I see your point but There’s no clear answer here.
The article raises a valid point that Cambodia has extensive history from these weapons spilling over from the Vietnam war and causing civilian fatalities way after the war ended.
My point here is that just because a war crime(s) is committed one the Russian side, that doesn’t give free reign to the Ukraine side to do the same.
@Dazza There are legitimate concerns about using cluster munitions but Ukraine is well aware of the problems they create. And unlike a 3rd world country like Vietnam, they will be better suited to mitigate those threats post-war. In the meantime, none of this matters if they lose because Russia will kill half of them anyway after the war.
And in the meantime Russia will have more time to drop even more cluster bombs
What’s worse, 8000 Russian and 2000 Ukrainian (US)? Or 12000 Russian? (Made up numbers to illustrate a point I haven’t seen made yet)
Russia will kill half of them anyway after the war.
Why? What sense does that make? When has there ever been any reason to believe that the goal is to kill Ukranians? This isn’t even the first time I’ve seen it said that if Russia wins (or even loses!) they’ll just wipe out all Ukranians afterwards. And neither time has there been any reasoning for why such an absurd claim should be believed.
If you truly believe this drivel, you’re doing everyone a disservice by not attempting to justify your claims. If you truly believe it and provide justification, you might just convince others to believe what you do.
So they took a vote and the people decided that they’re okay with this? Or did the administration unilaterally decide this like when they decided to cancel elections and restrict labor rights?
@BartsBigBugBag Just the fact that you asked those questions tells me everything I need to know. There’s no point in trying to answer. You won’t believe it anyway.
