Merged: Russian (genocidal) internal propaganda and goals about Ukraine

[Mark6]

Here is a Kremlin mouthpiece called Ria Novosti, which lays out Russia’s goals for Ukraine. I very much recommend putting it into Google translate. It is.. eye-opening:

https://ria.ru/20220403/ukraina-1781469605.html

The title is "What must Russia do with Ukraine". I am not translating the whole thing, but here are the highlights:

Denazification is necessary when a significant part of the people - most likely the majority - has been mastered and drawn into the Nazi regime in its politics. That is, when the hypothesis "the people are good - the government is bad" does not work. Recognition of this fact is the basis of the policy of denazification, of all its measures, and the fact itself is its subject matter.

Denazification is a set of measures in relation to the nazified mass of the population, which technically cannot be subjected to direct punishment as war criminals.

However, in addition to the top, a significant part of the masses, which are passive Nazis, accomplices of Nazism, are also guilty.

And then goes on to advocate complete suppression of even the word "Ukraine", as the Nazis get in via knowledge of history.

If it's on Ria dot ru, it's pretty much official policy.

[Mark6]

Much like "Denazification" is Russian-speak for "ethnic cleansing", here is another example of Russian-speak:

https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qi...61535ec0353f0f

Translation:

"Here, on the shore of Shelon river on 14(27) July 1471 took place a battle between armies of Moscow and Novgorod for unification of divided Russian principalities into one Russian state."

Yes. Battle for unification. Same as what is going in Ukraine now: exterminating Ukrainians for unification. Once everyone who is against the unification is dead, all is well.

[Hercules56]

This is an opinion piece that was published in the Russian funded and controlled Ria Novosti. Its views, regarding Ukraine and Ukrainians, are terrifying. Genocide is literally its agenda, goal and aim.

https://ria.ru/20220403/ukraina-1781...eg6_liLAQfdLVI

Below is just part of the article:

"The Nazis who took up arms should be destroyed to the maximum on the battlefield. No significant distinction should be made between APUand the so-called national battalions, as well as the territorial defense that joined these two types of military formations. All of them are equally involved in extreme cruelty against the civilian population, equally guilty of the genocide of the Russian people, do not comply with the laws and customs of war. War criminals and active Nazis should be exemplarily and exponentially punished. There must be a total lustration. Any organizations that have associated themselves with the practice of Nazism have been liquidated and banned. However, in addition to the top, a significant part of the masses, which are passive Nazis, accomplices of Nazism, are also guilty. They supported and indulged Nazi power.

Edited by xjx388:

Snipped quote to comply with Rule 4. Please limit quotes to brief snippets.

[Vixen]

Is the number of exclamation marks an indication of the magnitude of alarm we should feel?

[Mike!]

Originally Posted by Vixen

Is the number of exclamation marks an indication of the magnitude of alarm we should feel?

Like, "This amp goes to eleven."?

[timhau]

Originally Posted by Vixen

Is the number of exclamation marks an indication of the magnitude of alarm we should feel?

Not at all. I think Let's Celebrate Genocide Day falls on April this year anyway.

[dudalb]

A FInal solution to the Ukraine problem.

[Meridian]

Something I find interesting about that article (looking at the English translation here, which I believe is the same thing), is that this passage:

Quote:

The current nazified Ukraine is characterized by its formlessness and ambivalence, which allow it to disguise Nazism as the aspiration to “independence” and the “European” (Western, pro-American) path of “development” (in reality, to degradation) and claim that “there is no Nazism” in Ukraine, “only few sporadic incidents.” Indeed, there isn’t a main Nazi party, no Führer, no full-fledged racial laws (only a cutdown version in the form of repressions against the Russian language). As a result — no opposition or resistance against the regime.

basically admits that it's not actually Nazism in Ukraine! The article goes on to claim (without giving any reasons that I can see) that nevertheless "Ukronazism poses a much bigger threat to the world and Russia than the Hitler version of German Nazism."

