Russian sniper rifle in Ukraine conflict

[shibbershabber]

Only schools have basket ball courts?

This was. One of the first cases of Russia geolocating a social media post... These guys got blown up & it was a school.. Can probably find the story easy enough, if you care to.

Even if not a school, sure looks like civilian infrastructure to me.

 

[JuglansRegia]

This is more true of people who believe things like this, than it is of the Russians.

Of course, its the people that are calling for the destruction of the invading army and aggressor that are the problem. Do you believe that Russia is the victim? should Russia join NATO for protection from Ukraine?

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

Typical lefty BS... Dont want any WhAtAbOuTiSm

Your like or dislike of the perpetrator doesnt define what a war crime is.

The US is guilty of war crimes by your standards.

I'd love to reply to the entirety of that but hand to God I do not understand what you're trying to say. But, I will say this, Well no duh the US is guilty of war crimes, I think that's pretty common knowledge


Also, if I'm just hanging out in my house and some random person breaks into my house and start attacking me it's not my responsibility to make sure they're treated fairly and that I use Marcus of Queensberry rules.

 

[JuglansRegia]

Russia bit off more than they could chew by invading Ukraine, now its our duty to make sure they choke and die because of it. Hitler wrote a book sharing his thoughts, and Putin wrote some opinion piece which make it easy to predict his next move, if he is not destroyed in Ukraine we will have boots on the ground fighting him somewhere else.

 

[raftman]

Of course, its the people that are calling for the destruction of the invading army and aggressor that are the problem. Do you believe that Russia is the victim? should Russia join NATO for protection from Ukraine?

The attempt at verbal sleight of hand is pretty obvious, if comical.

 

[rjmt]

Thousands more U.S. troops have been put on shortened prepare-to-deploy orders, though the Pentagon hasn't decided ultimately how many troops it will commit to Europe.

Other troops recently mobilized to Europe include:

• 4,700 soldiers from the 82nd Airborne Division to Poland.
• 300 soldiers from the XVIII Airborne Corps to Germany.
• 1,000 soldiers from the 2nd Cavalry Regiment to Romania.
• 800 soldiers from the 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team to Latvia.
• 100 F-35 Lightning II air crew and maintainers to Estonia, Lithuania and Romania.
• 100 AH-64 Apache air crew and maintainers to Poland and the Baltic states.
• 3,800 soldiers from 1st Armored Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division, and its sustainment unit to Germany.
• 150 airmen from a KC-135 Stratotanker squadron from Fairchild Air Force Base, Washington, to Spangdahlem, Germany.
• 40 members of an Army air support operations unit to Romania and Poland.
• 300 ordnance and maintenance soldiers to Germany.
• 300 members of the Army's V Corps to Germany and Poland.

in my day, I was one of those who volunteered for NATO deployment
but I'm an old guy now who supports those who are now deploying

 

[RedRover]

Hmmm,

I'm not really sure about wanting to return to this thread, as it's beginning its digression into a S-show.

Off-topic threads can and do take away the doldrums for the more active members of the forum; as only so many re-hashed discussions about "caliber wars" or "Glock vs. John 'Hallowed be his name' Browning's design" can be had.

Heated/Strongly opinionated off-topics can keep it spicy, as long as the fundamental golden-rule is observed.

That stated, the site is primarily about firearms, and out of respect for the OP; that's what this thread ought to really stick to. Perhaps there can be a 100+ page thread dedicated solely to this conflict -- Such as there was for Alec Baldwin, or Kyle Rittenhouse. If there is one already, I dunno, I haven't looked yet. I'd be more content to take it over there.



I'll say my piece on the vid that came out that has been mentioned ITT; showing what appears to be war-crimes against POWs.

This conflict is really the first major conflict (at least involving the entire world's interest on a massive scale) to involve the cyber-space to such a degree that it has. The amount of information overload, often by those pushing their propaganda with an intended bias, or even outright falsities is monumental in scale. Allowing 24-48 hrs. for the dust to settle is often necessary to provide for a more accurate assessment of the event(s) that has/have transpired.

Internet sleuths abound in their little fact-check battles, and every Dick, Joe and Captain Turdball has their opinion on matters. Those looking for confirmation bias, will often find it where they're directed to.

Some may refer to it as the 'Fog of War'. I liken it to a 'Deluge of Disinformation'.



