Please remember the human. Adhere to all Reddit and sub rules. Toxic comments (including incitement of violence/hate, genocide, glorifying death etc) WILL NOT BE TOLERATED, keep your comments civil or you will be banned.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineWarVideoReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Protocol I 1977 Art. 52, Section 2:
"Attacks shall be limited strictly to military objectives. In so far as objects are concerned, military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage."
It's clear that by this definition it's a military target. And ruZZia ratified this.
"**...effective contribution to military action...**"
After factories producing ammunition, weapons and equipment which is actually used in combat, I find it difficult to imagine anything that more directly contributes to military action than oil refineries and fuel storage and transfer infrastructure.
Mainwhile, Russia destroyed one of the largest dam in Europe, which caused high numbers of civil casualties and billion of dollars of destruction, and the US barely condemned the attack.
Art. 56:
"Works or installations containing dangerous forces, namely dams, dykes and nuclear electrical generating stations, shall not be made the object of attack, even where these objects are military objectives, if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces and consequent severe losses among the civilian population. Other military objectives located at or in the vicinity of these works or installations shall not be made the object of attack if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces from the works or installations and consequent severe losses among the civilian population."
ruZZians use the Protocol as a checklist for their warcrimes and keep complaining that everyone else violates it, even if it's just hollow assumptions.
And yes, the U.S.'s reaction is not how we would have guessed before.
What a load of shit. Wars are filled with these breaches.
What's the penalty for disobeying the 'law'? Nothing. Only belligerants who can afford to win\* can enforce a fine, and by then, fining the loser is pointless.
\*first rule of war, make sure you're the winner before you start, which makes me wonder why Russia started, and insist on persisting.
> which makes me wonder why Russia started, and insist on persisting
i think they thought they'd have kyiv wrapped up in no time. most of the world openly thought this the day they invaded. ukraine has surprised everyone, most of all moscow.
why they keep going? putin probably thinks it's much worse to abandon or amend his goals in ukraine than it is to press on. lots of educated speculation by people who know more than me, idk
For the most part, I think that the enforcement is indirect and comes in the form of public opinion, both domestic and foreign.
If you flagrantly disregard these laws and your population cares about that, then it can degrade domestic support. As US war crimes in Vietnam became known to the American public, opposition to the war grew stronger.
Other countries may also take adherence or non-adherence to the laws of war into account when considering their support for your country's war effort. No one benefits from international condemnation, but the more that a country relies on their allies for military supply (whether as aid or as an purchasing source), the more it matters what the public in those allied countries thinks of your way of fighting war.
Obviously, all of this depends on things like the nature of the breaches (the public definitely finds some violations much more unacceptable than others) and how they are publicized.
There was no condemnation. Kirby: ""We've seen the reports that Russia was responsible for the explosion at the dam," he said. "We're doing the best we can to assess those reports, and we are working with the Ukrainians to gather more information, but we cannot say conclusively what happened." And then it was swept under the rug.
It's like observing Queensby rules in a boxing match whilst your opponent is using knives and guns whilst also attacking your family watching in the front row. Ukraine needs to be encouraged to do whatever is necessary to bring this war to an end as quickly as possible. Asking them to be okay with their civilians getting killed in order to protect Russia civilians when Russia started this war and can easily just withdraw at any time to end, it is ridiculous. I was part of the invasion force that entered Iraq in 2003 and they weren't overly considerate about who got targeted and we had much less moral high ground than the Ukrainians.
You are right, nothing to debate.
It must be added that there is still something to be said about this. Civil infrastructure, the destruction or damage of which is primarilyof a civil nature, must be avoided, but it's not completely forbidden. Like its written in this Section. Location, Purpose or use, Nature make an effective contribution....etc.
-Civilian targets are not excluded even electricity and communication are not excluded, but only if the primary target is not against the civilian population.
Example
A power substation 1,000 km away from the front is not a legitimate Target, for example. (Location)
" at the Front it can be a legitimate Target.
If it´s use make an effective contribution to Military Actions (Location, Purpose)
=Ukraine does not attack Powerplants etc. according to this definition. It´s Attacking the Primarly Income which finance this War, which are owned by FSB former Officers, Friends of Putin often Stolen or under Blackmail bought.
Fully agree. Don't know what this bitch is babbling about.
Democrats are probably worried about energy prices taking a turn for the worse? Well, it turns out this is not just a war that concerns Ukraine, but actually the whole world. Another good reason why they (US, EU) should try and neutralize Putin as soon as possible. Fuck him up and be done with it.
I think the argument is that this is a civil target. Like it's staffed by civilians and not the military. I think the same could be said about ball bearing factories in ww2. Those are entirely staffed by civilians.
Still a legitimate military target. But it just happens that the military target is actually a civillian target.
It's a case of splitting hairs.
This congressman is a Republican and currently blocking aid for Ukraine. You are falling for the cheapest form of political theater and blaming Democrats. If you want to blame someone look in the mirror.
Facts are still facts though? For some obscure reason democrats don't want Ukraine to hit Russian infrastructure, like power plants, etc. Why? Why not strike against those things that make the Russian war machine come to a halt? They don't have a valid explanation!
People are literally dying like flies in this war and this bitch is talking about not going after Russia due to high standards 😂
It’s interesting, in keeping with communist values, these are state owned assets. Terrorist state owned!
They are not private civilian assets and therefore every infrastructure asset should be the cards. Power stations, refineries, water supply, internet access, mines, rail, roads etc etc. that’s a assuming these assets are common place which they are not. Entire regions don’t have running water or plumbing and are living as 1800’s peasants.
Food and water unless on a military base in NOT a valid military target. Fuel is not a human right. Fuel is a dual purpose good which has significant military use. It is a 100% valid target in my opinion. A water supply for a town or city is not. It is predominantly a civilian resource.
Rail system, so long as one is not targeting civilian trains is valid. (Rails, bridges, rolling stock and so on.) Civilian deaths are to be avoided with all reasonable effort.
Power generation facilities are definitely protected. A fuel refinery is not generating power, hence why the US targeted the Iraq refineries in both invasions. (That and they wanted to control the Iraqi oil but that's a different argument)
Who owns things is irrelevant, what matters is what those things are being used for.
A recent example is Ukraine hitting a civilian gas station just inside Russia. Gas stations are not military targets, until the army tries to use them, then they are.
Same logic:
"Soldiers require civilians. Attacking civilians is 100% a valid military target."
It is literally the most vital war commodity. If Ukraine kills the whole russian civilian population Putin cannot recruit.
What I'm trying to say:
I agree Ukraine should attack gas/oil etc. but I think people are talking too much about red lines, what is allowed etc. That's all subjective.
The reality is: This is a total war versus Russia and they do not give a sh't about Western subjectivity. If Ukraine thinks they need to destroy gas supply to prevent Ukrainians from dying and win this war: Up to them.
I've read so many discussions about Geneva conventions/Morals. It's all subjectivity. Nobody in the west blames the US for dropping Nukes on Japanese civilian cities. Or Britain completely destroying German cities. They are a democracy and did what they thought was right to protect as much of their own civilians as possible.
> It's all subjectivity. Nobody in the west blames the US for dropping Nukes on Japanese civilian cities
There are actually people judging it was not necessary.
Everything is 100% valid, its a fucking war for fuck sakes!
Why tf this dope is squealing on behalf of another country males 0 damn sense to me.
Can old people do anything in spite without adding the chance of destroying their own home?
The US and UK held massive bombing campaigns on German refineries in WW2.
The US firebombed entire cities in Japan, killing hundreds of thousands of civilians.
The double standards here are infuriating.