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by Meridian

Something I find interesting about that article (looking at the English translation here, which I believe is the same thing), is that this passage:



basically admits that it's not actually Nazism in Ukraine! The article goes on to claim (without giving any reasons that I can see) that nevertheless "Ukronazism poses a much bigger threat to the world and Russia than the Hitler version of German Nazism."

It's almost like they are saying that aspirations of Independence and joining the European Union equals Nazism. Its just nuts.

[Jack by the hedge]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

It's almost like they are saying that aspirations of Independence and joining the European Union equals Nazism. Its just nuts.

They appear to be saying the Ukrainian Nazis are cunning and don't do any Nazi stuff or have a Nazi organisation so that there's no way to tell they're secretly Nazis except that Russia knows because it can always tell.

I do wonder who this bloodthirsty rhetoric is aimed at. Is it for domestic consumption or foreigners? Either way I suspect it's a bit of kite-flying to judge reactions and also a way to make Russia's actual intentions seem more benign (or at least less psychopthic) by comparison. Perhaps we are supposed to be relieved when we discover that Russia does not intend to murder every man, woman and child in the country, but rather only a proportion of them.

[Hercules56]

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge

They appear to be saying the Ukrainian Nazis are cunning and don't do any Nazi stuff or have a Nazi organisation so that there's no way to tell they're secretly Nazis except that Russia knows because it can always tell.

I do wonder who this bloodthirsty rhetoric is aimed at. Is it for domestic consumption or foreigners? Either way I suspect it's a bit of kite-flying to judge reactions and also a way to make Russia's actual intentions seem more benign (or at least less psychopthic) by comparison. Perhaps we are supposed to be relieved when we discover that Russia does not intend to murder every man, woman and child in the country, but rather only a proportion of them.

Yes, they only seek to murder or enslave the high-ranking "Nazis" and their supporters/enablers.

And anyone who took up arms against Russia, as only "Nazis" do such a thing.

I gotta tell ya, Russia has taken Godwins Law to a whole new stratospheric level.

[dudalb]

A Final Solution to the Ukrainian problem....

[crescent]

A few more snippets:

Quote:

denazification of this mass of the population consists in re-education,

two paragraphs later:

Quote:

The terms of denazification can in no way be less than one generation, which must be born, grow up and reach maturity under the conditions of denazification.

An entire generation doomed to the subjugation of communist style re-education.

Quote:

The name "Ukraine" apparently cannot be retained as the title of any fully denazified state entity in a territory liberated from the Nazi regime.

Quote:

Denazification will inevitably also be a de-Ukrainization

Quote:

Ukraine, as history has shown, is impossible as a nation state, and attempts to "build" one naturally lead to Nazism.

They recognize that some Ukrainians will not be pro-Russian for some time, so they propose a separate Bantustan for them:

Quote:

The "Catholic province" (Western Ukraine as part of five regions) is unlikely to become part of the pro-Russian territories. The line of alienation, however, will be found empirically. Behind it will remain hostile to Russia, but forcibly neutral and demilitarized Ukraine with formally banned Nazism. The haters of Russia will go there. The guarantee of the preservation of this residual Ukraine in a neutral state should be the threat of an immediate continuation of the military operation in case of non-compliance with the listed requirements. Perhaps this will require a permanent Russian military presence on its territory.

Quote:

Russia will have no allies in the denazification of Ukraine. Since this is a purely Russian business.

Quote:

Russia did everything possible to save the West in the 20th century.

Absolute unhinged madness - and this is the official word of the Russian Empire Nation. This is not an opinion piece from some random Russian journalist, not a Slavic version of Fox News. This is straight from the mouth of the Russian government.

Frightening stuff.


I think we are still a good long ways from any sort of mindset that might be conducive to a negotiated solution.

[crescent]

Another article with interviews from on high ranking Russian government person. Sergey Karaganov, works in the Kremlin, was an advisor to Yeltsin and is an advisor to Putin. (The article is in Italian [I used Google Translate] and you have to disable the ad blocker to see it.)

