120

Danger for next 100 years: Cambodian PM urges Ukraine not to use cluster munitions (news.yahoo.com)

submitted 1 year ago by NightOwl@lemmy.fmhy.ml to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml

74 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Tilted@programming.dev 28 points 1 year ago

Two things:

Russia is using cluster munitions
Russia started the war

[-] Dazza@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago

Yes but the people who suffer the most with these weapons is the civilians.

Just because they are already being used, doesn’t mean more should be used.

[+] AdamantlyAdam@newsie.social -10 points 1 year ago

@Dazza So, leave the war in Ukraine lop-sided so we can absolutely ensure that the majority of those killed are Ukrainian civilians instead of Ukrainian civilians AND Russian soldiers? What kind of sense does that make?

[-] Dazza@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

I see your point but There’s no clear answer here.

The article raises a valid point that Cambodia has extensive history from these weapons spilling over from the Vietnam war and causing civilian fatalities way after the war ended.

My point here is that just because a war crime(s) is committed one the Russian side, that doesn’t give free reign to the Ukraine side to do the same.

[-] AdamantlyAdam@newsie.social -3 points 1 year ago

@Dazza There are legitimate concerns about using cluster munitions but Ukraine is well aware of the problems they create. And unlike a 3rd world country like Vietnam, they will be better suited to mitigate those threats post-war. In the meantime, none of this matters if they lose because Russia will kill half of them anyway after the war.

[-] 133arc585@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago

Russia will kill half of them anyway after the war.

Why? What sense does that make? When has there ever been any reason to believe that the goal is to kill Ukranians? This isn't even the first time I've seen it said that if Russia wins (or even loses!) they'll just wipe out all Ukranians afterwards. And neither time has there been any reasoning for why such an absurd claim should be believed.

If you truly believe this drivel, you're doing everyone a disservice by not attempting to justify your claims. If you truly believe it and provide justification, you might just convince others to believe what you do.

[-] fruitywelsh@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago

I mean they have been bombing refugee coridors, so they clearly support killing noncombatants.

[-] BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tf 5 points 1 year ago

So they took a vote and the people decided that they’re okay with this? Or did the administration unilaterally decide this like when they decided to cancel elections and restrict labor rights?

[-] AdamantlyAdam@newsie.social -1 points 1 year ago

@BartsBigBugBag Just the fact that you asked those questions tells me everything I need to know. There's no point in trying to answer. You won't believe it anyway.