I don’t blame them. Ukraine needs to take the war to Russia to win.
As an American, I support Ukraine droning inside Russia. Fuck up their power plants, oil production, and bases! I believe most Americans would agree that in war, this tactic is fair game.
There have been no such calls for Ukraine to stop attacking Russia. The article is behind a paywall, and there are no corroborating stories from any credible news sites. According to the same article on yahoo news, the White House claimed its due to oil prices. The US gets its oil from Canada, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Brazil. The headline has no merit.
Power plants are not valid military targets though. No one should be attacking those and it’s always wrong to do so.
Edit: I posted this comment and immediately went to bed. After waking up and looking at responses, I’m absolutely disgusted with people justifying and approving war crimes. Attacking civilian infrastructure like power plants is a WAR CRIME and that’s why it’s a huge deal that Russia has been attacking power plants. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
Edit 2: alright, time for links since people seem unconvinced. Both the ICC and the UN consider the attacks by Russia on Ukrainian civilian infrastructure to be war crimes. If it’s wrong for Russia to do, it’s wrong for everyone to do.
Sorry, Russia already lost the right to say Ukraine shouldn’t be hitting their power plants.
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. If Russia started using VX gas, would it be acceptable for Ukraine to start using Sarin? Absolutely fucking not. There is never a legitimate excuse for a war crime.
There is never a legitimate excuse for a war crime.
There’s one actually. Survival.
If the situation gets to a point where your existence on the planet becomes problematic, you take the gloves off, you fight back with everything you can, especially if you’re protecting those that you love.
Having said that, fuck war, and fuck war crimes. Wish the UN could resolve this crap before it gets to where we are now.
Power plants areUkraine is not a valid military target though. No one should be attackingthoseit and it’s always wrong to do so.FTFY
Well yes, but starting a war suddenly and without declaration isn’t a war crime.
Well yes, butstarting a warsuddenly and without declaration isn’tis awarcrime.FTFY as well.
Look, I’m about as anti-war as they come. But in the capitalist neoliberal rules-based order, war happens constantly all over the world and the best we can do is enforce the provisions of the Geneva Convention. No good will come from equating war generally with war crimes right now. There will be a point where we can call war a crime against humanity, but the Overton window isn’t there yet.
Why are you framing it as if capitalism and neoliberalism are causing war? Isn’t this one of the most peaceful times in human history?
It’s not that they’re the cause of all war, but neoliberal capitalism is the root of all modern conflicts.
Maybe. But destroying the Russian dictatorship is a moral obligation for everyone in the free world.
All Russian infrastructure and assets are valid targets. Both inside and outside of Russia.
Attacking civilian infrastructure like power plants is a WAR CRIME and that’s why it’s a huge deal that Russia has been attacking power plants. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. All moral obligations are equal. That means doing unethical and immoral actions in pursuit of an ethical and moral goal means you are no longer fighting a good fight.
Power plants are valid military targets.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/when-are-attacks-civilian-infrastructure-war-crimes-2022-12-16/
Claiming that they’re typically valid targets is very different from “sometimes they are, in extreme circumstances”.
Power plants are not valid military targets though.
Yes apples are not oranges, so why are you trying to change the subject?
AFAIK there is not a single example of Ukraine attacking power plants in Russia.
An oil depot or refinery is NOT a powerplant. Russia has more than enough oil to serve their population, but maybe they can’t serve the military 100% too, if Russia chooses to prioritize their illegal military invasion over their own population, that’s a Russian problem. As long as Russia prioritize oil for their military, oil is a valid military target.I’m not trying to change the subject. The OP tried to slip a war crime target in with valid military targets, and I wanted to set the record straight.
Citation needed
Civilian infrastructure can in fact a valid target if it assist the military. Electricity generation is used to maintain many military systems, including telecommunications, logistics, lighting, radar systems, and all sorts of manufacturing capability that assists the military.
So fucking what? Attacking civilian power infrastructure isn’t the solution to fighting an enemy. Attack the military comms, logistics, lighting, radar, and manufacturing instead. Then everyone knows the attack is absolutely justified.
Buddy, I can smell the straw from here. Ukraine isn’t attacking Russia’s critical infrastructure out of some need for retribution. If a grizzly bear attacks you, you hit that thing in any sensitive spot you can reach until it backs off. Otherwise you’re dead. That’s the situation Ukraine has been in from the start. They’ve been persistently outgunned and outmanned. The only way to get Russia to stop is to hit them where it hurts.
I’m not making some kind of strawman argument. I’m correcting the OP, because attacking civilian infrastructure is a war crime. If Russia starts using chemical weapons, should Ukraine start too? If you have any sense of ethics, you’d say no.
Congratulations, you’ve successfully justified a war crime.
Power plants are not valid military targets though
Sure they are. You’d make a terrible military leader.
You’d make a terrible military leader.
And you’d end up in the Hague.
You are incorrect. Please don’t spread misinformation.
The geneva conventions and other treaties that established what we call the international conventions on warfare were not written by he UN, amd the UN has no jurisdiction on them. The geneva convention was held in 1864, about 80 years before the UN was formed.
The ICRC is the jurisdiction in “charge” of defining warcrimes.
In any case, warcrimes are contextual. Bombing a power plant in one instance may be a legitimate target in war, while in another case, where Russias goal was to cause civilians to freeze and suffer, may very well be. However, I am not a lawyer of the international criminal courts.
Again, so fucking what if the UN isn’t directly involved with charging and sentencing war crimes. The UN, the ICJ, and the ICC are all international organizations. When one makes a claim, it’s highly likely that the others will follow suit.
The UN isn’t in charge of war crimes. Since the power systems are used to fight a war. They are legit targets.
