"I gravely apologize for our treacherous invasion. To the generalship of our military units, I would like to say one thing — that they’ve acted cowardly, that they acted traitorously to us. I would like to say to all regiments of the Russian army: Lay down your arms. And Russian President Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, stop further combat actions. Stop bombings, stop sending soldiers here to kill civilians, to perform airstrikes."
Said Galkin Sergey Alekseevich, 34, quoted in "Captured Russian troops sob, apologize for invasion of Ukraine in TV interviews" (NY Post).
Posts
50 comments:
Nice, but this type of POW propaganda is against Geneva Convention for reason. John McCain didn't respond to multiple requests for comment.
Is this not a violation of the Geneva Conventions?
Conscripts. Conscripts everyone.
I realize rules go out the door in war, and of course the Russians themselves don't care one bit, but among the niceties of the law of war enunciated by our own DoD are prohibitions of exposing POWs to "curiosity" and even on taking photographs of them.
We should have learned in Vietnam that conscript armies are not well suited for aggression or morally questionable missions. Russia is finding this out.
Prisoners of war should be thought of as hostages. Whether there is a gun pointed at their heads (figuratively or otherwise), or they are caught up in Stockholm Syndrome, intelligent people should discount these comments.
So, the Ukrainians are doing exactly what those of us who pointed out the problematic nature of all those supposedly cute'n'cuddly videos of Russian soldiers getting to make phone calls home said they were going to start doing.
Russian soldiers are told they are liberating Russians from Neo-Nazis.
Russian population are told only military targets are being struck-no civilian causalities. They refuse to believe otherwise even when shown proof by family in Ukraine.
was he blinking, while he was saying this? Not that anyone besides Rhhardin could read it
Is this use of captured soldiers for propaganda purposes legal under the Geneva Conventions?
Did the Germans parade captured U.S. soldiers before the newsreel cameras in '42-'45? Did the Allies parade captured German soldiers? If so, was anyone prosecuted for this after the war?
Are Ukraine and Russia actually signatories to the Conventions? The USSR signed once upon a time, but was there any process to bring in the new countries spawned by USSR's collapse?
Have we carelessly sleepwalked into a post-international-order era, where anything goes and no-one really cares?
These are questions Google was unable to give a clear answer to.
More of this, please.
I hope (1) this guy is real (2) his contrition is real and (3) he left no hostages behind in Russia.
I think (3) is very problematic. Because if Putin or his proxies can do so, they are going to make an example of him, his family, his family's dog, and anybody who ever met him.
I guess it's not a war crime when the good guys exploit pows like this.
If he's real (which I doubt as I've never seen so much disinformation in my life), then he can never return to Russia, and his family is now on their way to a labor camp.
A handmade tale. A double-edged scalpel. 32... 33 trimesters, in progress.
It is deeply unethical, and possibly an international crime, to share POW videos like this. Remember John McCain being used in Vietnam to promote anti war views? It's the same thing, no matter how bad the Russians are.
Looks like Ukraine isn’t interested in following the Geneva Conventions.
If we’re not going to have our Putin whistleblower, this soldier is going to have to do. 😒
Hard to imagine somebody being this apologetic without some kind of coercion.
That said, it appears there have been a substantial number of senior Russian officers killed. That means they're not running the Brigade or Battalion but are up front trying to get a couple of platoons unstuck and moving. This doesn't speak well of company-level command, whose effups are obvious to the enlisted men. After which they are captured and their wonderful armored vehicles--listen to the instructors--are scrap. Morale is likely low and any unit/national loyalty--those guys got us into this like a bunch of morons--gets thinned out.
They thought they were going on an exercise with a full load of live ammo? Not buying it.
That said, it may have some effect. One of the guys is supposed to be 34 years old. Should be a sergeant by now.
It's quite an impressive showing of crocodile tears here today. Especially for conscripted soldiers of a "great" power that has flagrantly ignored conventions on treatment of civilians and POWs in other areas and times, such as in Grozny, Serbia*, Montenegro*, Bosnia*, and Syria.
Doesn't violation of the Geneva and Hague conventions remove their protections for the violators? If so, neither side can claim their protections in this little contretemps.
*Admittedly by proxies which were doing the dirty work while partnered with a certain country's military force 'advisors'.
POW? But there's no war! How can there be POWs?
Take that, arbitrary legalism.
I should think so... https://canadafreepress.com/article/anti-russia-then-arrest-the-clintons
Do you folks not get Russians, or do you dislike them too much to try?
