Quote from: tvbcof on Today at 09:03:04 AM

Quote from: be.open on Today at 06:57:25 AM

...
In your opinion, today's appeal of the commander of Azov about the presence of civilians near Azovstal is a confession to a war crime - given the humanitarian corridor opened by Russia yesterday and the ceasefire regime? If the civilians did not come out yesterday, then Azov is holding them hostage like a human shield? Doesn't that make the Nazis of Azov just a gang of terrorists?

I couldn't understand some of what they guy was saying, and my Pavlovian response from the first second of footage was that it was more professionally designed than one would expect from a spontaneous quicky vid. But it certainly could be. Anyway...

Asking if Azov in Mariupol committed war crimes is absurd to me, but not fully though because there is an element of personal ethics which can vary from person to person, philosophical framework to philosophical framework, etc. Although not religious, I grew up in a Christian country with 'Christian ethics' so the use of human shields is about as bad as it gets irrespective of what one law or convention may or may not say. Were I of the 'means justify the ends' philosophy, I might be of a different opinion generally although I think that most things construed as 'Nazi ideology' have pretty bad 'ends' as well.

There seems to be a religious ideology which may be more common than most people think. It is to actively make the world so filled with such vile behavior that God(s) will be compelled come back to straighten things out. I suspect that it appeals to people who have a propensity for degeneracy of one form or another anyway. Like Nazis, Bolsheviks, Maoist, some groups of doctors and scientists, etc. This seems to be the attitude promoted by many Kabbalists (especially the ethnic supremacist ones), and at least tolerated by garden variety Luciferians. It seems to me the best match for what we see going on in Ukraine these days, and yes, driven mostly by the Ukrainian (sponsor's) side.

Yes, I certainly consider the Azov guys to be 'just a gang of terrorists' from all that I can see when I try to be objective, but the people who built and control them (at least partially) are even worse. Unfortunately that is in large part my own government since I still hold a U.S. passport and pay taxes through that entity.

First of all, I do understand that there are fighting elements in Ukrainian army that have their own agenda and ideologies. Needless to say I do not agree with their ideology, while I do understand that they are fighting because they do not want to be ruled by a foreign power with a despot as president.

Now, in your view, can a full state be a terrorist institution? Please, for a moment, do not think of Putin's Russia, but rather... North Korea for example.
If you, what would be the acts of such a government?

- Threatening pacific and non-nuclearized neighbours with nuclear weapons?
- Having an army that is disproportionate to their GDP to impose their rules?
- Killing dissidents by, let's say, poisoning them?
- Killing civilians cold blood?
- Having the same leader for decades with no chance to renew or alternate?
- Having laws preventing

Would any of those be a sign of an institutionalisation of terror?