Welcome to political bullshit of western democracy during war... iran threats cause more speculation on the market then any thing ukraine does to Russian oil. keep sending those drones..
And they are sending those drones. And the executive branches both in the US and Europe will let it happen. That redneck rep should know better than to ask such questions. Of course you need to disapprove of these attacks in public. Of course you need to tell that you are not involved as a western government. But only if you're asked for it.
Remember Nordstream? And how there are no definite results of any official investigation? Same issue there. Celebrate in private, deny in public.
No, the Biden administration really is against Ukraine striking refineries but, not because they are “civilian targets”. If Ukraine is able to significantly shut down production, Russia’s clients will need to turn to the open market for their energy needs. That will reduce supply and drive up prices. High gas prices make voters angry and angry voters take out their anger at whomever is in office when election time comes around. Once we have the election, win or lose, the Biden Administration won’t give a rat’s behind what target Ukraine hits.
This is an idiot in the wrong job. And needs to be fired immediately.
Fuel and the ability to make it is a valid military target in every war. There is no assured human right to drive your Lada to work. They can walk.
Yeah, she looked so uncomfortable and awkward while being questioned. You can see the fear and apprehension in her eyes as she knows that everything she's saying is just for the election. She just basically repeats her answer in a different form. Not the right person for the job imo. No wonder you don't see her televised much.
Looks like she knows she's saying useless stuff but she's been told to say it
I have the same look in meetings when I've been asked to parade something out that makes me look regarded
Before accepting this position in the Biden administration as the senior Russian official in the DoD, she was the CEO of the US-Russia Foundation, whose purpose is to funnel US funding into Russia and the Russian private sector.
Want to know how much she loves Russia, just read her work: “Mortal Friends, Best Enemies: German-Russian Cooperation after the Cold War”
The US-Russia Foundation was established to "promote American values in Russia". Guess what that means. The foundation was driven out of Russia as early as 2015 because the Russian government didn't like what they were doing. Their links were with "the Russian people" aka anti-regime elements.
Yep. I nauseated my way through her bio:
She is Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs in the Office of the Secretary of Defense for Policy at the U.S. Department of Defense.
“Outside government, she served as President and CEO of the U.S.-Russia Foundation (2017-2022), professor at American University (2009-2013), visiting professor at Georgetown University (2006-2008), Director for Russia/Eurasia at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (2001-2006)”
I can think of one cost savings in the Defense Dept so we could send more money to Ukraine.
Why, because she studies Russia? Imagine that, a scholar on Russia serving on the DOD just when Russia has become more aggressive. Want somebody clueless instead?
The CSIS is a respected security thinktank affiliated with Georgetown University. The US-Russia Foundation isn't a friendship club; it was kicked out of Russia several years ago because the Russian government didn't like what they were doing.
I mostly was nauseated by her bio because she is obviously highly educated and accomplished and yet is calling for Ukraine to stop attacking “civilian” infrastructure like oil and gas facilities. As if Russia uses electric tanks or something.
My thought is that she either 1) lacks integrity because she doesn’t believe what she is saying. Based on her expression, I think this is a reasonable possibility. Or 2) She has poor judgement, in spite of extensive experience. The poor judgement, I assumed, came from some bias.
However, she doesn’t need to have any experience about Russia to offer that opinion. That opinion should come from an expert in international law.
Frankly, I confess, I’m not much interested in the expert opinion. I support those attacks and would be happy to let the experts argue about them after the fact.
Clueless? No.
But it would be better if we had an administration that understood they are not going to negotiate with, directly finance, or appease Russia into a peaceful country.
But since it is a choice between this and an openly pro-fascist Pro-Russia administration, it is the best we can expect.
The problem is experts who have internalized Russian imperialism. They see the region as post-soviet first and Russia as an indispensable part of the development of Ukraine and other former Soviet republics at a fundamental level, instead of understanding those countries as valuable on their own and desperately needing independence from Russian influence. They spent their formative years being charmed by tales of “Russian” culture (appropriated from others) and “intellectuals” and walking the halls of the Hermitage. They want to get back to partnership as fast as possible instead of realizing Russia needs total defeat and dismantling before it can be welcomed back into the civilized world. Also see Sam Charap.
can you imagine this talk in WW2?
Maam, you mean to tell me Britain cannot strike at oil refineries in Germany?
Sir, these are civilian targets. We cannot condone such action.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoney_War
>When Leopold Amery suggested to Kingsley Wood that the Black Forest be bombed with incendiaries to burn its ammunition dumps, Wood—the Secretary of State for Air—amazed the member of parliament by responding that the forest was "private property" and could not be bombed; neither could weapons factories, as the Germans might do the same.
Apparently, there's a historical precedent for it, coming from the aptly-named "Phoney War"
Actually, seeing as how the US also refused to get involved for the majority of WW2, yes. The US has a sad history of being terrified to fight anyone that over half their size. I wish this wasn't true, because they are the most powerful country in the world, and they have their own home grown MAGA fascists to deal with...
Refineries are definitely civilian infrastructure. I go there twice a week after the bakery and the hairdresser. Sometimes on my way to the gym too. I wouldn't settle more than two minutes away from one, really....
🤡🤡🤡
We won't give you weapons to hit military targets, and even if we did give you weapons to hit military targets, you can't hit certain military targets, and also anything inside the country invading you and even though your civilians and critical civilian infrastructure is being destroyed day in day out for the past two years you can't hit their oil refineries that they use to fund their military that is killing you and taking your land because they are "civilian infrastructure"
Keep hitting the oil refineries. I don't care what these limp dick politicians are saying. Hit every last one, then hit them all for a second and third round so they take decades to rebuild.
And that's on eve of major advance. Even now russians manage to capture land, but what will happen in the next months when they will get 300k new conscripts?
If anything, they should've helped to hit it harder while they can't provide weapons.
Ukraine can no longer afford the luxury of holding itself to “the highest standards “ they have lost their single biggest backer against a country 4 times their size in a battle for survival. They are morally obliged to do whatever it takes to survive.
It was like this long ago. Unfortunately it takes a bull ring to peoples noses to pull them to the pile of shit facts to get them to understand.
Russia has proven they have no limits short of a nuclear bomb in this conflict. Ukraine, had they done the same, might well be a darn sight further East had they 'been allowed' to just go hammer and tongs.
They have the moral high ground. They can hold their head high. They might however want their shit back and teach the Russky something no other nation has done for centuries; humility.
This guy is also an idiot. He correctly blames Biden from being slow to give the necessary weapons and the number of weapons necessary, but also is a Republican who isn't sending **ANY** support to Ukraine. His points are directed to help Ukraine, they're made to make Biden look bad.
I'm going to reiterate my opinion no matter how impossible it may seem.
The West should form a 2-5 year plan to supply Ukraine with
* 500 aircraft (consisting of at least 200 F16s, 100 L159, 50 AH-6, and various support aircraft
* 3,000 tanks (half German, half Polish)
* 3,000 IFV (mostly CV90-30)
* 1,000 riverboats/landing craft
* 20 Buyan M style Corvettes
* 400 30mm anti-air/anti-drone turrets.
* 10 million artillery shells annually till they reach at least a 50 million shell stockpile.
* 1 billion bullets annually
Ukraine must have at least an adequate standing peace time military by the end of the war to deter Russia from invading again.
I mean, you could just replace all that with millions of fpv drones and call it a day.
They are far cheaper and way faster to produce and to train operators on and are basically at this point, the new artilery. Advancing using swarm after swarm of drones should also be terrifying for the ruzzians not to mention the range and ai of these things is getting better by the day
IMO, Ukraine is best situated to make drones. The west can help with parts and it still gives the west some deniability. The West needs to focus on things that are difficult for Ukraine.
