this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2024
54 points (79.3% liked)

World News

39347 readers
3144 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Weirdmusic 10 points 2 days ago (15 children)

Ah, of course, that icon of non partisan high brow news and information the World Socialist Web Site

[–] 13esq 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (13 children)

Do you disagree with the article or just the source?

[–] Weirdmusic 4 points 2 days ago (12 children)
[–] 13esq 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The article seems factual and unbiased as far as possible can tell.

[–] FelixCress 7 points 2 days ago (2 children)

What about the title? Since when killing a soldier during war is a murder?

[–] 13esq -2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Semantics.

So what? You'd be fine with the title if it said "killed in action" or something like that?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I mean yeah, they probably would. The words have specific connotations; murder is not just killing, it's unlawful or unjust killing. This is like the opposite to when police shoot someone dead at a traffic stop and the headline is "black man passes away after interaction with police"

[–] 13esq 0 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

I'd argue that KIA implies that they were on the front lines, but once again that's semantics.

I think the vast majority understands the meaning of the headline and aren't overly concerned with the dictionary definition of murder.

[–] FelixCress 0 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I would say you are talking rubbish and use the word "murder" is a blatant Russian propaganda.

[–] 13esq 0 points 9 hours ago

You are entitled to your opinion.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Assasinations of individuals using perfidity are illegal under the Geneva convention. It is explicitly mentioned in the article. For a more detailed look read through this:

https://lieber.westpoint.edu/assassination-law-of-war/

Note that Westpoint is an American military academy. I hope this removes your worries of Russian trolls.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Please stop misreading (or misrepresenting, whichever it is) this source. As I mentioned in my other reply to you, the only definition of perfidy given in the Geneva Conventions is the invitation and betrayal of confidence. To quote your link:

Treachery comprised a breach of confidence by the attacker in a situation where the victim had reason to trust that attacker. In that sense, it foreshadowed the distinction between ruses and perfidy that would appear in 20th-century treaties and customary law of war.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This is not true, see the reply to the prohibitions around booby-traps, which explicitly notes them to be devices that can constitute treachery and perfidy. Which of course they are.

I find it hard to understand, how you get to the conclusion that having civilian objects explode in a civilian area is somehow considered an non treacherous attack, especially as treachery originates, as the article describes, from an understanding of "chivalry".

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Because, as I have already said to you, the device was manually triggered according to Russia. This makes it definitionally not a booby trap. If that did count as a booby trap, then a sniper waiting for someone to leave cover would be a booby trap, which is clearly nonsense.

I find it hard to understand, how you get to the conclusion that having civilian objects explode in a civilian area is somehow considered an non treacherous attack

Because the Ukrainians are under no obligation to announce what they are doing to the Russians and are therefore not betraying anything. It is not a war crime to employ stealth. It is perfidy to invite trust and then betray it, as I have pointed out to you in the Geneva Conventions and your source several times.

[–] FelixCress 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

He is either a Russian shill or a "useful idiot", you are wasting your time. And the mod removing my previous comment in which I called him the same should better read his posts again.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)