You’re free to form a different opinion. But when yours is different than the majority of the world’s and the International Court, but won’t even admit that yours might be the hot take, it’s not a good look
- 0 Posts
- 7 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
Cake day: June 13th, 2023
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
Buddy, what he said was reprehensible and I am not trying to defend his actions or statements. But does it meet the standard of “ethnic cleansing?” The International Court and most of the world says no.
The Wikipedia article is a summary of many cited sources. There’s academic ones like The Journal of Genocidal Research. There’s a UN report from the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. There’s news reports from Reuters and the BBC. There’s a report from the International Court. Though I’m sure you checked the sources before dismissing the article out of hand.
No one is saying that there was zero conflict in Donbas leading up to the invasion. But to label it as “ethnic cleansing” without even acknowledging that this claim is widely disputed internationally is at best irresponsible and at worst deceptive
5·22 days agoI work in mental health. If it bothers you, please say something. You’re likely not the only one. If they care at all, they’ll accommodate and maybe even consider putting something else on
The International Court of Justice does not just represent the West, it represents all UN countries. And while it did find evidence of human rights abuse it did not find evidence of genocide, because that is a high bar.
Furthermore, the International Association of Genocide Scholars, representing 300 genocide experts, condemned Russia’s use of the term to justify its own violence, as cited here: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14623528.2022.2099633?scroll=top&needAccess=true