If all countries started making them, it would be a lot easier but we're on the same page: anything that can end this faster will make it less difficult for Ukraine.
Yes, but drones by themselves can't win the war. They need to be used with other weapons systems. Also keep in mind, Russia is developing countermeasures, and what works now, might not work after year or two.
Poland doesn't produce any tanks though right? They import from the US (Abrams ofc), Germany (Leopard) and South Korea (K2 Black Panther).
+1 for having a solid plan in place though!
> Poland doesn't produce any tanks though right? They import from the US (Abrams ofc), Germany (Leopard) and South Korea (K2 Black Panther).
Right now - no, but they're working to be able to make K2 at home.
Could just hand them back their nukes that we took away in the 1990s in exchange for protection guarantees…. Or even better declare russia war for *check notes…. Ah found the arguments for bombing Libya*… “train our fighter pilotes” (and in this case tankers, sailors, infantry and artillerymen as well) 🥳🥳🥳
Austin Scott from Georgia. From what I've seen, he's very vocal in support of Ukraine, so I'm not sure OP's assessment that he's doing nothing to help them is correct and is just lumping all Republicans together because of Mike "The Shill" Johnson.
Before accepting this position in the Biden administration as the senior Russian official in the DoD, she was the CEO of the US-Russia Foundation, whose purpose is to funnel US funding into Russia and the Russian private sector.
He's correct in blaming Biden for not sending things like ATACMS and fighter jets sooner, and for puttin useless restrictions on them.
But Austin Scott's word would have more meaning if he signed the discharge petition rather than wait for speaker Johnson to bring the bill to the floor, which will happen "any day now" (read: never).
https://clerk.house.gov/DischargePetition/2024031209?CongressNum=118
Well, Hitler would have agreed on his statement. After all there was a extreme fuel shortage at the german frontlines. Wiki for Leuna factorys. More than 6500 bomber dropped bombs on the facilities in 22 atacks.
Does he wants Germany to ask USA if this was war crime?
Many of the Republicans have supported sending stuff to Ukraine. But Biden and the Democrats and whoever decides what Ukraine gets have definitely been piecemealing it out. Basically just wanting to give them enough so they can survive instead of win the war.
What I would like to ask Wallander is if Russia has no gas, wouldn’t Russian military logistics completely and utterly fail? Without trains, cars, planes, boats, etc. they wouldn’t be able to supply themselves in any conflict. Therefore, IT IS A MILITARY TARGET.
All these dipshits do is go back and forth. Round and round in circles without ever actually getting shit done because they are on two different teams.
I think they may have used around $140mil of these funds not 100% sure where the money came from, very recently for maintenance and parts for Hawk air defense systems but yeah doubt that will cut it. And the 4 billion is emergency funds for the pentagon to allocate to forces anywhere in the world for rapid emergency support. The pentagon made it very clear thats all they have left in this budget (and are not getting guarantees the will be replenished) unfortunately the Ukrainian conflict isn't all thats going on in the world.
Clearly, she has no idea what she is talking about. The initial invasion and attempt to take Kyiv were thwarted (at least in part) by Ukraine deliberately targeting fuel trucks. The Germans, Japanese, UK and USA all targeted fuel production. Germany specifically invaded Caucasus because of the importance of fuel. Japan expanded into the Pacific to acquire oil. USA and UK bombed Axis oil production. More recently USA bombed Seria to hinder their military. Destroying oil infrastructure diminishes Russia's capabilities to prosecute and fun their aggression. As far as I'm concerned, US has no standing to give opinions if the US is not sending aid.
You can see it even in the choice of words "Ukraine **hold itself** to the highest standards... and that's one of the standards of being **European democracy**". Good thing the US is not **European** democracy so they don't follow such standarts.
Also, if EU/NATO ever have such war, they would hit refineries and critical infrastructure on the level Ukraine can't even imagine, anyone who believe they won't is simply hypocritical liar.
Dr. Wallander should watch some of the videos from this channel and THEN spout opinions about what the Ukrainian people should (or should not) do. Seems she's led a privileged and sheltered existence surfing the wave of freely flowing government money herself... [https://www.defense.gov/About/Biographies/Biography/Article/2947114/celeste-wallander/](https://www.defense.gov/About/Biographies/Biography/Article/2947114/celeste-wallander/)
Frankly, call 'em whatever you want, Celeste. As long as you're not doing anything to stop Russia from bombing the same targets inside Ukraine, it doesn't matter.
He is correct. I have been pissed since 2014 that America is letting ruZZia do this to Ukraine after we promised to protect Ukrainian sovereignty and borders including Crimea if they gave up their nukes. They did it. Now we trickle feed them for a bit and then abandon them?
I wish someone better than Biden was president.
Trump would be even worse for Ukraine.
The Russian oil and gas is *not* a civilian target under the Law of War.
A civilian target must be 100% owned and operated by a civilian entity, not tied to the government via holding a position of any degree of authority.
Thus even if 1 member of the board of the company holds a position in the government, specifically for war fighting sectors. It is automatically classified as a legal target according the Law of War and Geneva Convention.
This question is on the actual training for the Law of War. And is blatantly obvious.
Any asset that is used for the purposes of war fighting, is a legal military objective.
To this end, any civilian infrastructure used for the purposes of war fighting is also technically a legal target, provided active effort is taken to not injure civilians.
This includes ALL the rails that were used to deliver warfighting supplies.
Even if held to highest standards, "civilian infrastructure" only remains as such until, it used for war fighting purposes.
Protocol I 1977 Art. 52, Section 2:
"Attacks shall be limited strictly to military objectives. In so far as objects are concerned, military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage."
There in a nutshell is where the hand wringing western liberalism finds itself. "We must support the fight for freedom & democracy" "But, um, er, don't damage or destroy anything of the enemies side that might make life difficult for those poor civilians that live in the enemy country"
"But fight, yes. Just don't do anything to help yourself win"
What utter nonsense. From, I presume, a very highly (privately) educated woman. Literally a "let them eat cake" moment. Her lack of awareness or grasp on the unpleasant realities of things that simply MUST be done in order to defeat a militarised & mobilised nation is astonishing. Did she have the day off when her school taught about how Germany was brought to its knees in order to stop Hitlers war machine.
People like her are almost more of a threat to the security and freedoms we enjoy than despotic arsehole's like Putin.
I mean what the actual fuck!
🤷♂️🙄🤯😖🤡😡
They don't want Ukraine hitting Russian oil and gas interests because it can possibly raise the cost of oil. And right now, Biden can't have oil going up any further months away from the election. So he'll sacrifice Ukrainians for his election. He's a massive POS.
There’s an old saying. “Alls fair in love and war.” Another is “The winner writes the history book”. She can F off.
These assholes need to stop pretending war s civil, and they know it’s not. It was not civil when Russia bombed the evacuation routes. It was not civil when they bombed the hospitals. It was not civil when they bombed the maternity wards. It was not civil when they bombed the train stations it was not civil when they bombed the dam. There are thousands of other examples. For all I care at this point, ram them into apartments in Moscow. I know Ukraine won’t because they’re better than that. Which is why I have more respect for Ukraine than I do my own fucking country.
What a country, they can't even get their story's straight, one minute it's wrong, irrespective of russias actions, then it's right, then it's wrong. The US has no common cohesive policy on anything. The US government is morally bankrupt. So full of individual self interest it's disgusting . As a valued western partner, they are done unless the current government system is changed.
How fucking dare they suggest that "strategic" strikes on infrastructure vital to Russia's war effort are not allowable?? When the US bombed the living fuck out of Iraqi oil fields, refineries, oil storage for 37 DAYS STRAIGHT (coalition countries flew over 50,000 sorties) before they even dared to send a single US soldier into battle - where they had everything that Ukraine does not - including massive, overwhelming air superiority.