As for the vid alleging the UKR shooting out the captives' legs. This was my train of thought after initially viewing it.

Presuming the vid as legit(UKR soldiers w/ RF captives)...

I first viewed it as: Considering that their entire country is under siege, they didn't have the luxury of time nor place to deliver the enemy to detention facilities. UKR forces were needed immediately back in the fight.
They weren't shooting them all in the head (as much as I imagine they would have like to have done), UKR forces were taking the enemy out of the fight. -- (It's my understanding that the RF soldiers may have been mortar shelling civilian inhabited residential apts. at the time that they were captured).

I then began to try to understand what was really going on here. Why would UKR forces release such a video? Are they stupid? What would be their motivation in doing so?

I then discovered that the video was released by the Russians with no explanation of/or direction towards the original source.

How did they acquire the video from UKR forces? Of course, Spidey-sense was telling me that something was fishy here.

I speculated some more...

Could it possibly be a video of RF forces shooting their own, perhaps as a punishment for desertion? RF forces have been known to shoot the legs of deserters before.

Then another thought bounced into my head -- Putin never officially declared war on Ukraine. He labeled it as a "Special Military Operation". Do the same rules of the Geneva Conventions apply? It it's not officially 'a war', can there be a legal status of 'prisoner of war'? Can it be legally construed as a 'war crime'?

Putin himself stated that the GCs wouldn't apply to the foreign combatants that RF forces captured. It's my understanding that Mercs aren't provided the same protections as soldiers registered as fighting under a country's flag. Putin sees the nation of Ukraine as illegitimate, therefore, he believes that all UKR forces are Mercs with his perverted logic.

So???

Personally, it still didn't sit well with me as there being anything ethical, honorable, or even sporting about shooting bound and defenseless men in the legs.

I came back to the motivations to release the vid, and who had the most to gain from the perceptions of those viewing it. Logic pointed to the Russians. Anyone who has spent any amount of time reading/viewing their reporting on this conflict can see that they aren't even trying half of the time to come across as being remotely truthful in their reporting.

The amount of outright verifiable mistruths is staggering. It's like they'll throw whatever B.S. out that'll stick. It's a volume game for them.

They've got their own population isolated and well-fed. Their intended target is the rest of the world, and whoever is gullible enough to believe their deception. "Say it enough times, and people will start believing it. Don't let up, keep on repeating it"

Goebbels wrote an infamous set of guidelines and rules for propaganda.

I'm quite aware that the UKR forces may at times be guilty of fibbing and/or embellishing their accomplishments* as well, to boost morale. It's also understood they have some questionable characters in their ranks. However, the Russians are downright shady as F' all.

It's for that lack of credibility about almost anything Russian State controlled media puts out (that can't be cross-checked or even triple-checked)... I can state with a strong reasonable suspicion that the vid isn't legit.

My opinion. YMMV.

I doubt that any amount of so-called experts on accents and dialects etc. would sway that opinion. That too can be faked.

How many Aussies and Brits pull off American accents in film these days, and most people don't even know that they aren't American until they're interviewed somewhere off set, and speaking in their native voice.

The Russians are willing to do whatever it takes to paint UKR as the villains, so as to weaken any empathy the casual layperson with no skin-in-the-game might have, and for that neutral entity to turn a blind-eye to the fact that Russia is laying colossal waste to the country, and indiscriminately murdering 1000s of innocent civilians.




For those TL;DR ---

I know if it was my country and innocent people/civilians being targeted and attacked... There would be no such vid to exist, only Sunflowers.




* It's understood that most of the Snake Island "FU to the ship" guys did survive, but it turns out that a few of them were actually killed now that the final story has come out. The survivors are back home after a prisoner exchange was made.

 

[ma96782]

I'm all for.....bringing alleged War Criminals to face justice.

Yup.....and that includes those involved in the alleged knee capping of POWs.

I say "alleged". Because yeah. Innocent until proven guilty in a Court of Law.

BUT, But, but......more importantly........I'd like to know how Putin will be brought to face charges? Say for his alleged Crimes Against Humanity? Surely one does NOT just start an entire war (killing thousands) and expect to get away with it?

Or....should he get a PASS?

Aloha, Mark

PS......as for a declaration of WAR. Note that the USA has NOT declared a WAR since 1941.

 

[JuglansRegia]

Well, Slobodan Milosevic died in a prison cell, after his people got smart and handed him over. I don't think Putin will die in a jail cell, I am thinking he will "jump" out a window, its the Russian way.

