The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

contricusc · Apr 3, 2023

Ananda said:
In anyway is it make it allright to be killed in public place like that with explosive devices ? Injuring civilians ? Is this not act of assassination bordering cross to terrorism ?

This was a targeted assasination, not an act of random terrorism. He was killed at an event he organized where he gathered with his supporters. The injured civilians were his closest supporters. When you say things like “We'll defeat everyone, we'll kill everyone, we'll rob everyone we need to”, it is no wonder some people will want to kill you. When you are a supporter of someone who says such things, and you attend his events about the war, you assume the risks of being under attack.

Also, calling him a journalist is a little far fetched. He fought for the self-proclaimed “DNR” as part of the “Vostok” battalion, as well as for the self-proclaimed “LNR.” Before that, he served a prison sentence for armed robbery. That’s not the CV of a journalist, but more likely of a volunteer combatant.

Ananda · Apr 3, 2023

contricusc said:
This was a targeted assasination, not an act of random terrorism.

Funny when it is on someone that work on opposite side, action that being done in West clearly call terrorism, become targeted assassinations if done to other side. So latter on is it alright for Russia or say Iran or Hezbollah blow up someone in public space at West, or Israel and call it as targeted assassinations?

Some girl give this guy a bomb, and yes it becomes targeted assassinations. No wonder people outside West more and more doesn't buy what Western media take "on this war", or can we call propagandist "on this war" ?

Like I say anyone can believe what they believe. This war already become murkier by both sides anyway.

contricusc · Apr 3, 2023

“So latter on is it alright for Russia or say Iran or Hezbollah blow up someone in public space at West, or Israel and call it as targeted assassinations?”

The cafe where Tatarsky was killed was holding a private event at the time, so it was not exactly a public space. When the attack is aimed exactly at a specific person, it is an assasination. When the attack is aimed at random people in the public, it is terrorism. This was more akin to a Mafia atack where they assasinate their rivals, than to a terrorist attack.

When Louis Mountbatten was killed by a bomb in his boat together with his family, placed by an IRA member, it was considered an assasination, not a terrorist act. Even the Wikipedia page about the event is called “Assasination of Louis Mountbatten”:

Assassination of Lord Mountbatten - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

No double standards here, just proper naming of events.

Feanor · Apr 3, 2023

ngatimozart said:
Why is an act of terrorism? Considering that Vladlen Tatarsky, actually Maxim Fomin:

"... posted a video in which he vowed: “That’s it. We’ll defeat everybody, kill everybody, rob everybody we need to. It will all be the way we like it. God be with you.” Prominent Russian military blogger killed in cafe blast

Those certainly aren't the words of an accredited journalist. He's no more a journalist than the wikileaks founder, or Vladimir Putin. Russian journos who don't toe Putin's line find themselves in deep trouble;

stay in a prison colony,

being mobilised,

defenestrated, or

poisoned etc.

He routinely visited the front lines and posted materials from there in fairly large quantities. I guess you can define journalist how you want, and you added the qualifier accredited there (by whom?). If you prefer to call him a mil-blogger and amateur journalist, that's fine by me. The murder in question is not fine by me, and should not be fine by anyone who wants to live in a society based on the rule of law.

Furthermore who says it was a Ukrainian hit? It could've been a:

FSB hit because of his criticism of the Russian military effort.

Putin doesn't like any criticism and maybe Fomin, to use his real name, stood on one toe to many or has outlived his usefulness.

Putin sending a message to Russian bloggers that criticism of the army's war record is no longer tolerated.

It could've have been an organised crime hit.

May have been a Russian resistant hit.

The point is that we don't know and labelling it as terrorism is just Russian propaganda.

It's an IED that went off in a cafe killing one and wounding many targeting a prominent public figure. If it had happened in Iraq we'd be calling it terrorism. It happened in Russia. As to who says it's a Ukrainian hit? Certainly not me. But if it was a Russian "resistance" hit, wouldn't that specifically make it terrorism? I.e. politically motivated? The only way this isn't terrorism is if it's organized crime or personal motives. If it's a political killing, be it by Putin, anti-Putin activists, Ukrainians, or space aliens who want to destabilize Russia, that's:

"The calculated use of violence or threat of violence to inculcate fear. Terrorism is intended to coerce or intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological."

terrorism

"terrorism" published on by null.

www.oxfordreference.com

If you prefer a different definition of the term, please let me know which and whence it hails.

ngatimozart said:
The UKR are using KS-19 AAA guns in the ground role. They are using "... Soviet UOF-412 rounds with OF-412 projectiles" manufactured in 1962.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1642262755662000129

Curious tidbit, Ukrainian sources were claiming that these guns were captured from Russia during the Kharkov offensive. I suspect they were double captured, and were possibly originally stored in the arsenal at Balakleya.

