94
Ukraine says all civilians are military targets
(thelemmy.club)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2026
94 points (71.8% liked)
Inventing Reality
707 readers
212 users here now
When the media decides who you are rooting for.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
The framing here does not say "they are military targets". It strikes out the negative to assert the positive, i.e., it is in discourse with a depoliticizing narrative that "I have nothing to do with Putin's war, don't touch my Wildberries". It really is at the same level as saying that ordinary Americans and ordinary Israelis are not innocent of the Iran war, the Gaza genocide etc. It is saying to the population: you can't wash your hands of this.
Now, that said, this is a flat nationalistic way of saying this, and it's a war propaganda poster.
Edit, yup, in the original Instagram post, that's exactly the framing, not "kill'em all":
It talks about normalization in culture and sports, it doesn't talk about killing them.
So why put an AK-47 in the "Ordinary Russians"? And they post that after weeks of killing Russian civilians this is pure bullshit.
I'm not here to defend Ukrainian war crimes. As to the ak47, I wrote:
So, it is depicting Russian citizens as combatants, that‘s what you‘re trying to say?
Sure, if you ignore all the rest of the framing, it is just doing that.
The framing of depicting them alongside and identically to a bunch of things the Ukranian government wants to kill?
Are we playing snakes and ladders? Go to the top of the thread: https://lemmy.ca/comment/24728683
That's what you're trying to convince people the framing is, the actual framing can be seen by anyone with eyes.
I must be such a dastardly villain.
I mean, u talk about framing, and the literal framing of the image is not helping ur case...
Just propagandized
That's still pretty disgusting, literally arguing that Russians should be expelled from culture and public spaces. It may not be "kill them all" but it is essentially "ethnically cleanse them"
...what do you think Russia has been trying to do to Ukraine?
None of the things mentioned, but it wouldn't matter if they did; ethnic cleansing as a form of collective punishment is still monstrous you soulless ghoul.
Prevent a large nation on their border from joining a political-military bloc (NATO) that exists explicitly to oppose their interests.
The blame ultimately comes down to the Western meddlers installing a fervently anti-Russian government in the Euromaidan coup.
Russians and Ukrainians are brother peoples, barely distinct from one another. If the Ukrainians wish to have an independent state, there is no inherent problem with that - but just as a Canada that is anti-U.S. would be a geopolitically impossible and untenable destabilizing force, a Ukraine that is anti-Russian is the same.
explicitly opposes their interests... like invading neighboring nations. so they invaded before Ukraine could join the anti-invasion club.
Since the breakup of the soviet union, Russia has invaded two nations: Georgia and the Ukraine. It invaded both for the same reason: they attempted to align themselves politically with the West and join NATO.
NATO was not founded to oppose Russian aggression. It was founded to oppose the Soviet Union. After Russia abandoned Communism, they petitioned to join NATO and the Western bloc in general. They were rejected by the West and all current hostilities stem from that rejection - Russia believed full reproachment under mutual anti-Communism was possible with the West but the West preferred their full economic subjugation.
Belarus and North Korea have been a more or less steadfast Russian allies and has never been threatened with invasion. Kazakhstan and Mongolia have maintained relatively independent political positions (playing both sides) and have never been targets of invasion. Azerbaijan has strong ties with Turkey, a NATO country, but has never attempted to join NATO itself and has friendly relations with Russia.
A NATO that includes Ukraine but not Russia is as untenable a situation as Canada having Chinese military bases lining the American border. If Canada was considering such a deal, America would invade immediately. The same would apply to Ireland hosting the Russians against the UK, or Mexico hosting the Iranians, whatever. Local rivalries are all fun and games until you start involving world power blocs. There is a reason why, despite tensions, nations like Sweden, Ireland, Canada, and Mexico do not host foreign troops; and why instances where this is threatened (the Troubles, the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Russo-Georgian war of 08) the result is always proactive invasion.
Latvia, Estonia and now Finland are all NATO and all border Russia. So I suppose they have it coming too huh? How dare they unite against a totalitarian aggressor.
Yes, and their membership in NATO was a major sticking point - if not for the Ukraine war, I think we would have seen a Russian invasion of Finland when they announced their intention to join NATO. Throughout the Cold War Finland managed to remain a neutral power and was never invaded by Soviets. They should have remained that way. Their membership in NATO will continue to be a source of regional tension well after the end of the Ukraine conflict.
if you push that timeline back slightly, they were invaded by the soviets during wwII and lost territory, which to this day they have not regained. Why should they trust Russia now, when they have clearly not abandoned their imperial ambitions.
The source of regional tension is imperialist Russia.