 

[RedRover]

PS......as for a declaration of WAR. Note that the USA has NOT declared a WAR since 1941.

However, the U.S. has sought U.N. Security Council Resolutions for conflicts as it pertains to U.S. combat actions, and their legality under International Law.

Putin did no such thing.

 

[rjmt]

Well, Slobodan Milosevic died in a prison cell, after his people got smart and handed him over. I don't think Putin will die in a jail cell, I am thinking he will "jump" out a window, its the Russian way.

the classic Russian way is a heart attack or lead poisoning

 

[ma96782]

RE : Post #210
UN Resolutions

That doesn't hold well with/for the US Citizens who want the US Constitution to be followed.

Remember that time when The Viet Nam War was litigated in court?

Was the Vietnam War unconstitutional?

This is the second of several articles that Constitution Daily will publish on the constitutional legacy of the war in Vietnam, with each article focused on a theme that is being explored in episodes this week and next of the PBS documentary, “The Vietnam War,” by Ken Burns and Lynn Novick...

news.yahoo.com

And....the below is not the actual case. But, it's a sort of snap shot picture of the question and the attempt at answering the question.

What type of war was the Vietnam war? - Answers

Well, the definition of the word "war" is "A state of open, armed, often prolonged conflict carried on between nation, states, or parties.", so by that definition Vietnam was in fact a war. However, officially in the eyes of the United States government, it was a conflict, because Congress never...

history.answers.com

Aloha, Mark

 

[rjmt]

RE : Post #210
UN Resolutions

That doesn't hold well with/for the US Citizens who want the US Constitution to be followed.

Remember that time when The Viet Nam War was litigated in court?

The below is not the actual case. But, it's a sort of snap shot picture of the question and the attempt at answering the question.

What type of war was the Vietnam war? - Answers

Well, the definition of the word "war" is "A state of open, armed, often prolonged conflict carried on between nation, states, or parties.", so by that definition Vietnam was in fact a war. However, officially in the eyes of the United States government, it was a conflict, because Congress never...

history.answers.com

Aloha, Mark

OK, how did a post on a Mosin sniper rifle in Ukraine morph back to Vietnam?

 

[sobo]

OK, how did a post on a Mosin sniper rifle in Ukraine morph back to Vietnam?

Sadly, your thread has been hijacked repeatedly. But you probably already know that happens a lot around here...

 

[Certaindeaf]

Pirate cutlasses!

 

[Xaevian]

Hmmm,

I'm not really sure about wanting to return to this thread, as it's beginning its digression into a S-show.

Off-topic threads can and do take away the doldrums for the more active members of the forum; as only so many re-hashed discussions about "caliber wars" or "Glock vs. John 'Hallowed be his name' Browning's design" can be had.

Heated/Strongly opinionated off-topics can keep it spicy, as long as the fundamental golden-rule is observed.

That stated, the site is primarily about firearms, and out of respect for the OP; that's what this thread ought to really stick to. Perhaps there can be a 100+ page thread dedicated solely to this conflict -- Such as there was for Alec Baldwin, or Kyle Rittenhouse. If there is one already, I dunno, I haven't looked yet. I'd be more content to take it over there.



I'll say my piece on the vid that came out that has been mentioned ITT; showing what appears to be war-crimes against POWs.

This conflict is really the first major conflict (at least involving the entire world's interest on a massive scale) to involve the cyber-space to such a degree that it has. The amount of information overload, often by those pushing their propaganda with an intended bias, or even outright falsities is monumental in scale. Allowing 24-48 hrs. for the dust to settle is often necessary to provide for a more accurate assessment of the event(s) that has/have transpired.

Internet sleuths abound in their little fact-check battles, and every Dick, Joe and Captain Turdball has their opinion on matters. Those looking for confirmation bias, will often find it where they're directed to.

Some may refer to it as the 'Fog of War'. I liken it to a 'Deluge of Disinformation'.



As for the vid alleging the UKR shooting out the captives' legs. This was my train of thought after initially viewing it.

Presuming the vid as legit(UKR soldiers w/ RF captives)...