Ananda · Apr 3, 2023

contricusc said:
No double standards here, just proper naming of events.

Terrorism | Federal Bureau of Investigation

To counter terrorism, the FBI's top investigative priority, we use our investigative and intelligence capabilities to neutralize domestic extremists and help dismantle terrorist networks worldwide.

www.fbi.gov

Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups who are inspired by, or associated with, designated foreign terrorist organizations or nations

Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature.

Let's see what FBI definition in here. You may call it targeted assassination, but in their book it is relagated to "terrorism". So when similar situations conducted in western soils for those opposing political possition to other state, directly suspicion already aim toward opposing state directive.

The FBI if that happen in US under those conditions already directing their investigation for terrorist attack. Not targeted assassination. As this is attack happen on public place.

So call this as terrorism act, has base even on Western standard. Unless if some of those in west decide not calling it terrorism, as happens for opposite sides. That's double standard on any definition.

contricusc said:
cafe where Tatarsky was killed was holding a private event at the time, so it was not exactly a public space.

When they are call cafe, and also open to several clientele, it is by any definition is public space. A cafe in Paris for example can be own by one parties, and if that parties conduct private gathering on that Cafe, doesn't mean that cafe become 'non public' premises.

Sycarion · Apr 3, 2023

Ananda said:
Well maybe he's not a journalist on some 'mainstream' western media standard. However there's also those 'bloggers' in west in each side of extreme political spectrums, that some still call them Journalists.

Just because some call them journalists, doesn't mean they are. The fact that any random person with a camera, a blog, and an audience can call themselves a journalist nowadays is a big problem. Undeservedly gaining the credibility and trust offered by the job title, while not necessarily following or being held to the standard a journalist should be held to.

But the fact that this happens, doesn't make them, and by extension this guy, an actual journalist. Especially not this guy considering the things he said, wrote, and published. He didn't work at a mass media/news company, he and his works didn't follow the journalistic Code of Ethics, he is not a journalist. Not even a citizen journalist. He is a blogger.

Edit: I realize I might come across as condoning him getting killed. I don't. People should be able to say what they want to say without getting killed. But I do take an issue with calling this guy a journalist instead of a blogger.

Vivendi · Apr 3, 2023

Just for the record: Targeting civilians is never OK, whether it's a blogger, a journalist, or some kids hiding in a house in Ukraine.

Just because I think this guy was a blogger not a journalist does not mean I think it was OK to kill him in this manner.

Ananda said:
Terrorism | Federal Bureau of Investigation

To counter terrorism, the FBI's top investigative priority, we use our investigative and intelligence capabilities to neutralize domestic extremists and help dismantle terrorist networks worldwide.

www.fbi.gov

Let's see what FBI definition in here.

Regarding FBI definitions:

Domestic terrorism: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature.

If you want to use this definition you have to demonstrate that this was done "to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature.". If not, it was not a terrorist act. Unless it was international terrorism, in which case you need to demonstrate that it was "Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups who are inspired by, or associated with, designated foreign terrorist organizations or nations " -- i.e. you need to demonstrate some kind of link to a designated foreign terrorist organization or nation. If you can't it does not fit this definition of terrorism either.

You are clearly jumping to conclusions since you cannot demonstrate any of these. Of course you could have used another definition of "terrorism" to better fit into your agenda (I am actually surprised you referred to the narrow and specific definitions of the FBI since they argue against calling an event an act of terrorism until further evidence has been gathered and analysed -- whereas you seem very eager to call it terrorism right away!).

This could be "terrorism", it could be related to "crime" (this guy was a criminal, and bombs are often used in Russia to kill other criminals), or it could be some lunatics. Or perhaps this blogger had messed with the wife of somebody who decided to get revenge. At this stage we don't know.

swerve · Apr 3, 2023

Ananda said:
When they are call cafe, and also open to several clientele, it is by any definition is public space. A cafe in Paris for example can be own by one parties, and if that parties conduct private gathering on that Cafe, doesn't mean that cafe become 'non public' premises.

