Let’s have a war!

[jfish26]

...so I guess that's a, no, the U.N. Court has NOT yet ruled on whether Ukraine committed genocide.

Seems like that ruling could clear up a lot in a hurry, as it pertains to this discussion.

if the U.N. Court rules that Ukraine has not committed genocide, well duh! Of course they didn't! Cuz it was all just Russian disinformation all along, as concluded by the no less than the U.N. Court! Confirmation bias confirmed! And I guess I'll have to eat whatever crauw you perceive me as deserving to eat then, now won't I, and you know I will! (like for real, not sure what "entirely wrong conclusion" you think I've drawn when I've mostly tried to maintain the court's conclusion is still pending.)

if the U.N. Court rules that maybe Ukraine, heaven forbid, HAS commited genocide...


oh man.


what then?

One, it is sad for you to basically run the "just asking questions" playbook, when you (inaccurately) say that you've "mostly tried to maintain the court's conclusion is still pending." I would again encourage you to revisit how YOU presented this for discussion, breathlessly and then doubling down over and over.

viewtopic.php?p=382826&hilit=genocide#p382826

Two, you can continue to DARVO along clumsily for as long as you'd like, but the fact is that you are biting on a right-wing/authoritarian misinformation tactic we see here and abroad, over and over, being the twisting of the fact of an investigation as a means of suggesting the fact of wrongdoing. And it's particularly egregious here, where - as you know - the investigation itself exists because the victim of misinformation is ASKING for the investigation.

As has been the case from (it seems) the moment Putin's pretextual war justification speech slid out from between his clammy lips, you ARE, by way of your "sincerely-held anti-war positions," falling for Russian dis- and misinformation.

[ousdahl]

I’m not sure Ukraine is ASKING for the investigation, though.

I read it more as, Ukraine asked the court to dismiss the genocide claims as baseless, and the court said they're gonna consider the claims anyway. But maybe that’s just confirmation bias, I guess. I’m aware of that much.

If it is NOT a matter of fact that the court is going to rule on whether Ukraine committed genocide, maybe we should discuss why the NYT would publish such a bombshell of a headline anyway. I guess NYT too really has been corrupted by Putin?

And I think it’s less Putin parroting and more sincere anti-war views to simply wish that one of our allies whom we continue to furnish with weapons can manage to stay nowhere near any allegations of genocide.

Is that *really* too much to ask?!

And yet, here we are with not one but TWO allies in that very position!

But, short of some newsworthy update, which we have not had since that headline broke in February…can’t believe I of all posters have to be the one to say this, but, dude, you’re beating a dead horse here.

I just don’t know what good you think it’s doing to try and keep referring back to an article about a European conflict I myself posted two months ago as so gotcha sort of response to what started out as me seeking discussion about a middle eastern conflict involving American casualties that happened THIS WEEK.

[Sparko]

Russia has invaded Ukraine for 10 years. It has lost the larger war and is going all-in on information and proxy wars. Using arguments which unite the far right and far left in opposing Ukraine. Ukraine has been incredibly restrained fighting a much larger and better armed invader. They cannot be allowed to lose this fight or the next war Ousdahl will oppose will be for Europe. Again. There is no space between Hitler and Putin.

[jfish26]

I’m not sure Ukraine is ASKING for the investigation, though.

I read it more as, Ukraine asked the court to dismiss the genocide claims as baseless, and the court said they're gonna consider the claims anyway. But maybe that’s just confirmation bias, I guess. I’m aware of that much.

If it is NOT a matter of fact that the court is going to rule on whether Ukraine committed genocide, maybe we should discuss why the NYT would publish such a bombshell of a headline anyway. I guess NYT too really has been corrupted by Putin?

And I think it’s less Putin parroting and more sincere anti-war views to simply wish that one of our allies whom we continue to furnish with weapons can manage to stay nowhere near any allegations of genocide.

Is that *really* too much to ask?!

And yet, here we are with not one but TWO allies in that very position!

But, short of some newsworthy update, which we have not had since that headline broke in February…can’t believe I of all posters have to be the one to say this, but, dude, you’re beating a dead horse here.

