Putin Unleashes Record Bombing in Ukraine as the World Watches Gaza
thedailybeast.com
Almost 90 bombs were dropped in one region in just 24 hours.
Russia unleashed an unprecedented bombardment in southern Ukraine overnight in what local officials described as a “massive attack” in the conflict which has continued to rage even as the international community’s attention has moved to the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza.
The Ukrainian Internal Affairs Ministry on Monday morning said Russia dropped at least “87 aerial bombs on populated areas of the Kherson region - the largest number for all time.” At least eight people were also injured in other Russian strikes carried out in the Odessa region further to the west on Sunday night.
You are viewing a single comment
If that was true, then I'm sure there's lots of statements from human rights organizations world wide clarifying how it's wrong.
Do you mind linking one?
Quick edit:
Also, that doesn't mean Israel isn't breaking the Geneva Convention...
In fact, it seems to be admission that they are...
It will take a bit to pull it from the 1948 archive but Raphael Lemkin used it because it was a loaded word to mean killing millions of people.
The actual UN definition added any transfer of children from one ethnic group to another in the last week of negotiations in 1948. Even by that definition it doesn't meet the UN term with what is happening in Gaza.
So to clarify, you agree that Israel is violating the Geneva Convention?
Your issue is just that the Genocide section is called that?
If all this is really that pedantic and you understand that human rights abuses are bad, and Israel is committing human rights abuses, I guess I'll take what I can get.
But it seems like you're defending the acts Israel are committing on the basis that the section of the genocide section of the Geneva Convention is more in depth than just saying "don't exterminate every single person in a group".
Because by that logic, there wasn't a genocide in North America for over a century against the indigenous people...
Your still ignoring the majority of what the Geneva Convention says...
I've linked it multiple times, and even quoted it once so you don't have to click the link...
https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml
Specifically
And
But the link really goes into specifics that you should know, just read the link.
I don't agree there was a genocide against the waring tribes of the Southeastern United States. The results of the Indian Removal Act wasn't a genocide but a forced migration after the War of 1812 due to to the local tribes joining the British and slaughtering civilians. If you read the Act you will see it was a direct response to the actions the tribes took against civilians.
The Souix Nation on the otherhand saw their children taken from them and placed in religious boarding schools, that would qualify.
Dude.... Ummm no. Just stop. There are less than 1% of the Native Americans left. We genocided those people. We killed them and took their land repeatedly. We forced them onto "worthless" land, and destroyed and outlawed their cultures. WE HANDED THEM POLIO AND CHOLERA INFECTED BLANKETS. Stop trying to whitewash fucking everything.
Also I don't give a fuck what a language that is DEAD has to say about a modern definition of an English word. You don't understand how language works.
There are 9.7 million Native Americans making up 2.9% of the total American population today. That is up from 313,000 prior to the Indian Wars. (105,000 lived east of the Mississippi, 128,000 west of the Mississippi to the Rockies, and 80,000 on the west coast.)
The Indian Removal Act migrated about 50,000 of the 105,000 to lands west of the Mississippi. The problem was this occurred during a yellow fever outbreak from 1822 to 1880 along the Mississippi and the South leading to a quarter of migrants to die along the route (150,000 white Americans in the same area also died).
I know it is big with progressive types to expose all the injustice in the world, but actually look at the context. Things are not as black and white as you want them to be.
Down from 60,000,000 in 1492
The rest of the planet lost 2/3 of humans from the same diseases. You can't blame Europeans for that.
No they didn't. They lost population due to the plague. The natives lost some due to the plague, but they lost way more than that due to the other diseases already present in Europe when Magellan and Columbus first landed.
About the same 2/3 of the population died in the new world due to disease.
Bullshit. About 90% of the original population died before the plague even hit Europe. You are trying to revise history, and flat out lying.