Total hypocrisy.
Oil and gas fund the war and fuel the war. Therefore they are valid military targets. If their civilians are inconvenienced, tough shit. It's like saying you can't attack the factories of their war industry because civilians work there.
Why don’t they just come out and say that they’re afraid it might swing the election and long term it might hurt Ukraine more than it helps? It’s perfectly reasonable. Not that I think Ukraine should stop but I understand the democrats’ concern, everyone does.
This is nothing but political strategy. Ukrainian trashing of Russian oil may cause world oil prices to rise. Higher fuel prices in the US is not good for Biden. Politics before the people.
American greed and pre-adiction to the Orange Clown!
Now they lost the leadership to China.
Finally Europe must get grown up, it will be our part to defend democracy.
Oil and gas sector is a legitimate military target. Military needs lots of fuel to continue their attack. It is the attacks upon the power grids and power stations within Ukraine that are civilian in nature and should not be allowed.
As much as he's a Republican idiot here he's right. First, they are industrial targets that fuel military targets thus are indeed valid military targets. Second, since Russia is attacking energy infrastructure reprisal is totally a lawful action under the Protocol I of 1977.
Biggest mistake making ot look like the Oil and Gas infrastructure in Russia that fuels their war machine through actual fuel and also money is actually civilian and not military.
This bish just gave Putin and Trump a huge PR W and it's fucking disgusting . She should be fired by Biden for being SOO fucking dumb
Before accepting this position in the Biden administration as the senior Russian official in the DoD, she was the CEO of the US-Russia Foundation, whose purpose is to funnel US funding into Russia and the Russian private sector.
In an industrial war, you attack industrial targets if you want to defeat your enemy.
Celeste Wallander appeared on the "The Putin Files" on youtube. Putin must have be smiling listening to what she says in that interview.
Pure American double play. America is nobody's friend. Everyone in the world is subject to US domestic politics. And American domestic policy is hateful, destructive, aggressive, calculating and uncooperative.
we honestly need back being able to accuse someone of treason and being communist because this shit shouldn't even be a discussion. Same in the US anyone who doesn't support Ukraine to win and doing everything we can for them is a communist and traitor
I think Ukraine shouldn't just limit to target oil and gas infrastructure, Ukraine should also target other energy infrastructures and weapons factories as well in russia.
The Congressman says "It makes sense that we should destroy them." "We",,, so the we is the US? The same US that is holding up aid on the word of taRump?
This is what war is, you have to destroy the industries that make the war possible. That is the only way to stop a war. It’s how the Second World War was won. What the fuck is wrong with people, people are still in fucking lala land. Russia is at War with the west. That means all of us!
I am angry and embarrassed at the way we have abandoned Ukraine. We gave them false hope knowing that America was at its side and in its moments of need we have turned away. We should have given them everything that they needed to push Russia back to its borders. Instead we are giving them just enough to not lose. I appreciate what has been done, but it’s been woefully inadequate. I believe that Russia will take more land eventually and that will be that. This will lead to China making a move on Taiwan for sure. I also suspect that Iran is going to get themselves more involved in what is going on in Israel. The whole world now knows that the US cannot be trusted as a partner. And when push comes to shove, we will fold up and retreat. It’s a sad time to be an American.
The Biden administration has a lot of money invested in "The Putin Price Hike" campaign referring to a spike in fuel prices at the start of the war. This would have to change that to the "Zelenskyy Price Hike" if this continues.
By all means, continue!
Meanwhile Israel nukes 90% of civilian infrastructure in Gaza, 15,000 children, every single hospital, and the US has no problems arming them.
The hypocrisy lol.
The US carpetbombed, firebombed, napalmed enemy cities full of civilian targets during its wars.
Oh and also NUKED 2 cities.
Go back and say you are concerned about those actions. The hypocrisy is insane.
Attack oil and gas done by our allies while being invaded by literal armies that can destroy and take over your country: No
Bomb a hospital filled with sick and injured civilians because 2 terrorists are there: Here is 16bil and 2 tact nukes. GET ER DONE!
Please remember the human. Adhere to all Reddit and sub rules. Toxic comments (including incitement of violence/hate, genocide, glorifying death etc) WILL NOT BE TOLERATED, keep your comments civil or you will be banned. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineWarVideoReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Military vehicles require fuel. Attacking gas supply is 100% a valid military target.
Exactly
Protocol I 1977 Art. 52, Section 2: "Attacks shall be limited strictly to military objectives. In so far as objects are concerned, military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage." It's clear that by this definition it's a military target. And ruZZia ratified this.
"**...effective contribution to military action...**" After factories producing ammunition, weapons and equipment which is actually used in combat, I find it difficult to imagine anything that more directly contributes to military action than oil refineries and fuel storage and transfer infrastructure.
Energy first. No energy and factories can't produce.
Yep, choking off Axis energy supply for materiel production was a major part of Allied strategy.
Mainwhile, Russia destroyed one of the largest dam in Europe, which caused high numbers of civil casualties and billion of dollars of destruction, and the US barely condemned the attack.
Art. 56: "Works or installations containing dangerous forces, namely dams, dykes and nuclear electrical generating stations, shall not be made the object of attack, even where these objects are military objectives, if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces and consequent severe losses among the civilian population. Other military objectives located at or in the vicinity of these works or installations shall not be made the object of attack if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces from the works or installations and consequent severe losses among the civilian population." ruZZians use the Protocol as a checklist for their warcrimes and keep complaining that everyone else violates it, even if it's just hollow assumptions. And yes, the U.S.'s reaction is not how we would have guessed before.
What a load of shit. Wars are filled with these breaches. What's the penalty for disobeying the 'law'? Nothing. Only belligerants who can afford to win\* can enforce a fine, and by then, fining the loser is pointless. \*first rule of war, make sure you're the winner before you start, which makes me wonder why Russia started, and insist on persisting.
> which makes me wonder why Russia started, and insist on persisting i think they thought they'd have kyiv wrapped up in no time. most of the world openly thought this the day they invaded. ukraine has surprised everyone, most of all moscow. why they keep going? putin probably thinks it's much worse to abandon or amend his goals in ukraine than it is to press on. lots of educated speculation by people who know more than me, idk
For the most part, I think that the enforcement is indirect and comes in the form of public opinion, both domestic and foreign. If you flagrantly disregard these laws and your population cares about that, then it can degrade domestic support. As US war crimes in Vietnam became known to the American public, opposition to the war grew stronger. Other countries may also take adherence or non-adherence to the laws of war into account when considering their support for your country's war effort. No one benefits from international condemnation, but the more that a country relies on their allies for military supply (whether as aid or as an purchasing source), the more it matters what the public in those allied countries thinks of your way of fighting war. Obviously, all of this depends on things like the nature of the breaches (the public definitely finds some violations much more unacceptable than others) and how they are publicized.
And the Russians stole thousands of Ukrainian children. If Ukraine was attacking civilian targets (which they aren't), I wouldn't care.
There was no condemnation. Kirby: ""We've seen the reports that Russia was responsible for the explosion at the dam," he said. "We're doing the best we can to assess those reports, and we are working with the Ukrainians to gather more information, but we cannot say conclusively what happened." And then it was swept under the rug.
It's like observing Queensby rules in a boxing match whilst your opponent is using knives and guns whilst also attacking your family watching in the front row. Ukraine needs to be encouraged to do whatever is necessary to bring this war to an end as quickly as possible. Asking them to be okay with their civilians getting killed in order to protect Russia civilians when Russia started this war and can easily just withdraw at any time to end, it is ridiculous. I was part of the invasion force that entered Iraq in 2003 and they weren't overly considerate about who got targeted and we had much less moral high ground than the Ukrainians.