Sergey Karaganov: «We are at war with the West. The European security order is illegitimate»

Quote:

How can you think a non-nuclear medium-sized country like Ukraine would ever attack a nuclear giant like Russia? And how can you think this is a Nazi country with a Jewish president elected with over 70% of the votes?
«Ukraine was being built by the US and other NATO countries as a spearhead, maybe of aggression or at least of military pressure, to bring NATO’s military machine closer to the heart of Russia. We can see now how well their forces had been preparing for a war. And Nazis were not only about killing jews. Nazism is about supremacy of one nation over another. Nazism is humiliation of other nations. The regime and the society in Ukraine were going very much like Germany in the 1930s».

Quote:

You say that NATO promised never to enlarge to the East and Russia was cheated on that. But former Warsaw Pact countries requested to be included in NATO themselves. And Russia signed up to the Founding Act on Russia-NATO relations in 1997, accepting NATO enlargement. No cheating there.
But we know that article 5 of NATO, stating that an attack on a NATO member is an attack to all, doesn’t work. There is no automatic guarantee that NATO would come to the defense of a member under attack. Please read article 5 of the Treaty. But this enlargement is an enlargement of the aggressive alliance. It’s cancer and we wanted to stop this metastasis. We have to do it by a surgical operation. I regret we were unable to prevent such an outcome».

Quote:

As for the intervention in Yugoslavia in 1999, it was made to stop a war that led to over 10,000 deaths and a UN tribunal charged Milosevic for war crimes, deportation and crimes against humanity.
«The massive killings in former Yugoslavia happened after the NATO’s rape of Serbia. People were killed on all sides. It was a civil war. It was an unspeakable aggression. And the Milosevic trial was a sad and humiliating show by petty people trying to rationalize their previous mistakes if not crimes».

Quote:

It was a UN tribunal, not a EU tribunal.
«We don’t acknowledge the right of that tribunal».

Quote:

So the overall goal of this war is to overturn the presence of NATO in central and eastern European countries?
«(snip) We wanted fair peace, but the greed and stupidity of the Americans and the short-sightedness of the Europeans revealed they didn’t want that. We have to correct their mistakes».

Quote:

Denazification is what Ukraine seems to have proven by electing a Jewish president. Demilitarization is the opposite of what Mr. Putin has achieved (Q snipped)
«Nazism is not only about antisemitism. It is about hating and suppressing all other nationalities. And it was taking over Ukraine. We never know how the military operations end. Demilitarization means destruction of Ukrainian military forces - that is happening and will accelerate. Of course, if Ukraine is supported with new weapons, that could prolong the agony. We can only talk about “victory” in quotes, because there are many casualties on both the Russian and the Ukrainian side. The war will be victorious, in one way or another. I assume demilitarization will be achieved and there will be denazification, too. Like we did in Germany and in Chechnya. Ukrainians will become much more peaceful and friendly to us».

Quote:

There is clear evidence that civilians have been targeted and killed by the Russian in Mariupol, in Bucha and elsewhere.
«The Bucha story is completely fake-staged, it’s a provocation».

It doesn’t look staged at all.
«I watched the pictures and I am 99% sure. But more in general there is a war and civilians suffer. We know that Ukrainian neoNazi forces have been using civilians as living shields, especially in Mariupol. We have different pictures with you».

The interview was published April 8, two days ago. It's got some language that could be interpreted as threatening towards Italy (the interviewer is Italian, publishing in an Italian publication). Russia still seems to be doubling down on things. This won't end any time soon.

[HansMustermann]

You know, as someone who paid attention to history, I find it ironic to blame the Ukrainians as nazis. The Russian rhetoric here seems a mix of the actual Nazis' infamous Generalplan Ost and Commissar Order. Except even those tended to be more hush-hush, the former being circulated only among the SS leadership AFAIK and the latter also including the military leadership.

That such an atrocity would be the public message is unprecedented even by actual Nazi standards.

