WAR in Ukraine, Putin approves initiation of special military operation (Part 2)

[Bill.in.PA]

The Russian Nord Stream gas pipelines were just sabotaged. A truck loaded with fertilizer just exploded on a strategic bridge to Crimea. The NATO response to Russia has been stuff happens, get over it.

Meanwhile the fleets of LNG tankers going to Europe are basically floating Hindenburgs. Undersea pipelines, bridges, and other critical infrastructure are not uniquely Russian. A logical outcome will be that the spat of explosions will accelerate and expand. Stuff happens. Get over it.

[Gaius]

@Bill.in.PA

The Russian Nord Stream gas pipelines were just sabotaged. A truck loaded with fertilizer just exploded on a strategic bridge to Crimea. The NATO response to Russia has been stuff happens, get over it.

Meanwhile the fleets of LNG tankers going to Europe are basically floating Hindenburgs. Undersea pipelines, bridges, and other critical infrastructure are not uniquely Russian. A logical outcome will be that more spat of explosions will accelerate and expand. Stuff happens. Get over it.

yes attacking supply lines is a legitimate act of war. In some cases there will be consequences, but the act itself is legitmate.

[Ben_Natuf]

@Bill.in.PA

Undersea pipelines, bridges, and other critical infrastructure are not uniquely Russian

lol… they are if their russian. or maybe you think putin has a claim on I-95. Hard to tell, you probably do.

[Samm]

@Gaius

@Samm

@Ben_Natuf

@Gaius

Airial bombing or shelling of a city is fair game.

under the laws of war that depends on what you’re aiming at.

Have the Russians been aiming?

In WW2 bomber pilots on night raids considered themselves fortunate if they were over the right city. Carpet bombing is fine.

Adults know the difference. Liars pretend they don’t.

That really does not answer my question. Are the Russians aiming at civilian targets or are they simply using 75-yr-old bombing technology and missing a lot?

[Samm]

@Bill.in.PA

The Russian Nord Stream gas pipelines were just sabotaged. A truck loaded with fertilizer just exploded on a strategic bridge to Crimea. The NATO response to Russia has been stuff happens, get over it.

Meanwhile the fleets of LNG tankers going to Europe are basically floating Hindenburgs. Undersea pipelines, bridges, and other critical infrastructure are not uniquely Russian. A logical outcome will be that the spat of explosions will accelerate and expand. Stuff happens. Get over it.

I’m not getting your point. This is a war, you know.

[Bill.in.PA]

My understanding is that for the attack to be a legitimate act of war it must be carried out by personnel in uniform, and the vehicle is identified as military vehicle.

Timothy McVeigh’s bombing was not a lawful act of war.

On the other hand, the NATO bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade may have been.

Nato bombed Chinese deliberately

[Ben_Natuf]

the russians use area firing techniques with their artillery. they do that because they have a lot of it, and if your enemy with less can’t gain an advantage with range and maneuver, its very effective. the problem is, they do it with wanton disregard knowing that the only thing they’re likely to hit are civilian targets. “rubbling” a city shows the intent is not to attack military targets, but to terrorize the inhabitants. their technique however, gives them plausible deniability.

[Ben_Natuf]

@Bill.in.PA

My understanding is that for the attack to be a legitimate act of war it must be carried out by personnel in uniform, and the vehicle is identified as military vehicle.

your understanding is lacking

[Bill.in.PA]

Was Sadaam Husein able to entertain foreign journalists and foreign politicians during the US invasion of Iraq?

Zelensky's 'Vogue' Photoshoot in War-Torn Ukraine Raises Eyebrows

The New York Times notes that the Russia has been avoiding attacks that target civilian infrastructure. That is likely to change big time if the attack on the Crimean bridge was really a Ukrainian truck bomb.

Aaron Maté

[Bill.in.PA]

Okay, then the Al Qaeda attack on the Pentagon was a legitimate act of war?

[Ben_Natuf]

if you say so

[Guvnah]

@Bill.in.PA

Car bombs and truck bombs used against civilian targets are classic tools of terrorists. At what point does the State Department designate Ukraine as a terrorist state?

Bridges are always military targets in war. Ukraine should have taken this one out months ago.

[Samm]

@Bill.in.PA

Was Sadaam Husein able to entertain foreign journalists and foreign politicians during the US invasion of Iraq?

Why do you keep changing the subject with “whatabouts”?

[Samm]

@Bill.in.PA

Okay, then the Al Qaeda attack on the Pentagon was a legitimate act of war?

What country did Al Qaeda represent that we were engaged in war with? What was the military value of the WTC?

[TheRedComet]

Nope. They’ve been doing the old Russian MO.

“Fire erratically and hope for the best.”

[TheRedComet]

Ah yes the Russians were totally avoiding needless civilian suffering when they were shooting women and old men in the head in Bucha a few months back.

The Ukrainians if anything have been far more restrained than I would have been.

[TheRedComet]

Bill will find any way to rationalize and excuse Russian crimes in the ultimate game of whataboutism this forum has ever seen.

[Samm]

@TheRedComet

Nope. They’ve been doing the old Russian MO.

“Fire erratically and hope for the best.”

Well, except when they were training new (apparently) tank crews by firing point blank at ten story apartment buildings …

[Gaius]

Oh okay,
From what I understand
Russians indiscriminately shell cities (not aiming at civilians)
then once their troops occupy the cities war crimes (targeting civilians) are quite common.

Why do you ask?

[e7alr]

Senior officials, significant government allies, major infrastructure are all legitimate military targets. Noncombatant losses are sadly a part of war. When Ukraine starts setting off car bombs at civilian hospitals, day care centers and in poor residential neighborhoods let us know.