That was a single incident by the British in the French and Indian War and resulted in zero cases of smallpox.
https://www.history.com/news/colonists-native-americans-smallpox-blankets
It happened several times in the southwest as well. It wasn't just one time. You're being willfully ignorant.
Those are myths.
And now you just entered the realm of Holocaust denial. You're a willful idiot, just a shame so many of you help destroy any chance at a decent future.
He's not wrong. The Smallpox Blanket myth is a closely held belief for which there is no evidence. Here's a good outline of how the story grew and spread over time.
https://allthatsinteresting.com/smallpox-blankets
I live(d) in the southwest US, and know a lot of natives that would be able to point to sources that I can't, that say otherwise.
The primary disconnect, if you read the link I posted, is that there were other vectors for smallpox deaths.
Nobody is denying that thousands upon thousands of people died of smallpox, that DEFINITELY happened.
It just wasn't caused by infected blankets.
The holocaust wasn't a myth, where do you get your information.
You're correct, the Holocaust happened, just like the genocide of the Native Americans happened, that you want to deny happened. Fuck off out of here with your genocidal apologist historical revisionism. I would have called out Woodrow "I literally wrote Southern Revisionism" Wilson, and my grandparent and great grandparents die. Fuck you and your historical revisionism. Also known as "bald-faced lies" if they are told with the knowledge of the history in question. If you are just parroting misinformation, fuck you again, but not as hard. Stop being willfully ignorant.
Wow...
Can you give a single example of a genocide you acknowledged happened?
Not as a "gotcha" I'm legitimately still trying to help you understand this, you mod some serious subs and unfortunately genocide is something you should understand in 2023.
Current events in Rohingya I'd classify as genocide. Uyghur falls within the definition of genocide as does Darfur in 2003, Congo in 2002, Zaire in 96 and absolutely Rwanda in 94.
In the modern day United States the largest genocide is never talked about, the California Genocide against the Chumash. The population of 4,500 was completely enslaved and killed. By 1900 only 200 Chumash were alive (today the population has increased to 5,000).
We'll go with the first.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-41566561
So, Myanmar claimed they were targeting terrorists, but there was lots of civilians deaths which caused noncombatants to flee their homes or risk being killed... Which meets the Geneva Conventions definition of genocide as it's ethnic cleansing.
To me, that sounds like what's going on in Gaza.
Can we talk about how you feel these are different?
I legitimately want to work through this, but I might not be replying as fast as this morning.
First reports are always wrong. I've already said that.
What does that mean?
If a woman reports her own rape, it never happened? Because she's the first to report it?
And why do you think the UN was the first to report?
They're an international organization of multiple governments. They don't make these reports off hand, the quote talks about things from 2017 in 2020, that's three years later, how is that a "first report"?
Are you saying you've changed your mind now and Rohingya isn't a genocide?
It means the first report of anything is always wrong. Details, time of events, witnesses, what actually happened is always wrong when first reported. Generally everything you hear in the first report is wrong and you should always wait until details become clear.
But you said that about a 2020 article talking about a genocide that started in 2017...
Is three years not enough time for details to become clear?
If that's true, today is 11/6, about a month after 10/7, why do you already have such solid opinions on that?
The first report of it being about terrorism was found to be untrue.
...
Which is what the government commiting the genocide said...
But that's not the point. The point is the reason it's a genocide, is the same thing Israel is doing.
Are you trying to make the case that no one should believe Israels initial claim that everyone they kill is justified by terrorism? Because that's where your logic is going, but that's the opposite position you've had this entire thread.
I don't see anything Israel is doing that is a crime at this time. Governments get a lot of leeway when dealing with terrorism and Israel is dealing with the aftermath of a wide scale terrorist attack against civilians.
https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2023/10/israeloccupied-palestinian-territory-un-experts-deplore-attacks-civilians
The UN disagrees with you on that too...
To avoid any confusion:
Is this another point you disagree with the UN on?
This is a good example of bias. Thanks for the example. A good rule we used in the military is that the first report is always wrong.