I mean, seriously, see the interviews for example with one of Goebbels' secretaries. Maintained to her final breath that she actually believed that the Jews -- including a jewish coworker of hers who one day disappeared -- were just being colonized in the Sudetenland and such. I'll grant that that might involve a good dose of wilful ignorance on her part, but still, the point remains that even then under the actual Nazis it was at least POSSIBLE to maintain such a wilful ignorance. They didn't go to great lengths to shove it into your face that, yeah, no, we should kill everyone and deport the rest to Siberia.

[Norman Alexander]

The tone of those responses suggest that Karaganov has his life and/or family and/or fortune under threat if he does not spout this obvious Soviet dominionist doggerel in line with Putin's "requirements". I just get a sense he does not actually mean what he says.

[crescent]

Another long screed in Russia in Global Affairs.

Who we are, where we are, what we are for - and why

Less consequential than others, it mostly encourages a more insular focus for Russia, including disengaging from the west and no longer aspiring to closeness with the west. Peter the Great was wrong, basically:

Quote:

The military operation of 2022 has become a major frontier. The point of no return in Russia's relations with America and Europe has been passed. And it affects the global situation in many ways.

In fact, we are talking about the rejection of part of the legacy of Peter the Great

Also, Third Rome rears its head once again:

Quote:

This civilization has largely European roots, but these roots are Orthodox Christianity, adopted from Byzantium

[Oystein]

Originally Posted by crescent

Another long screed in Russia in Global Affairs.

Who we are, where we are, what we are for - and why

Less consequential than others, it mostly encourages a more insular focus for Russia, including disengaging from the west and no longer aspiring to closeness with the west. Peter the Great was wrong, basically:



Also, Third Rome rears its head once again:

Sounds transparently opportunistic. As a German idiom would put it: The author is lying something into his own pocket.

[dudalb]

We now have two threada about this insane rant.
Tne mods should merge.

[Mike!]

Originally Posted by Hercules56

Yes, they only seek to murder or enslave the high-ranking "Nazis" and their supporters/enablers.

And anyone who took up arms against Russia, as only "Nazis" do such a thing.

I gotta tell ya, Russia has taken Godwins Law to a whole new stratospheric level.

I'm pretty sure their goal is to be the first nation to put a Godwin in orbit.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by Mark6

Much like "Denazification" is Russian-speak for "ethnic cleansing", here is another example of Russian-speak:

https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qi...61535ec0353f0f

Translation:

"Here, on the shore of Shelon river on 14(27) July 1471 took place a battle between armies of Moscow and Novgorod for unification of divided Russian principalities into one Russian state."

Yes. Battle for unification. Same as what is going in Ukraine now: exterminating Ukrainians for unification. Once everyone who is against the unification is dead, all is well.

Interesting picture, thanks!


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Shelon

[crescent]

I saw a thing today in which a Russian person referred to Russia, Belarus and Ukraine as a "Triune Nation", one nation with three parts.

So here's my thinking:

Putin seems to have a goal of ending the war on or by May 9, with Donbass to Kherson under Russian control. I mean, obviously Ukraine would not consider the war over by that point and under that state of affairs. But after that it would at least be easier for Russia to proclaim that Ukraine is the aggressor. Russia is already claiming that Ukraine is the aggressor, but if Russia stopped attempting further ground offensive operations the pro-Russian useful idiots would amplify that message even more.

Except - I don't think Russia will be able to get that much territory by then. With Ukraine focusing on Donbass, I don't think Russia will be able to gain more than a small extra bit of land compared to what they have now.

So if the status quo by the first week of May still resembles the current status quo, Russia will need another plan. I think we're currently on Plan D, so call it "Plan E".

Plan E: Start preparing in a few weeks (late April) with more language about the Triune Nation, more of the idea that Russia is more than a nation, it is a civilization unto itself. That builds the stage for Putin to finally declare war. Civil War. He'll admit that a state of war exists but he'll state that it's a Russian Civil war - Ukraine was never a real nation, right? All this is just a civil war between different parts of Russia, that's all Ukraine ever was.