I just don’t know what good you think it’s doing to try and keep referring back to an article about a European conflict I myself posted two months ago as so gotcha sort of response to what started out as me seeking discussion about a middle eastern conflict involving American casualties that happened THIS WEEK.

It's a "fruit of the poisonous tree" thing. If you are THIS unwilling to think even somewhat critically about how you gather information and form opinions, then your opinions are pretty hollow, and you should not expect them to be taken seriously.

I am still at a loss for why you are making the NYT story that you posted so inscrutable and mysterious. It is just not either of those things:

The top court of the United Nations ruled on Friday that it would take up the question of whether Ukraine committed genocide in its Donetsk and Luhansk regions, an accusation at the heart of Russia’s argument for its 2022 full-scale invasion.

The ruling came in a case brought by Ukraine to the International Court of Justice. The court said that Ukraine’s claim that there was no credible evidence that Kyiv was “responsible for committing genocide” in its Donetsk and Luhansk regions was admissible and that it would examine that claim on its merits.

[...]

Two days after the Russian attack, Ukraine brought its case to the court, which is based in The Hague, in the Netherlands, arguing that the genocide allegation was false and therefore Russia’s use of force against it was a violation of the Genocide Convention.

In its Friday ruling, the court dismissed jurisdiction over that claim by Ukraine as well as its allegation that Moscow violated the convention by recognizing separatist republics in Ukraine’s east as independent states. But the panel of 16 judges said it would rule on whether Ukraine committed genocide in its Donetsk and Luhansk regions.

It is plain: Ukraine brought the case, and sought the investigation, so that people like YOU would maybe stop taking Putin's word for it.

Again, if in your DARVO cycle, it's important to you to make the NYT the bad guy here, then there are many, many other places you might go.

https://apnews.com/article/ukraine-russ ... a9499093f4

The United Nations’ top court said Friday it has jurisdiction to rule on a request by Ukraine for a declaration that Kyiv is not responsible for genocide...

https://reliefweb.int/report/ukraine/mi ... he%20CPPCG.

In its judgment, the ICJ unanimously dismissed Russia’s procedural objections, ruling that the Court can decide on the merits [Ukraine's seeking of a determination by the ICJ] whether Ukraine is responsible for committing genocide in the Donetsk and Luhansk Regions, in violation of the CPPCG.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/wo ... 024-02-02/

The United Nations' highest court on Friday ruled that it will hear a case in which Kyiv has asked it to declare it did not commit genocide in eastern Ukraine, as Russia claimed as a pretext for attacking its smaller neighbour.

Ukraine brought the case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), also known as the World Court, days after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

https://www.voanews.com/a/international ... 68701.html

The U.N.'s International Court of Justice (ICJ) said Friday it will hear a case in which Ukraine has asked the court to declare it did not commit genocide in eastern parts of the country, a claim Russia made as a pretext for its invasion.

Ukraine filed its case at the ICJ just days after the February 2022 invasion, asserting Moscow violated the 1948 Genocide Convention when it said the invasion was necessary to stop an alleged genocide of Russian speakers in eastern Ukraine.

And, if secondary sources aren't your jam, here is Ukraine's application: https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/f ... -00-EN.pdf

1. In accordance with Articles 36 (1) and 40 of the Statute of the Court and Article 38 of the Rules of Court, Ukraine hereby submits this Application instituting proceedings against the Russian Federation.

2. This Application concerns a dispute between Ukraine and the Russian Federation relating to the interpretation, application and fulfilment of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (the “Genocide Convention” or “Convention”). As Ukraine further explains below, the Russian Federation has falsely claimed that acts of genocide have occurred in the Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts of Ukraine, and on that basis recognized the so-called “Donetsk People’s Republic” and “Luhansk People’s Republic,” and then declared and implemented a “special military operation” against Ukraine with the express purpose of preventing and punishing purported acts of genocide that have no basis in fact. On the basis of this false allegation, Russia is now engaged in a military invasion of Ukraine involving grave and widespread violations of the human rights of the Ukrainian people.

3. Ukraine emphatically denies that any such genocide has occurred and brings this Application to establish that Russia has no lawful basis to take action in and against Ukraine for the purpose of preventing and punishing any purported genocide.

