this was reported by the BBC at the start of the war, it’s possibly to be used to get rid of dead russian soldiers and stops people finding out what the real russian casualty rate is as it reduces the number of KIA’s returning home on Cargo 200 flights.
in short KIA’s are down graded to MIA’s and putin/kremlin will blame Ukraine for those.
Now the train of thought for those abominations is that they are to be used to remove the bodies of the liquidated civilians. The so called denazification is using Nazi methods again.
Maybe. The reports and photos of mass graves either means the Russians don’t GAF about public opinion… or higher ups want to put a lid on the evidence. Maybe China shared with them how they made the Free Hong Kong people go away?
If these are indeed being used to destroy the evidence of atrocities committed against civilians it is a very troubling development.
would like to have seen the license plate on the back of the trailer. Many ways to look at this:
could be that there are a whole lot more KIA’s than anybody wants to admit
Spring is in the Ukraine right not, and you ain’t had no fun till you smelled a bunch of rotting bodies
*somebody felt it was a good way to get rid of folks you really have no business getting rid of. I tend to
agree
gary
Thanks & glad others liked too - I originally posted those Kursk-series dioramas six years ago so they’d be unfamiliar to more recent members - a couple more…
Makes me reflect how similar today’s after-the-battle scenes look to those of 80 years ago. Compare & contrast with 80 years back from 1943 e.g. Gettysburg, when it was Napoleonic-era canons and dead horses. 
yes mate, you are so right
But actually, you’re deflecting… its ironic.
I’m not a fan of this war, or either side frankly. I’d quite like to see Russia get a walloping. But, the West’s stance is, in actual fact, a double standard.
The only reason that assistance is being offered is not because we care about Ukraine or Ukrainians, our Governments don’t. All they care about is that Russia is invading a country that’s a little too close to home to be comfortable. They don’t like it because they think another NATO country may be next…
And that, is the real reason. And, in that respect, they’re every bit as paranoid as Putin and by arming Ukraine, they’re indirectly facilitating any atrocities that are happening (and let’s be honest, we’ve no idea what the Ukrainians are doing to the Russians do we?) An attocity, is an attocity, is an attrocity.
Its about time we all got off our virtue signalling bandwagons.
How do you know they didn’t?
I mean they probably didn’t, but they certainly didn’t cover themselves in glory, not least because they shouldn’t have been there in the first place…
100’s of thousands of people, mostly innocent, have died either directly as a result of that action, or as a direct result of the West’s continually useless foreign policy following it. Christ, we should be so proud of ourselves eh… because after all, an atrocity must only be a summary execution of an an innocent civilian surely?
Think.
Abu Ghraib anyone…?
UNTIL someone comes forward with evidence then no ‘other’ atrocities have happened. We can speculate all we like but UNTIL that happens we can second guess until someones cows come home.
Every armed force has their bad eggs. But let’s see the evidence before we start speculating.
I did not go to Iraq myself and I did not verify the behaviour of every single soldier
in every single village in Iraq. Mistakes will be made and some soldiers/units will
commit war crimes. The question is if it is large scale and official policy or if it is
caused by “individual initiative”.
I do know that journalists were watching in Iraq, hoping to catch a juicy story or
a major scandal. No such supervision on the Russian side in this war, Ukraine is
cleverly making publicity and openness work for them. There is an incentive for
Ukraine to treat POW’s according to the rules since Russia is holding lots of
Ukrainian civilians as hostages (occupied towns et.c) and there are more than
enough reasons to suspect that Russia would do what Germany did to occupied
areas when there had been an attack on Germans (Lidice is one example:
Oradour-sur-Glane is another:
Russian handling of POW’s and civilians: Katyn massacre - Wikipedia)
Abu Ghraib is one of the very bad mistakes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisoner_abuse#Convictions_of_soldiers
I wonder if Russian justice will sentence war criminals.
About the invasion of Iraq in general: I think we can agree to disagree.
Getting rid of Saddam and ‘Chemical Ali’ was a good thing.