That way he can shift to a longer-term mindset and start (openly) adding (more) conscripts into the grind. And claim that foreign nations have no right to interfere in the new Russian War Sausage Factory Civil War.

The audience for this would be his own public - he needs to set the stage for a long-duration war with heavy casualties and higher rates of military production (although their ability to actually have higher rates of military manufacturing and refurbishing is sketchy as best, especially with sanctions). He would mostly just be prepping his own population for lots of death over a longer period of time.

[dudalb]

Originally Posted by crescent

I saw a thing today in which a Russian person referred to Russia, Belarus and Ukraine as a "Triune Nation", one nation with three parts.

So here's my thinking:

Putin seems to have a goal of ending the war on or by May 9, with Donbass to Kherson under Russian control. I mean, obviously Ukraine would not consider the war over by that point and under that state of affairs. But after that it would at least be easier for Russia to proclaim that Ukraine is the aggressor. Russia is already claiming that Ukraine is the aggressor, but if Russia stopped attempting further ground offensive operations the pro-Russian useful idiots would amplify that message even more.

Except - I don't think Russia will be able to get that much territory by then. With Ukraine focusing on Donbass, I don't think Russia will be able to gain more than a small extra bit of land compared to what they have now.

So if the status quo by the first week of May still resembles the current status quo, Russia will need another plan. I think we're currently on Plan D, so call it "Plan E".

Plan E: Start preparing in a few weeks (late April) with more language about the Triune Nation, more of the idea that Russia is more than a nation, it is a civilization unto itself. That builds the stage for Putin to finally declare war. Civil War. He'll admit that a state of war exists but he'll state that it's a Russian Civil war - Ukraine was never a real nation, right? All this is just a civil war between different parts of Russia, that's all Ukraine ever was.

That way he can shift to a longer-term mindset and start (openly) adding (more) conscripts into the grind. And claim that foreign nations have no right to interfere in the new Russian War Sausage Factory Civil War.

The audience for this would be his own public - he needs to set the stage for a long-duration war with heavy casualties and higher rates of military production (although their ability to actually have higher rates of military manufacturing and refurbishing is sketchy as best, especially with sanctions). He would mostly just be prepping his own population for lots of death over a longer period of time.

And I don't think Russia calling Ukraine the aggresor would gain it any new supporters it did not alreayd have.

[eerok]

My understanding is that Ukraine is accepted by the world as a sovereign nation, and no amount of guff from Putin would change a thing. Ukraine is not Russia just because Putin says so. He can fool some of the people some of the time, but posturing like this won't win him the war.

[crescent]

Originally Posted by eerok

My understanding is that Ukraine is accepted by the world as a sovereign nation, and no amount of guff from Putin would change a thing. Ukraine is not Russia just because Putin says so. He can fool some of the people some of the time, but posturing like this won't win him the war.

No - but he can use it to better prepare his own nation of the need for a longer and bloodier war. He sold them on the idea of a short fast conflict, now he needs to find a way to refocus and get them to accept that many dead Russian soldiers will be coming home for years to come.

The thoughts of the rest of the world don't weigh into that math at all. Putin's biggest potential conflict now is with his own people.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by crescent

I saw a thing today in which a Russian person referred to Russia, Belarus and Ukraine as a "Triune Nation", one nation with three parts.

So here's my thinking:

Putin seems to have a goal of ending the war on or by May 9, with Donbass to Kherson under Russian control. I mean, obviously Ukraine would not consider the war over by that point and under that state of affairs. But after that it would at least be easier for Russia to proclaim that Ukraine is the aggressor. Russia is already claiming that Ukraine is the aggressor, but if Russia stopped attempting further ground offensive operations the pro-Russian useful idiots would amplify that message even more.

Except - I don't think Russia will be able to get that much territory by then. With Ukraine focusing on Donbass, I don't think Russia will be able to gain more than a small extra bit of land compared to what they have now.

