@ramacca you didn't answer my post matey:
Do you agree that measuring sanctions by economic value rather than simply the number of countries sanctioning is more sensible? Ie rather than equating a sanction from the US with one from some.tiny impoverished African country that doesn't rven have a democratic government.
Do you accept that Russia has committed many hundreds and thousands of war crimes here?
Do you accept the referenda in the 4 territories was a sham? Copying in
@peteblue @Joey66 for dodgy referenda expertise
Regarding sanctions - sanctions are sanctions and countries are countries - big or small regardless of 'economic value'. . The world's majority, the 87% haven't sanctioned Russia.
Regarding war crimes - they are very difficult to determine when a war is going on. Making them without evidence can lead
to this happening.
https://correctiv.org › Home › Fact-checking
"Ukrainian MP Pavlo Frolov wrote in a
Facebook post that Denisova had neglected her duties by not setting up humanitarian corridors or advanced prisoner exchanges. Instead, she had focused too much on graphically outlining cases of sexual violence for which she did not provide any evidence. That, according to Frolov, harmed Ukraine’s reputation".
Or this, when a war is going on.
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Nayirah_testimony
Nayirah al-Ṣabaḥ during her testimony. It was later revealed that she was the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States and that her testimony could not be verified.
The
Nayirah testimony was false testimony given before the United States
Congressional Human Rights Caucus on October 10, 1990, by a 15-year-old girl who was publicly identified at the time by her first name, Nayirah. The testimony was widely publicized, and was cited numerous times by United States senators and President
George H. W. Bush in their rationale to support
Kuwait in the
Gulf War.
In 1992, it was revealed that Nayirah's last name was
Al-Ṣabaḥ (
Arabic: نيرة الصباح) and that she was the daughter of
Saud Al-Sabah, the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States. Furthermore, it was revealed that her testimony was organized as part of the
Citizens for a Free Kuwait public relations campaign, which was run by the American public relations firm
Hill & Knowlton for the
Kuwaiti government. Following this, al-Sabah's testimony has come to be regarded as a classic example of modern
atrocity propaganda.
[1][2]
In her testimony, Nayirah claimed that after the
Iraqi invasion of Kuwait she had witnessed Iraqi soldiers take babies out of
incubators in a Kuwaiti hospital, take the incubators, and leave the babies to die.
Her story was initially corroborated by
Amnesty International, a British
NGO, which published several independent reports about the killings
[3] and testimony from evacuees. Following the liberation of
Kuwait, reporters were given access to the country. An ABC report found that "patients, including premature babies, did die, when many of Kuwait's nurses and doctors ... fled" but Iraqi troops "almost certainly had not stolen hospital incubators and left hundreds of Kuwaiti babies to die."
[4] Amnesty International reacted by issuing a correction, with executive director John Healey subsequently accusing the
Bush administration of "opportunistic manipulation of the international human rights movement".
[5]
Regarding the referenda in the 4 territories was a sham? Isn't that up to them if the people living in that area call for a referendum? Like those living in Scotland? Do the Scottish people have a right to a referendum, despite the Tories saying they will not allow another one to take place? In the Good Friday Agreement there is a clause that says those living in the north eastern part of Ireland can have a referendum to cede from the UK. It was negotiated. The Unionists don't like that and would say it's a sham.
Part of a negotiated settlement for Ukraine will be about those 4 regions and what will happen to them. Maybe there will be a parting of the ways like what happened with Czechoslavakia.