The Wikipedia article is a summary of many cited sources. There’s academic ones like The Journal of Genocidal Research. There’s a UN report from the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. There’s news reports from Reuters and the BBC. There’s a report from the International Court. Though I’m sure you checked the sources before dismissing the article out of hand.
No one is saying that there was zero conflict in Donbas leading up to the invasion. But to label it as “ethnic cleansing” without even acknowledging that this claim is widely disputed internationally is at best irresponsible and at worst deceptive
Buddy, they weren’t even hiding it. Here’s Poroshenko saying precisely what the goal was. If you had a shred of integrity you’d be deeply ashamed of trying to white wash this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHWHqj8g7Bk
Buddy, what he said was reprehensible and I am not trying to defend his actions or statements. But does it meet the standard of “ethnic cleansing?” The International Court and most of the world says no.
Trying to eradicate culture, use of language, and subjugate a population certainly does meet the intent. The fact that they weren’t able to do it the way Israel is doing in Palestine is entirely due to the fact that LPR and DPR manage to mount effective resistance.
You’re free to form a different opinion. But when yours is different than the majority of the world’s and the International Court, but won’t even admit that yours might be the hot take, it’s not a good look
It’s not different from majority of the world, it’s different from 13% of the population in western nations who are using Ukraine to fight a proxy war with Russia. What’s not a good look is pretending what everybody can see is happening isn’t what it is.
The International Court of Justice does not just represent the West, it represents all UN countries. And while it did find evidence of human rights abuse it did not find evidence of genocide, because that is a high bar.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_genocide_in_Donbas?wprov=sfla1
I love it how people still trot our wikipedia as a source of truth, go read at the sources I’ve provided in this thread
The Wikipedia article is a summary of many cited sources. There’s academic ones like The Journal of Genocidal Research. There’s a UN report from the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. There’s news reports from Reuters and the BBC. There’s a report from the International Court. Though I’m sure you checked the sources before dismissing the article out of hand.
No one is saying that there was zero conflict in Donbas leading up to the invasion. But to label it as “ethnic cleansing” without even acknowledging that this claim is widely disputed internationally is at best irresponsible and at worst deceptive
Buddy, they weren’t even hiding it. Here’s Poroshenko saying precisely what the goal was. If you had a shred of integrity you’d be deeply ashamed of trying to white wash this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHWHqj8g7Bk
Buddy, what he said was reprehensible and I am not trying to defend his actions or statements. But does it meet the standard of “ethnic cleansing?” The International Court and most of the world says no.
Trying to eradicate culture, use of language, and subjugate a population certainly does meet the intent. The fact that they weren’t able to do it the way Israel is doing in Palestine is entirely due to the fact that LPR and DPR manage to mount effective resistance.
You’re free to form a different opinion. But when yours is different than the majority of the world’s and the International Court, but won’t even admit that yours might be the hot take, it’s not a good look
It’s not different from majority of the world, it’s different from 13% of the population in western nations who are using Ukraine to fight a proxy war with Russia. What’s not a good look is pretending what everybody can see is happening isn’t what it is.
The International Court of Justice does not just represent the West, it represents all UN countries. And while it did find evidence of human rights abuse it did not find evidence of genocide, because that is a high bar.
Furthermore, the International Association of Genocide Scholars, representing 300 genocide experts, condemned Russia’s use of the term to justify its own violence, as cited here: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14623528.2022.2099633?scroll=top&needAccess=true