News War with Russia

[Wij]

Ukraine did that.

You haven't proved that.

 

[Scouse]

You haven't proved that.

Onus is on you for once - explain why Russia would use artillery on a position they completely control.

It's madness @Wij. Tribal madness.

 

[Wij]

Onus is on you for once - explain why Russia would use artillery on a position they completely control.

It's madness @Wij. Tribal madness.

I don't even have the incident you are referring to. You've given me nothing.

A nuclear plant isn't one small thing it's a large area with different things of different strategic importance.

And why would Ukraine shell 'it' when it needs the energy? How does that make sense?

 

[DaGaffer]

Onus is on you for once - explain why Russia would use artillery on a position they completely control.

It's madness @Wij. Tribal madness.

Look on a map, the Ukrainians are in Nikopol, which is on the other side of the Dnipro from the plant. It's literally a couple of miles away and the Russians haven't shown much of a talent for accuracy in this war.

Maybe it is the Ukrainians, but it's very easy to demonstrate why it could be the Russians.

 

[Embattle]

Look on a map, the Ukrainians are in Nikopol, which is on the other side of the Dnipro from the plant. It's literally a couple of miles away and the Russians haven't shown much of a talent for accuracy in this war.

Maybe it is the Ukrainians, but it's very easy to demonstrate why it could be the Russians.

I tend to think it is a moot point anyway, as I said before only one country in this war is classed as the invader.

 

[Embattle]

MH17: Three guilty as court finds Russia-controlled group downed airliner

A Dutch trial finds a missile supplied by Russia killed 298 people on board MH17 over Ukraine in 2014.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Scouse]

MH17: Three guilty as court finds Russia-controlled group downed airliner

A Dutch trial finds a missile supplied by Russia killed 298 people on board MH17 over Ukraine in 2014.

www.bbc.co.uk

Wow. Obviously hugely safe.

The court found that a Russian-made missile supplied from Russia and fired by an armed group under Russian control brought down flight MH17.
The men - two Russians and one Ukrainian - were found guilty in absentia and sentenced to life in jail. A third Russian was acquitted.

Two Russians and a Ukranian, working together (under Russian control, obvs) tried and convicted whilst not at trial. The only one with legal representation aquitted.

 

[Raven]

Wow. Obviously hugely safe.

Two Russians and a Ukranian, working together (under Russian control, obvs) tried and convicted whilst not at trial. The only one with legal representation aquitted.

Or...maybe the only person innocent(ish) actually got legal council, rather than taking a nice apartment and pension in Moscow.

 

[Scouse]

Or...maybe the only person innocent(ish) actually got legal council, rather than taking a nice apartment and pension in Moscow.

So, he's innocent, but not really innocent, he's innocent-ish, because he didn't take payment from Russia for the crime he definitely committed, and instead got lawyers to show the world he is innocent-ish.

But he's fucking guilty, right?

 

[Raven]

So, he's innocent, but not really innocent, he's innocent-ish, because he didn't take payment from Russia for the crime he definitely committed, and instead got lawyers to show the world he is innocent-ish.

But he's fucking guilty, right?

Not guilty of shooting down a passenger plane. But, guilty of withholding evidence, pretty much.

Edit, and even then, it wasn't a deliberate act of shooting down a passenger plane, they fucked up, then tried to hide it.

 

[Scouse]

Not guilty of shooting down a passenger plane.

So guilty then, right? Yeah. Guilty. The dirty Russian fucker.

Of course, that's not quite how courts work is it. They bring a range of criminal charges and see what they can get to stick. And nothing could stick. Therefore - not guilty of a criminal offence.


Funny how just the mention of the word 'Russia' and people who previously supported even the rule of law fall over backwards to condemn the innocent. It's not tribal at all and totally normal. Com-pletely normal.

 

[Raven]

So guilty then, right? Yeah. Guilty. The dirty Russian fucker.

Of course, that's not quite how courts work is it. They bring a range of criminal charges and see what they can get to stick. And nothing could stick. Therefore - not guilty of a criminal offence.


Funny how just the mention of the word 'Russia' and people who previously supported even the rule of law fall over backwards to condemn the innocent. It's not tribal at all and totally normal. Com-pletely normal.

Have you read the report, or just the headline?

 

[Scouse]

Have you read the report, or just the headline?

Yes the whole thing. And this is the pertinent sentence:

A third Russian was acquitted

Acquitted. You know what that means in law right? (I linked it to the dictionary for you just in case)

But who cares really. It's only Russians. And they're all sub-human. They just ain't the same as us. I say we build a furnace and fuck 'em all in. That'd mean we finally have a solution to our problem.