It's possible for a cafe, bar, etc. to hold a private event & be closed to the public. I've been to such events, & been turned away from a pub (or in one case told we were welcome but only until a certain time), cafe etc. because one was being held there. It's a normal thing here, & in other countries I've been to.

I don't know whether that was the case here, but it's a mistake to assume the cafe was open to the public. It may have been, or it may not.

Note that thinking Tatarsky is no loss to the world & killing him is in a different category from killing people who are trying to report the truth, or bring about political change peacefully, does not mean that I condone blowing people up in (possibly) public spaces, or killing people just because they express loathsome opinions. I just resent this killing being lumped in with those of people whose only "crime" is to spread opinions Putin doesn't like.

Feanor · Apr 3, 2023

swerve said:
It's possible for a cafe, bar, etc. to hold a private event & be closed to the public. I've been to such events, & been turned away from a pub (or in one case told we were welcome but only until a certain time), cafe etc. because one was being held there. It's a normal thing here, & in other countries I've been to.

I don't know whether that was the case here, but it's a mistake to assume the cafe was open to the public. It may have been, or it may not.

Note that thinking Tatarsky is no loss to the world & killing him is in a different category from killing people who are trying to report the truth, or bring about political change peacefully, does not mean that I condone blowing people up in (possibly) public spaces, or killing people just because they express loathsome opinions. I just resent this killing being lumped in with those of people whose only "crime" is to spread opinions Putin doesn't like.

Given his criticism of the Russian military leadership, if he was killed by Putin's government, he may well fall into that category. It doesn't seem like the likeliest scenario, but we can't rule it out.

Ananda · Apr 3, 2023

Vivendi said:
clearly jumping to conclusions since you cannot demonstrate any of these. Of course you could have used another definition of "terrorism" to better fit into your agenda (I am actually surprised you referred to the narrow and specific definitions of the FBI since they argue against calling an event an act of terrorism until further evidence has been gathered and analysed -- whereas you seem very eager to call it terrorism right away!).

I call it terrorism, but you are clearly want this to be call justified killing. Seems you are the one who have agenda from beginning to discounted anything that happen to other side on anything then potential terrorism act.

Again if this happen in West, the western media already full of 'speculation' from beginning on terrorism attack. My point from beginning is shown the 'double standard' of reporting on western media. Call that of you want as my agenda. As clearly your agenda on the opposite side.

Ananda · Apr 3, 2023

swerve said:
don't know whether that was the case here, but it's a mistake to assume the cafe was open to the public. It may have been, or it may not.

Doesn't mean that particular cafe now is not consider as public area, as some in here seems eager to justify. Doing private function (if this is really happening) on a Cafe is usual business to do, and does not suddenly make a cafe ceased to be a public place.

Attacking someone in public place with explosive device, is terrorism act. US targeted killing using missile from drones practise is to wait until the target leave public space to reduce collateral damage (just as example on open policy in targeted killing). Doing this purposely in public space knowing well and disregarding of potential collateral damage, is act of terrorism no matter whose doing it.

relic88 · Apr 3, 2023

Seems like a lot to go through to kill this person in this way, lots of potential for failure and risk to others. Some people really had it out for him it seems and wanted to perhaps send a loud and clear message.

seaspear · Apr 3, 2023

A Russian woman who has been identified as an anti war activist has been arrested and has admitted under camera handing over the statuette ,Im not sure if there was duress media claims there was remains to be seen if she is accorded legal representation

Larry_L · Apr 3, 2023

Ananda said:
Funny when it is on someone that work on opposite side, action that being done in West clearly call terrorism, become targeted assassinations if done to other side. So latter on is it alright for Russia or say Iran or Hezbollah blow up someone in public space at West, or Israel and call it as targeted assassinations?

Some girl give this guy a bomb, and yes it becomes targeted assassinations. No wonder people outside West more and more doesn't buy what Western media take "on this war", or can we call propagandist "on this war" ?

Like I say anyone can believe what they believe. This war already become murkier by both sides anyway.

You keep bringing up the west. That is another thread. Russia has a much longer reach with their weapons that deliver huge amounts of explosives to many major cities in Ukraine. It is impossible for Ukraine to achieve parity in the missile exchange. Even if this was perpetrated by Ukraine, which is questionable, This was explosive delivered by other means to attack a soldier, who also happens to be involved in the information space in this war. The explosive was delivered in an area used in information, and cyber warfare. If all areas in the cities in Ukraine are legitimate targets, then the reverse should apply also. The collateral damage is to be regretted, however Russia did start this war, and this could be viewed by many as a legitimate military target.

