All of I B's Comments + Replies

I B21

The paragraph explicitly states 1) Russian aviation and TOS-1 Buratino targeted residential areas with bombings.. 2) Russian commanders prioritized capturing the city swiftly, disregarding the safety of civilians. 3) Russian commanders provided false information to their subordinates regarding the presence of civilians in residential areas.

You can get some insight into the situation from the text, I believe. It's just one data point but there  are countless evidence like that provided by Russians themselves. And nothing that kind of magnitude from Ukr... (read more)

I B20

@ChristianKl So, how are things with crimes allegedly perpetrated by Ukraine? This one is from Wagner's channel.

https://t.me/grey_zone/19363



 

1ChristianKl
That paragraph looks to me to be about how they handled civilians on the battlefield and is not about the number of destroyed homes in Mariupol. It does not really answer "Why are there so many destroyed homes in Mariupol?" 
I B22

Yes, they didn't. And I think the story about the Ghost of Kyiv is net negative. But not all propaganda is equal. One thing is to lie about a mythic mighty pilot to comfort people (which is still bad imo) and completely other thing is to say that Ukrainians destroyed Mariupol, killed people in Bucha or spend millions to vilify Ukraine and poison EU in information space.

https://www.civic-synergy.org.ua/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Words-and-Wars.-Ukraine-Facing-Kremlin-Propaganda.pdf

I B10

I'd like to object that it's rational. Sooner or later any lie will be revealed and the reputation/trust will be lost irrevocably. Without trust Ukraine will lose external and internal support and then the war. The risks are just not worth it.

3ChristianKl
It would be great if war propaganda lies would lead to irrevocably lost trust, but in most cases that's not what happens. Most people excuse lies from people they consider to be on their side in war.   In any case, at the start of this war, we had false propaganda stories like the Ghost of Kyiv. They didn't choose the strategy of not telling any lies and I'm not aware of any army doing that during a war. 
I B10

I'm not calling on the Ukrainians to prove anything anywhere in this post. 

Yeah but by assuming things (directly or not) you are framing the discussion in a way which significantly influences perception of the topic. 
 

I'm able to distinguish my epistemics from claims for what people should do and don't mix that together. We are arguing here on a rationality forum and it's helpful for rational reasoning to be able to think clearly about what's true.

I can substitute should with is it rational if it drives the point home better :)
Or I can expan... (read more)

1ChristianKl
It's rational for Ukraine to engage in war propaganda that's not always true. That's generally what most countries do when they are at war. 
I B74

throwaway62654 stated that Russians destroyed Mariupol.

One doesn't have to be an expert to see which side caused more death. Mariupol. All war crimes allegedly perpetrated by Ukraine pale in comparison to an entire city leveled to the ground. While people were still there.

You opposed and made the statement about possible involvement of Ukrainians.

Leveling Mariupol to the ground is a war crime that's allegedly perpetrated by Ukraine. I first heard that claim from a Russian friend who sourced it through a relative of a friend who was on the ground. Russian m

... (read more)
1ChristianKl
I don't think anybody in this discussion is operating with the authority of the Ukrainian government, so this is a quite strange claim. I'm not calling on the Ukrainians to prove anything anywhere in this post.  I'm able to distinguish my epistemics from claims for what people should do and don't mix that together. We are arguing here on a rationality forum and it's helpful for rational reasoning to be able to think clearly about what's true.
I B105
  1. The new "authorities" of Crimea de facto refused to pay for water supply of the peninsula - to this day the issue of repayment of debts of water users of Crimea to the Office of the North Crimean Canal in the amount of 1.7 million hryvnia in 2013 remains unclear.
  2. In 2015 Ukrainians proposed a new supply contract in accordance with international instruments, most notably the UN General Assembly Resolution of March 27, 2014 but Russians refused.
  3. Crimea is occupied, so international humanitarian law applies to its territory. Article 55 of the Fourth Geneva Conv
... (read more)
4ChristianKl
It might be worthwhile to add those details to the Wikipedia article.
I B-33

Then why are you spreading unconfirmed claims? That is not nice. 
The city was encircled by Russians on 1st March. Could you explain me how and why AFU destroyed half-million city just in one week? :)
If you're really honest here do at least some fact-checking.

3ChristianKl
throwaway62654 was talking about "war crimes allegedly perpetrated by Ukraine". I made a statement about what crimes have been alleged.  It's useful to be able to discuss what has been alledged and what has not been alleged. 
I B102

Leveling Mariupol to the ground is a war crime that's allegedly perpetrated by Ukraine

 

So, Do you think after Russians had encircled the city Ukrainians somehow were able to destroy it? :) 

P.S.: It is so shocking to see such statements in LW that I even registered here after 10 years of read-only. 

2I B
@ChristianKl So, how are things with crimes allegedly perpetrated by Ukraine? This one is from Wagner's channel. https://t.me/grey_zone/19363  
-12[anonymous]
-1ChristianKl
I'm able to separate out claims made where I know they are alleged from other claims where I have a strong belief that they are true. In this instance, the claim is that Ukrainians destroyed it before that point.