@OliverCooper Strictly speaking they’re not really even doing that - they’re saying UA are negligent in “not taking all feasible measures” to locate their military out of civilian areas. This is perverse because normally thats the attacker’s responsibility/
@OliverCooper Claiming human shields though doesn’t make sense because the Russians are happy to target civilians anyway, so the “shield” would not protect the UA forces./
@OliverCooper The implication has to be (but i suppose that’s only an assumption because the alternative is totally mad) that UA would then want to use the civilian casualties as propaganda - which is where my thoughts of perfidy came from /
@OliverCooper The other interpretation, that when facing an enemy that fires indiscriminately, you are under an obligation to weaken your own military effectiveness to protect the very civilians you’re trying to defend is so morally twisted it didn’t even occur to me!
Loading suggestions...