1) True, Russia has typically regarded Geneva more like Suggestions than Conventions. That's fair.
2) One of the reasons for this is the sheer pitiless inhumanity Hitler's Germany exhibited to the Soviets in general and Russians in particular throughout the Second World War.
3) Incidentally, Stalin's brutality against Ukraine was a major reason Ukrainians signed up in large numbers for the Waffen-SS, and why hardcore Ukrainian ultranationalist Bandera is a Ukrainian hero to this day.
4) By the way, Switzerland infamously kept its neutrality intact during the Hitler era... but not, it seems, during the Putin era. Which makes sense if you're insanely Russophobic and deny that BOTH the Great Patriotic War/ the Holocaust ever happened, but not otherwise.
5) These little details, combined with general history, serve to convince the average Russian that the West will cheerfully appropriate Nazi-aligned nationalism whenever some minor advantage can be gained against Russia.
6) And therefore, "friends, family, and fellow soldiers" testifying against the Russian army will be rejected out of hand, because the Nazis are -obviously- torturing them. The fact the youngest Russian soldiers (conscripts?) are generally featured in these videos only makes Russian soldiers sympathize for their plight. But the main emotion is to really hate the Banderites and all the Ukrainians who sympathize with them (currently portrayed as all Ukrainians).
7) This encourages Russian soldiers to treat all Ukrainian civilians like they were Nazis, and get their nukes ready for the Nazi sympathizers in the West. Especially the ones in Switzerland. Ah, Germany's planning to re-arm and remilitarize? Russians generally feel that Germany wasn't nuked enough, so hearing that Germany is coming to help the Azov Battalion justifies hitting- how many German cities? Lots, I imagine.
Anyways, that's definitely why I'm making plans to stay well out of major population centers.
>Leland said...
Looks like Ukraine isn’t interested in following the Geneva Conventions.<
Ukraine isn’t a signatory to the Geneva Conventions, so yeah, probably not too much interest - at least in Article 13.
Well that's one guy who can't go home again. They in fact may be his deeply and honestly held views of his generals and Russia's political leadership. But the "big boys" have a nasty habit of snapping back.
I detect some Olympic-grade conclusion-jumping here.
Given how close many Russians are with Ukrainians and vice versa ---at least before the war---- it would not surprise me to see voluntary and emotional expressions of regret by Russian prisoners.
I've looked through the Geneva Convention of 1950, and I don't see anything outlawing publication of **voluntary** statements by prisoners.
So: Where is the **evidence** that such statements depicted here are coerced or unlawful?
IOW, if not coerced, how is a truthful and voluntary statement by a prisoner unlawful "propaganda", and where in the Law of War is "propaganda" outlawed?
Comparison with *forced statements* by McCain and other POWS during the Korean and Vietnam wars thus seem off-point, at least for now. In those cases prisoners were tortured, beaten up and denied food/medicine if they didn't pretend they were being treated well, or didn't denounce their country. That's why all so many pics featured subtle raised middle fingers and the like. We KNEW they were faking it.
But I agree that Russian soldiers who willingly reveal their remorse on camera will be in a heap of trouble when/if they return home. All that blubbering is pretty unmanly and detrimental to military order and discipline---not to mention being to side with the "enemy".
As for "labor camps": does Russia still have them? If so, where and how large?
Wow, the Geneva Convention Russian propagandists are out strong today. Not do much with the indiscriminate shelling of civilians and hospitals and schools.......
All this talk of the Geneva Convention. Oh my yes, this must be a flagrant violation and should be punished severely. But you know what? I'll actually assign a somewhat higher priority to the deliberate, systematic, sustained shelling and bombing of civilians and civilian facilities such as hospitals, schools, houses of worship, residential buildings. That's the stuff that should be first on the docket for the war crimes tribunal.
Plus, in a world where every combatant has got a smartphone with hi-res and zoom cameras, and streaming services to everywhere, it's just a little strange to be getting vapors over "exposing POWs to public view." Maybe the Convention needs a tune-up?
"I weep for you," the walrus said. "I truly sympathize".
As the Russian walrus devours the Ukrainian oyster.
Looks like Ukraine isn’t interested in following the Geneva Conventions.
I think the Russians took their cell phones onto the battle field. Name, rank, and serial number don't mean anything when Mom's crying on the phone for you to come home.
Cell phones on the battle field might be a reflection of poor Russian tactical communications.
