A Russian war reporter was killed and three were wounded in Ukraine on Saturday in what the defence ministry said was a Ukrainian attack using cluster munitions, prompting outrage from Moscow.
You realise that Russians could say the same thing about Western/Ukrainian reporters, right? I’m not making any claim here about whether any particular journalists are propagandists. I’m pointing out that your argument could apply universally. Hence the need for universal rules against killing journalists.
Man, the ability to individually block any and all traffic from whole lemmy instances can’t come soon enough. The fewer authoritarian regime apologists oozing out of the cesspool of lemmygrad I have to yet manually block the better.
Another one who completely misunderstands my point. Did you gloss over the part where I said that I wasn’t calling any western journalist a propagandist? Only that Russian apologists could claim that and therefore ‘justify’ the killing of civilians (journalists). (Not that being a propagandist justifies the killing of a journalist, to be clear.)
You decided to shut off your brain. It’s illegal to criticize the war as a Russian. That isn’t true of Ukraine or it’s supporters. So you’re making a false comparison.
Are you just saying that russia could lie about western journalists? They can do that new, or whenever, or always. They’re dishonest about that kind of thing all the time, and they have broken so many international laws with this war that being worried that this could be their big opening to start breaking the law is just silly. So silly that I don’t think you’re arguing in good faith.
I’ll try to make this point even more directly: killing journalists is a war crime.
There are some occasions when this war crime is excused. For example, when there is no other choice and the the killing is proportionate to the achievement of some other legitimate aim but only if the civilians have been warned effectively. That exception does not appear to apply in the instant circumstances because the victims (one died, three were injured) were all journalists.
Facts that do not alter this conclusion:
The journalist being a propagandist;
Having one’s ‘own side’ commit the same or other war crimes;
The legality of the war;
The proximity of actual soldiers;
The extent to which this law is enforced or enforceable.
The reason I am talking about the killing of a Russian journalist is because he is the subject of the linked article in the post.
End of main point.
If the accusation of being a propagandist justified the killing of journalists, it would also negate the criminal aspect of any such killings by Russia. Russia could simply claim that western journalists are propagandists. It is irrelevant that you think all Russian journalists are propagandists because they will same the same in reverse. Westerners are not entitled to be the sole arbiters of which side is right. Further, there’s no ‘if’ because being a propagandist does not justify the killing of journalists, according to international law.
On another occasion, I would enjoy talking through the state of western and Russian media but for now it is a red herring and is obfuscating the main point.
At the top of your post, you said some things that would take time to verify. At the bottom, you repeated your same absurd argument where you aren’t willing to accept that Russian journalists are propagandists even though it is illegal for them to be critical of the war. And you assert that western journalists are just as likely to be propagandists even though they are actually free to report what they want. You are arguing in bad faith.
I’m begging you to re-read what I said but read it carefully. I chose my words with care and they mean almost the exact opposite of what you think they mean.
You didn’t read what I wrote. If you did, then you’d know I was responding directly to the point you’re trying to make. It doesn’t matter if Ukraine or it’s supporters give Russia justification to start committing war crimes. They already are and have been from the beginning.
I’m unsure if you’re unwilling to understand or unable to understand. Either way, we’re not going to make much progress. I must make a final cla[r]ification lest other readers assume that your (inaccurate) interpretation of my words is correct.
you repeated your same absurd argument where you aren’t willing to accept that Russian journalists are propagandists even though it is illegal for them to be critical of the war.
I’m saying it doesn’t matter whether the Russian journalist was making propaganda. Being a propagandist does not count as direct participation in war under international law. That means that even propagandists are counted as civilians. Therefore it is illegal to kill them.
I also told you that the propaganda point was a red herring. I’m not making any claim as to who is or who is not a propagandist. It is irrelevant.
And you assert that western journalists are just as likely to be propagandists even though they are actually free to report what they want.
No, I do not. I’m saying that Russia could claim that, and that westerners do not have a monopoly on truth. So if the propaganda point was germane (it’s not), it would apply to both sides and grant carte blanche to commit war crimes.
You are arguing in bad faith.
You have said this before and then attributed claims to me that I have not made. That is almost the definition of bad faith, but I am willing to put it down to simple confusion. I’m going to call it a day here because I can’t work on improving your comprehension while you think I’m saying things (which I am not saying) that clearly upset you.
Your argument reduces to solipsism. There are very obviously differences in how press freedoms are handled in Russia versus the west. Your comment clearly implies that you want to bypass that conversation.
