• queermunist she/her
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    7 months ago
    link
    fedilink

    I love how mad this is making people.

    He’s the Pope. Obviously he’s going to want peace. What the hell do people expect? He doesn’t care if land is Russian or Ukrainian as long as people stop dying. The geopolitics of the situation are simply not part of his ideology.

    • gamermanhEnglish
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      7 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      Interesting that he chooses to say the people having a genocide done on them need to surrender (which they’ve literally done and been shot anyway btw) and not the perpetrators of said genocide needing to stop.

      Probably because the Pope is and always has been a piece of shit

      • Nobilmantis
        arrow-up
        48
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        7 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        Interesting that he chooses to say the people having a genocide done on them need to surrender

        Huh he didnt say this about the people in Gaza, what are you talking about?

            • Omega_HaxorsEnglish
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 months ago
              edit-2
              7 months ago
              link
              fedilink

              Unless you also consider the Iraq war/ Afghanistan war to be genocides

              I mean Lets be real here. They started the “war” on a false pretense and then killed a fuck ton of civilians.

              • freagleEnglish
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                0
                ·
                7 months ago
                link
                fedilink

                A million civilians AND the birth defect rate went through the roof after the war AND they destroyed every single piece of infrastructure they could find including water and power AND they used chemical weapons like white phosphorous which is the modern equivalent of napalm

          • 420blazeit69 [he/him]English
            arrow-up
            36
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            7 months ago
            link
            fedilink

            Lmao well you sure don’t use the actual definition of genocide

            [T]he ICJ ruled on Friday that it will not address whether Russia violated the 1948 Genocide Convention by using what Ukraine says were trumped-up genocide charges as a pretext for the war, even if the invasion may have violated international law broadly.

            Instead, the case will proceed to assess whether Ukraine committed genocide in the eastern parts of the country, as Russia claims – a matter where judges ruled that they have jurisdiction.

            https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/2/2/icj-rules-that-it-will-hear-part-of-ukraine-russia-genocide-case

            • GenEcon
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              7 months ago
              link
              fedilink

              Holy shit you are completly spinning it around. Insane

              For context: the ICJ said they aren’t allowed to rule about Russia commiting a genocide. But Ukraine has asked the court to check if Ukraine did commit a genocide in eastern Ukraine, like Russia claimed. Its Ukraine asking for this investigation.

              '“In the present case, even if the Russian Federation had, in bad faith, alleged that Ukraine committed genocide and taken certain measures against it under such a pretext, which the respondent [Ukraine] contends, this would not in itself constitute a violation of obligations” under the genocide convention, the ICJ said in the ruling read out by its president, Joan Donoghue on Friday.

              The ICJ, known as the World Court, said it did not have jurisdiction to rule on whether Russia’s invasion violated the Genocide Convention, or on whether Moscow’s recognition of Donetsk and Luhansk, two breakaway republics in eastern Ukraine, amounted to a breach of the convention.

              But the judges said they would allow Ukraine’s request for the court to rule that there was no “credible evidence that Ukraine is committing genocide in violation of the Genocide Convention” in eastern Ukraine.

      • queermunist she/her
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        7 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        War crimes like the forcible transfer of children (i.e. genocide) are for the ICJ to deal with. As a religious leader his prerogative is to reduce suffering and death, by whatever means necessary.

        More importantly, Russia can keep this up far longer than Ukraine and he doesn’t want us to fight to the last Ukrainian.

        • Omega_HaxorsEnglish
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          0
          ·
          7 months ago
          edit-2
          7 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          I remember when they said they said they were going to charge Russia with war crimes and then when they investigated they found Russia wasn’t doing any war crimes, but in the process discovered they themselves were actually doing quite a few of their own. Every right wing accusation is a confession.

        • Aidinthel
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          7 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          Right, a smaller country can never successfully resist a larger one. That’s why Vietnam has been under US occupation (or was it French? I can never remember for some reason) all these years since Ho Cho Minh wisely surrendered to spare his people’s lives.

          • queermunist she/her
            arrow-up
            26
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago
            link
            fedilink

            A smaller neighbor is vastly different. Vietnam was on the other side of the planet for America and halfway for France. You can’t ignore that.

          • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]English
            arrow-up
            24
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago
            edit-2
            7 months ago
            link
            fedilink

            The Viet Minh had the support of the people. The Kyiv regime needs to send out kidnapping squads to fill gaps in their lines. They do not have the support of the people, so their prospects for a successful insurgency are nil.

      • pelikanEnglish
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        7 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        Well, if Pope is called “piece of shit” for calling to negotiations to prevent more people dying, then who are you, who’s ok with war going on? Entire shit?

        • Bremmy
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          7 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          He didn’t say negotiations, he said surrender

        • gamermanhEnglish
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          7 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          then who are you, who’s ok with war going on?

          Put more words in my mouth, it makes you look so much smarter

    • Omega_HaxorsEnglish
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      The moral compass of your average liberal is so fucked up the idea that people should die in large quantities for property is normal to them.

    • Avid Amoeba
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      7 months ago
      link
      fedilink

      This only makes sense under the assumption that if the land becomes Russian, the dying will stop. And that’s not guaranteed. Dropping down from dying to violence - that’s probably guaranteed to occur for a while if the land becomes Russian.

      • queermunist she/her
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        7 months ago
        edit-2
        7 months ago
        link
        fedilink

        Why wouldn’t the dying stop? Russia is going to need as many workers as possible to rebuild and make up for military losses, on top of the preexisting population stagnation that was already dwindling their workforce. The worst case scenario imo is population transfer, and that’s not good, but I don’t see Russia being able or willing to waste a population boost from Ukraine.

          • queermunist she/her
            arrow-up
            19
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            7 months ago
            edit-2
            7 months ago
            link
            fedilink

            There has to be an independent UN investigation report into the mass graves. Ukrainian investigators have a strong national interest in fabricating atrocity propaganda, just like the bullshit “investigations” getting churned out by Israel. We can’t just blindly trust either side of the war. The UN is looking into it but I’m not seeing any conclusions.

            • Avid Amoeba
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              10
              ·
              7 months ago
              edit-2
              7 months ago
              link
              fedilink

              The sending of own working population into the meat grinder is the more interesting part of their comment. It serves as a counterexample for the claim that Russia’s need for workers would prevent them from killing more workers. If that were true, they could have stopped throwing people into the meat grinder at any point in time.

              • queermunist she/her
                arrow-up
                9
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 months ago
                link
                fedilink

                There’s quite a difference between sending working age men off to war and just rounding them up for execution.

        • jol
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          7 months ago
          link
          fedilink

          Because Ukrainians wouldn’t just stop resisting.

          • Avid Amoeba
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            12
            ·
            7 months ago
            edit-2
            7 months ago
            link
            fedilink

            Precisely. Even if the active war stops with Russia taking over Ukraine as a whole or in part, there would need to be repression against the non-conformant Ukrainian population. The fact that the Ukranians haven’t folded a long time ago and keep fighting means there’s a lot of people that would not be happy with Russian government and therefore they should be expected to resist if that happens anyway. Therefore the obvious need for repression. Therefore the continuation of dying and violence under hose conditions.

            • jol
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              10
              ·
              7 months ago
              link
              fedilink

              Yip. Russia would not stop until total control of occupied regions and surroundings was obtained.