As you say this war has already become murky for both sides.

seaspear · Apr 3, 2023

A Bellingcat investigator has claimed that Tatarsky was a serving intelligence officer who blogged in the evening and that the cafe was often used by cypher activists against Ukraine ,if the forum at the cafe conducted by Tatarsky was in fact a meeting of those conducting cyber operations against Ukraine it might be considered a legitimate target
Ukraine War: Bellingcat's Christo Grozev looks at who could've killed Russian blogger - YouTube

Ananda · Apr 3, 2023

Larry_L said:
If all areas in the cities in Ukraine are legitimate targets, then the reverse should apply also.

By that logic, then Western media and politicians should not be 'shouting' to whole world on Russian violating human rights even blaming on state terrorism in Ukraine. My point from beginning is 'double standard' of Western media and establishment on reporting this war.

This it is not related to general Western-Russia relationship that more appropriate on other thread. Including now some in West trying to find justification on this assassinations as justified killing. You blow up purposedly a person on a public gathering disregarding collateral damages. That's terrorism no matter who send it.

Thus in this war the quality of both sides media including more and more the western media, is already channeling propagandist. So it is just like Russian media, Both Ukrainian and Western media also have double standard bias on this war. This clear in the way reporting of this assassinations.

This debate become prolonged, because some in here can't accept the view of 'respectfull' Western media already doing double standard on reporting of this war. This is why for most non western, both sides media already become propagandist media.

Larry_L · Apr 3, 2023

Ananda said:
By that logic, then Western media and politicians should not be 'shouting' to whole world on Russian violating human rights even blaming on state terrorism in Ukraine. My point from beginning is 'double standard' of Western media and establishment on reporting this war.

This it is not related to general Western-Russia relationship that more appropriate on other thread. Including now some in West trying to find justification on this assassinations as justified killing. You blow up purposedly a person on a public gathering disregarding collateral damages. That's terrorism no matter who send it.

Thus in this war the quality of both sides media including more and more the western media, is already channeling propagandist. So it is just like Russian media, Both Ukrainian and Western media also have double standard bias on this war. This clear in the way reporting of this assassinations.

This debate become prolonged, because some in here can't accept the view of 'respectfull' Western media already doing double standard on reporting of this war. This is why for most non western, both sides media already become propagandist media.

Yes, I have heard you hammer this point dozens of times, and do agree to some extent. I do feel that people in the west are more free to voice their opinion without repression so that there is more truth in western media. Bloggers, on both sides, (as opposed to reporters) mostly mix a good deal of propaganda in with some truth. As such, it is a part of the war effort, and our bias leads us to believe what we want to believe. That is not to sa that all media are created equal.

Redlands18 · Apr 3, 2023

I think we need to look at this incident as both an assassination and Terrorism, planting a bomb in a crowded restaurant for a private function, to kill one person, goes beyond pure assassination. It may have had 2 objectives. One to kill the prime target, two, to persuade people, to not attend functions that support the invasion of Ukraine, the first is assassination, the second is terrorism. She is a terrorist because she cared nothing for collateral damage and the lives of innocent bystanders.

Feanor · Apr 3, 2023

Update. Feb 19th-21st

Zaporozhye-Dnepropetrovsk.

Russian ATGM strike against allegedly a Ukrainian LP/OP. Zaporozhye region.

Colonelcassad

Еще один наблюдательный пункт ВСУ был поражён при помощи ПТУР Одним ударом были ликвидированы четыре нацика на Запорожском направлении. @ZSU_Hunter_2_0

t.me

Oskol Front.

Russian artillery strikes on the Kupyansk axis. They hit a house where apparently Ukrainian forces were hiding, and then hit the infantry as it exits.

Colonelcassad

Куда бежать? Прилёты по боевикам ВСУ на Купянском направлении. Пока вэсэушники занимались своими делами, их «срисовали» наши операторы БПЛА. В частных домах и на территориях участков противник организовал опорный пункт. Удары были нанесены по скоплению живой силы ВСУ. Пытаясь спастись от...

t.me

The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

Member

The Bunker Group

Member

Super Moderator

The Bunker Group

New Member

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

Super Moderator

The Bunker Group

The Bunker Group

Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

The Bunker Group

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

Super Moderator