What's so concerning here isn't how hard gathering this was, but how easy.

You will probably now say something like you'll eat crauw if and when the ICJ rules in Ukraine's favor, but that is beside the point here. The point is how you used and characterized all of this in the first place.

[Overlander]

There is no space between Hitler and Putin.

This.

Also, Hitler had Prescott Bush.
Putin has Trump.

[ousdahl]

I’m not sure Ukraine is ASKING for the investigation, though.

I read it more as, Ukraine asked the court to dismiss the genocide claims as baseless, and the court said they're gonna consider the claims anyway. But maybe that’s just confirmation bias, I guess. I’m aware of that much.

If it is NOT a matter of fact that the court is going to rule on whether Ukraine committed genocide, maybe we should discuss why the NYT would publish such a bombshell of a headline anyway. I guess NYT too really has been corrupted by Putin?

And I think it’s less Putin parroting and more sincere anti-war views to simply wish that one of our allies whom we continue to furnish with weapons can manage to stay nowhere near any allegations of genocide.

Is that *really* too much to ask?!

And yet, here we are with not one but TWO allies in that very position!

But, short of some newsworthy update, which we have not had since that headline broke in February…can’t believe I of all posters have to be the one to say this, but, dude, you’re beating a dead horse here.

I just don’t know what good you think it’s doing to try and keep referring back to an article about a European conflict I myself posted two months ago as so gotcha sort of response to what started out as me seeking discussion about a middle eastern conflict involving American casualties that happened THIS WEEK.

It's a "fruit of the poisonous tree" thing. If you are THIS unwilling to think even somewhat critically about how you gather information and form opinions, then your opinions are pretty hollow, and you should not expect them to be taken seriously.

I am still at a loss for why you are making the NYT story that you posted so inscrutable and mysterious. It is just not either of those things:

The top court of the United Nations ruled on Friday that it would take up the question of whether Ukraine committed genocide in its Donetsk and Luhansk regions, an accusation at the heart of Russia’s argument for its 2022 full-scale invasion.

The ruling came in a case brought by Ukraine to the International Court of Justice. The court said that Ukraine’s claim that there was no credible evidence that Kyiv was “responsible for committing genocide” in its Donetsk and Luhansk regions was admissible and that it would examine that claim on its merits.

[...]

Two days after the Russian attack, Ukraine brought its case to the court, which is based in The Hague, in the Netherlands, arguing that the genocide allegation was false and therefore Russia’s use of force against it was a violation of the Genocide Convention.

In its Friday ruling, the court dismissed jurisdiction over that claim by Ukraine as well as its allegation that Moscow violated the convention by recognizing separatist republics in Ukraine’s east as independent states. But the panel of 16 judges said it would rule on whether Ukraine committed genocide in its Donetsk and Luhansk regions.

It is plain: Ukraine brought the case, and sought the investigation, so that people like YOU would maybe stop taking Putin's word for it.

Again, if in your DARVO cycle, it's important to you to make the NYT the bad guy here, then there are many, many other places you might go.

https://apnews.com/article/ukraine-russ ... a9499093f4

The United Nations’ top court said Friday it has jurisdiction to rule on a request by Ukraine for a declaration that Kyiv is not responsible for genocide...

https://reliefweb.int/report/ukraine/mi ... he%20CPPCG.

In its judgment, the ICJ unanimously dismissed Russia’s procedural objections, ruling that the Court can decide on the merits [Ukraine's seeking of a determination by the ICJ] whether Ukraine is responsible for committing genocide in the Donetsk and Luhansk Regions, in violation of the CPPCG.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/wo ... 024-02-02/

The United Nations' highest court on Friday ruled that it will hear a case in which Kyiv has asked it to declare it did not commit genocide in eastern Ukraine, as Russia claimed as a pretext for attacking its smaller neighbour.

Ukraine brought the case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), also known as the World Court, days after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

https://www.voanews.com/a/international ... 68701.html

The U.N.'s International Court of Justice (ICJ) said Friday it will hear a case in which Ukraine has asked the court to declare it did not commit genocide in eastern parts of the country, a claim Russia made as a pretext for its invasion.

