to know about the state of it and who it was meant to serve.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/n...ng-civilians-new-testimony-and-investigation/The Russian military’s siege warfare tactics in Ukraine, marked by relentless indiscriminate attacks on densely-populated areas, are unlawfully killing civilians in several cities, Amnesty International said today in a new on-the-ground investigation.
For the first time, Amnesty International field investigators in Ukraine have independently verified physical evidence of banned cluster munitions, the use of which violates international law. They have also collected testimony that documents Russian siege tactics, including unlawful indiscriminate attacks, disruption of basic utilities, cuts to communication, destruction of civilian infrastructure, and restrictions on access to medicine and healthcare.
Indiscriminate attacks by Russian forces
amnesty runs a charity for distributing relief aid to ukraine. it doesn't do that for russia. so some of you need to get to grips with reality.Many of the Russian strikes that Amnesty International documented in recent months were carried out with inherently indiscriminate weapons, including internationally banned cluster munitions, or with other explosive weapons with wide area effects. Others used guided weapons with varying levels of accuracy; in some cases, the weapons were precise enough to target specific objects.
The Ukrainian military’s practice of locating military objectives within populated areas does not in any way justify indiscriminate Russian attacks. All parties to a conflict must at all times distinguish between military objectives and civilian objects and take all feasible precautions, including in choice of weapons, to minimize civilian harm. Indiscriminate attacks which kill or injure civilians or damage civilian objects are war crimes.
“The Ukrainian government should immediately ensure that it locates its forces away from populated areas, or should evacuate civilians from areas where the military is operating. Militaries should never use hospitals to engage in warfare, and should only use schools or civilian homes as a last resort when there are no viable alternatives,” said Agnès Callamard.
Amnesty International contacted the Ukrainian Ministry of Defence with the findings of the research on 29 July 2022. At the time of publication, they had not yet responded.
Would be funny if the Ukrainian advance in the South was a feint and they used their interior lines to shift forces back at Donbas while blowing up every means for the Russians to redeploy back there.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Yeah, I agree with that. It does seem Amnesty overlooked some of the unavoidable practicalities of fighting a defensive war over your own territory. I suppose there's shades in that (choices that can be made); but the general principle could have been acknowledged.I have to somewhat agree with @neverdie here, I don't think Amnesty is being paid by Russia nor are they willingly spreading Russian propaganda. The problem is that they seem to have no idea about how warfare equipment work and by condemning the Ukrainians for putting military equipment in the cities, they are basically creating an excuse for Russia to attack any civilian targets.
If Ukraine wants to protect a city under attack the only way to do so, is from within the city. You can't have anti air systems 20km outside the city and expect them to be able to intercept incoming fire, targeted at the city. The only way for AA systems like Nasams or BUK to have any chance of intercepting incoming missiles is to have them as close as possible to the targets they are designated to protect.
Same with the ground troops. Large parts of Ukraine is basically just a big grain field, just open fields as long as you can see. If Ukraine would place their tanks and infatry in these fields, outside the cities, they would just be sitting ducks for the Russian artillery, without any cover what so ever.
How have you and your family been doing?
It seems a bit more insidious than that. It seems to be the latest in a long line of Westerners trying to criticise their own Western nations or its allies by supporting the talking points of the enemy or at the very least creating a false equivalence.Yeah, I agree with that. It does seem Amnesty overlooked some of the unavoidable practicalities of fighting a defensive war over your own territory. I suppose there's shades in that (choices that can be made); but the general principle could have been acknowledged.
i can understand that criticism. i've had that criticism myself of these organisations in the past related to different actors, see the arab conflicts in particular and use of civilian places. in a place like gaza, what else are you supposed to do? but i've just about come round to the idea that they understand how it works and why actors do as they do but they refuse to take sides and generally tend to condemn it all outright which i don't have a problem with. if they didn't do that they'd have less credibility in my eyes even if they publish things that seem to me politically incorrect every now and then.I have to somewhat agree with @neverdie here, I don't think Amnesty is being paid by Russia nor are they willingly spreading Russian propaganda. The problem is that they seem to have no idea about how warfare equipment work and by condemning the Ukrainians for putting military equipment in the cities, they are basically creating an excuse for Russia to attack any civilian targets.
If Ukraine wants to protect a city under attack the only way to do so, is from within the city. You can't have anti air systems 20km outside the city and expect them to be able to intercept incoming fire, targeted at the city. The only way for AA systems like Nasams or BUK to have any chance of intercepting incoming missiles is to have them as close as possible to the targets they are designated to protect.
Same with the ground troops. Large parts of Ukraine is basically just a big grain field, just open fields as long as you can see. If Ukraine would place their tanks and infatry in these fields, outside the cities, they would just be sitting ducks for the Russian artillery, without any cover what so ever.