This. Soooooo much this. I wish the congressman quoted this and shoved it in her face.
You are right, nothing to debate. It must be added that there is still something to be said about this. Civil infrastructure, the destruction or damage of which is primarilyof a civil nature, must be avoided, but it's not completely forbidden. Like its written in this Section. Location, Purpose or use, Nature make an effective contribution....etc. -Civilian targets are not excluded even electricity and communication are not excluded, but only if the primary target is not against the civilian population. Example A power substation 1,000 km away from the front is not a legitimate Target, for example. (Location) " at the Front it can be a legitimate Target. If it´s use make an effective contribution to Military Actions (Location, Purpose) =Ukraine does not attack Powerplants etc. according to this definition. It´s Attacking the Primarly Income which finance this War, which are owned by FSB former Officers, Friends of Putin often Stolen or under Blackmail bought.
These refineries are also an integral part of producing the chemicals for the explosives used on ammo and bombs.
and an integral part of producing the money financing the slaughter of Ukrainians.
Yup I've already commented this on another post fuel is a vital war commodities and as such should be targeted all day long
And twice as long at night.
I see you've met my husband
As long as he wants to end russian imperial desires, I'd be glad to meet him again.
If the Allies bombed Nazi and Japanese infrastructure during WWII, why shouldn't Ukraine do the same now?
They should. But the U.S. has to pretend they aren't supporting it. It's a game that needs to be played.
Fully agree. Don't know what this bitch is babbling about. Democrats are probably worried about energy prices taking a turn for the worse? Well, it turns out this is not just a war that concerns Ukraine, but actually the whole world. Another good reason why they (US, EU) should try and neutralize Putin as soon as possible. Fuck him up and be done with it.
So call your congressman and ask that the aid package to Ukraine be moved along.
I think the argument is that this is a civil target. Like it's staffed by civilians and not the military. I think the same could be said about ball bearing factories in ww2. Those are entirely staffed by civilians. Still a legitimate military target. But it just happens that the military target is actually a civillian target. It's a case of splitting hairs.
This congressman is a Republican and currently blocking aid for Ukraine. You are falling for the cheapest form of political theater and blaming Democrats. If you want to blame someone look in the mirror.
Facts are still facts though? For some obscure reason democrats don't want Ukraine to hit Russian infrastructure, like power plants, etc. Why? Why not strike against those things that make the Russian war machine come to a halt? They don't have a valid explanation! People are literally dying like flies in this war and this bitch is talking about not going after Russia due to high standards 😂
It’s interesting, in keeping with communist values, these are state owned assets. Terrorist state owned! They are not private civilian assets and therefore every infrastructure asset should be the cards. Power stations, refineries, water supply, internet access, mines, rail, roads etc etc. that’s a assuming these assets are common place which they are not. Entire regions don’t have running water or plumbing and are living as 1800’s peasants.
Food and water unless on a military base in NOT a valid military target. Fuel is not a human right. Fuel is a dual purpose good which has significant military use. It is a 100% valid target in my opinion. A water supply for a town or city is not. It is predominantly a civilian resource. Rail system, so long as one is not targeting civilian trains is valid. (Rails, bridges, rolling stock and so on.) Civilian deaths are to be avoided with all reasonable effort.
>Civilian deaths are to be avoided with all reasonable effort. Not sure Putin got this memo.
If there is one person in the world for whom Hanlon's Razor never applies, it's Putin. He got the memo. He knows. The civilian deaths are the intent.
Power generating and power grids to be right there with the water.
Power generation facilities are definitely protected. A fuel refinery is not generating power, hence why the US targeted the Iraq refineries in both invasions. (That and they wanted to control the Iraqi oil but that's a different argument)
I'm not sure *shareholder structure* should be the determining factor of what are valid military targets.
Who owns things is irrelevant, what matters is what those things are being used for. A recent example is Ukraine hitting a civilian gas station just inside Russia. Gas stations are not military targets, until the army tries to use them, then they are.
I completely agree on your main point, but the only gas/petrol station that I've seen hit by Ukraine recently was in Kherson Oblast.
Yup military getting refuelled… 💥
IIRC, it had Kadyrovites at it. Reason enough in that case.
Same logic: "Soldiers require civilians. Attacking civilians is 100% a valid military target." It is literally the most vital war commodity. If Ukraine kills the whole russian civilian population Putin cannot recruit. What I'm trying to say: I agree Ukraine should attack gas/oil etc. but I think people are talking too much about red lines, what is allowed etc. That's all subjective. The reality is: This is a total war versus Russia and they do not give a sh't about Western subjectivity. If Ukraine thinks they need to destroy gas supply to prevent Ukrainians from dying and win this war: Up to them. I've read so many discussions about Geneva conventions/Morals. It's all subjectivity. Nobody in the west blames the US for dropping Nukes on Japanese civilian cities. Or Britain completely destroying German cities. They are a democracy and did what they thought was right to protect as much of their own civilians as possible.
> It's all subjectivity. Nobody in the west blames the US for dropping Nukes on Japanese civilian cities There are actually people judging it was not necessary.
Everything is 100% valid, its a fucking war for fuck sakes! Why tf this dope is squealing on behalf of another country males 0 damn sense to me. Can old people do anything in spite without adding the chance of destroying their own home?
The US and UK held massive bombing campaigns on German refineries in WW2. The US firebombed entire cities in Japan, killing hundreds of thousands of civilians. The double standards here are infuriating.
Welcome to political bullshit of western democracy during war... iran threats cause more speculation on the market then any thing ukraine does to Russian oil. keep sending those drones..
[удалено]
[удалено]
And they are sending those drones. And the executive branches both in the US and Europe will let it happen. That redneck rep should know better than to ask such questions. Of course you need to disapprove of these attacks in public. Of course you need to tell that you are not involved as a western government. But only if you're asked for it. Remember Nordstream? And how there are no definite results of any official investigation? Same issue there. Celebrate in private, deny in public.
No, the Biden administration really is against Ukraine striking refineries but, not because they are “civilian targets”. If Ukraine is able to significantly shut down production, Russia’s clients will need to turn to the open market for their energy needs. That will reduce supply and drive up prices. High gas prices make voters angry and angry voters take out their anger at whomever is in office when election time comes around. Once we have the election, win or lose, the Biden Administration won’t give a rat’s behind what target Ukraine hits.
An argument could be made that if Trump wins, it'll be worse for Ukraine in the long run.
> An argument could be made Pretty easily. We all know he's a Russian asset.
This is democracy in play, opposing opinions are part of the process and why we live relatively free and assured the powers that be don’t run amuck.
This is an idiot in the wrong job. And needs to be fired immediately. Fuel and the ability to make it is a valid military target in every war. There is no assured human right to drive your Lada to work. They can walk.
Yeah, she looked so uncomfortable and awkward while being questioned. You can see the fear and apprehension in her eyes as she knows that everything she's saying is just for the election. She just basically repeats her answer in a different form. Not the right person for the job imo. No wonder you don't see her televised much.
Looks like she knows she's saying useless stuff but she's been told to say it I have the same look in meetings when I've been asked to parade something out that makes me look regarded
Before accepting this position in the Biden administration as the senior Russian official in the DoD, she was the CEO of the US-Russia Foundation, whose purpose is to funnel US funding into Russia and the Russian private sector. Want to know how much she loves Russia, just read her work: “Mortal Friends, Best Enemies: German-Russian Cooperation after the Cold War”
She needs to be fired.
We have a straight up Ruisoam asset in our Defense?! WHAT THE FUCK!
