Quote from: suchmoon on Today at 01:43:11 AM

Quote from: DaRude on March 17, 2022, 11:29:49 PM

Facts are facts, hard to argue against them, can't expect anyone to believe mass media over UN. There's a much higher online presence and cell phone penetration in 2022 Ukraine than in any previous conflicts, so if anything UN numbers would be the most accurate for this war in comparison to any other conflict.

You seem to be confused. UN doesn't base their info on instagram posts so their counts will be trailing until they get it confirmed according to their standards. Media outlets report as they get the info but they take reasonable steps to verify it, at least the ones I'm reading do. They're unlikely to be off by 80 percent or whatever you're suggesting, just reporting earlier than officially confirmed numbers, as can be seen looking at e.g. numbers from the first week of the war.

Quote from: DaRude on March 17, 2022, 11:29:49 PM

Comparing apples to apples, (so far) the numbers just don't support the narrative of trigger happy blood thirsty Russian army going out of their way to kill civilians over their primary objective. Numbers indicate that they're Just getting smoked from every window of every building.

As if this "ratio" that you're clinging to means anything. Both can be happening at once - Russian soldiers are killing civilians, AND are getting killed themselves.

Quote from: DaRude on March 17, 2022, 11:29:49 PM

https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/ukraine-russia-putin-news-03-17-22/h_50c6d854024131e7fcb716d51fa4b8e2

This is from UA spokesperson. Was really hoping to see over 2000+ cars today, I guess logic being Russia didn't shoot at 2000 cars yesterday, doesn't shoot at 800 cars today but would totally shoot if all civilians were allowed to evacuate at once? How many do you think they'll allow to leave besieged city without food tomorrow, and how many they'll decide to keep in the city out of concern for their safety so people wont get shelled by the Russian side?

Wish Red Cross would provide some data, but nevertheless that's very interesting way of reporting, 800 cars left Mariupol, 2000 people made it through Russian-occupied territory to UA side. That's 2.5person/car. Either cars leaving besieged city half empty, cars are grabbing coffee taking their time and still driving through Russian side or ...

I don't even know what you're arguing about anymore. Can you pop down to Mariupol and let us know if there is a nice empty unobstructed 12-lane freeway that fits 300 thousand people all at once and if the nazis or zombies or Klingons are messing with it somehow. Maybe you'll find the elusive Mariupol subway too - to debunk the theater bomb shelter conspiracy. Check out Berdyansk on the way and let us know why the humanitarian aid trucks and evacuation buses can't make it to Mariupol.

media outlets take reasonable steps? Grin

Are we talking about the same conflict in this fog of war? surely not Russian media and the other side is not much better. Have you considered that maybe, just maybe you shouldn't believe everything mass media tells you? Especially from countries with direct interest in the conflict, those that are sending weapons to this war? There's a good reason why UN doesn't blindly follow mass media like keyboard warriors, otherwise we'd have these 13 snake island posthumous "Hero of Ukraine" awarded daily to soldiers who surrendered and are in good health. As far as UN's ability to count civilian casualties, don't fool yourself, they have much better access to accurate numbers in Ukraine now than their numbers in Yemen, Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, Syria, Kosovo...

Sure, lets ignore independent information, fact that people are still choosing to evacuate to Russia from UA when given a choice, and long standing standards to quantify aggression of the attacker towards the civilian population. Now care to educate us on which criteria you're using to determine that theres a targeted attack on civilian population of UA, instead of collateral damage? Using that same criteria of yours can you provide an example of other conflicts where civilians were outright targeted and another example following your logic that shows that they weren't? (I fully expect you to just ask another rhetorical question, instead of attempting to address these)

Ahh I see, so at first the reason for keeping the civilians in the city for the siege was their own safety, and now the new reason is that there are just not enough roads to handle over 800 cars (even though 2000 cars managed to leave day prior)?

Your mental gymnastics and reluctance to even allow the possibility of a thought that a neo-nazi battalion can do bad things is truly astonishing.