In wars like this one, when one side attacks the other side for no reason at all and wants to exterminate them, we take sides. All the problems, all the killing, all the injustice, happens because Russia invaded Ukraine. Russia's goal is to eliminate Ukraine altogether, it is life or death for Ukraine. Russia should lose this war, and they should pay for what they did. That's it. What Ukraine did or did not do, is of no concern at this moment. In the future, after the war is over, we can discuss their mistakes. Right now we take their side, because they are a victim with a knife on their throats.I will just always disagree with that sense. You're calling for self-censoring, for the suppression of anything negative about Ukraine. And even more, you're suggesting that anyone who isn't doing that is intending to help Russia (as your last sentence says). I find that attitude (which is not just you, obviously; many people on here seem to think the same) deeply troubling. Orwellian.
The source CBS used for the claims that only 30% of the weapons ending up on the front lines is Donatella Rovera from Amnesty. She is also the one responsible for the claims about Ukrainian war crimes.It seems a bit more insidious than that. It seems to be the latest in a long line of Westerners trying to criticise their own Western nations or its allies by supporting the talking points of the enemy or at the very least creating a false equivalence.
We even had them trying to downplay the Holocaust just after WWII, as many sincerely believed and argued it was being over exaggerated to create a distraction from the (supposed) crimes of the Allied nations.
There’s now the CBS documentary too they are involved in, where they make completely unsubstantiated claims about the final destination of Ukraine’s military aid. The mask is slipping.
Comparing it to the Israel-Palestinia conflict is quite interesting. I know a lot of Amnesty workers are openly very anti Israel in their views. Have Amnesty ever made any report, claiming Palestinian war crimes due to weapons being located close to populated areas?i can understand that criticism. i've had that criticism myself of these organisations in the past related to different actors, see the arab conflicts in particular and use of civilian places. in a place like gaza, what else are you supposed to do? but i've just about come round to the idea that they understand how it works and why actors do as they do but they refuse to take sides and generally tend to condemn it all outright which i don't have a problem with. if they didn't do that they'd have less credibility in my eyes even if they publish things that seem to me politically incorrect every now and then.
on populated areas, certain i've seen them criticize them for it before. on everything else, they've criticized the palestinian resistance in terms as harsh or harsher than the ukrainian resistance despite the asymmetry between each side.Comparing it to the Israel-Palestinia conflict is quite interesting. I know a lot of Amnesty workers are openly very anti Israel in their views. Have Amnesty ever made any report, claiming Palestinian war crimes due to weapons being located close to populated areas?
In previous conflicts Amnesty International has documented that Palestinian armed groups have stored munitions in and fired indiscriminate rockets from residential areas in the Gaza Strip in violation of international humanitarian law. Reports have also emerged during the current conflict of Hamas urging residents to ignore Israeli warnings to evacuate.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/its-immoral-for-hamas-to_b_5629548Furthermore, Amnesty International (while vehemently urging Israel to cease military activities) has stated Hamas is violating international law by storing rockets in civilian areas and urging people not to leave their homes after being warned by Israel of impending attacks:
As explained above, in previous conflicts Amnesty International has documented that Palestinian armed groups have stored munitions in and fired indiscriminate rockets from residential areas in the Gaza Strip, and available evidence indicates that they continue to do both during the current hostilities, in violation of international humanitarian law. During the current hostilities, Hamas spokespeople have reportedly urged residents in some areas of the Gaza Strip not to leave their homes after the Israeli military dropped leaflets and made phone calls warning people in the area to evacuate.
What mask? And what is it revealing?It seems a bit more insidious than that. It seems to be the latest in a long line of Westerners trying to criticise their own Western nations or its allies by supporting the talking points of the enemy or at the very least creating a false equivalence.
We even had them trying to downplay the Holocaust just after WWII, as many sincerely believed and argued it was being over exaggerated to create a distraction from the (supposed) crimes of the Allied nations.
There’s now the CBS documentary too they are involved in, where they make completely unsubstantiated claims about the final destination of Ukraine’s military aid. The mask is slipping.
no idea who she is beyond her amnesty connection but she didn't pluck the numbers out of thin air. seems to be sourced from the following.She is definitelly a rotten apple within the organisation for whatever reason and not the only one either. I know of at least one Amnesty Finland board member that has been spreading Kremlin propaganda on twitter.
so not sure how accurate that is but it's coming from a very pro-ukrainian source. then you have lots of other material that comes direct from nato countries about the same topic. i'd guess no one knows exactly how many weapons go missing but that it's not a small amount even if it isn't 60% which seems incredibly massive. some will end up on the black market. just some snippets below."All of this stuff goes across the border, and then something happens, kind of like 30% of it reaches its final destination," said Jonas Ohman, founder and CEO of Blue-Yellow, a Lithuania-based organization that has been meeting with and supplying frontline units with military aid in Ukraine since the start of the conflict with Russia-backed separatists in 2014.
"30-40%, that's my estimation," he said in April of this year.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine-military-aid-weapons-front-lines/
Nato and EU states are pushing for better tracking of weapons supplied to Ukraine in response to fears that criminal groups are smuggling them out of the country and on to Europe’s black market.