I remember Reagan's adventure into Grenada. One enterprising soldier was having trouble communicating with his superiors until he found a telephone booth, and called Fort Bragg. Read the whole thing. There were other SNAFU's.
Sorry, it was a sailor not a soldier.
AND the first comment complains about the unfairness to Russia.
I'm no expert on the subject, but I have to ask if soldiers engaged in a criminal war, being unlawful combatants, are entitled to the protections of the Geneva Convention.
But thanks everyone for being so concerned about the real bad guys, the Ukrainians.
prohibitions of exposing POWs to "curiosity"
What? You're not going to suggest that the Russians just surrender to the treatment given to them?
A lot of people who have been disgusting silent about the destruction of Ukraine are suddenly coming out of the woodwork to moan about how the Russians are being mistreated.
"In 2019, perhaps anticipating the possibility of its invading Ukraine in the near future, Russia withdrew its declaration under Article 90 of Protocol 1.
By withdrawing this declaration, Russia has pre-emptively left itself with the option to refuse access by any international fact-finding missions to Russian entities, individuals or resources that might potentially find Russia responsible for violations of the Geneva Conventions standards.
The four conventions and first two protocols of the Geneva Conventions were ratified by the Soviet Union, not Russia.
Hence there is a risk of the Russian government of the day disavowing any responsibility under the Conventions in toto."
Ukraine also his not a signatory as a sovereign country. It signed in 1956 as an SSR of the USSR.
"Is this use of captured soldiers for propaganda purposes legal under the Geneva Conventions?"
Is our torture of prisoners captured in our dubious war of terror legal under the Geneva Conventions.
NO.
Bender said...
A lot of people who have been disgusting silent about the destruction of Ukraine are suddenly coming out of the woodwork to moan about how the Russians are being mistreated.
Some of us think about this in a much more complicated way than binary dumbfucks that want to call people Putin puppets do.
I know that sympathy and empathy are multisylabic words and have similar enough meaning to be confusing to some about the differences between them.
It sounds like a lot of these soldiers are conscripts, not well fed or trained or equipped. Not all soldiers are rapist murderer assholes just looking for people to torture and kill. I don't think the average Russian soldier is getting much sleep or food right now and I doubt they are particularly enthusiastic about this venture.
Likewise the Russian people don't really have much say in what is going on and they are getting crushed pretty hard and are the target of a lot of bullshit they don't really deserve.
What I am noticing is that the people in power are doing a lot of things that hurt the little people all over the world, but are not doing the things that would stop this war.
It is almost as if there is a group of people keeping this war going and another group of people eager to denounce putin puppets. There is another group of people that want to sell arms to the western governments so those governments can ship guns to Ukraine. Seems pretty convenient to me.
This war ends and Russian aggression ends when the Biden Regime stops feeding Putin 130$ a barrel oil.
Sanctions only hurt the Russian people. Putin is still getting his oil out and still getting money.
But 130$ a barrel oil also fucks the working class in the US so why would the Biden Regime do anything to stop that?
The little people in Ukraine are getting crushed. They deserve sympathy. But we know that you all don't really care about the people of Ukraine because then you would also care about Myanmar and Ethiopia and the dozen or so other conflicts happening right now.
No the Ukrainian people are just a bloody shirt for you all to wave and this gives the small minded something to focus on for their 2 minute hate.
Mark said...
I'm no expert on the subject, but I have to ask if soldiers engaged in a criminal war, being unlawful combatants, are entitled to the protections of the Geneva Convention.
But thanks everyone for being so concerned about the real bad guys, the Ukrainians.
The Ukrainian people are getting fucked.
Ukrainian leaders are getting Billions in aid.
The Russian people are getting fucked by western sanctions.
The Russian soldiers are conscripts by and large that are underfed, under trained, and under equipped.
Putin though is still getting his money from 130$ a barrel oil. And nobody questions why Biden is allowing this?
The American people are getting fucked by 130$ a barrel oil.
The Biden Regime and it's supporters get to bang the war drums and call people traitors.
The food riots are about to start now all over the world.
I can't wait to see all you warmongering fucks show your feelings for the death and destruction your war causes.
Biden caused this war and he did it knowingly and on purpose. He made clear public statements inviting it. He drove the price of oil up so Putin could afford it.
You are a bunch of blind fools.
Cell phones on the battle field might be a reflection of poor Russian tactical communications.