I first viewed it as: Considering that their entire country is under siege, they didn't have the luxury of time nor place to deliver the enemy to detention facilities. UKR forces were needed immediately back in the fight.
They weren't shooting them all in the head (as much as I imagine they would have like to have done), UKR forces were taking the enemy out of the fight. -- (It's my understanding that the RF soldiers may have been mortar shelling civilian inhabited residential apts. at the time that they were captured).

I then began to try to understand what was really going on here. Why would UKR forces release such a video? Are they stupid? What would be their motivation in doing so?

I then discovered that the video was released by the Russians with no explanation of/or direction towards the original source.

How did they acquire the video from UKR forces? Of course, Spidey-sense was telling me that something was fishy here.

I speculated some more...

Could it possibly be a video of RF forces shooting their own, perhaps as a punishment for desertion? RF forces have been known to shoot the legs of deserters before.

Then another thought bounced into my head -- Putin never officially declared war on Ukraine. He labeled it as a "Special Military Operation". Do the same rules of the Geneva Conventions apply? It it's not officially 'a war', can there be a legal status of 'prisoner of war'? Can it be legally construed as a 'war crime'?

Putin himself stated that the GCs wouldn't apply to the foreign combatants that RF forces captured. It's my understanding that Mercs aren't provided the same protections as soldiers registered as fighting under a country's flag. Putin sees the nation of Ukraine as illegitimate, therefore, he believes that all UKR forces are Mercs with his perverted logic.

So???

Personally, it still didn't sit well with me as there being anything ethical, honorable, or even sporting about shooting bound and defenseless men in the legs.

I came back to the motivations to release the vid, and who had the most to gain from the perceptions of those viewing it. Logic pointed to the Russians. Anyone who has spent any amount of time reading/viewing their reporting on this conflict can see that they aren't even trying half of the time to come across as being remotely truthful in their reporting.

The amount of outright verifiable mistruths is staggering. It's like they'll throw whatever B.S. out that'll stick. It's a volume game for them.

They've got their own population isolated and well-fed. Their intended target is the rest of the world, and whoever is gullible enough to believe their deception. "Say it enough times, and people will start believing it. Don't let up, keep on repeating it"

Goebbels wrote an infamous set of guidelines and rules for propaganda.

I'm quite aware that the UKR forces may at times be guilty of fibbing and/or embellishing their accomplishments* as well, to boost morale. It's also understood they have some questionable characters in their ranks. However, the Russians are downright shady as F' all.

It's for that lack of credibility about almost anything Russian State controlled media puts out (that can't be cross-checked or even triple-checked)... I can state with a strong reasonable suspicion that the vid isn't legit.

My opinion. YMMV.

I doubt that any amount of so-called experts on accents and dialects etc. would sway that opinion. That too can be faked.

How many Aussies and Brits pull off American accents in film these days, and most people don't even know that they aren't American until they're interviewed somewhere off set, and speaking in their native voice.

The Russians are willing to do whatever it takes to paint UKR as the villains, so as to weaken any empathy the casual layperson with no skin-in-the-game might have, and for that neutral entity to turn a blind-eye to the fact that Russia is laying colossal waste to the country, and indiscriminately murdering 1000s of innocent civilians.




For those TL;DR ---

I know if it was my country and innocent people/civilians being targeted and attacked... There would be no such vid to exist, only Sunflowers.




* It's understood that most of the Snake Island "FU to the ship" guys did survive, but it turns out that a few of them were actually killed now that the final story has come out. The survivors are back home after a prisoner exchange was made.

Now that is thinking and asking questions. May it be contagious.

 

[RedRover]

RE : Post #210
UN Resolutions

That doesn't hold well with/for the US Citizens who want the US Constitution to be followed.

Remember that time when The Viet Nam War was litigated in court?

The below is not the actual case. But, it's a sort of snap shot picture of the question and the attempt at answering the question.

What type of war was the Vietnam war? - Answers

Well, the definition of the word "war" is "A state of open, armed, often prolonged conflict carried on between nation, states, or parties.", so by that definition Vietnam was in fact a war. However, officially in the eyes of the United States government, it was a conflict, because Congress never...

history.answers.com

Aloha, Mark

That's a whole different can o' worms there. Congress has authorized use of military force. If that's considered constitutionally sound, despite not being a formal 'declaration of war'... That's left up to interpretation by people smarter than me.

My point had to do more with following International Law, and as it pertains to the Geneva Conventions -- Of which Russia and Ukraine are both parties to.

