Igor Girkin Outlines Huge Problem Russian Soldiers Face

[toomuchtime_]

The Kremlin's description of its full-scale invasion of Ukraine puts Russian troops at risk of being considered criminals, according to military blogger Igor Girkin.

"From a legal standpoint, it is not known what the so-called Special Military Operation is," said the former commander of Moscow-backed troops in the Donbas region from 2014, using Moscow's official term for the war it started in February 2022.

"It is just unknown. The troops that are fighting now don't have any legal standing," he said in a clip on his Telegram social media channel tweeted by Twitter user Natalka and XSoviet News.

"This is why if this ends in defeat, not a single soldier will be able to say he was just following an order because from the legal standpoint, he didn't have the right to follow it.

"How can a soldier shoot a citizen of a formally sovereign state when no war has been declared? This makes him a criminal." Newsweek has contacted the Russian defense ministry for comment.

Girkin is a former FSB officer who has been a prominent critic of how Vladimir Putin and his generals are conducting the war in Ukraine, giving an unvarnished view on his Telegram channel of what he sees as their military shortcomings.

MSN

www.msn.com

But Putinheads don't need no stinkin' laws to kill Ukrainians.

 

[para bellum]

Girkin has a death wish. The other day he told Putin to shut up, lol.

 

[konradv]

The Kremlin's description of its full-scale invasion of Ukraine puts Russian troops at risk of being considered criminals, according to military blogger Igor Girkin.

"From a legal standpoint, it is not known what the so-called Special Military Operation is," said the former commander of Moscow-backed troops in the Donbas region from 2014, using Moscow's official term for the war it started in February 2022.

"It is just unknown. The troops that are fighting now don't have any legal standing," he said in a clip on his Telegram social media channel tweeted by Twitter user Natalka and XSoviet News.

"This is why if this ends in defeat, not a single soldier will be able to say he was just following an order because from the legal standpoint, he didn't have the right to follow it.

"How can a soldier shoot a citizen of a formally sovereign state when no war has been declared? This makes him a criminal." Newsweek has contacted the Russian defense ministry for comment.

Girkin is a former FSB officer who has been a prominent critic of how Vladimir Putin and his generals are conducting the war in Ukraine, giving an unvarnished view on his Telegram channel of what he sees as their military shortcomings.

MSN

www.msn.com

But Putinheads don't need no stinkin' laws to kill Ukrainians.

I don't think the U.S. is going to be jumping in on this one considering that we never declared war on Vietnam.

 

[toomuchtime_]

I don't think the U.S. is going to be jumping in on this one considering that we never declared war on Vietnam.

We didn't need to since we were just coming the aid of our ally, South Vietnam.

 

[johngaltshrugged]

They have as much legal standing as we did when we invaded Afghanistan, Iraq & stationed troops into Syria.

This is a really bad idea to go down this road that could easily apply to our own troops

 

[MisterBeale]

I don't think the U.S. is going to be jumping in on this one considering that we never declared war on Vietnam.

This is precisely what I was thinking. . . "police action."

 

[Litwin]

 

[MisterBeale]

We didn't need to since we were just coming the aid of our ally, South Vietnam.

And the Russians are just coming to the aid of their allies in the Donbas oblasts. .

 

[toomuchtime_]

They have as much legal standing as we did when we invaded Afghanistan, Iraq & stationed troops into Syria.

This is a really bad idea to go down this road that could easily apply to our own troops

Entirely different. Afghanistan hosted al Qaeda when it attacked us and refused to give them up, so we went in and got them: self defense.

The argument in Iraq is murkier. International law allows that preemptive attack, when a threat is imminent, is self defense, but a preventive attack, when the threat is not imminent, is aggression. The US argued that that Iraq was preparing to attack US allies again, so the invasion was a preemptive attack, but critics of the war argued he threat was not imminent, therefore the invasion was an aggression.

Russia clearly was in no danger of an imminent threat from Ukraine or anyone else using Ukraine, so the invasion was clearly an aggression and every action by every Russian in Ukraine is a criminal act.

 

[toomuchtime_]

This is precisely what I was thinking. . . "police action."

There is no such thing in international law. Korea was sometines referred to as a police action because it was done under the auspices of the UN, but there is no provision under international law for any country taking a police action on its own.

 

[toomuchtime_]

I don't think the U.S. is going to be jumping in on this one considering that we never declared war on Vietnam.

We haven't declared war since WWII, but that doesn't mean we cannot legally come to the defense of an ally, South Vietnam. There is no moral equivalence between Russia and the US. Only ignorance and bigotry could lead you to such a conclusion.