The "anti invasion club" that has only ever fought offensive wars
Ukw I don't even argue with you people on ideological basis because the very foundational assumption on which you base all your arguments is so infantile in its complexity that it doesn't even deserve to be addressed.
Materially, Russia's victory is objectively inevitable, short of WW3, because the West has run out of weapons to give to Ukraine, and Ukraine is going to run out of people sooner or later. Meanwhile Ukraine's own officials are saying Russia's production is going up because the corruption in the military has been getting rooted out as the war becomes increasingly more important for Russia.
So because the US killed Iranian citizens, now Iran gets to kill American citizens? Is that how it works?
Yeah, probably. You invade a country without a good reason ans kill civvies, why wouldn't retaliation be on the table?
You don't get to invade a country and maintain any sort of moral high ground. Israel, the US, Russia. It's all the same shit at the end of the day. But Tmthe US sucking doesn't automatically make their opponents the good guys. Russia sucks too and you would have to be a completely brainwashed moron not to realize that.
Do you read your own comments before posting? Do you even understand what you're saying?
Killing civilians is not retaliation. It's a specifically prohibited war crime, with punishment up to death for those responsible. It's not supposed to ever happen, regardless of which side you're on.
If someone kills your family member, you don't get to kill a family member of theirs and call it even. That's not how any of this works. If societies operated like this, we'd all be dead already.
By your logic - you wouldn't mind being pointlessly slaughtered just because your government (that you didn't vote for) decided to arbitrarily invade another country (which you protested against), would you? Or having a global nuclear wasteland, because that's the only thing endless escalation leads to?
It doesn't matter who's invading whom. Killing civilians is despicable, period. Anyone responsible for it should be held accountable to the highest degree possible. Regardless which side they're from. Both Ukraine and Russia, just like both US and Iran should answer for all crimes committed. There are no excuses for any of this.
Being a victim of an invasion doesn't immediately give you immunity or permission to do whatever the hell you feel like doing. Just like if someone breaks into your house, you don't get to do the same or worse to them.
... you definitely know what words means
Literally reversing victim and offender here. Ukraine spent eight years trying to ethnically cleanse their east, killed 14,000 civillians, and now that Russia has stopped them and is waging a war 10 times safer for civillians than America's unprovoked full scale invasion of Iraq, now libs wanna call that ethnic cleansing.
Show me the policies, show me the outlawing of culture and language, show me the death squads. I can show you all of those things from the Ukrainian government.
Oh man. Are you really defending the clear aggressor in an obviously unjust war?
Surely the entire world is wrong about this one and we're being mean to poor, innocent Russia who clearly did nothing wrong.
Entire world in question:
The "entire world" being the western powers of Amerika and friends.
Man it would be so cool to be a dipshit who thinks you can describe wars like a barfight between two people, as if thats how countries work. Too bad it's not one of those just wars that Ukraine participates in, like the US-Israel war on Iran
But to reiterate, no, I'm against the Holocaust participant-worshipping nazi regime that attempted genocide on a subset of it's own people before being stopped by Russia.
"The entire white empire"
Anyway,
Show me any of this or shut up.
How dare you post the original context of the post - that goes against the narrative!
How could they put it clearer?
Does that say "we consider civilians military targets?"
Yes.
Edit: and not only do they say that, they also practice it by showing have shown that they have no qualms about killing civilians.
Oh? Does it? Can you point to where it says "we, the Ukrainian government are proclaiming to the world that we are targeting civilians?"
I don't see any evidence to back up the claim, so I'm afraid I can't agree to your assertion. A single image that can be interpreted in a multitude of ways (as I describe elsewhere in fact), is not any sort of proof I consider valid.
I'm greatly interested if you have other evidence to suggest the claim is true, as that would constitute a significant crime.
Edit (as it appears you have included further context in an edit): What I am wanting to see is a documented pattern of Ukrainian military personnel attacking civilians. I'm not talking about buildings - I want to see the UAF doing the same shit the IDF does to innocent Palestinians (that the world chooses to ignore).
Modern mechanized warfare by definition effectively forces civilian and military targets together because they rely on the same infrastructure to function (power plants, railroads, bridges, etc.) Does that make striking those things right? Well, no, but war itself isn't exactly "right," but striking those targets for their military value with civilian impact being collateral damage is a far cry from the IDF's double-tapping of aid workers.
Just today Ukraine killed 13 civilians and wounded another 80.
They also suicide-bombed a restaurant last week.
This is inexcusable.
Can you point to where Charlie Kirk ever said "I am racist"?
...Yes? How does saying ordinary russians are to blame, depicting them holding AKs, imply anything else?
Even if it's implying lesser culpability, how does that not imply civilians are legitimate targets, when it's still implying culpability?