Ukraine filed its case at the ICJ just days after the February 2022 invasion, asserting Moscow violated the 1948 Genocide Convention when it said the invasion was necessary to stop an alleged genocide of Russian speakers in eastern Ukraine.

And, if secondary sources aren't your jam, here is Ukraine's application: https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/f ... -00-EN.pdf

1. In accordance with Articles 36 (1) and 40 of the Statute of the Court and Article 38 of the Rules of Court, Ukraine hereby submits this Application instituting proceedings against the Russian Federation.

2. This Application concerns a dispute between Ukraine and the Russian Federation relating to the interpretation, application and fulfilment of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (the “Genocide Convention” or “Convention”). As Ukraine further explains below, the Russian Federation has falsely claimed that acts of genocide have occurred in the Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts of Ukraine, and on that basis recognized the so-called “Donetsk People’s Republic” and “Luhansk People’s Republic,” and then declared and implemented a “special military operation” against Ukraine with the express purpose of preventing and punishing purported acts of genocide that have no basis in fact. On the basis of this false allegation, Russia is now engaged in a military invasion of Ukraine involving grave and widespread violations of the human rights of the Ukrainian people.

3. Ukraine emphatically denies that any such genocide has occurred and brings this Application to establish that Russia has no lawful basis to take action in and against Ukraine for the purpose of preventing and punishing any purported genocide.

What's so concerning here isn't how hard gathering this was, but how easy.

You will probably now say something like you'll eat crauw if and when the ICJ rules in Ukraine's favor, but that is beside the point here. The point is how you used and characterized all of this in the first place.

So I suppose it’s foregone that Ukraine did not commit genocide then?

Guess we can get ahold of the UN and let them know they can call the whole thing off.

[jfish26]

You are, still, avoiding the point.

[ousdahl]

Bro but the point all along, at least for this week’s installment, was about a U.S. ally using U.S. weapons to bomb U.S. humanitarian workers, not to mention bomb foreign embassies in other foreign countries yet.

It takes a lot of hubris to ignore that discussion while also lecturing me on avoiding the point.

[jfish26]

Focus.

You have taken offense to the suggestion that you have adopted Putin's talking points.

However, you repeatedly do adopt Putin's talking points.

What we are talking about here, is an instance in which you obviously drew an incorrect conclusion that just so happens to dovetail with Putin's talking points.

I believe you sincerely hold anti-war positions.

I also believe that pro-Putin dis- and misinformation has exploited those positions by turning you, right here, into a megaphone for Putin's talking points.

[ousdahl]

So are you suggesting that Israel bombing U.S. aid workers and foreign embassies is actually just more Putin misinformation?

Cuz, if not, then please realize I’ve tried to change the subject away from Putin, and Russia and Ukraine, to Israel and U.S. aid workers and foreign embassies.

And again, it’s pretty wild that you fail to recognize that while also talking down on me about “focus.”

[jfish26]

But, you do need to focus.

Because the issue is something more fundamental than "this week's installment."

The issue is that your opinions on any given "week's installment" - really, even your descriptions of the facts and circumstances of any given "week's installment" - are not worth taking seriously if they are built on toothpick foundations.

And what you have done, and are doing, with this ICJ/genocide thing does not give us the warm-and-fuzzies on that.

[ousdahl]

Welp.

guess that settles it.

Ukraine is good, Russia is bad, Israel is worth burying your head in sand; and any opposition to or criticism of war, up to and including concern about allegations of genocide, is actually just Putin propaganda.

We came to this conclusion by just blanket-accepting one party's allegation denial as established fact.

We're able to establish one party's denial as a factual conclusion not by objectively considering the evidence at hand and just letting court procedures...um, well, proceed; but by posting the one party's denial in the standard-issue bold red underlined italicized font. That's how I remember law school teaching it to me too.

Oh, and this is also prima facie evidence that the one who needs to focus here is actually me.

Now, while we wait for my Ritalin to kick in, let's move right along.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/05/politics ... index.html

US preparing for significant Iran attack on US or Israeli assets in the region as soon as next week

[MICHHAWK]

I don’t so much care. when the war is happening half way across the world.

