Unable to load image
/h/slavshit House Femboy Founder
rdramamademegay cock/balls :marseyevilgrin: i like this marsey its the best :marseyevilgrin:  2mo ago (edition.cnn.com) 347 thread views #298078

Ziggers caught :marseyflirt: on camera :marseyneat: executing surrendered Ukrainian :marseyazov2: soldiers :marseyarmy:

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/09/06/europe/video-russia-surrendering-ukrainian-soldiers-killed-intl-cmd/index.html

Death :marseykhorne: to ziggers

22
New Old Top Bottom Controversial Random
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

View entire discussion

just one guy committed a war crime

Lmao Holy shit.

Then they just killed everyone

You already admitted at least one of this group was committing a false surrender. I'm going to assume all of them were doing it.

but he was disoriented

Yeah that's the whole point of nading when you're clearing enclosed spaces. Nothing you described makes him anything but a valid target.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

You already admitted at least one of this group was committing a false surrender. I'm going to assume all of them were doing it.

By lying on the ground with their hands above their heads? That one guy probably decided not to listen to his commander and kill as many as he could before dying.

Yeah that's the whole point of nading when you're clearing enclosed spaces. Nothing you described makes him anything but a valid target.

Being unarmed and not expressing any hostility makes him an invalid target.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

they were just lying on the ground

Hiding grenades and aks

unarmed and not being hostile makes him an invalid target

That's completely untrue. He's an enemy combatant in uniform and is a valid target. You could bomb his barracks while he's sleeping cuddling his chechnyan r*pe buddy and it isn't a war crime.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Hiding grenades and aks

Where the frick do you see any AKs? They are completely unarmed. Even if they weren't, there's no way that they could pull any sort of weapon and use it against an enemy before getting shot in this situation. If that was their plan, they could have just not surrendered and fought till the last man. Keep in mind, I'm not even sure if that last guy at the end was actually carrying a weapon or if they just shot him because they thought he was carrying the weapon. I THINK that he had something in his arms.

That's completely untrue. He's an enemy combatant in uniform and is a valid target. You could bomb his barracks while he's sleeping cuddling his chechnyan r*pe buddy and it isn't a war crime.

Bombing the enemy position and killing an enemy that you can obviously see isn't a threat to you are two completely different things.

Anyway, the last two links I gave you are far less disputed, so go watch them.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

they are unarmed

You just admitted one of them had an ak. We're now arguing over how many had an ak. Keep up.

killing an enemy that isn't a threat to you

Youre allowed to kill soldiers that aren't a threat to you. What do you think they do? Stand around and posture until they get grounds for self defense? Lmao you're an actual idiot.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

You just admitted one of them had an ak. We're now arguing over how many had an ak. Keep up.

I'm arguing that the last one was carrying something that COULD have been a weapon. The rest of them were clearly unarmed unless they were keeping their AKs in their butt.

Youre allowed to kill soldiers that aren't a threat to you. What do you think they do? Stand around and posture until they get grounds for self defense? Lmao you're an actual idiot.

You tell them to surrender, if they refuse you can determine that they are hostile. Honestly, I'm willing to concede that, even if he was court marshaled, he could have simply said that he was too disoriented by the battle to determine whether or not he was hostile, so he probably wouldn't be sentenced.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Literally everyone surrendered and was lying on the ground except one guy who decided to open fire.

Has now been retracted to

I'm arguing that the last one was carrying something that COULD have been a weapon.

Vatnik you can do better.

you tell them to surrender. If they refuse then you can determine they're hostile

Uh no. They're not cops. The uniform the person is wearing declares him as hostile. It is why soldiers are required to wear them during war.

if he was court marshalled

Nothing be did would lead to a court Marshall. He shot an enemy combatant that was stunned by an explosive. Vatniks resisting to trust mobiks with rifles doesn't mean you're not allowed to shoot them.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I was giving hohols the benefit of the doubt because it did seem like he was carrying something, however, upon further inspection, I'm not sure if that something was a weapon. Even if it was, the other soldiers were clearly unarmed and lying on the ground, which makes their surrender perfectly real.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

By the way in your tell them to surrender first mind how do ambushes work? You get all set up to attack their convoy then send a runner over to gauge intent?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments
Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.