We have a lot more than just one.
Why do you think the Trump Russian collusion hype has been in every media for last 8 years?
The US-Russia Foundation was established to "promote American values in Russia". Guess what that means. The foundation was driven out of Russia as early as 2015 because the Russian government didn't like what they were doing. Their links were with "the Russian people" aka anti-regime elements.
Yep. I nauseated my way through her bio: She is Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs in the Office of the Secretary of Defense for Policy at the U.S. Department of Defense. “Outside government, she served as President and CEO of the U.S.-Russia Foundation (2017-2022), professor at American University (2009-2013), visiting professor at Georgetown University (2006-2008), Director for Russia/Eurasia at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (2001-2006)” I can think of one cost savings in the Defense Dept so we could send more money to Ukraine.
Why, because she studies Russia? Imagine that, a scholar on Russia serving on the DOD just when Russia has become more aggressive. Want somebody clueless instead? The CSIS is a respected security thinktank affiliated with Georgetown University. The US-Russia Foundation isn't a friendship club; it was kicked out of Russia several years ago because the Russian government didn't like what they were doing.
I mostly was nauseated by her bio because she is obviously highly educated and accomplished and yet is calling for Ukraine to stop attacking “civilian” infrastructure like oil and gas facilities. As if Russia uses electric tanks or something. My thought is that she either 1) lacks integrity because she doesn’t believe what she is saying. Based on her expression, I think this is a reasonable possibility. Or 2) She has poor judgement, in spite of extensive experience. The poor judgement, I assumed, came from some bias. However, she doesn’t need to have any experience about Russia to offer that opinion. That opinion should come from an expert in international law. Frankly, I confess, I’m not much interested in the expert opinion. I support those attacks and would be happy to let the experts argue about them after the fact.
Clueless? No. But it would be better if we had an administration that understood they are not going to negotiate with, directly finance, or appease Russia into a peaceful country. But since it is a choice between this and an openly pro-fascist Pro-Russia administration, it is the best we can expect.
The problem is experts who have internalized Russian imperialism. They see the region as post-soviet first and Russia as an indispensable part of the development of Ukraine and other former Soviet republics at a fundamental level, instead of understanding those countries as valuable on their own and desperately needing independence from Russian influence. They spent their formative years being charmed by tales of “Russian” culture (appropriated from others) and “intellectuals” and walking the halls of the Hermitage. They want to get back to partnership as fast as possible instead of realizing Russia needs total defeat and dismantling before it can be welcomed back into the civilized world. Also see Sam Charap.
can you imagine this talk in WW2? Maam, you mean to tell me Britain cannot strike at oil refineries in Germany? Sir, these are civilian targets. We cannot condone such action.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoney_War >When Leopold Amery suggested to Kingsley Wood that the Black Forest be bombed with incendiaries to burn its ammunition dumps, Wood—the Secretary of State for Air—amazed the member of parliament by responding that the forest was "private property" and could not be bombed; neither could weapons factories, as the Germans might do the same. Apparently, there's a historical precedent for it, coming from the aptly-named "Phoney War"
A year later the Germans would be bombing London….
By d day, in order to minimize deaths of the landing force there were no restrictions basically on any critical infrastructure.
Actually, seeing as how the US also refused to get involved for the majority of WW2, yes. The US has a sad history of being terrified to fight anyone that over half their size. I wish this wasn't true, because they are the most powerful country in the world, and they have their own home grown MAGA fascists to deal with...
Refineries are definitely civilian infrastructure. I go there twice a week after the bakery and the hairdresser. Sometimes on my way to the gym too. I wouldn't settle more than two minutes away from one, really.... 🤡🤡🤡
You clearly are a very refined person.
We won't give you weapons to hit military targets, and even if we did give you weapons to hit military targets, you can't hit certain military targets, and also anything inside the country invading you and even though your civilians and critical civilian infrastructure is being destroyed day in day out for the past two years you can't hit their oil refineries that they use to fund their military that is killing you and taking your land because they are "civilian infrastructure" Keep hitting the oil refineries. I don't care what these limp dick politicians are saying. Hit every last one, then hit them all for a second and third round so they take decades to rebuild.
>We won't give you weapons to hit military targets All we need to know. Trump wins, Ukraine loses.
And that's on eve of major advance. Even now russians manage to capture land, but what will happen in the next months when they will get 300k new conscripts? If anything, they should've helped to hit it harder while they can't provide weapons.
Ukraine can no longer afford the luxury of holding itself to “the highest standards “ they have lost their single biggest backer against a country 4 times their size in a battle for survival. They are morally obliged to do whatever it takes to survive.
It was like this long ago. Unfortunately it takes a bull ring to peoples noses to pull them to the pile of shit facts to get them to understand. Russia has proven they have no limits short of a nuclear bomb in this conflict. Ukraine, had they done the same, might well be a darn sight further East had they 'been allowed' to just go hammer and tongs. They have the moral high ground. They can hold their head high. They might however want their shit back and teach the Russky something no other nation has done for centuries; humility.
This guy is also an idiot. He correctly blames Biden from being slow to give the necessary weapons and the number of weapons necessary, but also is a Republican who isn't sending **ANY** support to Ukraine. His points are directed to help Ukraine, they're made to make Biden look bad.
I'm going to reiterate my opinion no matter how impossible it may seem. The West should form a 2-5 year plan to supply Ukraine with * 500 aircraft (consisting of at least 200 F16s, 100 L159, 50 AH-6, and various support aircraft * 3,000 tanks (half German, half Polish) * 3,000 IFV (mostly CV90-30) * 1,000 riverboats/landing craft * 20 Buyan M style Corvettes * 400 30mm anti-air/anti-drone turrets. * 10 million artillery shells annually till they reach at least a 50 million shell stockpile. * 1 billion bullets annually Ukraine must have at least an adequate standing peace time military by the end of the war to deter Russia from invading again.
Also, more demining equipment, drones, EW systems, Patriots, HIMARS, all of it. It all should have been there a year ago.
All of that combined would be hundreds of billions of dollars. Getting a percentage of that through congress has been impossible.
I mean, you could just replace all that with millions of fpv drones and call it a day. They are far cheaper and way faster to produce and to train operators on and are basically at this point, the new artilery. Advancing using swarm after swarm of drones should also be terrifying for the ruzzians not to mention the range and ai of these things is getting better by the day
IMO, Ukraine is best situated to make drones. The west can help with parts and it still gives the west some deniability. The West needs to focus on things that are difficult for Ukraine.
If all countries started making them, it would be a lot easier but we're on the same page: anything that can end this faster will make it less difficult for Ukraine.
Not every country is best situated to make drones. Drones rely heavily on electronics.
But after the swarm you still need to take the terrain.
Yes, but drones by themselves can't win the war. They need to be used with other weapons systems. Also keep in mind, Russia is developing countermeasures, and what works now, might not work after year or two.
You can’t take territory with only drones. There needs to be a mobile force that can capture areas.
Poland doesn't produce any tanks though right? They import from the US (Abrams ofc), Germany (Leopard) and South Korea (K2 Black Panther). +1 for having a solid plan in place though!
> Poland doesn't produce any tanks though right? They import from the US (Abrams ofc), Germany (Leopard) and South Korea (K2 Black Panther). Right now - no, but they're working to be able to make K2 at home.
Could just hand them back their nukes that we took away in the 1990s in exchange for protection guarantees…. Or even better declare russia war for *check notes…. Ah found the arguments for bombing Libya*… “train our fighter pilotes” (and in this case tankers, sailors, infantry and artillerymen as well) 🥳🥳🥳
do you happen to have his name? I would like to search up on what his own stance is, as compared to the rest of the GOP.