So if the status quo by the first week of May still resembles the current status quo, Russia will need another plan. I think we're currently on Plan D, so call it "Plan E".

Plan E: Start preparing in a few weeks (late April) with more language about the Triune Nation, more of the idea that Russia is more than a nation, it is a civilization unto itself. That builds the stage for Putin to finally declare war. Civil War. He'll admit that a state of war exists but he'll state that it's a Russian Civil war - Ukraine was never a real nation, right? All this is just a civil war between different parts of Russia, that's all Ukraine ever was.

That way he can shift to a longer-term mindset and start (openly) adding (more) conscripts into the grind. And claim that foreign nations have no right to interfere in the new Russian War Sausage Factory Civil War.

The audience for this would be his own public - he needs to set the stage for a long-duration war with heavy casualties and higher rates of military production (although their ability to actually have higher rates of military manufacturing and refurbishing is sketchy as best, especially with sanctions). He would mostly just be prepping his own population for lots of death over a longer period of time.

Sounds plausible

For the last 20+ years two things have resulted in a significant bump in support for Putin, economic growth and military intervention. With the international sanctions in place, the former is not going to happen any time soon which means that Putin needs a state of (near) perpetual war.

If, as you suggest, Putin can frame this as a civil war for internal consumption then IMO he's likely to retain public support. Heck, they can even announce on 9 May that the de-Nazification of Ukraine was a resounding success, that the Ukrainians are now supporting Russia and there's only residual opposition.

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by dudalb

Biden just called what what Russia is doing in Ukraine genocide. This is upping the rhetoric quite a bit.
Also, Pentagon is sending more weapons to the Ukraine including for the first time aircraft..attack helicopters and Bradely AFV.
Something is esclating the situation.

Forced adoptions of over 100,000 children is genocide.

split from The Biden Presidency (3)

Posted By:jimbob

[BobTheCoward]

Originally Posted by jimbob

Forced adoptions of over 100,000 children is genocide.

Genocide is understood to be part of an intent to destroy the group. Doing it for other reasons is not genocide.

[Aridas]

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

Genocide is understood to be part of an intent to destroy the group. Doing it for other reasons is not genocide.

By the look of it, the present situation very much counts even when it comes to that.

To poke further at the relevant way, though...

Quote:

Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group

The final prohibited act is the only prohibited act that does not lead to physical or biological destruction, but rather to destruction of the group as a cultural and social unit.[51] It occurs when children of the protected group are transferred to the perpetrator group. Boys are typically taken into the group by changing their names to those common of the perpetrator group, converting their religion, and using them for labor or as soldiers.[69] Girls who are transferred are not generally converted to the perpetrator group, but instead treated as chattel, as played out in both the Yazidi and Armenian genocides.[51] The measures used to forcibly transfer children may be imposed by direct force or psychological coercion, such as threats, duress, or detention.[3] For example, the removal of children into boarding schools and white adoptive families to forcibly assimilate indigenous peoples of the Americas was commonplace in the United States and Canada in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Boarding schools and adoptions were a means of the government to strip children from their families, and thereby their languages, cultures, ceremonies, and land; this was in service of governments' missions to erase indigenous peoples from their land and its history.[70]

Going a bit further, Russia is reusing justifications that it's used before to commit genocide against ethnic Ukrainians. Justifications for the Holodomor, for example.

[gnome]

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

Genocide is understood to be part of an intent to destroy the group. Doing it for other reasons is not genocide.

I do not think you are correct, at least when it comes to the definition used in the UN Genocide Convention.


BBC.COM: How do you define genocide?

Quote:

Article Two of the convention defines genocide as "any of the following acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such":

Killing members of the group

Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group

Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part

Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group

Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group

Bolding mine.

ETA: Someone beat me to it.

[BobTheCoward]

Originally Posted by gnome

I do not think you are correct, at least when it comes to the definition used in the UN Genocide Convention.


BBC.COM: How do you define genocide?



Bolding mine.

ETA: Someone beat me to it.