 

[Death-Ninja]

And the Russians are just coming to the aid of their allies in the Donbas oblasts. .

The ethnic Russian population, is huge in the Crimea, and the Donbas, lost in whole war started by Obama/Biden is why Russia took back the Crimea, folks do understand I hope that Crimea was once Russian and turned over to Ukraine in old Soviet days (1954) by Krueschev, at any rate what provoked Russians was the Azov boys murdering ethnic Russian population, more than a few via burning them alive!

Obama, and his hand picked point man on Ukraine, Joe Biden did that, not Putin!

 

[Litwin]

The Kremlin's description of its full-scale invasion of Ukraine puts Russian troops at risk of being considered criminals, according to military blogger Igor Girkin.

"From a legal standpoint, it is not known what the so-called Special Military Operation is," said the former commander of Moscow-backed troops in the Donbas region from 2014, using Moscow's official term for the war it started in February 2022.

"It is just unknown. The troops that are fighting now don't have any legal standing," he said in a clip on his Telegram social media channel tweeted by Twitter user Natalka and XSoviet News.

"This is why if this ends in defeat, not a single soldier will be able to say he was just following an order because from the legal standpoint, he didn't have the right to follow it.

"How can a soldier shoot a citizen of a formally sovereign state when no war has been declared? This makes him a criminal." Newsweek has contacted the Russian defense ministry for comment.

Girkin is a former FSB officer who has been a prominent critic of how Vladimir Putin and his generals are conducting the war in Ukraine, giving an unvarnished view on his Telegram channel of what he sees as their military shortcomings.

MSN

www.msn.com

But Putinheads don't need no stinkin' laws to kill Ukrainians.

sounds more and more like 1917

Prigozhin DENIED claims Muscovy is fighting NATO and "Nazis" in Ukraine I What games does he play ?

What games does he play ? Prigozhin DENIED claims Muscovy is fighting NATO and "Nazis" in Ukraine I What games does he play ?

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[Litwin]

The ethnic Russian population, is huge in the Crimea, and the Donbas, lost in whole war started by Obama/Biden is why Russia took back the Crimea, folks do understand I hope that Crimea was once Russian and turned over to Ukraine in old Soviet days (1954) by Krueschev, at any rate what provoked Russians was the Azov boys murdering ethnic Russian population, more than a few via burning them alive!

Obama, and his hand picked point man on Ukraine, Joe Biden did that, not Putin!

how is weather in Moscow , ivan ?

 

[MisterBeale]

The ethnic Russian population, is huge in the Crimea, and the Donbas, lost in whole war started by Obama/Biden is why Russia took back the Crimea, folks do understand I hope that Crimea was once Russian and turned over to Ukraine in old Soviet days (1954) by Krueschev, at any rate what provoked Russians was the Azov boys murdering ethnic Russian population, more than a few via burning them alive!

Obama, and his hand picked point man on Ukraine, Joe Biden did that, not Putin!

I remember, back in January and February of last year, when our government was saying, that Russia was amassing troops on the border of Ukraine, and that it was getting ready to invade.

A whole lot of naysayers, that opposed funding and US involvement there, were saying this was nonsense.

Well, see, the thing that our media kept us woefully misinformed about, was that the EU & US, all the NATO nations and Ukraine, were purposely not living up to their part of the Minsk agreements, and had only used them as a pretext to build up Ukraine's national defenses.

Just before that Russian troop build up, Ukraine itself, had mobilized a huge army, on the border of Crimea and the Donbas, preparing to end the conflict, and take back Crimea.

WAR IN EUROPE AND THE RISE OF RAW PROPAGANDA​

WAR IN EUROPE AND THE RISE OF RAW PROPAGANDA

WAR IN EUROPE AND THE RISE OF RAW PROPAGANDA

johnpilger.com

". . . Russian-speaking Ukrainians, under economic blockade by Kyiv for seven years, are fighting for their survival. The "massing" army we seldom hear about are the thirteen Ukrainian army brigades laying siege to Donbas: an estimated 150,000 troops. If they attack, the provocation to Russia will almost certainly mean war.

In 2015, brokered by the Germans and French, the presidents of Russia, Ukraine, Germany and France met in Minsk and signed an interim peace deal. Ukraine agreed to offer autonomy to Donbas, now the self declared republics of Donetsk and Luhansk.

The Minsk agreement has never been given a chance. In Britain, the line, amplified by Boris Johnson, is that Ukraine is being "dictated to" by world leaders. For its part, Britain is arming Ukraine and training its army. . . "

Former Chancellor of Germany, Angela Merkel herself, admitted, that the NATO allies and Ukraine, never had any intention of honoring in good faith the Minsk agreements.