Since Russia launched its war against Ukraine, western states have pledged more than $10bn in military support, from portable rocket launchers and armoured vehicles to rifles and vast amounts of ammunition.
A number of Nato member states are discussing with Kyiv some form of tracking system or detailed inventory lists for weapons supplied to Ukraine, two western officials briefed on the talks told the Financial Times.
Ukraine’s government is setting up a more extensive weapons monitoring and tracing system with the help of western countries, a third person familiar with the situation said.
“All these weapons land in southern Poland, get shipped to the border and then are just divided up into vehicles to cross: trucks, vans, sometimes private cars,” said one of the western officials. “And from that moment we go blank on their location and we have no idea where they go, where they are used or even if they stay in the country.”
The potential for US weapons sent to Ukraine to fall into the wrong hands is “among a host of considerations” given the “challenging situation” on the ground in the country, said Bonnie Denise Jenkins, US under secretary for arms control and international security, on Tuesday.
“The US very seriously takes our responsibility to protect American origin defence technologies and prevent their diversion or illicit proliferation,” Jenkins told reporters in Brussels, adding that the US was in “continued contact” with Kyiv on the issue.
https://www.ft.com/content/bce78c78-b899-4dd2-b3a0-69d789b8aee8
the us and other states and orgs will be conscious of this because of the afghan, syrian, and iraqi experiences where a lot of weapons went missing. and even in conflicts which predate those. it's a fact of war. i just don't know if it's enough evidence to start a witch hunt. it may be that she's anti-ukrainian but her sources aren't.The US has few ways to track the substantial supply of anti-tank, anti-aircraft and other weaponry it has sent across the border into Ukraine, sources tell CNN, a blind spot that's due in large part to the lack of US boots on the ground in the country -- and the easy portability of many of the smaller systems now pouring across the border. It's a conscious risk the Biden administration is willing to take.
In the short term, the US sees the transfer of hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of equipment to be vital to the Ukrainians' ability to hold off Moscow's invasion. A senior defense official said Tuesday that it is "certainly the largest recent supply to a partner country in a conflict." But the risk, both current US officials and defense analysts say, is that in the long term, some of those weapons may wind up in the hands of other militaries and militias that the US did not intend to arm.
"We have fidelity for a short time, but when it enters the fog of war, we have almost zero," said one source briefed on US intelligence. "It drops into a big black hole, and you have almost no sense of it at all after a short period of time."
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/04/19/politics/us-weapons-ukraine-intelligence/index.html
which is part of the overall point i was making. she's seen as bad because she says something that isn't on message or is perceived as being hostile but was she bad when she said this back in may? of course not. she also has a history throughout her career of tracking illegal weapons, which a cursory glance of her working biography and articles tell me.Amnesty International says it has documented war crimes in Ukraine, including the “wilful killings of civilians” by Russian forces when they occupied an area northeast of Kyiv, Ukraine’s capital, in February and March. Civilians have also suffered abuse such as “reckless shootings and torture” at the hands of Russian forces in the early stages of Russia’s invasion, the rights group said in a report published on Friday. “These are not isolated incidents. These are very much part of a pattern wherever Russian forces were in control of a town or a village,” Donatella Rovera, Amnesty’s senior crisis response adviser, told a news conference in Kyiv.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022...nce-shows-russian-troops-committed-war-crimes
What mask? And what is it revealing?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I don't get the discussion either. Of course Ukraine will not play everything by the book, this is a war and not a game. And of course it has to be allowed to cover such incidents. Does it help the Russian propaganda? Sure. But covering this is the difference between news and propaganda and we should all hope that we get news instead of propaganda.People who think Amnesty of all organizations are in the service of the Russian government have gone off the deep end. They might make mistakes, but it's not entirely clear how big this one is. Is it really so hard to believe that Ukraine is making bad judgments of their own in their attempt to defend themselves against Russian conquest?
What an awful comparison, do you even understand the difference betwen victim and aggressor?Yeah and you can go to Russia and tell those being locked up for protesting that now is not the time for dissent and they need to rally round their country and leaders, get on board the team and come on in for the big win.
Alternatively you can defend free expression and support the ability to criticise.
Ridiculous.It’s just morally so wrong on every level to be discussing this right now and it shouldn’t need any explanation. I advise you to go to the frontlines and then let us know if you still feel the same about that Amnesty report timing and necessity when it creates even more harm for the victim? It’s very easy to take a high horse from a warm couch in western country.
That doesn't answer my questions. 'The mask is slipping' suggest that someone was pretending to be someone else, but the pretense is coming out. So my question was: what mask do you think Amnesty was wearing? I.e., what do you think they pretended to be? And what are we now learning about them instead? I.e., who are they really?Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
That's such a cop-out. So if you're not fighting there, you're not allowed to say anything negative?It’s just morally so wrong on every level to be discussing this right now and it shouldn’t need any explanation. I advise you to go to the frontlines and then let us know if you still feel the same about that Amnesty report timing and necessity when it creates even more harm for the victim? It’s very easy to take a high horse from a warm couch in western country.