It’s explained to you in the cite I gave you. It’s hard to take you seriously when you try to cite the UN who put Iran in charge of human rights.
The UN isn’t in charge of war crimes.
Neither is Duke. I would call an international convention of nations far more legitimate than any college on this matter.
Then were the charges? Where is the UN voting to use force to arrest Putin ? Exactly. The UN is worthless.
Here are the charges. Who would have guessed international conventions influence international courts?
deleted by creator
It’s morally wrong to do so. At the end of the day, like every single other war in the human history sadly , the right side is the winning one, be It bombing power plants, hospitals or houses.
They are fighting in the fucking defensive war. What fucking logic is that? They should even cross the Russian border if needed.
Removed by mod
Stop making vague mildly stupid comments.
That’s literally how war works, what’s your solution? Water pistols at 30 paces?
Removed by mod
Aww come on, you can do better than that. Let’s take it from the top and try again with feeling.
Hilariously if the US gets nuked so does the rest of the planet so your hope is both childish and hilariously idiotic.
What warnings? Last I heard the very deliberate language was that the US “Did not encourage” strikes inside Russian territory. Has that language escalated?
Can’t read the article due to the torrent of pop ups unfortunately because I’m very interested to know the basis of the headline.
last section of the document
It just seems super vague to me. It says that they are ignoring the advice to call off the strikes, but there’s nothing in there from an official or anything about what exactly they are being advised. Maybe I’m splitting hairs here, but it doesn’t seem definitive at all as to what’s being communicated.
It is vague and it needs to be because at best this is second hand account of what it was said.
Every time I see headlines like these I remember that Ukraine denied the US told them to stop hitting oil plants in Russia, but people kept repeating the story.
Anyway…
Ukrainian forces launched a drone attack on Kardymovo, Smolensk Oblast tonight, successfully hitting a pair of Russian oil depots.
Both of the complexes are heavily burning.
US: please stop hitting logistic targets inside Russia!!!
Meanwhile
Russia: targets Ukrainian hospitals, power stations, gas depots, telecom infrastructure, emergency aid infrastructure, schools, parks, apartment buildings, restaurants, etc etc etc.
How about this: we’re allowed to tell them how to run their war as long as we supply them an uninterrupted pipeline of the shit they need to win it the way they’re telling us to.
Oh wait: we already tried that, except we not only didn’t even do it well, but also didn’t hold up our end of the bargain because of fucking fascist far-right politicians. So we kinda fucked that one up, didn’t we?
I hate that it took this long but the aid package cleared the house and is expected to clear the Senate. This just happened yesterday https://www.npr.org/2024/04/21/1246170238/ukraine-military-assistance-house-vote-mike-johnson-volodymr-zelenskyy
Oh I know. All I’m saying is that any semblance of justification for exerting strategic oversight of their war is gone, considering the political fuckery we just pulled in the last 6 months that had very real and negative consequences for Ukraine.
Oh yeah that’s absolutely fair! I mainly threw this comment up because it’s super fresh news so I was hoping to help spread it a bit.
Ukraine should only consider the comments of countries sending money and weapons.
When the US starts to send money again, then the US can comment.
Didn’t they just approve an aid package this morning?
In addition to the 80 billion they’ve already sent?
It went through the house, it is not yet approved. And for 8 months now, Ukraine has gotten no support from the US.
What, really? August was the last aid package?
Pretty much, the repubs have been holding aid hostage like a bunch of petulant children. MTG and Johnson leading the way, sucking on that orange tanned dong.
Dang, I’ve been traveling since the end of last year, I hadn’t realized they’d been f****** with the aid for so long. Dicks.
Yep, I see them as traitors. Regan is rolling in his grave right now.
No doubt on the treason charges.
They literally sent in forged elector certificates to try to trick NARA and pence into falsely certifying trump.
If Ukraine wants US money, maybe they should listen to them?
Israel doesn’t, they get US money all the time.
I have this feeling if Ukraine used the cash portion of the aid packages to lobby and buy the politicians they might be actually be able to supply themselves with meaningful procurement.
The Saudis as well. Despite 9/11.
deleted by creator
I feel it’s a seismic shift in the position of the USA as a world power. Netanyahu has stopped listening and has faced no repercussions, so naturally Zelenskyy is doing the same. Completely withdrawing support for both Israel and Ukraine doesn’t appear to be in the USA’s best interests.
This could be a stretch but maybe it has to do with Trump and the likelihood he’s going to turn around and tell both sides to quit prolonging these wars and either finish off their opponents or get to signing a peace treaty.
For Israel it means escalating (as evidenced by how they’re poking the other bear - Iran - in the region) and for the Ukraine doing as much damage as possible to weaken the Russians so a peace treaty appears the better option over continuing to fight against an opponent who won’t lay down.
I could also be talking out of my exhaust pipe. I’ve been paying less and less attention to these conflicts the longer they’ve gone on.
That filthy orange traitor isn’t getting back into the Whitehouse
And it’s just Ukraine, not “the Ukraine”. Your use of the official Russian belittlement tells me all I need to know.
In Australian media they are referred to as Ukraine and the Ukraine. You certainly missed that I used both conventions. Try not to assume that the language used denotes a position.
As for Trump, I certainly hope he is not elected again, but the election needs to happen first.
Stop posting paywalled articles
I hope Ukraine wins and takes a cut of Russian territory as compensation.
And why shouldn’t they?
Removed by mod
Good. Fuck russia.
deleted by creator
As they should, I hope they somehow take out Putin
Apt, considering what the US did in the Middle East with their own drones.
Lolol Ukraine trading the war to Russia.
Putin is a cunt but that’s a pipe dream.
I like the Economist but maybe posting their articles here should be avoided since no one can obviously read them so everyone is just commenting about the headline.