Ukrayinska Pravda

Putin disappointed by Merkel's words about Minsk agreements​

Putin disappointed by Merkel's words about Minsk agreements

Vladimir Putin, the President of Russia, has been disappointed by the statement of German ex-Chancellor Angela Merkel, where she claimed that the Minsk agreements of 2014 enabled Ukraine to prepare for the war with Russia.

www.yahoo.com

I found the date, it occured on Dec. 7, 2022.

Here is a link, to the pay-walled interview;

Angela Merkel: "Hätten schneller auf die Aggressivität Russlands reagieren müssen"

Angela Merkel spricht im Interview mit der ZEIT über ihren neuen Lebensabschnitt. Die Ex-Kanzlerin erklärt, was sie an ihrer Russland-Politik noch heute für richtig hält.

www.zeit.de

Angela Merkel: "Hätten schneller auf die Aggressivität Russlands reagieren müssen"

Angela Merkel spricht im Interview mit der ZEIT über ihren neuen Lebensabschnitt. Die Ex-Kanzlerin erklärt, was sie an ihrer Russland-Politik noch heute für richtig hält.

web.archive.org

(translation)

"ZEIT: The whole world is waiting for a word of self-criticism!

Merkel: That may be the case, but the attitude of the critics does not correspond to my opinion on many points. To simply bow to it just because it's expected, I think would be cheap. I had so many thoughts back then! It would be downright a sign of inadequacy if, just to have peace of mind and without really thinking like that, I simply said: Oh, right, now I realize it too, that was wrong. But I'll tell you one point that bothers me. It has to do with the fact that the Cold War never really ended because Russia was basically not at peace. When Putin invaded Crimea in 2014, he was expelled from the G8. NATO has also stationed troops in the Baltic States to show that we, as NATO, are ready to defend. In addition, we in the Alliance have decided to spend two percent of each country's gross domestic product on defense. The CDU and CSU were the only ones who still had that in their government program. But we too should have reacted more quickly to Russia's aggressiveness. Germany has not reached the two percent target despite the increase. And I didn't give a passionate speech
about it every day either."

<snip>

(translation)

"ZEIT: But you can still find plausible how you acted in earlier circumstances and still consider it wrong today in view of the results.

Merkel: But that presupposes also saying what exactly the alternatives were at the time. I thought the initiation of NATO accession for Ukraine and Georgia discussed in 2008 to be wrong. The countries neither had the necessary prerequisites for this, nor had the consequences of such a decision been fully considered, both with regard to Russia's actions against Georgia and Ukraine and to NATO and its rules of assistance. And the 2014 Minsk agreement was an attempt to give Ukraine time.

Note d. Red.: The Minsk Agreement is a set of agreements for the self-proclaimed republics of Donetsk and Luhansk, which broke away from Ukraine under Russian influence. The aim was to gain time with a ceasefire in order to later come to a peace between Russia and Ukraine.

She also used this time to get stronger, as you can see today. The Ukraine of 2014/15 is not the Ukraine of today. As one saw in the battle for Debaltseve (railway town in Donbass, Donetsk Oblast, ed.) in early 2015, Putin could easily have overrun them at the time. And I very much doubt that the NATO countries could have done as much then as they do now to help Ukraine."

​

 

[konradv]

We haven't declared war since WWII, but that doesn't mean we cannot legally come to the defense of an ally, South Vietnam. There is no moral equivalence between Russia and the US. Only ignorance and bigotry could lead you to such a conclusion.

No, it's just me pointing out that in both cases no war was declared. Getting on your high horsae doesn't cut it in international relations.

 

[BothWings]

We didn't need to since we were just coming the aid of our ally, South Vietnam.

Actually we were coming to the aid of our ally FRANCE.

 

[toomuchtime_]

And the Russians are just coming to the aid of their allies in the Donbas oblasts. .

Are you trying to sound stupid? You can't invade another country because a few people in that county ask you to.

No, it's just me pointing out that in both cases no war was declared. Getting on your high horsae doesn't cut it in international relations.

No, it's just you fundamentally not understanding the situation. In Vietnam, we were not at war with North Vietnam, we were assisting South Vietnam defend itself against attacks from Noth Vietnam, so it would have been inappropriate to declare war against North Vietnam.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Actually we were coming to the aid of our ally FRANCE.

Not exactly. The US helped fund France's war in Vietnam, but onc France left, the US stepped in to prevent the spread of communism.

 

[MisterBeale]

Are you trying to sound stupid? You can't invade another country because a few people in that county ask you to.

I quote, from you, yourself. . .

"We didn't need to since we were just coming the aid of our ally, South Vietnam."