The HUGE problem is to rebuild a country after the purely military victory.
Iraq wasn’t one ‘nation’ before Saddam and it still isn’t.
Trying to unify such a heterogenous population can be extremely difficult.
How long has the UK existed as a united kingdom?
Scottish independence is still an issue.
The Ottoman empire ruled them all, by force and violence, for centuries.
WW I boke it apart and then the colonial powers, UK and France, held them
together (all tribes and ethnic groups were ruled by foreigners so no tribe or
ethnic group ruled over another). Then came WW II and Germany incited a
rebellion in Iraq (ME 109’s were supplied):
After the war Iraq eventually became a nation of its own but it was never
a nation of Iraqis, it had a ruler and the ruler controlled various ethnic groups
who deep down wanted to be their own rulers.
Creating a democratic nation takes generations …
Yes, and then arbitrarily drew lines on the map to define ‘nations’. Fantastic foreign policy wasn’t it.
Yep. Fresh mistakes piled on top of older mistakes.
The problem in that area is that the ethnic groups, tribes and clans
are mingled so trying to draw maps to sort them into separate
territories would result in a map looking like gerrymandered
election districts in the US.
Yugoslavia is another example of “nations” arbitrarily bundled
together into one “country”. They were also mixed up with each other
so many groups claimed the same areas …
So…If we didn’t help the Ukranians, And we let the Russians army slowly wipe out the Ukranians, we would be doing Ukraine a service by reducing atrocities caused by the Russian army. Sort of like getting your throat sliced open quickly instead of slowly…Me thinks that you over looked the fact that there is the tinest possibility that we just might be helping the Ukraine for more than one reason. I agree that if nothing was done then at some point NATO would be visited. An example would be every country prior to Poland that was succeded to Germany prior to WW2. None of them was enough. As long as they were being given, Germany was willing to take for free, without cost. Poland was where that changed. So stopping that process now is the thing to do based on history.
As to not caring about Ukraine, I think you are just looking for a talking point. Would the invasion of Finland or Sweden have caused any less of a responce? I think the responce would have been no less for them as it was for Ukraine. If you asked me if the Ukranians committed atrocities on the Russians, I would have said probably not…until the Russian atrocities become known to the Ukranians. Once known, all bets are off. The Germans and the British had few atrocities in Africa because one side did not start committing heinous acts on the other. On the Russian Front both sides regarded the other as less than human and took their rage out on the other any way they could. The Marines and the Japanese were the same way. very few prisoners. What it takes is one side to set the rules and the other side will play by them.
The Balkans is a prime example of a ‘nation’ united under the umbrella od a ‘Dictatorship’ that actually worked (for better or worse’). With hindsight, we can see that Iraq wasn’t disimilar… (I served in both for the record).
See, now people are starting to think about the existential implications, it perhaps might cause some to deviate from the prevelent ‘we good, them bad’ rhetoric…
I completely agree, and am at pains to point out that I this has been my stance throughout. But, my point is that we aren’t always on the side of ‘right’ and ‘good’ - or do things ‘for the right reasons’.
Some objectivity required, and I freely admit, that includes me.
Sooner or later it boils down to:
Is it morally righteous to take a life to save other lives?
I say yes.
Or, in other words, to choose the lesser of two evils (depending on the circumstances, who’s involved and whether we think there’s anything in it for us)…
It’s a sub-concious calculation - or shall we say, ‘risk assessment’ we do as humans before making that kind of decision…
playing the game of mortal combat, you as an individual will actually treat your enemy the same way he treats you (I know some folks go off the deep end). Just happens that way. You see something ugly, and it’s in your mind for eons. A kid has little issue with the subject of revenge. Most folks can’t grasp that.
gary
I would open the door for someone trying to carry a big bomb into Putins office
and I would gladly “terminate” the madman who threatens to kill a group of
unknown civilians.
Some situations require immediate action and some need thinking about.
In this case (Ukraine) I think I have sufficient facts to make a choice that will
not give me a bad conscience later.