==========
would cell phones have worked without Starlink? aka Elon Musk - who has twittered throwdown to Putin
Ice Nine said...
>Leland said...
Looks like Ukraine isn’t interested in following the Geneva Conventions.<
Ukraine isn’t a signatory to the Geneva Conventions, so yeah, probably not too much interest - at least in Article 13.
**************************
Yes, it is: look it up.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_parties_to_the_Geneva_Conventions
as for the claim about not subjecting prisoners to "curiosity"-----which means not parading them around in front of hostile crowds---as being the same as showing prisoners weeping and apologizing from remorse and not coercion---gimme a break.
"True, Russia has typically regarded Geneva more like Suggestions than Conventions."
Whereas we just deny we're violating the Conventions even while obviously doing so, by resorting to obvious subterfuges such as creating specious categories of captives ("unlawful combatants") who we designate as not subject to Geneva protections, or by renaming torture "enhanced interrogation." How easily euphemisms magically transform reality for those eager to deny their crimes and for a public eager to turn away from the truth.
Robert Cook said...
"True, Russia has typically regarded Geneva more like Suggestions than Conventions."
Whereas we just deny we're violating the Conventions even while obviously doing so, by resorting to obvious subterfuges such as creating specious categories of captives ("unlawful combatants") who we designate as not subject to Geneva protections, or by renaming torture "enhanced interrogation." How easily euphemisms magically transform reality for those eager to deny their crimes and for a public eager to turn away from the truth.
***********
...... combatants, who are defined as "members of the armed forces of a party to an international conflict, members of militias or volunteer corps including members of organized resistance movements as long as they have a well-defined chain of command, are clearly distinguishable from the civilian population, carry their arms openly, and obey the laws of war.
Does that "as long as" sound like Al Qaeda or ISIS to you?
Did Al Qaeda and ISIS "obey the laws of war"? Were they clearly distinguishable from the civilian population.
No, so they aren't covered by the GC and are indeed "unlawful combatants".
As for waterboarding being torture, it's been clearly established that aside from having the shit scared out of you, it did no lasting damage. If it did, it would not have been part of our own services' survival training. Or are you saying we torture our own people?
Jeebus, you're as dumb as a box of cornflakes.
Mark said... I'm no expert on the subject
truest statement that i've heard in a long time
Robert Cook said...
How easily euphemisms magically transform reality for those eager to deny their crimes and for a public eager to turn away from the truth.
3/15/22, 7:55 PM
Can't say you're wrong.
The Gnomes of Zurich are holding their convention in Geneva this year. Putin could take them out with a single low-yield device (to the cheers of a lot of Althousers apparently).
Speaking of legalisms, if the Ukrainian SSR signed a treaty, it was as an independent country, per original UN membership. The Ukraine and Belorussia had seats, in addition to the Russian SSR.
Like the old commie told us in '72, international treaties reflect the objective power relations at the time they are made, and can not be expected to remain in force if those power relations change.
So far the civilian casualty figures made public seem very low to me. Usually early reports are greatly exaggerated but these seem almost low-balled. Hard to figure.
I care about the Ukraine and its people far more than I care about Ethiopia and Myanmar and their people, though I have no good advice or effective aid to give any of them and care about our border with Mexico more than all of them combined.
To Achille's most excellent rants, I can only add this.
It's not about excessive sympathy for the Russians, it's about realistically evaluating human nature for all the participants and not twisting events to fit notions of whose is right and who is wrong. It's also not about using this the way the current junta is, as a messaging opportunity for ideologies or virtues. So quit shaking your blue-and-yellow pom-poms long enough to reflect on that.
"'...combatants, who are defined as "members of the armed forces of a party to an international conflict, members of militias or volunteer corps including members of organized resistance movements as long as they have a well-defined chain of command, are clearly distinguishable from the civilian population, carry their arms openly, and obey the laws of war."'
"Does that 'as long as' sound like Al Qaeda or ISIS to you?"
How do know members of either organization did not have chains of command? How many of those we captured and tortured were even actual members of Al Qaeda or Isis? Many were not.
"Did Al Qaeda and ISIS 'obey the laws of war'? Were they clearly distinguishable from the civilian population."
Does our military obey the laws of war? One reason Julian Assange is being persecuted is because he dared allow to be posted online at Wikileaks a video of a US Helicopter crew laughing and making cracks as they massacred a few journalists and civilians on the ground, as well as another citizen who tried to drag the slain to safety, wounding the kids in his van. (One of our troops says, "This'll teach them not to bring kids to a battle zone." This battle zone was where these people lived.)