I had to look it up again to remind myself, but yeah, Mercs aren't entitled to the status of POW. But what about if one side is not recognizing the other as legit?

Article 2 explicitly includes the language of "Declaration of War" AND "Armed Conflict" or "Police Action", and that the conventions apply if two or more signatory nations are involved.

The articles apply to a signatory nation even if the opposing nation is not a signatory, but only if the opposing nation "accepts and applies the provisions of the Conventions". There's a whole other part on Internal strife - Gov. vs. Rebel Forces & Rebel Forces vs. Rebel Forces.

Speaking of Vietnam(They had Mosins there too )...

Were NVA legit, but VC were not? Apparently as indigenous offenders, the VC were not entitled to POW status.

If the UKR vid is indeed legit, were these DNR/LNR separatists in the video, or were they RF soldiers?




I'm being a little 'Chatty Cathy' on here for this stuff, but I'm mostly refreshing myself on it, and informing anyone else curious or needing a refreshing on it.

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

Sadly, your thread has been hijacked repeatedly. But you probably already know that happens a lot around here...

Even one time by the OP!

Here is a screenshot of when he did that

 

[ma96782]

RE : Post #213
The "jump".

Post #212 was a response to Post #210. Its' right there at the beginning.
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________

That being said......and speaking of a Mosin Nagant. Say that......a regular citizen/guy picks up a Mosin Nagant rifle (in the current Ukraine situation) and uses it to fire upon the "enemy/invader".

But then.......
Note that........
I don't recall (in this current Ukraine case) a UN resolution calling for definitive action/war by the Member Nations? But then.....is a UN Resolution enough? Is it a go ahead......to do a full on WAR?

If I remember correctly.....China was a dissenting vote to some resolution. Anyway.

Yeah.....America isn't involved at this point. Though, imagine if......Brandon was to deploy troops into Ukraine? Would the Congress say, "Wait, you have to declare WAR first?" Or will he get the pass (like usual). It's NOT a war because Congress hasn't declared one. Thus, we will call it a "Police Action" and it'll all be OK.

Ooops.......that was little off topic.

So then......
Should all of the combatants (the guy who picked up the MN) then be given all of the protections of "real military combatants"?

Hummmmm........I believe that, even the Volksstrum (in WW2) just an wore an arm band and took the oath of allegiance.

So?

Is it merely a question of.......
Unless someone has taken an oath? What of the "irregular" citizen/forces? Or, are they actually just Criminals and should be treated as such?

Not saying that all criminals deserve summary execution. But, isn't it a sort of a situation like the quote from "Apocalypse Now"?

Capt. Willard: "Charging a man with murder in this place was like handing out speeding tickets in the Indy 500".



Aloha, Mark

 

[rjmt]

RE : Post #213
The "jump".

Post #212 was a response to Post #210. Its' right there at the beginning.
_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________

That being said......and speaking of a Mosin Nagant. Say that......a regular citizen/guy picks up a Mosin Nagant rifle (in the current Ukraine situation) and uses it to fire upon the "enemy/invader".

But then.......
Note that........
I don't recall (in this current Ukraine case) a UN resolution calling for definitive action/war by the Member Nations? But then.....is a UN Resolution enough? Is it a go ahead......to do a full on WAR?

If I remember correctly.....China was a dissenting vote to some resolution. Anyway.

Yeah.....American isn't involved at this point. Though, imagine if......Brandon was to deploy troops into Ukraine? Would the Congress say, "Wait, you have to declare WAR first?" Or will he get the pass (like usual). It's NOT a war because Congress hasn't declared one. Thus, we will call it a "Police Action" and it'll all be OK.

Ooops.......that was little off topic.

So then......
Should all of the combatants (the guy who picked up the MN) then be given all of the protections of "real military combatants"?

Hummmmm........I believe that, even the Volksstrum (in WW2) with just an arm band took the oath of allegiance.

So?

Is it merely a question of.......
Unless someone has taken an oath? What of the "irregular" citizen/forces? Or, are they actually just Criminals and should be treated as such?

Not saying that all criminals deserve summary execution. But, isn't it a sort of a situation like the quote from "Apocalypse Now"?

Capt. Willard: "Charging a man with murder in this place was like handing out speeding tickets in the Indy 500".



Aloha, Mark

did the Irregular Over Mountain Men who stormed King's Mountain to destroy a Tory Army take an oath of allegiance? NO
or were they just rebel criminals