You realise that Russians could say the same thing about Western/Ukrainian reporters, right? I’m not making any claim here about whether any particular journalists are propagandists. I’m pointing out that your argument could apply universally. Hence the need for universal rules against killing journalists.
Man, the ability to individually block any and all traffic from whole lemmy instances can’t come soon enough. The fewer authoritarian regime apologists oozing out of the cesspool of lemmygrad I have to yet manually block the better.
I’m glad to see at least some diversity in opinion compared to Reddit.
Community for Lemmy app on Android can block entire instances. Now the main problem is that they’re on lemmy.world as well.
Another one who completely misunderstands my point. Did you gloss over the part where I said that I wasn’t calling any western journalist a propagandist? Only that Russian apologists could claim that and therefore ‘justify’ the killing of civilians (journalists). (Not that being a propagandist justifies the killing of a journalist, to be clear.)
You decided to shut off your brain. It’s illegal to criticize the war as a Russian. That isn’t true of Ukraine or it’s supporters. So you’re making a false comparison.
Are you just saying that russia could lie about western journalists? They can do that new, or whenever, or always. They’re dishonest about that kind of thing all the time, and they have broken so many international laws with this war that being worried that this could be their big opening to start breaking the law is just silly. So silly that I don’t think you’re arguing in good faith.
I’ll try to make this point even more directly: killing journalists is a war crime.
There are some occasions when this war crime is excused. For example, when there is no other choice and the the killing is proportionate to the achievement of some other legitimate aim but only if the civilians have been warned effectively. That exception does not appear to apply in the instant circumstances because the victims (one died, three were injured) were all journalists.
Facts that do not alter this conclusion:
The reason I am talking about the killing of a Russian journalist is because he is the subject of the linked article in the post.
End of main point.
If the accusation of being a propagandist justified the killing of journalists, it would also negate the criminal aspect of any such killings by Russia. Russia could simply claim that western journalists are propagandists. It is irrelevant that you think all Russian journalists are propagandists because they will same the same in reverse. Westerners are not entitled to be the sole arbiters of which side is right. Further, there’s no ‘if’ because being a propagandist does not justify the killing of journalists, according to international law.
On another occasion, I would enjoy talking through the state of western and Russian media but for now it is a red herring and is obfuscating the main point.
At the top of your post, you said some things that would take time to verify. At the bottom, you repeated your same absurd argument where you aren’t willing to accept that Russian journalists are propagandists even though it is illegal for them to be critical of the war. And you assert that western journalists are just as likely to be propagandists even though they are actually free to report what they want. You are arguing in bad faith.
I’m begging you to re-read what I said but read it carefully. I chose my words with care and they mean almost the exact opposite of what you think they mean.
If you would like to verify the top part, you could start here: https://lemmygrad.ml/comment/1115946
You didn’t read what I wrote. If you did, then you’d know I was responding directly to the point you’re trying to make. It doesn’t matter if Ukraine or it’s supporters give Russia justification to start committing war crimes. They already are and have been from the beginning.
I’m unsure if you’re unwilling to understand or unable to understand. Either way, we’re not going to make much progress. I must make a final cla[r]ification lest other readers assume that your (inaccurate) interpretation of my words is correct.
I’m saying it doesn’t matter whether the Russian journalist was making propaganda. Being a propagandist does not count as direct participation in war under international law. That means that even propagandists are counted as civilians. Therefore it is illegal to kill them.
I also told you that the propaganda point was a red herring. I’m not making any claim as to who is or who is not a propagandist. It is irrelevant.
No, I do not. I’m saying that Russia could claim that, and that westerners do not have a monopoly on truth. So if the propaganda point was germane (it’s not), it would apply to both sides and grant carte blanche to commit war crimes.
You have said this before and then attributed claims to me that I have not made. That is almost the definition of bad faith, but I am willing to put it down to simple confusion. I’m going to call it a day here because I can’t work on improving your comprehension while you think I’m saying things (which I am not saying) that clearly upset you.
Edit: grammar
Journalists have been jailed for exactly that in Ukraine and some NATO countries though, so it is definitely true for some of those places.
I know. I’m so tired of these lemmygrad accounts. I assume most are bots but no doubt plenty of idiots too. Makes actual socialism look bad.
Your argument reduces to solipsism. There are very obviously differences in how press freedoms are handled in Russia versus the west. Your comment clearly implies that you want to bypass that conversation.
No. I’m explaining one of the rationales behind the rule that even propagandists are protected in war as civilians.
Except many countries do have freedom of the press. So no it can’t apply universally.
Except