 

[Raven]

You seem quite upset, again. I'll (probably not) respond when you have calmed down a bit.

 

[Wij]

I don’t understand the argument here. Russians and Russian-backed separatists did it. Some were found guilty for it. End of story.

 

[Scouse]

You seem quite upset, again. I'll (probably not) respond when you have calmed down a bit.

Not upset at all old bean. Happy to provide a reality check

 

[Scouse]

I don’t understand the argument here

Raven is accusing a man acquitted of a crime of being guilty, despite being aquitted.

That's the argument.

 

[Wij]

Raven is accusing a man acquitted of a crime of being guilty, despite being aquitted.

That's the argument.

Well he wasn’t guilty of the charges brought against him. He may have been a part of that shitty ‘separatist movement’ but that’s not a crime in the Netherlands.

 

[Raven]

Raven is accusing a man acquitted of a crime of being guilty, despite being aquitted.

That's the argument.

Erm, no it isn't. As usual, you are reading what you want to read, not what is actually written.

As the report (quite clearly?) states, he knew about it but wasn't involved in carrying it out.

So...er...was found not guilty of carrying it out...

Not entirely sure what you are trying to argue about, except always looking for something, anything, to argue about.

 

[Scouse]

You're both so desparate to say he's a cunt really @Wij. He's a human who felt the way he did - right or wrong - and like us, he based his decisions on the information he was given, the values he was taught and the circumstances he found himself in.

But what he wasn't guilty of a crime. Period.

Nothing else needs to be said - but because: 'Russia' both of you have to say something.

 

[Scouse]

As the report (quite clearly?) states, he knew about it but wasn't involved in carrying it out.

Not at all. That's a reading fail on your part. All it says is that he knew about the existence of a missile - so fucking what? He was part of a separatist group. But (drum roll):

He's not guilty of a crime!

Period. End of.

 

[Raven]

Not at all. That's a reading fail on your part. All it says is that he knew about the existence of a missile - so fucking what? He was part of a separatist group. But (drum roll):

He's not guilty of a crime!

Period. End of.

Yes, well done on agreeing to exactly what I said, it only took 30 mins of you mashing F5.

 

[Wij]

Not at all. That's a reading fail on your part. All it says is that he knew about the existence of a missile - so fucking what? He was part of a separatist group. But (drum roll):

He's not guilty of a crime!

Period. End of.

In The Netherlands yes. If Ukraine retakes Donbas the regime he was part of will have to answer for lots of crimes.

 

[Scouse]

In The Netherlands yes. If Ukraine retakes Donbas the regime he was part of will have to answer for lots of crimes.

Ah. So he's guilty then eh @Wij? Even if we have to start fucking about with legal systems, he's fucking guilty. The dirty fucking Ruskie. We'll get the cunt in the end eh? That's Justice.

Of course the Glorious Ukranian Legal System is amazing! It's a lie that ECHR has found against it multiple times - including against Article 3 - the Prohibition of Torture. All hail Ukraine! They're not just a slightly softer version of Russia in disguise! And all down with Russia!

 

[Raven]

Of course the Glorious Ukranian Legal System is amazing!

Dutch*

Edit, now you are in full whataboutism mode.

 

[Scouse]

Dutch

You struggling to follow the thread m8? Wij was talking about doing him under Ukranian law when Donbas is retaken. Anything to get the cunt. I fully agree!

 

[Jupitus]

Holy fucking cow - you lot are doing my bloody nut in !!!

 

[Raven]

You struggling to follow the thread m8? Wij was talking about doing him under Ukranian law when Donbas is retaken. Anything to get the cunt. I fully agree!

mmm. But they guy was tried under Dutch law, and found not guilty, mostly because he wasn't guilty of the crime put in front of him. The rest of them were guilty as fuck and didn't even acknowledge the court, just vanished, likely into nice digs in Moscow.

Not quite sure what previous Ukrainian crimes have to do with anything.

 

[Wij]

You struggling to follow the thread m8? Wij was talking about doing him under Ukranian law when Donbas is retaken. Anything to get the cunt. I fully agree!

Look at what happened in areas retaken from Russia such as Bucha. Many of the separatists will be guilty under standard Ukrainian and international law. That’s not even controversial. I specifically said not guilty in the Netherlands.

 

[Wij]

Not quite sure what previous Ukrainian crimes have to do with anything.

It’s just trying to draw an equivalence between the attacked and the attacker because somehow that seems like a good idea.