I guess many of those we imprisoned and tortured were not clearly distinguishable from the civilian population, given how many were not actually members of Al Qaeda or ISIS.
And...if we invade a country and their country people take up arms against our invading troops, what matter is it that they may not be members of a formally organized army? They are citizens fending off invaders. The language is legal language, and is subject to self-serving interpretations to justify that which it forbids. In essence, if we abstain from torture and abuse of "recognized soldiers" but subject "unrecognized soldiers" to torture and abuse, we are essentially making a mockery of the principles guiding the Geneva Conventions: "Do NOT resort to barbarism." We did.
No, so they aren't covered by the GC and are indeed 'unlawful combatants.'"
So you have convinced yourself, if not me, so you can sleep well at night, I guess, even knowing we tortured and abused and held prisoner in Gitmo and other black prisons many who were later released for lack of evidence of their participation in "terrorist acts" (i.e., resisting US invasion) or membership in Al Qaeda of ISIS.
"As for waterboarding being torture, it's been clearly established that aside from having the shit scared out of you, it did no lasting damage. If it did, it would not have been part of our own services' survival training. Or are you saying we torture our own people?"
This specious defense again. We subject our soldiers to torture, yes, to better prepare them to endure what they might experience in war. What makes it slightly less torturous for them is that our soldiers subject to waterboarding as part of training know it will not last long and they know they will not be subjected to it repeatedly and continuously.
Torture is not defined as torture only if it leaves lasting damage physical. Most torture is designed to not leaving lasting physical damage. Also, there were other tortures we inflicted aside form waterboarding. There were also at least a few prisoners who died as a result of our treatment of them.
In short, our violations of the Geneva Conventions far exceed making a POW appear on camera against his will pleading for the war to stop, etc.
Cook said...
"'...combatants, who are defined as "members of the armed forces of a party..as long as they have a well-defined chain of command, are clearly distinguishable from the civilian population, carry their arms openly, and obey the laws of war."'
"Does that 'as long as' sound like Al Qaeda or ISIS to you?"
How do know members of either organization did not have chains of command? How many of those we captured and tortured were even actual members of Al Qaeda or Isis? Many were not.
>>> Did Al Qaeda obey the LAWS of war? Did ISIS, when it executed American journalists, Italian contractors or other non-combatants?
>>> And has the concept of "fog of war" escaped you?. Why do you hold us to a standard of perfection while airily waving away the brutal policies of our adversaries?
Does our military obey the laws of war? One reason Julian Assange is being persecuted is because ...stipulated.
con't
3/16/22, 2:39 PM
>>>>Does that example, if true, demonstrate let alone PROVE, that US **policy** was to indiscriminately target civilians? If so, were all the videos we saw of US pilots coordinating their attacks with ground troops, SO AS TO AVOID civilians, just propaganda?
When did WE ever shell whole towns and cities as Russia is doing NOW? Why did we go house-to-house in Fallujah instead of just shelling the place flat, as the Russians are doing now?
I guess many of those we imprisoned and tortured were not clearly distinguishable from the civilian population, given how many were not actually members of Al Qaeda or ISIS.
>>>If they carried arms, were using them against us, and were not in uniform, they are NOT covered by the GCs. READ the fucking TREATY.
>>>> If you allude to Al Ghraib you must KNOW how many soldiers and officers involved in that were cashiered and/or jailed. You can fucking look....it....up.
And...if we invade a country and their country people take up arms against our invading troops, what matter is it that they may not be members of a formally organized army?
>>>We just didn't invade countries for the fun of it. With Iraq, it was because Saddam tried to choke off the West's oil supply. With Afghanistan, a terrorist harbored on their soil had killed 3,000 of our citizens in a terrorist attack.
They are citizens fending off invaders. The language is legal language, and is subject to self-serving interpretations to justify that which it forbids. In essence, if we abstain from torture and abuse of "recognized soldiers" but subject "unrecognized soldiers" to torture and abuse, we are essentially making a mockery of the principles guiding the Geneva Conventions: "Do NOT resort to barbarism." We did.
>>>>You are pissing into the wind, arguing against an international treaty signed by most nations on Earth. A key REASON for it was to make it clear that non-combatant civilians were not targets. But that objection doesn't address your initial jeering at the US for purporting to ignore the GCs as **a matter of policy.***
continued
Continued, to Cook
<
Post a Comment