You wrote: "We can be certain people are dead, beyond that, we have claims without much substantiation." I don't think my characterization of that comment was at all unfair when I wrote: "You state that we can be sure only that there is a pile of bodies, but beyond that just claims without substantiation. That is a nice attempt to steer people away from making judgements about the likely culprit.
As for the spelling of judgment, I will admit that my spelling above is an acceptable spelling in the UK, while dropping the "e" is the preferred spelling in the United States. However, while judgment is preferred, judgement is acceptable enough to not get flagged by autocorrect, and even appears in some legal documents in the United States.
Your alternative thesis for the bound hands of victims (I have seen more than one) is highly unlikely, especially in light of the surveillance footage obtained by the NYT.
Why did they keep these pictures "in a drawer" for more than 20 days, before publishing them?
Who is the "they" in your question? The NYT doesn't own the footage and most likely didn't request surveillance footage until the very recent discovery of civilian bodies on the ground. Prior to that discovery whomever looked at the footage was looking for presence and movement of armed forces, and not thinking about looking for slaughtered civilians.
A false dilemma, also referred to as false dichotomy or false binary, is an informal fallacy based on a premise that erroneously limits what options are available. The source of the fallacy lies not in an invalid form of infe...
As for the spelling of judgment, I will admit that my spelling above is an acceptable spelling in the UK, while dropping the "e" is the preferred spelling in the United States.
Is "Seattle" Silver not in the United States and using American spelling?
Who is the "they" in your question? The NYT doesn't own the footage and most likely didn't request surveillance footage until the very recent discovery of civilian bodies on the ground. Prior to that discovery whomever looked at the footage was looking for presence and movement of armed forces, and not thinking about looking for slaughtered civilians.
Yes sure You must be kidding, right? I would say, more likely, each and every piece of imagery was carefully examined for a tiniest possibility to accuse Russia of anything. It was done by all anti Russian militaries, journalists and eagar amateurs. It was surely done by Russians, as well. Nobody managed to spot 11 bodies lying in the street for 3 weeks?! Very hard to believe.
As for the spelling of judgment, I will admit that my spelling above is an acceptable spelling in the UK, while dropping the "e" is the preferred spelling in the United States.
Is "Seattle" Silver not in the United States and using American spelling?
Are you posting from a UK Troll farm?
I am in the United States, but what is your point? I had already agreed that dropping the "e" was the preferred spelling in the US. If I had wanted to claim that I was following the preferred spelling for my location because I was in the UK, I would have said so. So no, I wasn't hiding my location. You seem to be trying to deflect from your incorrect allegation that I had mischaracterized your statement about bodies and claims. And you are doing it badly.
"As to "unprovoked", you can debate cause and effect all day." If I call you an idiot and you shoot me in the face, were you provoked?
"Unprovoked" here is not use of apologetic quotes, but referencing a term used by someone else.
You're arguing against your own analogy.
Stating that events have causes, and are sometimes caused, does not argue for extreme or disproportionate response.
""Every event is the result of many prior events." What profound insight!
Events in the Ukraine did not spontaneously occur without context. It is a symptom of a decades-long simmering East-West conflict, ongoing economic and hegemonic interplay, and countless other factors.
That insight is not "profound", it's obvious. Or ought to be.
"This conflict (and nearly everything) is not distilled into a simple good-vs-evil paradigm." Here's a hint...
So the world really is purely divided into Good and Evil?
If calling out a tweet to my specific intention is meant to refute something I stated, I don't know what that would be.
The tweet is meant to debunk Russian claims many civilian casualties in Bucha are new or staged.
I never stated they were.
What I did state is some corpses appear recent based on appearance of the bodies. And that revenge killings, such as Russian collaborators or stragglers, might be expected, then mis-attributed.
And that revenge killings, such as Russian collaborators or stragglers, might be expected, then mis-attributed.
Is there any evidence of revenge killings (and no, your claims that the bodies are recent are woefully insufficient unless you’re an expert in medical forensics)? Or is this just wild speculation?
What I did state is some corpses appear recent based on appearance of the bodies. And that revenge killings, such as Russian collaborators or stragglers, might be expected, then mis-attributed.
What I did state is some corpses appear recent based on appearance of the bodies. And that revenge killings, such as Russian collaborators or stragglers, might be expected, then mis-attributed.
And that revenge killings, such as Russian collaborators or stragglers, might be expected, then mis-attributed.
Is there any evidence of revenge killings (and no, your claims that the bodies are recent are woefully insufficient unless you’re an expert in medical forensics)? Or is this just wild speculation?
If calling out a tweet to my specific intention is meant to refute something I stated, I don't know what that would be.
The tweet is meant to debunk Russian claims many civilian casualties in Bucha are new or staged.
I never stated they were.
What I did state is some corpses appear recent based on appearance of the bodies. And that revenge killings, such as Russian collaborators or stragglers, might be expected, then mis-attributed.
It was in response to your first post on the dead bodies to which I responded in which you claimed that we had bodies but no substantiation of any other claims. Your statement that most of the dead were probably killed by Russians was subsequent to your 'no substantiation' statement, and I hadn't seen that further statement when I posted the tweet.
Is there any evidence of revenge killings (and no, your claims that the bodies are recent are woefully insufficient unless you’re an expert in medical forensics)? Or is this just wild speculation?
Any evidence the Russians did this?
Or just wild speculation?
Yes. There are people who were there stating that it was Russians. And there are satellite images confirming the bodies were there during the time Russia was occupying the area. So, no. It’s not wild speculation. Next question.
Why did they keep these pictures "in a drawer" for more than 20 days, before publishing them?
So the satellite images are now fake too?
They weren't in a drawer, you miserable twit. There was just no reason for anyone to go and find and analyze those particular satellite images, amongst the hundreds of thousands of satellite images of the Russian invasion taken every day, just to get out in front and pre-debunk some idiotic fantasy claims by demented scumbags like yourself that video of dead bodies lying in road in Bucha, Ukraine were actually just a bunch of staged crisis actors who couldn't figure out not to get up before the director yelled "cut!"
Basically, no one knew how low, idiotic and desperate your type would go when confronted with your war crimes. Now we know.
Yes. There are people who were there stating that it was Russians. And there are satellite images confirming the bodies were there during the time Russia was occupying the area. So, no. It’s not wild speculation. Next question.
There's also video of them gunning down people with their hands in the air and lighting up cars for no reason.
There's absolutely zero discipline in the Russian army.