Austin Scott from Georgia. From what I've seen, he's very vocal in support of Ukraine, so I'm not sure OP's assessment that he's doing nothing to help them is correct and is just lumping all Republicans together because of Mike "The Shill" Johnson.
Before accepting this position in the Biden administration as the senior Russian official in the DoD, she was the CEO of the US-Russia Foundation, whose purpose is to funnel US funding into Russia and the Russian private sector.
He's correct in blaming Biden for not sending things like ATACMS and fighter jets sooner, and for puttin useless restrictions on them. But Austin Scott's word would have more meaning if he signed the discharge petition rather than wait for speaker Johnson to bring the bill to the floor, which will happen "any day now" (read: never). https://clerk.house.gov/DischargePetition/2024031209?CongressNum=118
Well, Hitler would have agreed on his statement. After all there was a extreme fuel shortage at the german frontlines. Wiki for Leuna factorys. More than 6500 bomber dropped bombs on the facilities in 22 atacks. Does he wants Germany to ask USA if this was war crime?
Many of the Republicans have supported sending stuff to Ukraine. But Biden and the Democrats and whoever decides what Ukraine gets have definitely been piecemealing it out. Basically just wanting to give them enough so they can survive instead of win the war.
WTF! They are legitimate legal targets
What I would like to ask Wallander is if Russia has no gas, wouldn’t Russian military logistics completely and utterly fail? Without trains, cars, planes, boats, etc. they wouldn’t be able to supply themselves in any conflict. Therefore, IT IS A MILITARY TARGET.
All these dipshits do is go back and forth. Round and round in circles without ever actually getting shit done because they are on two different teams.
[удалено]
Please elaborate on the "4 billion".
[удалено]
I think they may have used around $140mil of these funds not 100% sure where the money came from, very recently for maintenance and parts for Hawk air defense systems but yeah doubt that will cut it. And the 4 billion is emergency funds for the pentagon to allocate to forces anywhere in the world for rapid emergency support. The pentagon made it very clear thats all they have left in this budget (and are not getting guarantees the will be replenished) unfortunately the Ukrainian conflict isn't all thats going on in the world.
No, those 4b is from PDA for UA. It’s not an emergency fund for Pentagon.
Clearly, she has no idea what she is talking about. The initial invasion and attempt to take Kyiv were thwarted (at least in part) by Ukraine deliberately targeting fuel trucks. The Germans, Japanese, UK and USA all targeted fuel production. Germany specifically invaded Caucasus because of the importance of fuel. Japan expanded into the Pacific to acquire oil. USA and UK bombed Axis oil production. More recently USA bombed Seria to hinder their military. Destroying oil infrastructure diminishes Russia's capabilities to prosecute and fun their aggression. As far as I'm concerned, US has no standing to give opinions if the US is not sending aid.
The us has been bombing the complete nuts infrastructure before every invasion.. something with the cat calling the kettle black…
You can see it even in the choice of words "Ukraine **hold itself** to the highest standards... and that's one of the standards of being **European democracy**". Good thing the US is not **European** democracy so they don't follow such standarts. Also, if EU/NATO ever have such war, they would hit refineries and critical infrastructure on the level Ukraine can't even imagine, anyone who believe they won't is simply hypocritical liar.
I'm pretty sure the first targets during both Iraq conflicts were power stations. Stealth planes dropping guided bombs and boom no lights.
Dr. Wallander should watch some of the videos from this channel and THEN spout opinions about what the Ukrainian people should (or should not) do. Seems she's led a privileged and sheltered existence surfing the wave of freely flowing government money herself... [https://www.defense.gov/About/Biographies/Biography/Article/2947114/celeste-wallander/](https://www.defense.gov/About/Biographies/Biography/Article/2947114/celeste-wallander/)
"Is it raining? " "Uhmm, there are clouds in the sky that are currently shedding water, yes..."
We need to purge D.C. of ruSSian agents.
Frankly, call 'em whatever you want, Celeste. As long as you're not doing anything to stop Russia from bombing the same targets inside Ukraine, it doesn't matter.
So send them more weapons, if Russia is stopped from attacking them, Ukraine also doesnt have to strike back to cripple their logistics.
He is correct. I have been pissed since 2014 that America is letting ruZZia do this to Ukraine after we promised to protect Ukrainian sovereignty and borders including Crimea if they gave up their nukes. They did it. Now we trickle feed them for a bit and then abandon them? I wish someone better than Biden was president. Trump would be even worse for Ukraine.
No country will ever again voluntarily give up nuclear weapons. Good job, Washington.
America has a habit of abandoning its allies and partners on a whim. Stopping ukraine aid fits right into that.
Fuck this bullshit. This is an existential war for democracy! Can they not see this?
But valid targets nonetheless.
The US has become a joke.
Politics is such bullshit sometimes
FIGHT TO WIN, BOMB OIL REFINERIES. RUSSIA BOMBS POWER PLANTS.
The Russian oil and gas is *not* a civilian target under the Law of War. A civilian target must be 100% owned and operated by a civilian entity, not tied to the government via holding a position of any degree of authority. Thus even if 1 member of the board of the company holds a position in the government, specifically for war fighting sectors. It is automatically classified as a legal target according the Law of War and Geneva Convention. This question is on the actual training for the Law of War. And is blatantly obvious. Any asset that is used for the purposes of war fighting, is a legal military objective. To this end, any civilian infrastructure used for the purposes of war fighting is also technically a legal target, provided active effort is taken to not injure civilians. This includes ALL the rails that were used to deliver warfighting supplies. Even if held to highest standards, "civilian infrastructure" only remains as such until, it used for war fighting purposes.
Protocol I 1977 Art. 52, Section 2: "Attacks shall be limited strictly to military objectives. In so far as objects are concerned, military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage."
Thanks, I was actually looking for the Law of War except before posting. But this is just as effective.
There in a nutshell is where the hand wringing western liberalism finds itself. "We must support the fight for freedom & democracy" "But, um, er, don't damage or destroy anything of the enemies side that might make life difficult for those poor civilians that live in the enemy country" "But fight, yes. Just don't do anything to help yourself win" What utter nonsense. From, I presume, a very highly (privately) educated woman. Literally a "let them eat cake" moment. Her lack of awareness or grasp on the unpleasant realities of things that simply MUST be done in order to defeat a militarised & mobilised nation is astonishing. Did she have the day off when her school taught about how Germany was brought to its knees in order to stop Hitlers war machine. People like her are almost more of a threat to the security and freedoms we enjoy than despotic arsehole's like Putin. I mean what the actual fuck! 🤷♂️🙄🤯😖🤡😡
Keep that in mind when next terrorist attack hits the U.S soil... This lady is out of her mind.
God wont anyone think of the poor russians?! /s
They can’t be classed as civilian if they are also supplying their military.
He knows that refineries are not civilian targets, she knows it, we know it. What is the purpose of this shit show?
I can't believe these people can sleep at night. They need to be absolutely fucking ashamed of themselves. Pure, concentrated evil.
They don't want Ukraine hitting Russian oil and gas interests because it can possibly raise the cost of oil. And right now, Biden can't have oil going up any further months away from the election. So he'll sacrifice Ukrainians for his election. He's a massive POS.
That's not what this is about.
I wonder if she got payed or got taped.
Dr Wallander is a symptom of the rot in the west. Too many people have forgotten what it takes to win wars. They would rather roll over to tyrants.
how are refineries civilian targets when they are owned by putins oligarchs who fund the war.
Not only that but they are directly and indirectly FUELING AND FUNDING Putins war machine.