I’m shellfish that way.

[KUTradition]

[ousdahl]

I’m shellfish that way.

zat you, lobster?

[jfish26]

This rhetoric, especially the non-specific mealy-mouthed defense of what is objectively a requirement that Ukraine surrender in a war it did not seek, sound familiar?

Inside Donald Trump’s secret plan to end the Ukraine-Russia war

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... cret-plan/

Former president Donald Trump has privately said he could end Russia’s war in Ukraine by pressuring Ukraine to give up some territory, according to people familiar with the plan. Some foreign policy experts said Trump’s idea would reward Russian President Vladimir Putin and condone the violation of internationally recognized borders by force.

Trump’s proposal consists of pushing Ukraine to cede Crimea and the Donbas border region to Russia, according to people who discussed it with Trump or his advisers and spoke on the condition of anonymity because those conversations were confidential. That approach, which has not been previously reported, would dramatically reverse President Biden’s policy, which has emphasized curtailing Russian aggression and providing military aid to Ukraine.

As he seeks a return to power, the presumptive Republican nominee has frequently boasted that he could negotiate a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine within 24 hours if elected, even before taking office. But he has repeatedly declined to specify publicly how he would quickly settle a war that has raged for more than two years and killed tens of thousands of soldiers and civilians.

[…]

Russia has previously declared it was annexing Ukrainian land beyond the Donbas region and Crimea and Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, has said he would not accept surrendering any territory. Exchanging territory for a cease-fire would put Ukraine in a worse position without assurances that Russia would not rearm and resume hostilities, as it has in the past, said Emma Ashford, a senior fellow at the Stimson Center, a nonpartisan think tank. “That is a terrible deal,” she said of Trump’s proposal.

The Trump campaign declined to directly address questions for this article. “Any speculation about President Trump’s plan is coming from unnamed and uninformed sources who have no idea what is going on or what will happen,” campaign spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said in a statement. “President Trump is the only one talking about stopping the killing.”

[ousdahl]

I still think there has to be some other something between, “but anything BESIDES our strategy of piecemeal support for Ukraine with no end in sight is bona fide Putin propoganda!!!,” and, some cognizant realization that the piecemeal support for Ukraine has and is yielding Putin more and more territorial gains in Ukraine - which is to say, maybe the strategy is not working as intended.

If only there were some other something.

And ideally some other something that more closely resembles some just deescalation, rather than perpetuation and escalation.

Now go ahead and call me a Putin parrot again! Just get it out of your system!

Ok, now let’s just move right along.

In this week’s episode of, “Democratic Profiles In Courage…”

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4578 ... y-aid/amp/

[jfish26]

I still think there has to be some other something between, “but anything BESIDES our strategy of piecemeal support for Ukraine with no end in sight is bona fide Putin propoganda!!!,” and, some cognizant realization that the piecemeal support for Ukraine has and is yielding Putin more and more territorial gains in Ukraine - which is to say, maybe the strategy is not working as intended.

If only there were some other something.

And ideally some other something that more closely resembles some just deescalation, rather than perpetuation and escalation.

You keep cycling back through the same broken reasoning.

Our "strategy of piecemeal support" - which, to be perfectly clear, is a strategy of restraint and remove - made sense, and was working just fine.

But then, people who think the same way you think (but for different reasons) turned off the spigot nearly altogether, such that what is meant by "piecemeal" became something much different than what the strategy actually is/was.

And those same people - you now included - are playing gotcha games by blaming the crippled strategy for being ineffective.

This is what the right wing of our politics does: they break things, and then blame things for being broken.

And these are your kinfolk at least on this issue; they got there because Trump (who is beholden to Putin) told them to, you got there because Putin's shit is working its magic on your sincerely-held anti-war positions.

The result is obvious even if you do not want it to be: here you are again, saying in thinly-veiled code that Ukraine bears some responsibility for deescalating a war of aggression that it did not seek.

[KUTradition]

you know how i know fish has children?

[Sparko]

Ousdahl is the very model of a modern major sophist, and no longer merits an answer. This is what you get when you pay for an argument and walk into the abuse office.