In the part you quoted, it said with intent to destroy. That means if you do it for some other reason....like trying to compel a government to surrender....it isn't genocide. It is just your normal war crime.

[gnome]

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

In the part you quoted, it said with intent to destroy. That means if you do it for some other reason....like trying to compel a government to surrender....it isn't genocide. It is just your normal war crime.

I think the scale indicates an intent that fits within the definition. Trying to destroy a population "root and stem" (to borrow the phrase from GoT) doesn't stop being genocide just because your goal is to force a surrender.

[BobTheCoward]

Originally Posted by gnome

I think the scale indicates an intent that fits within the definition. Trying to destroy a population "root and stem" (to borrow the phrase from GoT) doesn't stop being genocide just because your goal is to force a surrender.

...it does, actually

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

Genocide is understood to be part of an intent to destroy the group. Doing it for other reasons is not genocide.

Yes, and it's consistent with Russian attempts to try to erase Ukrainian cultural identity

[BobTheCoward]

Originally Posted by jimbob

Yes, and it's consistent with Russian attempts to try to erase Ukrainian cultural identity

Yes, that is what likely would make it genocide. If you made an argument of intent, I wouldn't have argued.

[jond]

Originally Posted by jimbob

Forced adoptions of over 100,000 children is genocide.

split from The Biden Presidency (3)

Posted By:jimbob

Perhaps you could also add the other couple threads about the Russian press office report suggesting genocide into this one?

[HansMustermann]

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

Yes, that is what likely would make it genocide. If you made an argument of intent, I wouldn't have argued.

That's not just wrong, but actually it's pencils-up-the-nose underpants-on-head retarded. Being the END goal was never a requirement. Achieving goal A as a means to another goal B is still not changing the fact that A was a goal.

NOWHERE in national or international law exists such a stupid idea that if crime A was done with the intent of doing crime B, then obviously you're not guilty of crime A. Like if I shoot a guard in order to rob a bank, the idea that it would stop being homicide because, after all, that was just a mean not the final end, is plainly stupid and ignorant. On the contrary doctrines such as "felony murder" exist to actually aggravate A too, if B was intentional.

More to the point, under the Rome Statute, intent (as part of establishing the degree of guilt) is defined as meaning to engage in the conduct and, in relation to consequences, as meaning to cause that consequence or being "aware that it will occur in the ordinary course of events".

Again: you don't have to intend it to be the end goal, alone and by itself. If in whatever course of events or goal you pursue, you're aware that a criminal act will be involved, then yes, you are guilty.

Edit: standard disclaimer: this is not actual legal advice. If you intend to start targeting members of a group, consult with an actual lawyer first.

[theprestige]

I think it's worthwhile to make a distinction between what Russia is doing, whatever you call it, and what dictionary definition is most proper to use.

It's easy enough to agree that by convention we will refer to a certain set of acts as "genocide", for reasons which should be obvious to most. Then we can discuss whether Russia is committing these acts. We can discuss reports of such acts, and consider whether the reports are true.

Whether such acts would be found under a "dictionary definition" of genocide, according to this or that rigid epistemology, should be a separate topic for the R&P subforum.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

Yes, that is what likely would make it genocide. If you made an argument of intent, I wouldn't have argued.

Genocide committed intentionally as a means to some other end is still genocide.

Not only that, but policies that result in genocide or ethnic cleansing as a side effect of some other goal, I think can be properly referred to as genocide.

I think we should keep the thread focused on what Russia is reported to be doing, and what Russia is trying to cover up or to justify. I don't think we should spend any time on what dictionary definition of "genocide" you would prefer us to use in the discussion. We all know what we're talking about.

[HansMustermann]

I'm saying that they literally qualify under the definition in Article II of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. The source there being the UN.

So it's not whether it fits some vernacular or hyperbole or metaphor or whatever use. I'm saying that it literally fits the definition in the actual law, which is really the only one that matters. Bob can handwave until he gets sore arms muscles, his redefinition doesn't override the actual legal definition.