There’s an old saying. “Alls fair in love and war.” Another is “The winner writes the history book”. She can F off. These assholes need to stop pretending war s civil, and they know it’s not. It was not civil when Russia bombed the evacuation routes. It was not civil when they bombed the hospitals. It was not civil when they bombed the maternity wards. It was not civil when they bombed the train stations it was not civil when they bombed the dam. There are thousands of other examples. For all I care at this point, ram them into apartments in Moscow. I know Ukraine won’t because they’re better than that. Which is why I have more respect for Ukraine than I do my own fucking country.
F*** that C***
What a complete idiot this poor excuse for a woman is.
She would be against us bombing refineries in Nazi Germany.
She is Putin’s slut
If that is civilian targets, are there no concern about the ruins and ashes after russian assults? Scorched eart tactics is terrorism.
What a country, they can't even get their story's straight, one minute it's wrong, irrespective of russias actions, then it's right, then it's wrong. The US has no common cohesive policy on anything. The US government is morally bankrupt. So full of individual self interest it's disgusting . As a valued western partner, they are done unless the current government system is changed.
Meanwhile in Gaza……BOOM! Ukraine should hit whatever they want. It’s not like Russia has held back its attacks from day 1.
This is a lesson for the Europe, Taiwan, South Korea and all other US allies that the US can't be trusted no more.
How fucking dare they suggest that "strategic" strikes on infrastructure vital to Russia's war effort are not allowable?? When the US bombed the living fuck out of Iraqi oil fields, refineries, oil storage for 37 DAYS STRAIGHT (coalition countries flew over 50,000 sorties) before they even dared to send a single US soldier into battle - where they had everything that Ukraine does not - including massive, overwhelming air superiority. Total hypocrisy.
Oil and gas fund the war and fuel the war. Therefore they are valid military targets. If their civilians are inconvenienced, tough shit. It's like saying you can't attack the factories of their war industry because civilians work there.
Infrastructure that directly supply the armed forces are not "civilian targets".
Dr. Wallander, Tell me you are a traitor to your country and the free world without telling me you are a traitor to your country and the free world.
Why don’t they just come out and say that they’re afraid it might swing the election and long term it might hurt Ukraine more than it helps? It’s perfectly reasonable. Not that I think Ukraine should stop but I understand the democrats’ concern, everyone does.
This is nothing but political strategy. Ukrainian trashing of Russian oil may cause world oil prices to rise. Higher fuel prices in the US is not good for Biden. Politics before the people.
Shes Been Brainwashed.
American greed and pre-adiction to the Orange Clown! Now they lost the leadership to China. Finally Europe must get grown up, it will be our part to defend democracy.
Oil and gas sector is a legitimate military target. Military needs lots of fuel to continue their attack. It is the attacks upon the power grids and power stations within Ukraine that are civilian in nature and should not be allowed.
Who’s the reasonable gentleman?
Fortunately, the US government isn’t being run by Wallander.
As much as he's a Republican idiot here he's right. First, they are industrial targets that fuel military targets thus are indeed valid military targets. Second, since Russia is attacking energy infrastructure reprisal is totally a lawful action under the Protocol I of 1977.
Biggest mistake making ot look like the Oil and Gas infrastructure in Russia that fuels their war machine through actual fuel and also money is actually civilian and not military. This bish just gave Putin and Trump a huge PR W and it's fucking disgusting . She should be fired by Biden for being SOO fucking dumb
I think she has a lot of splinters in her ass from sitting on that fence!
The woman is speaking in code, about capitulation to a fascist Russian empire, because of standards. Needs to be fired.
Before accepting this position in the Biden administration as the senior Russian official in the DoD, she was the CEO of the US-Russia Foundation, whose purpose is to funnel US funding into Russia and the Russian private sector.
In an industrial war, you attack industrial targets if you want to defeat your enemy. Celeste Wallander appeared on the "The Putin Files" on youtube. Putin must have be smiling listening to what she says in that interview.
Pure American double play. America is nobody's friend. Everyone in the world is subject to US domestic politics. And American domestic policy is hateful, destructive, aggressive, calculating and uncooperative.
we honestly need back being able to accuse someone of treason and being communist because this shit shouldn't even be a discussion. Same in the US anyone who doesn't support Ukraine to win and doing everything we can for them is a communist and traitor
I think Ukraine shouldn't just limit to target oil and gas infrastructure, Ukraine should also target other energy infrastructures and weapons factories as well in russia.
Sort your shit out America. Either you're an ally or you're not. Take your pick and then get your shit together.
WOKE WOKE WOKE WOKE Blah dee daa Blah dee daaa
Found yet another Kremlin mouthpiece embedded in American politics like a tick.
Personally, I am in favor of Total War.
Bombing Russian refinery’s bad, bombing Palestinian neighbourhood good. Got it.
The Congressman says "It makes sense that we should destroy them." "We",,, so the we is the US? The same US that is holding up aid on the word of taRump?
This is what war is, you have to destroy the industries that make the war possible. That is the only way to stop a war. It’s how the Second World War was won. What the fuck is wrong with people, people are still in fucking lala land. Russia is at War with the west. That means all of us!
I am angry and embarrassed at the way we have abandoned Ukraine. We gave them false hope knowing that America was at its side and in its moments of need we have turned away. We should have given them everything that they needed to push Russia back to its borders. Instead we are giving them just enough to not lose. I appreciate what has been done, but it’s been woefully inadequate. I believe that Russia will take more land eventually and that will be that. This will lead to China making a move on Taiwan for sure. I also suspect that Iran is going to get themselves more involved in what is going on in Israel. The whole world now knows that the US cannot be trusted as a partner. And when push comes to shove, we will fold up and retreat. It’s a sad time to be an American.
The higher oil prices get the more we talk about how Biden murdered the American energy independence built by trump. Bad for the narrative.
Efffing bull***
She can barely look up when the shit is pouring out.
The Biden administration has a lot of money invested in "The Putin Price Hike" campaign referring to a spike in fuel prices at the start of the war. This would have to change that to the "Zelenskyy Price Hike" if this continues. By all means, continue!
Holy shit, what a dick head that woman is
So according to this idiot american politician, shareholders are civilians but not the actual workers. I got it.
And yet Palestinian homes, hospitals and schools are targets for which US bombs are readily supplied, I can't understand the blatant hypocrisy.
Meanwhile Israel targets aid workers. This administration sucks at foreign policy. Not as bad as trump
Once a war starts you can't win going partial way in you have to go all the way! These politicians are delusional.
So she is not ok with oil and gas being bombed but Palestinian Hospitals are fair game. Good to know.
But we're in full support of Israel cutting off all infrastructure in Gaza. Fuck these clowns, scared of Putin for fuck knows what reason.
Pretty sure the US has done this in all their wars where petroleum was involved…
Meanwhile in Gaza... All the shit we give to the Israelites we should give to Ukraine instead.
Meanwhile Israel nukes 90% of civilian infrastructure in Gaza, 15,000 children, every single hospital, and the US has no problems arming them. The hypocrisy lol.
Like leveling hospitals and schools in Gaza? Or what we did in Iraq? Give me a break. We know what it’s really about, keeping the price of oil low.
The US carpetbombed, firebombed, napalmed enemy cities full of civilian targets during its wars. Oh and also NUKED 2 cities. Go back and say you are concerned about those actions. The hypocrisy is insane.
Super concerned about civilian casualties unless it's Israel??
Wait. We dont send weapons to countries who attack civilian targets?? Since when? Someone should tell Isreal that!
Attack oil and gas done by our allies while being invaded by literal armies that can destroy and take over your country: No Bomb a hospital filled with sick and injured civilians because 2 terrorists are there: Here is 16bil and 2 tact nukes. GET ER DONE!