Like was it a meaningful debate or a flat out flame war? And what was the main theme you were arguing over?

    • Iconoclast@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 days ago

      There is a meaningful difference between:

      1. Russia committing specific acts that could legally qualify as genocidal, and
      2. The war as a whole being accurately described as a genocide.

      Under international law, genocide requires the specific intent to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. This is a very high bar. It’s not enough to show that terrible things are happening to a group. You need to show that the perpetrator’s goal is the destruction of the group.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 days ago

        Under international law, genocide requires the specific intent to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group.

        Yes, and stealing their children and forcing them into your culture fits that description as it has several times in human history, including with Residential Schools in North America.

        It’s cultural eradication.

        I’m honestly not sure if I would call the overarching conflict a genocide, but Russia is absolutely doing genocidal things with the intent of eradicating Ukrainian culture from the contested regions.